@CoachMark

I dont think so, but if they turned out to be related I wouldnt be that shocked :) They both give the same nerdy vibe in some ways.

@Burnt_Veggies @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@CoachMark @freemo @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews I don't know about you, Coach, but I'm already done with this troll.

@Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

So weird to have "I miss George McCarthy" on my 2024 bingo card...
And I'm a socialist!

@freemo

@mutter01 @Burnt_Veggies @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

That Libertarian guy only won the nomination after 7 rounds of voting or something like that and it saw something like 64 him to 36 "anybody else" or something to that effect. 😂

@gfjacobs

Right, which is what I am doing. Harris and Trump represent fascism, and while Chase Oliver isnt perfect he is a good compromise between freedom and fascism.

@Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@freemo @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

Yup read his TL.

Definitely a troll.

Thanks for playing #WhackATroll (tm @laffy)

Buh-bye.

#blocked

@gfjacobs

Ahh good old mastodon toxicity as usual. cool story bro.

@Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@freemo @gfjacobs

Please explain to me two things.

First, how is voting for a fringe candidate who cannot win anything or accomplish anything any kind of compromise, let alone a good one?

Second, explain to me exactly how Kamala Harris represents fascism.

@Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@joeinwynnewood

> First, how is voting for a fringe candidate who cannot win anything or accomplish anything any kind of compromise, let alone a good one?

Cause who wins or looses will in no way be effected by your vote. So your vote has no more value if you happened to pick the guy who won or the guy who lost, that outcome is the same regardless.

So since voting for the guy who happens to win accomplished absolutely nothing as well the question is how is voting for a third party candidate, presuming he looses, accomplishing something. Simple, your nudging the percentage points for third parties higher, and the percentage for primary parties lower. This in turn effects botht he calculated (projected) chance of a third party being a challenger int he future, and drives greater support to third parties (as they are harder to write off the higher their percentage points go).

So in short, while voting for a majority candidate absolutely does no good, even if it wins, voting third party **always** does good regardless of if they win.

> Second, explain to me exactly how Kamala Harris represents fascism.

In much the same way the republicans do. With violent exclusionary opposition to even mild criticism of their party. and the fantacism that goes along with that. Combine that with her general support of police and an unwillingness to fix (or even recognize in any meaningful way) the deep rooted issue with police in this country, and combine that with the genocide she supports in palestine the fascism meter is cranked all the way to 11.

@gfjacobs @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@freemo @gfjacobs

"Cause who wins or looses will in no way be effected by your vote."

This is a flat out lie. Of the more than 120 million votes cast in the 2016 election, 107,000 votes in three states effectively decided the election.

It was less than 1/2 that in 2020.

The same is true for dozens of Congressional races, hundreds of state office races and many thousands of local races across the country.

@Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@joeinwynnewood

> This is a flat out lie. Of the more than 120 million votes cast in the 2016 election, 107,000 votes in three states effectively decided the election.

You told me it was a lie, and then provided evidence of why I was correct. You're doing it wrong :)

So assuming you were part of that 107,000 that means if you voted one way the same person would have won with a 107,000 margin, if you voted the other way they would have won with a 106,999 margin. The outcome would have been exactly the same no matter how you voted if you were part of that 107K group. No matter how small the group is, as long as it is greater than 1 you changing your vote will not effect the vote of anyone else int he group, therefore the outcome is unchanged by your vote.

> It was less than 1/2 that in 2020.

You would have to find a case where it was 1/107000 that number to show even a single counter-example to my claim, so again, still proving me right.

> The same is true for dozens of Congressional races, hundreds of state office races and many thousands of local races across the country.

We are talking presidential election here. But sure, ill bite, even if we included congressional races you'd still have to show such a race coming down to a single vote, which you cant. Even if you could the odds of being that one person who decides a vote the one time in all of history it is likely to happen on a major election is still so astronomically high it is effectively 0 even if it did happen once somewhere.

@gfjacobs @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@freemo @gfjacobs

Last I checked we add up all the votes for each race.

If you bothered to read the article you would know the 107k was across not one but three states, and they were not distributed evenly.

You also ignore state and local races. I can find you several PA House races that were decided by under 60 votes in 2022.

The margin of Democratic control is two seats.

Every vote really does matter.

@Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@joeinwynnewood Don't engage with the trolls. It fuels them. Spend your energy sharing your perspective with people who have a chance of changing their mind.

They are making an intentional decision to share their anti-establishment opinion on the Harris group. They want people to see the posts. Continuing to engage keeps the thread active and continues to give the person a platform.

Not responding robs them of fuel.

@freemo @gfjacobs

"In much the same way the republicans do. With violent exclusionary opposition to even mild criticism of their party."

Also a flat out lie.

There is a cacophony of voices within the Democratic Party who argue incessantly over all manner of policy and governance, from Cori Bush to Joe Manchin.

If your goal is to harm the party, you're not going to get much of a welcome, nor should you expect otherwise.

@Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@joeinwynnewood

Thats the kind of bias I expect. I didnt really expect you to get past this point, its soo subjective to have a chance.

If thats really how you feel im not even going to touch that one. It comes across as just too far gone to be able to reason with in terms of bias.

@gfjacobs @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@freemo @gfjacobs

What a load of crap.

I said nothing of how I "feel".

Is Cori Bush not part of the Democratic caucus in the US House and Joe Manchin in the US Senate?

Facts certainly can be hard to argue against.

Past my bed time. I'll see if you come up with anything worth responding to in the morning.

@Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@joeinwynnewood

As I said, I have no interest in debating this assertion of yours. Take a hint.

You did a great job at proving one thing though, the toxicity of the democratic party to criticism is very much alive and well I see.

