How does it change your calculation if you realize the lack of a primary is probably why you have the evil villain behind January 6th in office?

I'm not talking about Harris specifically re Epstein, no idea what her involvement is. I'm saying the blue team in general. And is it really a good defense to say "my team was less involved with Epstein"? I'd humbly submit that it's not.

▲

cosmicgadget a day ago | parent [-]

They're not my team. I am an independent who votes for people, not parties. And yes, while any involvement with sex trafficking is bad, distant association is far, far better than actually perpetrating the crimes. Or promising to expose the perpetrators and then failing to do so.

This is why we live in different realities.

▲

ifyoubuildit a day ago | parent [-]

> while any involvement with sex trafficking is bad, (why doesn't this sentence end here?) distant association is far, far better than actually perpetrating the crimes. Or promising to expose the perpetrators and then failing to do so.

Different realities indeed. The dems didn't even do that first part of promising to release things before "failing" to. Nobody in charge wants this stuff out.

This is why our system is fucked. You just have to convince people you're not as bad as the other guy, and you get carte blanch to do pretty much whatever.

	▲	cosmicgadget a day ago \| parent [-]
		> why doesn't the sentence end here? Once again, because being in a political party that has rapists is not the same as committing rape. Do I need to explain this further? > The dems didn't even do that first part of promising to release things before "failing" to. So then don't vote for them? Though if you are voting based on this issue and have a choice between a man who is in the files and has a documented history with Epstein or a woman who is a former state AG and didn't run in the east coast Trump/Epstein circles, please tell me you aren't as naive as Joe Rogan.