It really says a lot about Democrats on this sub-forum when they give the, "I'm not going to read this". I never see people here labeled Republican do it why do you?

Do you really think your shit don't stink because I hate to be the bearer of bad news everyone's does.

When people engage with you in conversation/debate the one thing you never say is "I'm not going to read this or hear you out". You aren't refuting anything it just shows how lazy you are.

I think most Democrats don't PHYSICALLY read anymore they just listen to MSM through their television and phone and then just give "Dem punchlines".

I know reading is hard and it's easier to just absorb MSM ideologs and repeat them but a little effort goes a long way.

Please don't be offended I'm just generally curious why people can't read two paragraphs on a gaming forum when they ask for "supporting arguments" or "facts"

🌟 Hard Labour Camps 🌟

I find it weird that you aren't able to engage in some normal back and forth on a gaming forum.

Not to mention the list of people willing to engage and actually discuss the same tired shit we've been shoveling for 8 years is ever diminishing. If someone's willing to strike up a conversation you want, don't just make fart noises until they go away.
To that point, look at the conversation about Citizens United in the Israel thread. Its eye opening for some people. If all you did was watch Stephen Colbert and listen to Audie Cornish, you'd probably think Citizens United is some supreme court ruling on par with a ruling allowing puppies to be flayed and ground into mcdonalds hamburgers. They'll ominously deride it as the event that portended the end of our democracy by the corrosive influence of money in politics, but do they ever give a description of the 1st amendment stakes at issue, the context of the case or legal arguments? 85% of democrats polled would support a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United. Less than half polled would consider that an attack on free speech. What percent have any clue what its actually about? Supporting a petition to overturn the 1st amendment, its like Americans being asked to ban dangerous dihydrogen monoxide from polluting nature. But what really defines the zeitgeist is the opposition to learning about it. Objecting to anyone discussing it as spreading propaganda and disinformation, demanding censorship, facebook/reddit moderators flagging anyone posting a dissident thought to silence them, etc etc


The George Floyd trial was a big watershed for this. All the information was out there right in public, before the trial even began. I can point to the documentation and reports that lay out exactly how every possible indicator was present that George Floyd died of an overdose, how all the indicators of restraint and force causing his death were negative, how the physical evidence recovered from the scene could only be explained by him downing an entire bag of fentanyl percocets like he's a crackhead joey chestnut. A coroner's report where the cause of death has absolutely zero supporting evidence in the medical observations, and a coroner who said he would have called it a drug overdose if not for being directly threatened by a colleague who said he'd sic a mob on him. And yet here we are in 2024 and you cannot discuss this. The very conversation is banned across most of the internet. Media personalities have to either avoid the subject, or treat as fact the conclusion of the trial. The vast majority of casual observers would just assume Chauvin murdered Floyd, its on video, we saw it ourselves, and anyone saying otherwise is a dangerous racist who needs to be silenced. Don't talk to them, don't discuss it, just spam fart noises.

pretty on-par for Goomer

you put your mask on closed your eyes and said lalalalalalalalalala







nobody is this dim i think he is just trying to troll

It’s 2024, these aren’t trolls. They are that unhinged.

It's not trolling, they are persecuting us and laughing about it

Notice how its never ever about policy

Whats their message? Trump likes Hitler. Trump is a fascist. Trump is a sex creep. Trump is a felon. Trump is unhinged, Trump is bad orange man
What difference does it make to me or any other US citizen what Trump's character is like? How does it affect me, or the country?
Trump vows to end taxes on social security, end taxes on tips, end taxes on overtime, stop illegal immigration, stop outsourcing, protect freedom of speech and civil liberties, prevent world war 3 and disengage from proxy wars, keep men out of womens sports, ramp up energy production, deregulate, ramp up federal enforcement against violent crimes. Kamala would ship more jobs overseas, expand a welfare state and hike taxes to pay for it, plunge the world into war, restrict our liberties and crack down on dissent and tank our economy. And I'm supposed to hear Icemage telling me that John Kelly got his rhubarb rubbed wrong by Trump and therefore how could I ever vote for him?

I wouldn't drink a bottle of draino just because you thought the label looked more colorful. I respect Trump for being a teetotaler and how every girlfriend he's had said he was a perfect gentleman. I don't respect Trump for being a pugilistic braggart full of hot air. And absolutely none of that factors into who I vote for, because it doesn't factor into how our country will be run.

Is it? Kamala Harris is a hard left airhead / serial plagiarist who can't handle even the most gentle and favorable of circumstances. She flubs even the easy talk show lobs thrown at her. Her running mate is also a serial liar and part-time CCP enthusiast. The administration's own John Kerry is in Europe telling anyone who will listen that Harris must win or they'll never be able to neuter the first amendment. The border collapsed, and Kamala is out stressing the need to surgically transition migrants. The data on the pandemic is in, and Democratic-lockdowns robbed a generation of education, health, and wealth. Jihadists are appeased as the administration argues with itself whether to declare Israel a terrorist state. The Afghanistan debacle is a "great success". Ukraine is winning the war they're losing. As Europe slowly decays, Democratic economic policy is to become a second Europe.

Some small amount of self-awareness is in order. Harris is struggling because she's a terrible politician forced on an electorate after she and her party covered up the fact that the sitting president was senile. Voters are tired of rising crime; they're worried about economic instability. The "Trump is a fascist" schtick works well for the Atlantic crowd, but unlike the Atlantic, most voters still possess the ability to look back ~4-8 years and recall for themselves whether Trump was or was not a fascist.

To your question, I'm confused as to what damning allegations you're talking about. That he doesn't know who Rommel was? Or that the German economy rebounded in the 1930s? Surely not that he was curious about the proximate cause and responsibility for World War 1. Kelly is a poor man's armchair philosopher. What is good for our allies may not be good for us. Our allies today may not be our allies tomorrow. And whether or not they're our allies or not obviously has nothing to do with whether their actions are just or unjust. What the article highlights to me is that yellow journalism is fundamentally a double-edged sword. I'm not sure how anyone can take the Atlantic seriously after this.