If it was about verifying that votes were legitimate they shouldn't have a problem appropriating finding so that we go out to every single citizens house and ensure they are issued an ID that is to their standards (which they claim is citizenship). We know it's actually about ensuring that people who have a difficult time getting an id have a difficult time voting.
Edit. Whoops I spelled some thing wrong
That's a good point. A family doesn't just have to be your flesh and blood though. It can be your community as well, but I know I wasn't thinking that even though I should have been. I don't see much of the leadership on the trump team expressing love to even their flesh and blood even if I do apply a strict definition of family.
I don't think women in general love trump. I think that's a difficult demo for him. Sure I can find a few at his events but the average woman really doesn't like him. Does that mean he's not masculine? They are just inventing little things to be on the surface of what is and isn't masculine. Walz has the only core masculine traits I can think of. He loves and takes care of his family. Everything else is superfluous window dressing. These guys only care about dressing though.
Republicans:"democrats are trying to get ILLIEGALS to vote. We have no proof but ahhhhhhhhh!"
Democrats:"man do you remember how close they were when they were caught on video ACTUALLY STORMING THE CAPITOL BUILDING! I bet that they may try something else, like those fake electors, or....read the article"
It's the best.... the best syphilis anyone's EVER had... my doctors..you know doctors say I've got great syphilis
It took me 30 minutes to get what they meant when they said "reassigned ". I first thought they meant reassigned to the case that made everything else confusing. They meant reassigned to a different case.
I misread lasted as tasted. I've never been curious about that.
At least she got contracts. Still a bad guy though.
There are no borders here so my first thought was "what has germany done?"
I don't like the part about the "dictator". I would say that that one person's vote does disrupt this arbitrary definition of fairness of you really think about it, but it doesn't interrupt my colloquial view of fairness and I'm betting most other people's.
"Hundreds"? Oh my God there are "hundreds" of them. A solid user base for a social media app there.
Really? Why did they allow those private farms at all then? My understanding was that the farms that were collectivized only produced enough for themselves to eat, so they went back a little and said "okay, you can have SOME capitalism until we get it figured out". How they figured it out was quotas, and hey, on paper it looks good. You just have to tell Stalin a good number. Somehow the store room's still empty.