Having stuff on hand for cravings is unreasonable…? Seriously?

Than get a different brand of you want to be this bloody entitled lmfao.

They have other sizes and you can order online, or, use a bloody knife…

I mean if you’re eating it in pieces instead of the whole thing you already need to put the thing away….

Buy smaller bars then. The situation has remedies…

Knife?

It’s a seven pin, and unless I’m mistaken, you can see the control box on top of the frame as well.

Trailer emergency brake is probably pulled. Not ideal, but it’s probably not gonna go anywhere even if they start to load it like that.

Nah, since that’s not what the original topic was about anyways, and you seem to be hell bent on being correct instead of having a discussion.

The onus is on you, you claimed the terms are used and I already asked and you decided to not oblige and tell me to Google it.

So you Google it, or provide the proof you claimed of first.

The terms the US wants and uses is democrats and republicans, since they don’t really follow ideologies at all.

In a healthy political system the right will have some left ideas and left will have some right. Maybe educate yourself on other politcal systems first if you want to discuss and call me out? Your democracy is a sham, others don’t operate that way, yet you want to claim they do…? What….?

Ideas, but not the party themselves since they want to distance themselves…

Yes I don’t follow, but it’s shoved down everyone’s throats.

I’m telling you how your politics look to OUTSIDERS… this is how WE view the shithole that you claim is democracy. None of those terms are used how you’re claiming they are.

Sure YOU use the terms, but anything that escapes to other people doesn’t, because that’s how they want to be presented. As you say, they only use the term for “ideas”, that’s distancing dude… yeeesh.

No, I’ve never seen an article or comment about US politics use those terms. Which is odd for how often they get posted in other places.

And no, your country and politics specifically avoid those terms, since they want a two party system and that’s part of how it works.

It’s republican and democrats, not progressive and conservatives, that’s the “marketing”. Would love some articles from the US that use these terms though.

They are smearing “centrists” and the “right” in every comment dude…

And no, they just have an axe to grind for anyone who doesn’t align politically with them.

In a functioning democracy a “centrist” would have the good ideas of both the progressives and conservatives. So there isn’t anything about denying probable facts, and the rant they’re going on about 2+2=6 is a strawman fallacy to derail the conversation. Since that’s the uniquely US issue…

In a functioning political system both the “left” and “right” are competent and have good ideas.

Who said midpoints from incompatible solutions? Thats unique US issue as we’ve already discussed and pointed out, in other countries and political systems, that’s what you would want, since they are combing good ideas, not 2+2=6 as you’re claiming. Yes that’s apparently what happens in US political, not in healthy democracies.

Uh… yes it is, that’s why I would like for you to point to any other countries with these two party democracy issues.

You seriously can’t see how calling people “left”, “right”, or “centrist” is insulting them? Is that how ingrained and indoctrinated this stuff is in US politics?

It’s progressives and conservatives, the fact that you don’t even comprehend you’re refering to sides while using these insults and slurs to refer to political parties is quite frankly wild. You’re calling anyone who doesn’t agree with you politically names, I never mentioned in here dude lmfao, that makes you an ass. But yeah that shows your intent with this discussion, I’m gonna block you now instead.

Hence maybe why I’m pointing out that there shouldn’t be any sort of party or candidate that should be referred to as “centrist”…?

In other countries and political systems, that would be someone who would stand in the middle and actually have both good points as their platform.

In the US it’s used as smear to refer to people who don’t align politically with you. Same with the terms “left” and “right”. Other democracies have parties in these sides, but A there’s more than one, and B, the term isn’t used to smear and slander people or parties.

Hence this being a uniquely American thing…. Other countries use terms like progressive and conservatives instead, much more friendly and correct terms.

Why are you calling people who want to do what’s good for the nation, centrists?

You’re smearing them since they are wanting to do something different than what you want, that doesn’t automatically make them bad.

This is the state of US politics… can’t even have someone poke their head in without being insulted since they aren’t fully in the left or right. Two party democracy doesn’t work, and you’re perpetuating and making it harder for your country to try and accept this needed change.

Don’t just insult and call people names who don’t agree with you politically, that just makes you an ass.

You’ve mentioned left and right, are those not the party lines? You can’t claim you’re not mentioning parties when you’ve only done it using different terms in every comment. You can’t have someone who is “centrist” in democracies with more than 2 candidates, it’s a uniquely US issue, especially with the smear campaigns instead of actual politics.

I mean you described them that way, and you’re using them to describe the two different parties. Claiming otherwise is asinine. If they aren’t parties, and they aren’t sides, then what are they?

Without parties or sides, you can have left, right, or center. I’m sorry you got called out on this and are now flinging shit and making yourself look like biased bigot.

Now can you answer my questions or are you just going to deflect because you can’t answer simple questions without decrying people who don’t align politically with you…?

I don’t follow US politics* since I don’t live there……

But the issue is uniquely American, maybe you need to follow other countries politics more to see how flawed yours is?

This isn’t unique to the US. The US did not invent the concept of a midpoint.

What other countries have a two party democracy? And what other countries smear the other parties to the degree of US politics?

I get you have an axe to grind, but I said I was an outsider, how am I supposed to know one side is right and one side is wrong? If one is right and one is wrong, that really only makes one party now doesn’t it? You seem to want to point out math to others, but have an issue understanding it yourself.

Which is wrong. What “good points” do right-wingers legitimately have?

This is why US politics are wild….

Saying “both sides have good points” places a mystical property on whatever is in the middle, as though the middle is inherently correct.

And you’re saying only the left is right in both of your statements, obviously you aren’t impartial and have a bias, as pointed out in my previous comment

You’re batting a bit too hard for someone that thinks correct answers come from finding the midpoint. If someone says 2+2=4, and someone else says 2+2=6, the answer is still 4, not 5.

That is some fallacious strawmanning right there, you’re saying only one side can be right, that’s not someone who is willing to have a discussion, you’re obviously just throwing shit at anything you don’t agree with.

Which is the entire point of his joke running, it’s hilarious that you can’t see this, but not surprising since you think there’s only one party. This is American politics people.

And neither are they, so what’s your point? They’re just saying that both sides have good points, and they’re the “party” that will get what the nation wants done. Is trying to do what the nation wants as whole centrist to you? Or are trying to smear someone who doesn’t align fully with you? That’s the issue that they are also trying to bring to light, you are saying there is sides, there shouldn’t be… since to be centrist requires sides… or parties… you’ve no contradicted yourself in your explanation.

What’s centrist about that? I think you’re just reading way too far into this or trying to make it into something it’s not. Both sides have points, both are wrong, and you’re trying to decry someone saying this. That’s frankly wrong dude.

There shouldn’t be sides, and that makes centralism impossible, it’s only possible with the two party system.

Your comment makes it seem like there can only be two sides, that’s the entire issue with the US democracy from an outsider, where’s the other parties? Why only two, and why are you defending that there should be only two on divided lines?