• @nomous
    link
    03 months ago

    If something affects both sides it’s effectively “a wash” and cancel each other out.

    Unless you have weird double standards and only apply them when it’s convenient.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      03 months ago

      That doesn’t work in this context, if one person murders someone, and another murders 2 people, both are still murderers, one just is a worse murderer(as in more evil, not as in worse at committing murder)

      • @nomous
        link
        03 months ago

        That doesn’t work in this context

        one just is a worse murderer

        Seems like it works just fine.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          03 months ago

          So are you agreeing with what I said about both people being murderers or not? Because of you are then you agree that it isn’t a wash, and if you disagree then you are fucking stupid.

    • @Cleggory
      link
      -23 months ago

      If something affects both sides it’s effectively “a wash” and cancel each other out.

      It’s called mental gymnastics to think “two wrongs make a right.”

      • @nomous
        link
        23 months ago

        It’s called a strawman to build an argument that was never made and then attack it.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 months ago

          an argument that was never made

          It says 0 scandals right there in the post

          Just because the other guy also has scandals doesn’t mean she has 0

        • @Cleggory
          link
          03 months ago

          You didn’t make this absurd claim?:

          If something affects both sides it’s effectively “a wash” and cancel each other out.

          If you are victimized, you believe you then have the right to also victimize “to cancel it out”?

          • @nomous
            link
            03 months ago

            Context is important, that’s how we continue the conversation.

            If Candidate A is a genocidal maniac, and Candidate B is a genocidal maniac. It’s effectively a wash and pointless to say “well Candidate A supports genocide!”

            Hope this clarified my meaning.

            • @Cleggory
              link
              03 months ago

              Criticizing genocide is pointless if both major candidates support it.

              Apathy has paved a basis for genocide throughout history, your view is not novel nor beneficial.

              • @nomous
                link
                1
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Grandoise words that mean little and contribute nothing but obviously you love the smell of your own *farts so go off.

                Whatever helps you sleep at night

                • @Cleggory
                  link
                  23 months ago

                  Apathy was too big of a word for you??

                  • @nomous
                    link
                    03 months ago

                    Oh I know lots of defintions. It’s especially useful sniffing out self important jackasses who love to read their own words.