and when has a left boycott ever been effective? Never.
That said, I thought the exemption for bakeries was strange.
Greg Flynn doesn’t own Panera. He owns some franchise units. JAB holdings is the one that owns Panera.
and when has a left boycott ever been effective? Never.
That said, I thought the exemption for bakeries was strange.
Greg Flynn doesn’t own Panera. He owns some franchise units. JAB holdings is the one that owns Panera.
Do you think a CEO is always representing their company?
Is your obsession with white nationalists because you can’t call everyone fascists or you will get banned?
This is not providing examples of which rights you’re fighting for.
Bad people do bad things is the kind of logic I should expect from you.
Do you have evidence that Trump is a white nationalists? Remember try to be specific in your examples.
Yes.
Like I already said, it isn’t an obsession.
This is a strawman.
I already linked this earlier just for you to ignore. So I’ll put in the same level of effort.
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/4330735-trump-maga-and-the-insidious-underbelly-of-white-supremacy-in-america/
Since you believe a CEO is always representing their company, then a person couldn’t be a CEO of multiple companies but they are, companies would be legally liable for all actions of their CEO but they are not.
You really need to work on understanding logical fallacies, you lose all credibility when you use them incorrectly.
An opnion piece that doesn’t mention white nantionalists in the whole article is not evidence that Trump is a white nantionalists. Do you even read the articles you cite.
You still haven’t listed a single right that you people were fighting for with the soul cycle boycott.
A person can represent multiple companies. And the law is the law, it is often not a reflection reality.
You portrayed my argument as “Bad people do bad”, an intentionally weak and inaccurate version of my argument. That’s by definition a strawman.
“A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion”
The only real difference here is that you portrayed my argument to be so weak that it was implied to be inherently wrong. But at the end of the day you were using a strawman.
If anyone here has lost credibility it is you for using fallacies, and then lying about it.
Evidently the concept of synonyms is beyond your understanding. That, and the spelling of “nationalist”.
You’re also fundamentally missing the point. The article is talking about the -ism, not the specifics which would be the -ists.
I’m glad you finally concede a CEO is not always representing their company.
Let’s look at your reply
White nationalists are bad, taking people’s rights away is bad. Remember this was in response to being asked which rights you people were fighting for, which you still can’t list. Bad people do bad things is a perfect summary of your dodge of the question.
Your article had accusations but no evidence, those accusations were Trump has done some racists things. That’s a far leap from Trump is a white nationalists.
Still waiting for what rights your fighting for.
That is not what I said. If you want to have honest discussion, this is not the way to do it.
That is not my argument.
I’m putting in the same level of effort as you. Do you want better sources? Then quit being dishonest about what I am saying, and quit the insults. Until then I’m not going to bother putting in effort to cite the evidence just for you to play childish games.
I already explained this, just for you to strawman it.
Here are your exact words.
You can’t represent multiple companies simultaneously, you should look up feduciary responsibilities.
Just admit you’re lazy and/or couldn’t find a source supporting your insane claims. The 1st step to improving as a person is to take responsibilities for your actions.
I’m starting to believe you misuse logically fallacies incorrectly as a defense mechanism for your poor arguments.
You still haven’t listed a single right you people were fighting for. All you’ve claimed is white nationalists (bad people) want to take away rights (bad things). You haven’t provided any evidence that they want to take away a specific right or even listed which rights they are trying to take away.
And the law doesn’t always reflect reality.
With you? Nah. It’s not worth the effort. Next time try to be honest about what I an saying and maybe I’ll put in the effort.
Nor do many of your comments.
Admitting you’re too lazy/can’t find a source is a step forward. You get a gold star.
Still can’t list one single right.
Or that they are white nationals
It falls under the great lie. If you keep repeating it, maybe people will believe it.
Either pizza was completely lazy or there are not any nut job articles claiming Trump is a white nantionalist.
Nationalist
How’s the saying go? when you can’t argue on merits go after spelling and grammar.
Really seem to be putting a lot of effort into defending yourself over this. Must be really bothering you.
I’m fully aware I can’t spell, it doesn’t bother me at all.
There are articles claiming it but it’s circular logic. He’s a white nationalist because they say he is.
That’s pizza’s wheelhouse I’m surprised he didn’t cite one of those articles.