Reminder that I'm a random person on the internet

My dad taught physiology and survival training in the Air Force, and later for the FAA. You're right about this not being very useful in any kind of survival scenario.

You're going to lose a lot more liquid just digging the hole than you would ever gain from collecting condensation. Pretty much the most important survival item in any scenario is a pot that can boil a couple cups of water.

For the most part, filters are just for taste and mouth feel. Nothing you can make or find in an emergency situation is going to filter out the stuff that's going to give you dysentery, or it won't work fast/efficient enough to keep you from dehydrating. Unless you have some iodine or bleach handy, being able to boil water is a must.

Nah, the Japanese government since WW2 has primarily been run by war criminals or the children of war criminals. Modern Japan is basically what Germany would have been if people like Goring got to skip the Nuremberg trials and instead became the president.

So you’ll give rulership to trump - who wants to have in the USA what Putin has in Russia - just to punish the DNC?

"So the DNC is giving rulership to trump - who wants to have in the USA what Putin has in Russia - just to punish the Democrats who want a more viable candidate?"

There is no other choice right now - it’s “doddering old man with a good cabinet and no ambition to become a fucking dictator,” or a wannabe dictator.

Why isn't there another choice right now? Why wasn't there another choice 6 months ago? Why are we being forced to choose between two decrepit old men?

I never said I was voting for Trump, or even abstaining from voting. I just think it's ridiculous that people like you aren't outraged at the DNC for propping up a candidate doomed to failure, and at such a crucial time.

You’d rather let democracy die than compromise on a few ideals?

I feel that would be a better question to ask the DNC..... Would you rather let democracy die than pick a candidate other than a senior citizen who's obviously struggling with dementia?

The only reason we're in this situation to begin with is because the DNC refuses to leave behind their archaic self enforced rule, where seniority is the only thing that matters.

Why doesn't the democratic party have a single viable alternative to a man who can barely string together a coherent thought in public? Because, they refuse to support anyone who isn't economically center right, and anyone who isn't old enough to qualify for Medicare.

Are you actually trying to say you did not say "They didn't decide"? Because it's right there, just a few posts up. Literally word for word.

Can you not see that you were the first to state "They didn't decide"?

Again, "DNC has the responsibility to remain impartial, and when it doesn't, it's not surprising that the candidate they decide deserves to be president loses." Is not the same as "they decided".

Believing someone deserves something is not the same as giving something to someone. It's just evidence of partiality.

Are you really not smart enough to just go look back after I told you you said it? Or are you just grossly dishonest? Who are you lying for here? You can't honestly believe you can gaslight, because it's still right there for me to look at.

I think you may need to work on your rhetoric and reading comprehension.

Also, I see you've continued to ignore the fact that you haven't defended your original statement. You know..... the whole point of the argument.

Nah, this dude is just lying their asses off for some reason. I get voting for the lesser of two evils, I mean I voted for Clinton as well. But, apparently there are still ride or die Clinton heads out here still sucking down the copium.

Lol

They didn't decide.

And

the candidate they decide deserves to be president loses.

Are the same to you...?

Keep trying to shift the goal post.

You are the one who made an assertion, I rebutted it with sources evidence. You keep trying to squirm away from the fact that you were absolutely wrong. You can keep up the gish gallop of logical fallacies if you want, but we both know you have failed to defend your original affirmation, so now you are relying on semantic reasoning.

Project harder next time.

the candidate they decide deserves to be president loses.

Is what I originally said.... You decided to take it out of context and change the phrasing, interpreting it as if I claimed they rigged the primaries. In reality they did decide who they thought deserves to be the president, the impartiality is clear.

You aren't being very academically honest.

This is all moot, the original argument was that you claimed all the DNC did was write some bad email, and that's just not true. The DNC showed a remarkable amount of bias in the primaries. All your other arguments have just been poor attempts to distract from the fact that your original statement was a lie.

Go kick rocks.

You literally linked to two people saying it was rigged with the link text "they didn't decide"

Lol, the reason it's in quotes is because it's quoting you.

This branch of the argument derives from as a response to my original rebuttals. Which was "has the responsibility to remain impartial, and when it doesn't, it's not surprising that the candidate they decide deserves to be president loses"

You interpreted this as the DNC decided the election. In the article I provided, there is plenty of evidence to prove that the DNC did not remain impartial and chose to meddle the democratic process. You chose to ignore the entirety of the context to fixate on pedantry that furthers you logical fallacy.

Again, you don't even realize you are fighting your own strawman argument.

You've got yourself so tied up trying to be right or trying not to be wrong, rather than figure out what's right, that you don't even know which way's up anymore.

Said the man to the mirror.

They didn't decide

Because that's the type of candidate they believe they want.

Guessing you've never heard of the term "manufacturing consent"?

Hillary was unlikeable because she was a woman who wasn't submissive. Sexist people hate that. Everyone who ever met her loves her.

I mean, that's just validating her own reasoning on why she lost the election. She didn't win because she was arrogant, and decided she didn't have to campaign in Michigan.

People also didn't like the fact that she and the DNC colluded together to torpedo Sander's primary at any given chance.

I personally don't like her because of what the Clinton's have done to the DNC over the last 2 decades, particularly their championing of 3rd way politics.

Offhandedly blaming every valid criticism as Republican propaganda does nothing but drive people away. Hillary Clinton was obviously a bad candidate, this is self evident in the fact that she lost to a conman.

It's not the job of the DNC to blame voters for not voting for their chosen candidate, it's their job to give us candidates that we want to vote for.

It is fairly rare for either party to control Congress and the executive for long, so I'm not sure if that's exactly the main pitfall we've run into.

I think this is mostly an unforced error on the part of neoliberalism, specifically 3rd way political ideology. In the 80s and 90s 3rd way politics grew as an idea to work around congressional gridlock.

Basically, the democratic party figured they would work across the aisle with moderate Republicans on policy they could both agree on. Hoping that this would show the American population that they were the party that could get things done.

This worked in part, Bill Clinton the main architect of American 3rd way movement became very popular. However, it had two repercussions that we are still dealing with today. It gave the policy initiative to the Republican party, allowing them to be the directors of this across aisle cooperation. It also drastically shifted the democratic party to the right.

If the DNC is rating Congress members based on criteria of Third way ideology, then the members most willing to cooperate with moderate Republicans are going to fill leadership positions. Which is why the DNC leadership is currently full of center right senior citizens conditioned to bending backwards to the whims of Republican economic policy.