HighPeakFox

@grobyfox1990, @Phil Bowman likes my posts - should I be worried?

Sure - I was just pointing out that trolls tend to prioritise winding others up. I think here, it's just clanging cognitive dissonance.

Sometimes, people accuse certain posters of trolling. I really wish that they were, but I think he really does believe what he says.

Alexa, define 'heavy lifting' for me. I keep forgetting that all those media outlets are owned by evil leftie oligarchs and billionaires.

If you really think the two candidates are equally bad, or that Trump is the lesser of two evils, then we really have nothing left to discuss.

Listen fella - you've boldly led by saying you'd vote Trump, and you're also out there with your religion at times too. Harris is not perfect, however, your claim that Trump is polling ahead is highly contentious. Perhaps if you didn't display your opinions as facts, you wouldn't get so many backs up. I am afraid that whatever metrics you are using to judge Harris' competency, you aren't being consistent in judging Trump by the same metrics. So, given he's a man that loses billions, has filed for bankruptcy numerous times and grifts endlessly because he's such a failure as a businessman, I'd say he's far less competent for office. Never mind the small matter of wanting to take away female bodily autonomy, threatening to deport humans and threatening to jail his political opponents. You don't get to file that under 'ridiculous' and not be challenged. 'Ridiculous' is justifying voting for this maniac.

Wow, he got off lightly.

OK Benguin. I will engage on any or all of your claims, as long as you don't conveniently fail to acknowledge any of the other factors that should stop anyone with any semblance of sentience from justifying voting for (let's not beat about the bush here) someone quite happy to destroy democratic processes because he otherwise will end up incarcerated - c.f. Jan 6 2001 for reference. You don't get to frame the debate for your own convenience - others may chip in in response to your highly limited reading of the situation. If you wish to display cognitive bias, expect to be called out on it. If you're going with the unproven 'Kamala Harris is incompetent' (in fact, she has a long track record of the opposite in her field) without any obvious justification, then we are already beyond the possibility of reasonable engagement, so spare us the deflection.

I am not running for office, am I?

I'm not trying to. These people aren't listening to anyone.

Being popular isn't important.

I admire your stance. My mental health cannot withstand joining you, unfortunately.

By the by. I'm sick of being asked to listen to the mental gymnastics of people trying to justify their awful opinions and voting choices. That many can persuade themselves that fascists aren't fascists terrifies me.

I think pointing out 4 irrefutable facts, regardless of political position, was pretty uncontroversial.

That's just 4 things off the top of my head, thought you might like some absolute facts to buttress your incredible statement.

Street name?

I'd be just staggering

I am sensitive, but chose to ask carefully rather than jump to conclusions.

@David Hankey, just so I understand, were you laughing at me or with me?

You are amongst esteemed company here Chris. Don't think it's only you, it really isn't.

OK, thanks for explaining - I try to keep out of such stuff so am a little slow.

Is there a reason you're making this personal?

Getting thoroughly medically checked out hasn't yet provided answers, but I do now know I was born with one kidney.

You are Greg Davies, and I claim my £5.

There it is, right there - that IS false equivalence.