That's still a lot of people with criminal records whose lives are much more difficult for it, for something she's now antagonizing her opponent for flip flopping on as well.
Don't get me wrong, I'm voting Harris and donating to get campaign. But I find this particular attack vector to be massively hypocritical.
I wonder how many people she pursued possession charges on as a DA.
Edit:
But at different junctures of her time in office, she has been an enforcer of cannabis laws and an opponent of legalized use for adults in California.
Though she defended marijuana’s use for medicinal purposes as district attorney, her prosecutors in San Francisco convicted more than 1,900 people on cannabis-related offenses.
Also a word thing to focus on during a World War.
Trump argued that the legal actions against him set a bad precedent
Well, we finally agree on something.
The fact that he's a free man and the republican nominee 4 years after attempting to steal an election and then subsequently attempted a coup is a really fucking bad precedent and shows that the legal system is impotent to stop large scale corruption.
There are Canadians that proudly fly the confederate flag too. Olympic level mental gymnastics
It sounds weird, but I can imagine it working. Sometimes sweet fruit and mild salt can combine well. And mustard is kind of salt like.
You forgot the open carry
This is a ridiculous narrative.
Trump is sexist and racist. His base is sexist and racists. This isn't even debatable, it's about undeniable as you can get without them literally explicitly stating that's their motivation under oath.
It's also extremely likely that Trump idolized Hitler and is trying to use his playbook. And a bunch of "conservative" groups doing the same. There is plenty of evidence to support this.
Just fucking call it what it is instead of trying to draw parallels to ancient history.
"Trump is trying to campaign on sexism, racism, and xenophobia to rally the racists and misogynists, in an attempt to catch lightning in a bottle the same way Hitler did, in order to establish himself as a dictator"
Is that so fucking hard to say directly?
taking a lot of fridge / freezer space
Maybe you forgot the freezer part.
There's Starlink, now. But somehow, relying on a Musk product to be able to do your job seems... risky.
I consider it animal abuse, but I can understand that there's an argument that it's not. I think the distinction of requiring scientific evidence supporting their claim is a reasonable requisite to allow the discussion.
It seems like things worked out here. My knee-jerk reaction would be to classify vegan diets in carnivor pets to be animal abuse and probably would have reported. But discussion happened to allow for discourse, and they rolled back the decision to at least allow for transparency.
And to be clear, I still think it is hands down animal abuse and hope that others come to the same conclusion. Animals don't have the ability to make an informed choice. Subjecting them to a dangerous diet to satisfy your own niche moral compass is evil.
It's not about you, it's about the animal. Get over yourself.
But again, I think it's OK to have the discussion, and I hope the community buries their side into oblivion.