Add it to the pile.

What’s the most recent example of “full reset” for a comparable nation with the economic output, military power, or population size similar to America? The USSR? Any examples that are more successful?

I’m not arguing that change isn’t needed, it is, but what’s realistic. Especially when going up against those with the greatest vested interest in status quo, those brainwashed to rail against what’s in their best interest or the greater good, or those too apathetic to engage with any of it.

Heard this one before. How long before we hear about his extramarital affairs and the abortion he paid for. It’s always projection with these assholes.

EDIT: My bad, this guy just paid for his future wife’s abortion. Rules for thee and not for me. Slightly different hypocrisy for this guy.

Had to look up the date of the vaccine, looks like it became commercially available in 1984, and licensed in America by 1995. If you’re 30-40+, you were probably forced to have it as a kid.

Same, but they only want grandchildren as facebook sex trophies. No interest in babysitting or being supportive in any other meaningful way.

They were able to raise children on a single salary without leaning on family for childcare, so why can’t we? Surely nothing has changed over the last 30-40 years.

I actually find it hard to believe people don’t think Trudeau’s leadership has been a very significant problem for this country. It’s just laughable that anyone thinks Pierre is better.

I keep having this conversation with people who hate Trudeau. I get them to list out their issues with him, and none are problems the Conservatives are looking to solve. But the anti-“woke” brainworm is just too strong. They will literally vote against their own interests to own the Libs. The Americanization of Canadian politics is already here.

God I wish I could find just $2k a month rent. That’s what I’m being forced to give up. Everything I’m seeing is 50-100% more.

I just get really tired of the “why didn’t they shoot the in the leg or hand” comments.

This was not the intention of my “shoot first and shoot to kill” comment.

My issue is with the “warrior mindset” training adopted by many police forces that assumes every situation is a life threatening encounter for the officer and warrants an escalated response in order to preserve their own safety.

You are right, a firearm should not be raised unless the intention is to shoot to kill. I am saying that being trained to shoot to kill is not the appropriate background to respond to mental wellness check.

No one is going be prominent enough to compare to Bernie, especially at the twilight of his political career, and be a natural successor.

It’s like saying where’s the next Obama, when Obama himself was no name, first term, junior Senate candidate from Illinois when he gave the 2004 DNC keynote speech, only four years before becoming president.

What I’m trying to say is, unless you’re already neck deep in Vermont politics, we probably won’t hear the name of the next prominent progressive out of the state until that seat opens up.

I don’t disagree with you. They have been militarized with surplus weapons, gear, and vehicles. All of which they were handed with wildly insufficient training, under a system with little to no repercussions for excessive use of force. It’s no surprise we’re in the situation we are today.

It’s almost as if a militarized police force trained to shoot first and shoot to kill shouldn’t be in charge of wellness checks, mental health emergencies, or even nonviolent offenses.

In fact, we could use some of the budget assigned to police and use it to train non-violent emergency response teams, since the police won’t be doing that work anymore.

If only we had a catchy slogan for it.

I always thought it was a tbsp of maple syrup a day to take care of a canadian problem

Christ, with that title I thought I was getting a Beaverton article.

All research and successful drug policy

Shows that treatment should be increased

And law enforcement decreased

While abolishing mandatory minimum sentences

Just have the Lorax settle this

“We’re gonna have a little bit of a dialogue of what racist things that Charlie Kirk said.”

“I don’t know anything about that,”

Not much of a dialogue lol

Would have been even better if it didn’t look like the one on the left was speaking. I like the idea of the reader deciding which one they’re more comfortable with and assuming they’re the one talking.

Only if freedom also means submitting your identification for validation in order to browse porn.

deleted by creator

I thought the phone was a knife, cause that would have also been reasonable.