Thanks! I think @lemonmelon explained it well. Seems I was skirting the definition by a whisker and got away with it but still failed as a joke or pun should be understandable without having to pull out a Latin dictionary 😀

Thanks for the extensive, informative and complete reply! Very helpful in trying to understand the nuances of the English language.

Question: I thought to ‘transpire’ could mean ‘shedding moisture’ and/or ‘things that happened or are revealed’

English is not my first language though so there’s that

Sweat shaming, never did I think this would transpire here…

Isn’t it his constitutionally right to bear arms though?

I’ll get my coat…

Don’t let anyone call you antisemitic

That ship of having the phrase have any meaning has sailed decades ago, at least for me. It is a sign you are on the right side of truth as this line of ‘defense’ is always used to cover up something morally wrong which Israel is being called out for.

Voting for the party which does not want to worsen the status quo might not work

This might be the case, this is the ‘hope’ part I mentioned but it might work.
But you can bet on your life and those you care for that the other party will try everything in their new found power to make things absolutely worse.

I get the dilemma and voting for any party in this scenario is tough but I would still opt for the party of hope and which displays signs of change for the better.

Ok, so if both of these hypothetical parties fully and completely, without reservation, support the invasion (or let’s call it what it is, war) then there is not a lot you can do.

But it turns out one party has no problems with that invasion/war and supports it. Heck, they even tell others who protest the invasion to just accept it all as a fact and just deal and live with it. Also calls to surrender parts of your land because the leader of the invasion is having a certain ‘grip’ on the party leader.

The other party is lacking in action to change this outcome but has shown signs that they do not like the invasion but need to get/stay in power to try and stop the madness. But to get elected they cannot come out and say “we will stop the invasion” because that is a death-knell to their goal to be elected and in power.

As you see or can probably understand, you are not dealing with parties per-se, you are dealing with the populace who get to vote for either party. Navigating that populace to get elected is a tricky and a risky thing, before you know it you blew you chances and the other party wins.

This is truly the case of voting for the party who has some semblance of being able to do the right thing, even if it is late or voting for the party who has clearly signaled to be 100% against what you hope and stand for.

Best bet in this case is to vote for hope and possibility, not the surefire way the other party wants to dig a much, much deeper hole which will be infinitely more difficult to crawl out of.

There is no easy solution, only thing we have is choosing the ones who show a flicker of hope in doing better. Good luck!

hard to support a party when it condones the killing of one’s family.

So I suppose you would vote neither party?
Party A is not doing enough to stop the killing and ‘condones’ (I disagree with that word and characterization) Party B has messaged that the killing isn’t going fast and hard enough and will give wider support to the killing once elected

Party B also wants to deport people of a certain heritage (multiple groups, not just the one) and perhaps you fall into that bracket? I really hope not.

GPS and navigation was a life changing thing for me as I am, how shall I put it, geographically challenged.

Give me the option of turning left or right and I will constantly choose wrong. I tested this with my family, who thought I was being dramatic and hyperbolic, and they witnessed my failures in all glory. Since then I am no longer allowed to ‘just wing it’ when we are on route…

“hardline Hindu monk”

What does he practice, full contact yoga? Mahabharata style asceticism?

Kamala needs 1 state
Trump needs multiple states

All kidding aside, OP did a great job compressing it all in the last 2 paragraphs.

This is kinda on you, you chose to visit hexbear. Just block that instance. And while you are at it, also block lemygrad.

Remains the question: why the self-flagellation?

The GOP agrees with you

That is correct, even the GOP agrees with you.

You think about it, you hope it will be done…and Max actually does it 🫡

It’s the same. Liberty is driven by money and it is scared advertisers will take offense and consequentially less money be generated because of it. MBS is cognizant of this concern and started to act as he also is driven by financial motives.

You could consider Liberty and MBS to be in the same camp on this one. And it is all about financials, not morals.

Meh, two peas in a pod as far as I am concerned 🤣

This absolute nonsense. Max should push this issue by not complying (maybe even add a little “fuck yous” in the message). What are they going to do? Whatever the next step would be, just ignore and do not comply.

Force the hand of the FIA to show them for what they are : idiots gatekeeping nonsense. This does nothing for the sport and it is a non-issue.

Some part of me feels this is a consequence of an American company owning F1 now and implementing these BS actions that seem to be normal in US sports. I was afraid that this mentality would come to F1 and here we are…