You are reciting points that are provably false. Low information voter, reason your party lost and will continue to. Normal people do not agree with your extremism.
>Low information voter, reason your party lost and will continue to
It's funny, in a sad way, that after so much discussion here about how silly it is to have this us vs. them, side vs. side mentality, that we end up with someone saying this.
Maybe they're not so much "low information" as not sticking their fingers in their ears over the subsequent legal ruling by the presiding judge that the jury's finding that Mr Trump "sexually abused" Ms. Carroll implicitly determined that he forcibly penetrated her digitally - in other words, that Mr Trump did in fact "rape" her as that term is commonly used and understood outside the context of New York Penal Law when tossing out Trump's countersuit
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.54...
I don't think it's "extremism" to suggest that a legal ruling that somebody forcibly penetrated their victim for sexual gratification might be a stain on their character.
itsoktocry|1 year ago
"The verdict was split: Jurors rejected Carroll’s claim that she was raped"
https://apnews.com/article/trump-rape-carroll-trial-fe68259a...
You are reciting points that are provably false. Low information voter, reason your party lost and will continue to. Normal people do not agree with your extremism.
ziddoap|1 year ago
It's funny, in a sad way, that after so much discussion here about how silly it is to have this us vs. them, side vs. side mentality, that we end up with someone saying this.
notahacker|1 year ago
I don't think it's "extremism" to suggest that a legal ruling that somebody forcibly penetrated their victim for sexual gratification might be a stain on their character.