Wow statistically supporting Trump is a very bold move. Considering that he wants to ban them and Deport them at best.
I also find it funny that during the debate, you had Harris advocate the 2 state solution, and treating them with the dignity they deserve, and Trump didn't even mention them, lol
They will be in for a very rude awakening if he wins.
Talking about dignity and what actually happens is 2 different issues. They talked ceasefire while simultaneously giving money and weapons to the time of 500 weapons drops. What they say is just as disingenuous as anything coming out of a Republicans mouth. They talk about concern for environment while ignoring the first 2 months of Israeli bombing had the same environmental impact as 150k tons of burned coal.
Republicans have a long and storied history of convincing people to vote against their best interests.
That's very true. And I have a pretty big feeling that puttenstein gets her funding from a lot of the same people.
And so do the Democrats.
Democrats supporting genocide of Muslims is statistically supporting Trump.
Trump said he wants Isreal to finish the job. You're fooling yourself if you think Trump won't intentionally make things worse.
Trumps voters want palestinians dead. Progressive voters are the ones that will protest voting if they think itll support the continuing genocide.
Wow statistically supporting Trump is a very bold move.
They want to vote for Stein. They get to do what they want with their votes. They are educated enough to choose which candidate they want to vote for. Even if it's not your candidate.
Where did I say they didn't? I simply said as facts support that that statistically only supports Trump and not Stein. When it comes to presidential elections third parties are persona non grata outside of helping the worst option get elected.
They want to vote for Stein. They get to do what they want with their votes. They are educated enough to choose which candidate they want to vote for. Even if it’s not your candidate.
Just because someone has the basic ambulatory nature to pick a candidate. Does not mean they are informed or educated. It is there right regardless. But that doesn't make it good or informed. And just as it is their right to do it. It's everyone's right to call out what a blunder it is.
Does not mean they are informed or educated.
So are you implying that that Muslim American voters are un-informed or uneducated then?!
No more so than the rest of the population.
No more so than the rest of the population.
And that covers both republicans AND democrats, right?
They don't WANT to vote for Stein, they're being convinced to vote for Stein by people who want the worst possible outcome for them.
Taking votes away from Harris only hurts the Palestinian cause, it does not help them. Should Trump get elected, he will allow Bibi to RAZE Gaza, while all along saying "It's about time, why didn't you do it sooner?"
"I will give Israel the support that it needs to win but I do want them to win fast."
In the same event, Trump also labelled pro-Palestinian supporters calling for an end to U.S. support for Israel's war as "pro-Hamas thugs" and "jihad sympathizers." He threatened to arrest and deport them from the U.S. if he became president.
they’re being convinced to vote for Stein by people who want the worst possible outcome for them.
Who? I personally think they are educated enough to know what they want and don't want.
They want to vote for Stein. They get to do what they want with their votes. They are educated enough to choose which candidate they want to vote for. Even if it’s not your candidate.
Telling someone their vote is wasted on a 3rd party is blatant right wing voter suppression and they wonder why over 100m people don't vote. They say republicans vote against their own interests while demanding 3rd party voters do they same
It's really not, though. With the current system, it IS a wasted vote, chump.
The wasted vote is the vote cast For the same people that have caused most of our problems for the last several decades, thinking that somehow, for some reason they're going to do it different this time.
Yes!! Glad someone else is saying it besides me! Preach on, brother!
Getting really tired of the continual misinformation on 3rd Parties, Monk.
A progressive who stays home on Election Day — or backs Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Cornel West, or No Labels — is voting for Donald Trump."
A more damning quote is at the very end of that article:
"Progressives should not make the same mistake that Ernst Thälmann made in 1932. The leader of the German Communist Party, Thälmann saw mainstream liberals as his enemies, and so the center and left never joined forces against the Nazis. Thälmann famously said that “some Nazi trees must not be allowed to overshadow a forest” of social democrats, whom he sneeringly called “social fascists.”
After Adolf Hitler gained power in 1933, Thälmann was arrested. He was shot on Hitler’s orders in Buchenwald concentration camp in 1944."
"The Dangerous Illusion of a Presidential Third Party in 2024"
While I generally agree with your sentiments. In this instance at least I don't know that I would call it misinformation. Ignorant people do ignorant things out of emotion very often. And I'm sure that a lot of people in those populations are being a heavily propagandized and feel a need to do this despite how much they stand to suffer from it.
