That's exactly my point. Pretty much everyone in the country believes "If who I vote for doesn't win it will be because of election fraud." If the citizens do not trust their country's democratic process then it's not a First World Country.

I dunno, that would be Republicans supporting cancel culture.

The ones they find attractive?

The definition of a first world country includes being a "stable democracy".

If you ask Americans how likely they believe attempts at election fraud will happen in the 2024 election I would be shocked if less than 80% said "very likely". That is not a stable democracy.

Poison the food, burn down the houses, kill all the villagers, then migrate a couple loyal believers to breed me some new followers.

So much easier to grow new ones than to convert existing ones.

Scared the crap out of me when it happened too. Wouldn't work today though, as my wife named our user accounts and I doubt they have a recording of someone whispering "Mr Bitchtits".

Sounds like a convenient excuse to only do it in public schools from people who don't have their children in public schools.

I need everyone to pay attention to this: if you stop paying for this bullshit the prices go down.

But the output of AAL is useful and desired.

And yet he still wants more. It's not enough to have most of the money, he needs to have all the money.

She clearly asked not to be filmed, yet they post the video with her in it.

On brand for Republicans not recognizing a woman's agency or autonomy.

They should've just declined him as a customer, or insisted that no recording at all could be done on their property.

The employees at the donut shop did not make that call. The owner (who likely wasn't on site) made that call. I do believe the one employee had her face blurred because she did not agree to being recorded.

The Vance campaign should not have released the video, because even if it's not as bad as people are saying, it's not good and does not help his campaign in the slightest.

Only if you're 10 years old.

Looks like gamers got comfortable with not owning Ubisoft games, just like he wanted.

You're allowed to say gamer

It wasn’t a personal attack

You knew I was being facetious—I hope.

You knew I was being facetious—I hope.

Considering that was the only thing resembling an argument in your post, I guess that means the conversation was over when you immediately gave up on trying to defend your argument and only posting something facetious.

Strange how you post something completely facetious and that's fine, I reply with something facetious and you cry foul and run away.

I think most would agree that you shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Is it a perfect solution? No. Is it superior to doing nothing? Definately.

However, I'd argue it's effective in the same way that a cannonball is an effective flyswatter.

A cannonball is a terrible fly swatter. Seriously, you would have a hell of a time killing a single fly with a cannonball.

The conversation was over when you kept insisting nothing could be done unless you ban the internet entirely, despite reality proving that wrong.

I think that Brazil is within their rights to seize property or assets of entities engaging in illegal activity.

And if that illegal activity is originating from outside the country and brought in through the dumb pipes then what?