Not even. He officially left the Dems and registered as independent earlier this year.

Notice also how their go-to response is to talk about their right to vote for third-party candidates, which is a strawman of the criticism they typically receive. They can’t and don’t engage the actual substance of criticism, which is that voting third-party under our first-past-the-post system is a bad plan that has a proven track record of accomplishing absolutely nothing.

The first movie I remember seeing in theaters was the Special Edition of A New Hope.

I loved Episodes I & II as a kid, but by the time Episode III rolled around I had developed enough appreciation for good screenwriting that I left the theater mildly disappointed.

Good thing we always have old faithful- racism and sexism. That’ll swing those undecideds.

At work, both the resident Gen-X divorced-dad asshole and the luddite boomer have taken to complaining that “We’re all going to be called racists and misogynists for not voting for Kamala” while grousing about hating her more than Biden, never once mentioning a single point of policy that they dislike.

No, Mike Pence debated Harris in the previous election cycle. It’s tradition for the Vice-Presidential nominees to debate each other.

Both lawsuits argue that Tennessee law does not account for evolving science on the transmission of HIV or precautions that prevent its spread, like use of condoms. Both lawsuits also argue that labeling a person as a sex offender because of HIV unfairly limits where they can live and work and stops them from being alone with grandchildren or minor relatives.

“Tennessee’s Aggravated Prostitution statute is the only law in the nation that treats people living with HIV who engage in any sex work, even risk-free encounters, as ‘violent sex offenders’ subjected to lifetime registration,” the ACLU lawsuit states.

“That individuals living with HIV are treated so differently can only be understood as a remnant of the profoundly prejudiced early response to the AIDS epidemic.”

Her motivations aren’t even as noble as that. The article goes on to describe how she’s actually just trying to undercut a proposed constitutional amendment:

But Ms. Bolick also railed against Planned Parenthood and Democratic support for abortion rights. She argued that her vote to repeal the 1864 ban could be Arizona’s best shot at curbing the momentum behind a proposed ballot measure to enshrine abortion protections in the state constitution.

House of Leaves by Mark Z. Danielewski.

Insulting someone via stereotype doesn’t show that they’re wrong. You’ve added less to the discussion than the person you’re attempting to mock.