Portraying third party presidential candidates as anything more than an ineffectual handwavy the way to absolve yourself of responsibility without actually taking responsibility. Absolutely is misinformation. Highlighting that the misinformation and propaganda are working, which is ironically all this really does. Despite OPs intentions. Does have some value. Though I understand your frustration with them.
Well said.
Despite OPs intentions.
Not so well said. What exactly do you think my "intentions" are? I am posting an article that is online in a much more public environment than Lemmy. And I didn't write the article. Or have anything to do with it's creation.
I was giving you the undeserved benefit of the doubt. The fact you assume otherwise probably says more about your own behavior.
The fact you assume otherwise
So if you were giving me the undeserved benefit of the doubt, why talk about my intentions prefaced with the word "despite"? I actually think your post was well-written and had good points, but when you say "despite OPs intentions" it's very easy to misunderstand what that means. I apologize if I was incorrect.
Getting really tired of the continual misinformation on 3rd Parties, Monk.
Understood. But what misinformation are you seeing? This article doesn't speak out against any of the issues you pointed out.
You know I respect you, but in this instance, it seems you are more tired of people "overlooking" the facts you are quoting, rather than "misinformation" for this particular article.
Because I am not seeing anything in this article that contradicts the information you have posted.
That 3rd parties are somehow viable? (They aren't). Or that voting 3rd party won't harm the Democratic candidate? (It does).
But the article doesn't address those issues. They are simply reporting information about Muslim American voting choices based on interviews and polls.
Information you disagree with is not misinformation.
DISCLAIMER: America has a two party system. In the current political climate, both parties are supportive of Israel and voting therefore offers no way to solve this issue. Trump is also worse than Harris on this issue. Not voting or choosing 3rd party only helps the republicans, and if you don't agree with their platform, the only rational electoral choice is to vote blue. While you may disagree with some policies, one has to make a pragmatic decision on election day. Voting is a chess move not a love letter. The death will continue regardless, we have no power to stop it.
Now that's over....
Wow wouldn't it be nice if the democratic party didn't insist on arming an active genocide and alienating large numbers of would be voters through their uncritical support of an apartheid state.
Wouldn't it be nice if we could have a candidate who did not support acts which are fundamentally evil
Trump is also worse than Harris on this issue. Not voting or choosing 3rd party only helps the republicans, and if you don’t agree with their platform, the only rational electoral choice is to vote blue.
I disagree, but you have a well-written post. So I appreciate your contributions.
Thanks! What part do you disagree with? On the merits of 3rd party voting?
What part do you disagree with? On the merits of 3rd party voting?
Yeah, you said that "choosing 3rd party only helps the republicans" and that kind of thinking is exactly why third parties have such a hard time. Everyone is so afraid of the "other side" that they hesitate. In addiction to the bullies that yell at them about it.
Yeah I totally understand where you're coming from. The problem is the first past the post system, but changing to another one isn't in the interest of the major parties so it's unlikely they'll do it.
You're right that this kind of thinking is why third parties have a tough time. But if you do vote third party, most other people still won't and you will just take away from your preferred option out of the two main parties. It's a terrible system where the fear of the spoiler effect takes any chance away from other candidates and from the voters who they represent. Ross Perot was the most successful 3rd party candidate in recent memory and he wasn't even close to winning.
Literally the only way out is to force the issue through protest etc.
But honestly I would never criticise you for not wanting to vote for these people. I totally get it. My disclaimer was a semi joke intended to keep people from turning my criticism of the dems into a conversation about Trump and the election
Fair points. Thank you!
The glaring issue is we do have a nonevil anti genocide candidate in the ballot, but people are more comforted by their preferred and familiar evil
Do you mean Russian Asset Jill Stein who also actively opposes Ukraine?
No, that's not it at all. The glaring issue is that the 3rd party candidates have ZERO chance of winning the presidency. None, zilch, nada. Comprendez? Simply put, they almost certainly aren't on enough state ballots to get the required 270 EC votes, but even if they did they wouldn't even come close.
And I'm sorry, you're saying people that vote for the only 2 plausible candidates are evil? Sounds like trying to justify crashing planes to me.
