"Wholly imaginary"? So you're saying the revenge porn never happened? Nor the year he spent messaging a girl telling her she was fat and ugly and should kill herself?
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @geniecoefficnt
You're trying to tell me that there are other "facts" that, by explaining the reason he did these things, 1) remove all moral culpability for his having done them, and 2) prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that his "propensity" for having done them is completely gone
1 reply 1 retweet 74 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @geniecoefficnt
#2 is the really important one, and you have no such proof - no such proof can exist The best substitute we could have for proof would be a track record of him having spent a long time without doing anything comparably harmful again Which we don't, because it was 5 years ago
3 replies 1 retweet 86 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect
"long time" as defined by Arthur Chu on the basis of nothing whatever
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @geniecoefficnt
No, as defined by the people he harmed who are coming out today to tell people not to vote for their abuser
1 reply 3 retweets 76 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect
yes gauge his propensities on the basis of the duration of their resentment. Exactly why we execute people if their victims decree it. You're insane.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @geniecoefficnt
There's a big big difference between executing someone and not voting them into office! Not being voted into office isn't some kind of horrible punishment, I haven't been voted into office, nobody I know has been voted into office
8 replies 11 retweets 146 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect
we're talking about the likelihood of a repeat offense, remember? And the relevance to that of the victims' emotional state. Try to keep things straight.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @geniecoefficnt
Yeah and the threshold for how willing you are to judge someone based on their past should be very high when it comes to throwing them into prison but very low when it comes to electing them into office Why is this so hard to understand
3 replies 17 retweets 135 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @geniecoefficnt
His victims, who know him a lot better as a human being than you or I do, think he's unfit for office based on their experiences I think it's perfectly fair to take their advice in that regard, because electing someone is a big fucking deal
4 replies 5 retweets 105 likes
Has nothing to do with him being free to live his life He can live his life without having a position of public power over other people, most people do
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @geniecoefficnt
this is the exact same bullshit argument the Kavanaugh stans tried. running for office is a JOB INTERVIEW. your boss - in the case of elected leaders, that’s the citizens - get to decide if you’re a good fit for the job or not. Them saying no isn’t oppression.
2 replies 4 retweets 46 likes -
it’s not a civil rights violation to not be a congressman
0 replies 2 retweets 26 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.