Got any evidence? Or is it just feelings?

I'm sorry your feelings are hurt.

the rest of the staff have been running the show since 2020

This is literally the #1 talking point on the right that came out in the last week and it's being repeated like gospel. We are getting better at spotting this nonsense.

You don't have to be a bot to repeat propaganda. You just have to fall for it and then regurgitate it. In your case, it's like word for word. Most people at least try to put their own personal touch on it to not make it too obvious

Is there like an email list I can get on so I can get the same talking memos? I too would like to learn where I can repeat bot talking points

It's not about voters selecting the candidate. It's about the logistics of setting up a campaign in FOUR MONTHS. These are things that take years to set up) 1(staff, volunteers, offices, funds). Harris has everything ready to roll. What the he'll do you want???

You guys fall in line with the same talking points really fast....

What are you talking about???? Trump literally tried to coup the government with false slate of electors!! Are you even for real here jerking yourself off about being able to pick the candidate? Are you serious???

Now????

And there it is. You guys have already started attacking Kamala. Not even waited for Biden twoshep down. It's almost like it doesn't matter who the democratic nominee is...

Yea I agree. It's a strange way to phrase it

It might be a language issue. You asked for a source that nations have a right (some would argue a 'human' right) to join alliances:

Actually that is a human right

Source?

So the question asking for a source on 'human rights' is kinda nonsensical, that's why they responded the way they did. You can't provide a source for 'human rights'. That's a philosophical / metaphysical question. There is no official source for human rights hence why the question makes no sense.

On another note, are you the guy I was discussing a while back about conscription in Ukraine? Can't remember. Hope you are all right if you are.

Can you address the scheme to overturn the election using false slate of electors in 7 states?

Why are we creating our own definitions for words? Fascism is a term used to describe a very specific form of governance characterized by elements not included in your description. Chief among them is ruling by a dictatorship and exclusive single party.

The things you described are indeed bad things, some which have been adopted and implemented by fascist regimes as well. But just because two people engage occasionally in the same practices it doesn't make them twinsies by definition. Sometimes me and my buddy wear the same shirt, but he's a communist and I'm a liberal. Just because we wear the same shirt sometimes it doesn't suddenly make him liberal or me communist.

Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/ FASH-iz-əm) is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement,[1][2][3] characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race

There is a strange fetishization of this word online and it has since lost any meaning it used to originally have because now every bad thing has become a fash. It's meaningless.

That's a declaration of human rights, not a philosophical logical demonstration of why we are endowed with rights. The person was pointing out the silliness of your original question.

Why do you conflate two different things --both bad-- but cant distinguish the definitions for each? There's a reason we have separate words for Imperialism and fascism? There's a weird fetish for this word here and you are very intent on applying it for some reason.

What an emotional response

Man, at this point the word has no more meaning. The definition has been coopted and broadened so much that anything bad is a fash

Why are you intent on muddling the meaning of words?

The guy you are arguing with conceded that America did bad things, just those things are called something else. What is it with the fetishization of this word in particular?

We can all agree:

Imperialism=bad

Fascism=bad

Imperialism definitionally is not fascism. Words have meaning for a reason.

Parts of the definition do not make the definition. Are you intentionally obfuscating? Just because some actions share fascistic traits doesn't de facto a fascist country make. Perhaps educate yourself on the definition of fascism?

But what does that have to do with the definition of fascism? That is an evil action that inspired a fascistic government.

I understand your point but there are many other things that factors at play besides where the loans originated. For example interest rates are appalling on many of these loans. These are arbitrary factors that don't hurt the lenders. They can still make a profit.