Stein is on enough ballots to get way past 270. But voters cling to their oligarch bread crumbs too tightly to do the right thing. Their biggest fear is losing those bread crumbs
But voters cling to their oligarch bread crumbs too tightly to do the right thing.
Yeah that's called the spoiler effect. The spoiler effect hurts 3rd party candidates too.
Spoiler effect only exists in the mind of Liberals.
Good thing I'm not a liberal, and I have hard mathmatical evidence. Here it is!
Total voters: 1214
52% of voters approved of the results.
cocina - 626 votes - WINNER
owen - 588 votes
Total voters: 1214
48% of voters approved of the results.
owen - 585 votes - WINNER
room - 317 votes
cocina - 312 votes
These two randomly generated elections are identical, with the exception that the second election has a newly introduced candidate, who is irrelevant.* Yet despite their irrelevance, their introduction has changed the outcome of the election. That means this is a failed electoral system, and this is what people are talking about when they talk about the spoiler effect, as per the definition:
* Irrelevent meaning they had no chance of winning. In the second election, the voters colored lime green and light blue would never have voted for the new purple candidate, because the lime green and blue candidates were closer. So telling those voters to "quit voting for the establishment, vote with your heart" is meaningless, because that's already what they're doing, they're just voting for whoever is closest to them.
That is based on the assumption that a 3rd party voter would vote for a right wing duopoly party to begin with if there were no 3rd party options. We would likely leave that box empty and vote down ballot or simply not vote at all.
That is based on the assumption that a 3rd party voter would vote for a right wing duopoly party to begin with if there were no 3rd party options.
Not really. It's the subset of voters that have an effect on the votes of the doupoly candidates, and 3rd party voters who would never vote for the doupoly candidates by definition aren't in that subset to begin with.
Zooming out/accounting for voters abstaining doesn't actually change anything:
Election report for election "Plurality 2 Candidates"
Total people: 1047
11% of people supported the winner.
Kruger - 112 votes - WINNER
Sahl - 111 votes
Election report for election "Plurality 3 Candidates"
Total people: 1047
10% of people supported the winner.
Sahl - 109 votes - WINNER
Kruger - 93 votes
Maikol - 91 votes
The overwhelming majority of Maikol's votes came from voters who didn't vote for the preexisting duopoly. However Maikol's entrance into the race was enough to split the vote with Kruger, causing the election to be won by Sahl.
The math is the same math, it still shows the spoiler effect.
Then the best solution is create an create an environment where Democrats are the 3rd party.
That just kicks the can down the road instead of actually solving it. The spoiler effect is still there.
And you should be especially motivated to remove the spoiler effect from our electoral systems, since it is in large part what is stopping your 3rd party from being successful. Everybody should be able to vote for who they most like, without having to worry about the spoiler effect.
The glaring issue is that the 3rd party candidates have ZERO chance of winning the presidency.
Because of all the bullies saying that and pressuring people to vote for their fav candidate.
It's another form of voter suppression, decades of people being told their votes do not matter is why we have 100 million people that do not vote. because they know that the two choices currently in government do not represent their needs, and they will not support those that ignore their needs.
It’s another form of voter suppression, decades of people being told their votes do not matter is why we have 100 million people that do not vote.
Exactly!
Since many in this community have a habit of resorting to personal attacks when responding to posts recently, I'll say this: I support and respect everyone’s right to vote for who they want to.
I'm just posting this article that’s already available on a much bigger platform than Lemmy—I didn’t write it, just sharing it for discussion.
Can't wait for liberals to get extremely racist in reaction to Palestinian-Americans not voting for the genocide of their own families.
Sigh. Voting for Stein helps Trump. Trump is worse for Palestine than Harris.
We can grandstand and holier-than-thou all we fucking want, but it's simple Aristotilian logic.
You're so one-note. I'm amazed that you can't see how you're working against your own interests here. Every post you make seems to turn more people away from what you advocate for.
Unfortunately you don't get points for trying, and the effect you're having is certainly not helping the Palestinian cause. It's truly stunning to watch you be so self-interested in being perceived as "right" that you can't see the negative effect you are having.
I'm trans. I'm going to die for being principled and refusing to vote for genocide. Calling that self interested is interesting lol
K.
Funny how you seem to think voting isn't enough, but all you're willing to do is vote and complain about cornfields. I'm sure Palestinians are comforted by your dubious, self-interested principles. You couldn't even compose a response that didn't start almost every sentence with "I."
