Donkey_Punch wrote on Dec 2, 2024, 21:37:
Got to hand it to them. They convinced a whole country worth of idiots to vote for Trump. They are good at what they do.

WannaLogAlready wrote on Nov 10, 2024, 15:55:
The too simple people, who let their populist political group or rich religious leaders to decide for them.
One example, young male blacks and latins, systemically kept apart from a good education, the better to be duped and manipulated.
They believe that their wealthy masters care for them and not for the money they squeeze from them.

Teddy wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 18:44:

Beamer wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 17:24:

ByteCrawler wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 16:17:

No it was censorship and interference. One example is enough. Just like America has had enough of how far away the Dems have strayed. Your party literally hates America and self-loathes itself. You'll have me believe I should apologize for being born. I'd rather live differently.

Have strayed from what?
It wasn't really interference, it was them fearing that it was false information. It isn't the first time, and won't be the last time, that media sources try to avoid false information. After what happened with Clinton, they played it very safe. Too safe, I agree.

But, frankly, if Hunter Biden's laptop influenced your vote, you're [the royal "you"] a moron. An absolute moron. Hunter was never near the presidency, because Democrats have actual standards and believe in merit, and know that the children of presidents don't merit major positions in the White House (they also know reality TV stars don't, but that's a different story.) Hunter being a scumbag isn't really news, and if you voted due to it, well, you're a moron, right? I think we can all agree to that. It'd be like voting because Baron lives at home with his parents instead of in a dorm room.

Dude, the guy you're debating is sending out obvious racist, white-supremacist dog-whistles that the Democratic party is trying to make him apologize for being born (unsaid word: born white). Think about that for a moment and whether its even worth engaging with someone like that. My opinion, no one that far down the rabbit hole of nonsense will ever be persuaded by anything. Not logic, not reason, not facts. The only thing they want is to continue spewing their "I'm a victim!" propaganda without interruption or else they'll start crying "CENSORSHIP!"

Beamer wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 16:08:

ByteCrawler wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 15:48:

Cutter wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 15:45:
The fact you don't understand why the Dems lost is why they lost. But by all means, keep on vilifying everyone who won't drink the radical left's Kool-Aid and see how that works out for you. You better get comfortable with losing from here on in in that case. This wasn't approval of Trump, it was rejection of a shitty and incompetent political party and their far left agenda. Same thing that's happening in Europe, Canada, and the rest of the world. Next time try having an actual open primary and let people pick a candidate they want, not the appointed DEI hire.

Bingo!

What, specifically, was "far left," and can you cite a quote from Harris on it?

Beamer wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 16:13:

ByteCrawler wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 13:30:

Beamer wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 13:01:

ByteCrawler wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 11:06:

Beamer wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 10:54:
Elon Musk using his billions to buy a social media site, take control of the algorithm, turn it into a massive disinformation system, use that leverage to jockey for a cabinet position that can make him even more billions shouldn't be something that we tolerate.

But it's OK when its Zuckerberg and Meta, lol. Or how about Google giving all the assistance they can possibly give to Kamala and she still lost because they weren't jockeying for a better position when the anti-trust calls come.

Can you cite what this assistance was? Did Zuckerberg constantly post and amplify things beneficial to her? Did he share the stage with her repeatedly? Did he pay millions of dollars to people registering to vote for her?

I don't have any citations and it's really not necessary, I didn't forget about his involvement (whether him personally or the company he owns) with election interference and censorship in 2020. He didn't endorse her because either A) he didn't want to step in the 2020 muck again to affect their bottom line or B) she's just not a good candidate.

Zuckerberg Admits Facebook Wrong to Suppress Hunter Laptop Story, Scolds White House for Covid Censorship/

So, you have one example from 4 years ago, and it's something that was less interference and more trying to play something safe.
Great. That's fantastic. So many facts and so few feelings. Compares exactly with Musk tweeting hourly that Kamala will round up Republicans and that she'll personally ruin him and America.

jdreyer wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 15:58:

Cutter wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 15:45:
The fact you don't understand why the Dems lost is why they lost. But by all means, keep on vilifying everyone who won't drink the radical left's Kool-Aid and see how that works out for you. You better get comfortable with losing from here on in in that case. This wasn't approval of Trump, it was rejection of a shitty and incompetent political party and their far left agenda. Same thing that's happening in Europe, Canada, and the rest of the world. Next time try having an actual open primary and let people pick a candidate they want, not the appointed DEI hire.

Nah, it was the 20% inflation that happened during COVID. Voters blamed the Dems for that since Biden was president. It's really just that simple.

Cutter wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 15:45:
The fact you don't understand why the Dems lost is why they lost. But by all means, keep on vilifying everyone who won't drink the radical left's Kool-Aid and see how that works out for you. You better get comfortable with losing from here on in in that case. This wasn't approval of Trump, it was rejection of a shitty and incompetent political party and their far left agenda. Same thing that's happening in Europe, Canada, and the rest of the world. Next time try having an actual open primary and let people pick a candidate they want, not the appointed DEI hire.

BigVlad wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 13:26:

ByteCrawler wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 13:16:

BigVlad wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 12:48:

Frang wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 12:40:
Wow, just wow. Literally everything you said is a fallacy. MSNBC and CNN in the house it would appear.

Nope. Everything I said was correct. Gotta get out of that bubble, man.

Funny response coming from a fellow bubble dweller. Let me guess, your bubble is better because everything you said is "correct".

Well, yes of course. I care about what is actually true. I have no interest in believing things are true just because I would prefer it to be so. So if I am in a bubble, then that bubble is by definition better because it better reliably leads to truth. Usually that requires cross checking many points of data but that is not difficult to do.

Beamer wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 13:01:

ByteCrawler wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 11:06:

Beamer wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 10:54:
Elon Musk using his billions to buy a social media site, take control of the algorithm, turn it into a massive disinformation system, use that leverage to jockey for a cabinet position that can make him even more billions shouldn't be something that we tolerate.

But it's OK when its Zuckerberg and Meta, lol. Or how about Google giving all the assistance they can possibly give to Kamala and she still lost because they weren't jockeying for a better position when the anti-trust calls come.

Can you cite what this assistance was? Did Zuckerberg constantly post and amplify things beneficial to her? Did he share the stage with her repeatedly? Did he pay millions of dollars to people registering to vote for her?

BigVlad wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 12:48:

Frang wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 12:40:
Wow, just wow. Literally everything you said is a fallacy. MSNBC and CNN in the house it would appear.

Nope. Everything I said was correct. Gotta get out of that bubble, man.

Beamer wrote on Nov 6, 2024, 10:54:
Elon Musk using his billions to buy a social media site, take control of the algorithm, turn it into a massive disinformation system, use that leverage to jockey for a cabinet position that can make him even more billions shouldn't be something that we tolerate.

Cutter wrote on Oct 23, 2024, 16:21:
If you're dropping $500+/- on a new phone, is it really a big ask to spend $30-$50 more for a good case and screen protector? It sounds like you're looking for a reason to destroy your phone so you can rationalize buying a new one.