"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 @geniecoefficnt
They have to escalate to "You want him to go to prison for life!" Or, "So you want people executed!" as soon as possible or risk it being made painfully apparent that the actual consequence, not being an elected official, isn't cruel and unusual punishment.
1 reply 1 retweet 25 likes -
I've been following a number of these arguments, and the pro-Coleman side, *always* drastically misrepresents their opponent's position. Because said position is, you know, completely reasonable.
1 reply 1 retweet 18 likes -
Replying to @veleda_k @geniecoefficnt
Well the more reasonable (still batshit) stance is arguing that Frownfelter is such an evil right-wing politician that voting him out will immediately save countless lives A stance that is, at best, exaggerated
1 reply 2 retweets 22 likes
Frownfelter has some bad votes on his record but also a lot of good ones Coleman has no record at all other than being a shitposter and sexual predator Why anyone trusts him about anything, including his politics, is beyond me
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.