Wow statistically supporting Trump is a very bold move. Considering that he wants to ban them and Deport them at best.
I also find it funny that during the debate, you had Harris advocate the 2 state solution, and treating them with the dignity they deserve, and Trump didn't even mention them, lol
They will be in for a very rude awakening if he wins.
Talking about dignity and what actually happens is 2 different issues. They talked ceasefire while simultaneously giving money and weapons to the time of 500 weapons drops. What they say is just as disingenuous as anything coming out of a Republicans mouth. They talk about concern for environment while ignoring the first 2 months of Israeli bombing had the same environmental impact as 150k tons of burned coal.
Republicans have a long and storied history of convincing people to vote against their best interests.
That's very true. And I have a pretty big feeling that puttenstein gets her funding from a lot of the same people.
And so do the Democrats.
Democrats supporting genocide of Muslims is statistically supporting Trump.
Trump said he wants Isreal to finish the job. You're fooling yourself if you think Trump won't intentionally make things worse.
Trumps voters want palestinians dead. Progressive voters are the ones that will protest voting if they think itll support the continuing genocide.
They want to vote for Stein. They get to do what they want with their votes. They are educated enough to choose which candidate they want to vote for. Even if it's not your candidate.
Where did I say they didn't? I simply said as facts support that that statistically only supports Trump and not Stein. When it comes to presidential elections third parties are persona non grata outside of helping the worst option get elected.
They want to vote for Stein. They get to do what they want with their votes. They are educated enough to choose which candidate they want to vote for. Even if it’s not your candidate.
Just because someone has the basic ambulatory nature to pick a candidate. Does not mean they are informed or educated. It is there right regardless. But that doesn't make it good or informed. And just as it is their right to do it. It's everyone's right to call out what a blunder it is.
So are you implying that that Muslim American voters are un-informed or uneducated then?!
No more so than the rest of the population.
And that covers both republicans AND democrats, right?
They don't WANT to vote for Stein, they're being convinced to vote for Stein by people who want the worst possible outcome for them.
Taking votes away from Harris only hurts the Palestinian cause, it does not help them. Should Trump get elected, he will allow Bibi to RAZE Gaza, while all along saying "It's about time, why didn't you do it sooner?"
https://www.reuters.com/world/netanyahu-denies-report-he-spoke-trump-about-gaza-talks-2024-08-15/
"I will give Israel the support that it needs to win but I do want them to win fast."
In the same event, Trump also labelled pro-Palestinian supporters calling for an end to U.S. support for Israel's war as "pro-Hamas thugs" and "jihad sympathizers." He threatened to arrest and deport them from the U.S. if he became president.
Who? I personally think they are educated enough to know what they want and don't want.
Republican operatives.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/gop-network-props-liberal-party-candidates-key-states-113310968
https://democrats.org/news/statement-gop-operatives-prop-up-jill-stein-and-cornel-west-as-spoilers/
https://apnews.com/article/cornel-west-jill-stein-republican-network-harris-4089fb0c9ebb16002e56a1c254a21b0e
https://front.moveon.org/roundup-more-republican-collusion-and-corruption-propping-up-spoiler-candidates/
I guess 2000 was long enough ago to forget
They want to vote for Stein. They get to do what they want with their votes. They are educated enough to choose which candidate they want to vote for. Even if it’s not your candidate.
Telling someone their vote is wasted on a 3rd party is blatant right wing voter suppression and they wonder why over 100m people don't vote. They say republicans vote against their own interests while demanding 3rd party voters do they same
It's really not, though. With the current system, it IS a wasted vote, chump.
The wasted vote is the vote cast For the same people that have caused most of our problems for the last several decades, thinking that somehow, for some reason they're going to do it different this time.
Yes!! Glad someone else is saying it besides me! Preach on, brother!
Getting really tired of the continual misinformation on 3rd Parties, Monk.
https://www.thirdway.org/memo/the-data-how-third-parties-could-be-spoilers-that-elect-trump
"The Data: How Third Parties Could be Spoilers that Elect Trump"
https://web.archive.org/web/20240122162245/https://theintercept.com/2024/01/22/biden-trump-president-election-third-party/
"Don’t Fall for the Third-Party Trick
A progressive who stays home on Election Day — or backs Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Cornel West, or No Labels — is voting for Donald Trump."
