one can care without an effective means to do something about it.

This is factually incorrect, and easily disproved with just the scantest effort.

if that were true, you could prove it, instead of claiming it’s easy to prove.

The conclusion that you are an animal abuser then becomes an unavoidable consequence.

no, you’re making a leap of logic

You are an animal abuser.

this is a baseless claim.

you’re still eating more of them by eating animal products…

not necessarily. we mostly feed livestock parts of plants we don’t or can’t eat. so while spinach is human-edible, the spinach fed to chickens is not handled in a way that keeps it safe for human consumption. by feeding it to livestock, we are conserving resources.

most people are not abusing animals.

the green new deal, which kamala signed onto. that is the reason i voted for kamala, and you should thank jill stein. if not for that, i mighta voted jill again.

the news is owned by powerful interests who do not benefit from telling you about her at the moment.

no one is talking about betting but you. the discussion is about ethics and voting.

the burden is on you to show their relevance

saying it doesn’t make it true

when will you accept that there are an infinite number of possible outcomes, including no one taking power at all?

it’s a story, not math.

these are irrelevant examples. it’s a pure red herring.

this isn’t proof. it’s storytelling.

some of the people who refused to vote for Democrats are queer.

Non-voters/protest voters don’t give a fuck about trans people

prove it

refusing to accept the reality of mathematics

support your claim

The chance of a Trump victory and all that it entailed was a line in the sand that they were willing to cross.

that chance was thrust upon all of us. accepting reality doesn’t make him acceptable.

by refusing to act, they didn’t oppose that man getting into power.

you can refuse to vote for a Democrat and still oppose the man getting into power.