To be clear: The “anti-science” candidate is one who would increase oil drilling and approve the Willow Project, given that the majority of scientists of the world are urging us to ramp down fossil fuel extraction immediately. The “pro-science” candidate one who would cancel the Willow project on her first day in office. The “anti-medicine” candidate is one who will not support a public option, and says he’d refuse to sign a Medicare For All bill. The “pro-medicine” candidate is someone who stands for universal healthcare. Smears do not change the truth; they just obscure it. But only for so long.

Apr 30, 2023 · 4:02 PM UTC

199
379
46
2,195
Replying to @marwilliamson
To be clear since you are "pro-science" this means you will undo the legal fiction of "gender identity" that is terrible for women and kids, and put an end to child vivisection (aka "trans kid health care") as sex is real, binary, and doesn't change.
1
Replying to @marwilliamson
As for Willow Project, it was going to happen regardless. This administration reduced harm to the environment & Indigenous Alaskans wanted it. They DGAF what some colonizer thinks about it.
2
Replying to @marwilliamson
Tuskegee Global. Rule over a a world of ash. Poisoner in Chief a.co/d/in6Z4I6
2
Replying to @marwilliamson
Pro science? Did he work for Pfizer? Moderna?
1
Replying to @marwilliamson
Science-denier showing her lack of governing qualifications. Color me surprised
Replying to @marwilliamson
I love you but your knowledge about climate change should be updated and your knowledge of world economics is woefully inadequate. Cheers
1
Replying to @marwilliamson
The person championing all of those causes (Bernie Sanders) is asking you to drop out… need more be said?
2
Replying to @marwilliamson
Yes and. Science needs to incorporate more than what's objective. It hasn't yet dealt with all the implications of Hubble showing us we need a shift of awareness that's bigger than what Copernicus showed us. This would be great platform material for the vision the Democrats need.