A more damning quote is at the very end of that article:
"Progressives should not make the same mistake that Ernst Thälmann made in 1932. The leader of the German Communist Party, Thälmann saw mainstream liberals as his enemies, and so the center and left never joined forces against the Nazis. Thälmann famously said that “some Nazi trees must not be allowed to overshadow a forest” of social democrats, whom he sneeringly called “social fascists.”
After Adolf Hitler gained power in 1933, Thälmann was arrested. He was shot on Hitler’s orders in Buchenwald concentration camp in 1944."
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/sep/11/robert-reich-third-party-candidates-will-help-trump-win
"Third-party candidates will help Trump win"
https://www.thirdway.org/report/the-dangerous-illusion-of-a-presidential-third-party-in-2024
"The Dangerous Illusion of a Presidential Third Party in 2024"
While I generally agree with your sentiments. In this instance at least I don't know that I would call it misinformation. Ignorant people do ignorant things out of emotion very often. And I'm sure that a lot of people in those populations are being a heavily propagandized and feel a need to do this despite how much they stand to suffer from it.
Portraying third party presidential candidates as anything more than an ineffectual handwavy the way to absolve yourself of responsibility without actually taking responsibility. Absolutely is misinformation. Highlighting that the misinformation and propaganda are working, which is ironically all this really does. Despite OPs intentions. Does have some value. Though I understand your frustration with them.
Well said.
Not so well said. What exactly do you think my "intentions" are? I am posting an article that is online in a much more public environment than Lemmy. And I didn't write the article. Or have anything to do with it's creation.
I was giving you the undeserved benefit of the doubt. The fact you assume otherwise probably says more about your own behavior.
So if you were giving me the undeserved benefit of the doubt, why talk about my intentions prefaced with the word "despite"? I actually think your post was well-written and had good points, but when you say "despite OPs intentions" it's very easy to misunderstand what that means. I apologize if I was incorrect.
Understood. But what misinformation are you seeing? This article doesn't speak out against any of the issues you pointed out.
You know I respect you, but in this instance, it seems you are more tired of people "overlooking" the facts you are quoting, rather than "misinformation" for this particular article.
Because I am not seeing anything in this article that contradicts the information you have posted.
That 3rd parties are somehow viable? (They aren't). Or that voting 3rd party won't harm the Democratic candidate? (It does).
But the article doesn't address those issues. They are simply reporting information about Muslim American voting choices based on interviews and polls.
Information you disagree with is not misinformation.
And here's the other one.
Another what?
Exactly.
The news source of this post could not be identified. Please check the source yourself. Media Bias Fact Check | bot support
DISCLAIMER: America has a two party system. In the current political climate, both parties are supportive of Israel and voting therefore offers no way to solve this issue. Trump is also worse than Harris on this issue. Not voting or choosing 3rd party only helps the republicans, and if you don't agree with their platform, the only rational electoral choice is to vote blue. While you may disagree with some policies, one has to make a pragmatic decision on election day. Voting is a chess move not a love letter. The death will continue regardless, we have no power to stop it.
Now that's over....
Wow wouldn't it be nice if the democratic party didn't insist on arming an active genocide and alienating large numbers of would be voters through their uncritical support of an apartheid state.
Wouldn't it be nice if we could have a candidate who did not support acts which are fundamentally evil
I disagree, but you have a well-written post. So I appreciate your contributions.
Thanks! What part do you disagree with? On the merits of 3rd party voting?
Yeah, you said that "choosing 3rd party only helps the republicans" and that kind of thinking is exactly why third parties have such a hard time. Everyone is so afraid of the "other side" that they hesitate. In addiction to the bullies that yell at them about it.
Yeah I totally understand where you're coming from. The problem is the first past the post system, but changing to another one isn't in the interest of the major parties so it's unlikely they'll do it.
You're right that this kind of thinking is why third parties have a tough time. But if you do vote third party, most other people still won't and you will just take away from your preferred option out of the two main parties. It's a terrible system where the fear of the spoiler effect takes any chance away from other candidates and from the voters who they represent. Ross Perot was the most successful 3rd party candidate in recent memory and he wasn't even close to winning.
Literally the only way out is to force the issue through protest etc.
