Comments by "Nathan Levesque" (@nathanlevesque7812) on "CNN's Jim Acosta Grills Andrew Yang Over The One Question Everyone Has" video.

It's a true combo, just like "I'm not a racist but" is always being followed up by something racist.
6
@Zeuts85 He always waffled.
6
@mikeb2586 Neither of those 'answers' specifies anything or addressed the specific question. Saying it's a human right doesn't indicate whether it's a federal or state matter, let alone how Roe v Wade should have been decided. Saying some background check rules for firearms says nothing about access to an AR-15, let alone at age 18. There are already 'some' rules about background checks. And again it could be federal or state level with his nonanswer.
2
@mikeb2586 Conditional statements are logically valid even if they are irrelevant, such as yours. If you have to fill in the blanks for a politician then you cannot know what you will get.
2
@mike1134 ranked choice is just a funnel to make FPTP results look more populist
1
@mike1134 ...you really didn't think that through, as is usual of ranked choice fans. If someone is not voting because their vote will just be wasted under FPTP, then they aren't going to select a second option under RCV. They want to just vote their conscience. If they were fine with settling for 2nd best then they would just vote strategically under FPTP. RCV doesn't give them anything they didn't already have. It just inflates the vote count for candidates and parties that are no more popular than they were under FPTP. Only proportional representation like MMP can ensure that votes are not wasted.
1
@mike1134 I literally just used the example voter type that you gave...either way, the votes still end up going to the same place. That's what happens wherever it is implemented. And 'many' in the USA can put their 1st vote into a third party candidate, but they're still going to a see a single digit % before it gets dumped into an establishment party candidate...and that's just for President (more attention). Breaking the EC threshold that way isn't plausible. They haven't manage to break 5% in almost 30 years. They haven't gotten a single legitimate electoral college vote in more than 50 years (faithless electors don't count). The only thing that would change is that there would be an asterix about earlier rounds put next to the final results.
1
@randal_gibbons bait
1
Common sense does not exist. There is no sense that is common, not even basic sense.
1
'I have no definable ideology other than everyone else's side is bad. I am very special.' -Yang
1