@gfjacobs @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@freemo @gfjacobs @Burnt_Veggies

My assertion? My statement of facts that you don't want to debate because there's no debating facts.

There's nothing toxic about calling out lies and bullshit. What's toxic is letting lies and bullshit stand unchallenged.

@CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@joeinwynnewood @freemo@qoto.org @gfjacobs @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews man that freemo guy is such a troll

@alexhammy

I don't know what he is - he's got over 33k followers and has been around a long while, both why I bothered to engage.

@joeinwynnewood

Whatever the reason, for the third time, not interested in debating it.

@gfjacobs @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@freemo @gfjacobs

Must be tough to not be able to defend your bluster.

@Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@joeinwynnewood @freemo @gfjacobs @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

I want Kamala Harris to be the Republican candidate, so I can vote for the Democratic Socialist on the left with broad support and a realistic plan to decarbonize the economy in their first 100 days. I also want ranked-choice voting, a cure for baldness and pet pony. But I don't live in that world. So I'll vote for Harris and the Democratic coalition, because it's my best nudge that direction.

@HalfHeartedFanatic

I am 100% with ya!

@joeinwynnewood @gfjacobs @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@HalfHeartedFanatic

I applaud your realism.

May I ask what you've done/are doing to move things in a direction where a Democratic Socialist could be someone with broad support?

PS How close do you think Tim Walz is to that "ideal"?

@freemo @gfjacobs @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@richardgrant

Yeah, I saw it was still in there and deleted from more recent entries as well as prior ones via edit, though I guess too late.

Thanks for the heads up.

@joeinwynnewood

Not as tough as you having a tantrum over someone not being willing to discuss something with you. Grow up.

@gfjacobs @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@freemo

I've been wondering why you've got so many followers. It must be for the performance, mediocre as it is, because it certainly isn't for the substance.

@gfjacobs @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@freemo @gfjacobs

"an unwillingness to fix (or even recognize in any meaningful way) the deep rooted issue with police in this country"

Lie number 3.
“Part of what we have to do here is also look at the militarization of police departments and, and the kind of money that is going to that. And we need to demilitarize police departments”
https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/26/politics/kfile-kamala-harris-praised-defund-the-police-movement-in-june-2020/index.html

PS You can't do anything at all if you can't get elected.

@Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@joeinwynnewood

Right, as I said I didnt really expect a fair or objective (unbiased) opinion on this half of the question. Like I said your opinion on this half isnt particular interest for me to debate as I dont expect it to get anywhere productive if you are that far gone (biased).

@gfjacobs @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@joeinwynnewood
I'm begging you, stop giving fuel to the trolls. I understand that someone is wrong and has a bad opinion on the internet, and it feels like the end of the world if you don't show them how wrong they are.

Engaging doesn't prove them wrong, it gives them an audience and a platform for their bad ideas.

I really hoped more people would learn this from 2016
@kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@freemo this kind of "my vote doesn't matter" logic is a fallacy. It's not the diff votes that made a candidate win, it's also all the other votes that brought them high enough to be those diff votes. Your vote can be considered the first vote, the exact first tie-break vote, the last no longer important vote, it doesn't matter, they aren't in order, what matters is that it was one of the votes that made a candidate win or the ones that made a candidate lose less.

"My vote doesn't matter" defeatism is how elections are lost.

@freemo @joeinwynnewood @gfjacobs @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
@randahl

@freemo @joeinwynnewood @gfjacobs @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews
#blocked

@joeinwynnewood @freemo@qoto.org
I blocked the freemo troll. Not sure why they would post here except to rile people up. TY for your posts Joe.

@WizardBear

He's apparently got a lot of followers, which is disturbing, but I think warrants a bit of time to challenge his BS.

@joeinwynnewood I appreciate that. His post kind of hit me the wrong way so I immediately blocked. I do sometimes try and challenge people's BS. TY for the response. Following you now. All the best.

@joeinwynnewood Lesson of politics: recognize the people who won't change their mind no matter what you say, and don't spend your energy giving them a platform.

I used to be a "every authority evil!" anarchist. There's nothing to be gained by engaging. Your energy is spent dealing with someone who is only interested in spreading their own ideas and reinforcing the positions they already hold.

@gfjacobs @Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@Stanman

I beleive you meant to say something?

@Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@freemo Stay tuned…

@Stanman

I never once said I would only vote for the perfect canddidate. None of the candidates are perfect, if that were the case I wouldnt be voting.

No, my line in the sand is simple, I wont vote for an evil person or vote in a way that perpetuates a two party system (which itself is evil and fascist in its nature).

> Those parties can change, but it usually requires some sort of cataclysm first.

The two main parties int he USA have flipped 8 times in the history of the USA. In those 8 times every single time the new party that became a majority party had very little (~1% support) the year before.

The only thing that is real about the 2-party system is that it gives the **illusion** of a two party system because the parties change abruptly and the vote doesnt tend to reflect actual support.

> So, voting outside of those two parties really, truly is nothing but performative.

Since your axiom is false so is your conclusion. You also are under the mistaken impression that a vote that happens to be for the winner somehow has more value. Being right doesnt have any value add to your vote.

> If someone is committed to voting third party, my only response is: What the fuck?

Thats basically my response whenever someone says their voting one of the major two parties. Sounds like they should be in a straight jacket its so outlandish.

@Burnt_Veggies @CoachMark @WrenArcher @kamalaharrisforpresidentnews

@freemo Oh I see! So you hate the two-party system! What else do you hate? The Constitution? Maybe you need to find another country to live in that’s more to your liking?

@Stanman

Nothing remotely american about a two party system except the stupidity to believe it is real.