But honestly I would never criticise you for not wanting to vote for these people. I totally get it. My disclaimer was a semi joke intended to keep people from turning my criticism of the dems into a conversation about Trump and the election
Fair points. Thank you!
The glaring issue is we do have a nonevil anti genocide candidate in the ballot, but people are more comforted by their preferred and familiar evil
Do you mean Russian Asset Jill Stein who also actively opposes Ukraine?
No, that's not it at all. The glaring issue is that the 3rd party candidates have ZERO chance of winning the presidency. None, zilch, nada. Comprendez? Simply put, they almost certainly aren't on enough state ballots to get the required 270 EC votes, but even if they did they wouldn't even come close.
And I'm sorry, you're saying people that vote for the only 2 plausible candidates are evil? Sounds like trying to justify crashing planes to me.
Stein is on enough ballots to get way past 270. But voters cling to their oligarch bread crumbs too tightly to do the right thing. Their biggest fear is losing those bread crumbs
Yeah that's called the spoiler effect. The spoiler effect hurts 3rd party candidates too.
Spoiler effect only exists in the mind of Liberals.
Good thing I'm not a liberal, and I have hard mathmatical evidence. Here it is!
These two randomly generated elections are identical, with the exception that the second election has a newly introduced candidate, who is irrelevant.* Yet despite their irrelevance, their introduction has changed the outcome of the election. That means this is a failed electoral system, and this is what people are talking about when they talk about the spoiler effect, as per the definition:
* Irrelevent meaning they had no chance of winning. In the second election, the voters colored lime green and light blue would never have voted for the new purple candidate, because the lime green and blue candidates were closer. So telling those voters to "quit voting for the establishment, vote with your heart" is meaningless, because that's already what they're doing, they're just voting for whoever is closest to them.
That is based on the assumption that a 3rd party voter would vote for a right wing duopoly party to begin with if there were no 3rd party options. We would likely leave that box empty and vote down ballot or simply not vote at all.
Not really. It's the subset of voters that have an effect on the votes of the doupoly candidates, and 3rd party voters who would never vote for the doupoly candidates by definition aren't in that subset to begin with.
Zooming out/accounting for voters abstaining doesn't actually change anything:
The overwhelming majority of Maikol's votes came from voters who didn't vote for the preexisting duopoly. However Maikol's entrance into the race was enough to split the vote with Kruger, causing the election to be won by Sahl.
The math is the same math, it still shows the spoiler effect.
Then the best solution is create an create an environment where Democrats are the 3rd party.
That just kicks the can down the road instead of actually solving it. The spoiler effect is still there.
And you should be especially motivated to remove the spoiler effect from our electoral systems, since it is in large part what is stopping your 3rd party from being successful. Everybody should be able to vote for who they most like, without having to worry about the spoiler effect.
Because of all the bullies saying that and pressuring people to vote for their fav candidate.
It's another form of voter suppression, decades of people being told their votes do not matter is why we have 100 million people that do not vote. because they know that the two choices currently in government do not represent their needs, and they will not support those that ignore their needs.
Exactly!
Since many in this community have a habit of resorting to personal attacks when responding to posts recently, I'll say this: I support and respect everyone’s right to vote for who they want to.
I'm just posting this article that’s already available on a much bigger platform than Lemmy—I didn’t write it, just sharing it for discussion.
Can't wait for liberals to get extremely racist in reaction to Palestinian-Americans not voting for the genocide of their own families.
Sigh. Voting for Stein helps Trump. Trump is worse for Palestine than Harris.
We can grandstand and holier-than-thou all we fucking want, but it's simple Aristotilian logic.
You're so one-note. I'm amazed that you can't see how you're working against your own interests here. Every post you make seems to turn more people away from what you advocate for.
Unfortunately you don't get points for trying, and the effect you're having is certainly not helping the Palestinian cause. It's truly stunning to watch you be so self-interested in being perceived as "right" that you can't see the negative effect you are having.
I'm trans. I'm going to die for being principled and refusing to vote for genocide. Calling that self interested is interesting lol
K.
Funny how you seem to think voting isn't enough, but all you're willing to do is vote and complain about cornfields. I'm sure Palestinians are comforted by your dubious, self-interested principles. You couldn't even compose a response that didn't start almost every sentence with "I."
Regardless, blocked. You're boring and ignorant.