I voted a few weeks ago. Excluding the Democrats that were running unopposed, I voted for one Democrat at the county level over the Republican, and everyone else from POTUS on down was red. In 2018 I think I voted for three or four Democrats.
ad1x2's forum posts
@Stevo_the_gamer said:
I'm not sure the media, along with those obsessed with Trump making endless tweets/comments/threads, will know what to do if Trump is defeated this year. They might lose their purpose in life!
They'll probably laugh, gloat, and share a bunch of memes mocking Trump supporters for the first few weeks. Hollywood will spend their next two or three awards shows boasting about how everything will go back to normal under a Biden presidency. A few may even openly fantasize about Trump being arrested by the NYPD minutes after Biden gets sworn in, although that's pretty unlikely.
After Trump goes back to Mar-a-Lago to retire and comedians get tired of mocking Trump for losing the election, they will struggle for material. Maybe they'll lightheartedly make fun of Biden's frequent gaffes and memory lapses and then change the subject.
Other entities like the Lincoln Project will really be screwed because the GOP isn't going to accept them for being RINOs that may have contributed to Trump's loss and Democrats aren't going to accept them because, well, they're Republicans.
On the other hand, if Trump wins, they'll act angry openly while secretly being happy that they still have a job. After Trump is declared the winner they'll just claim that (insert number of votes Trump got here) million people are racists, or if they are black they are Uncle Toms. Vladimir Putin may even get a few more shoutouts for election interference.
@Sevenizz said:
@Serraph105: @LJS9502_basic: So no proof then. Got it.
"The rioting will continue until you vote Trump out!"
That's pretty much what it has come down to in some people's minds. No riots took place during Obama's presidency, and it's supposedly Trump's fault riots broke out after a police officer working for a Democratic police chief in a Democratic city that was in a Democratic state was filmed kneeling on a black man.
I don't know, but I think there is a definition for the unlawful use of violence (riots) and intimidation to achieve a political goal you want to happen (get undecided people to vote for Biden). That definition may be called terrorism, but I could be wrong.
Talking about these riots specifically, I'm wondering if they're pissed the knife-wielding man didn't get shot two weeks from now so they could try their luck scoring a PS5 or Xbox Series X/S during their peaceful protests.
@LJS9502_basic said:
@ad1x2 said:
Instead of mocking the person that commented, maybe you should try to understand why he commented instead of just dismissing him as being some flyover country moron voting against his own interests.
For example, why did he lose his job? Where was his job (was he in a major city with massive layoffs due to COVID)? Did he own a business that was burned to the ground during the mostly peaceful riots that happened after George Floyd died? Is he someone that is trying to get a job in the fracking industry, which Biden promised to eliminate before trying to walk it back after he was told his comments could have cost him states that heavily rely on it like Pennslyvania?
I know some of you won't ask those questions and will just pat each other on the back while talking about how stupid Trump supporters are, but that doesn't get to the bottom of the issue. Smug dismissal of people with different political beliefs or living situations than you are why so many Trump supporters are unwilling to have a conversation with you that may have convinced them to consider voting for Biden.
As some from Pennsylvania..........I wish fracking was banned. But that isn't what Biden said.
While I emphasize with your viewpoint, we're still probably a few decades away from being able to detach from it completely. When people are using it right now to feed their families, they probably aren't going to vote for the guy who hinted that they would get rid of it. It may not affect you personally if you aren't in the fracking industry (although the pollution is probably what makes you want to ban it), but you don't represent all of Pennslyvania.
@nepu7supastar7 said:
@ad1x2:
Refusing to post a flimsy story isn't censorship, it's more about integrity. You don't post something until all the details are out and the Hunter story had holes and red flags from the beginning. Millions watching something doesn't necessarily mean that they all agree with the content either. Personally, I like watching other people's viewpoints on certain matters. I don't have to like it or agree with it.
The media posted a story from an anonymous source claiming that Trump called dead soldiers losers despite people that actually don't like him like Bolton saying that it's doubtful he said it.
The media spent weeks talking about how Justice Kavanaugh was a serial rapist based on flimsy testimony from an accusor he supposedly went to high school with, but when Joe Biden was accused of sexual assault, the accuser was pretty much made persona non grata.
The media spent an eternity telling us how a 16-year old kid from Kentucky smirking while wearing a MAGA hat was a huge racist threatening a Vietnam Vet (that we later found out never went to Vietnam) before more footage came out showing the full story.
The media breathlessly covered Bubba Wallace's alleged hate crime until they found out the supposed noose was just a misidentified garage door rope pull.
We don't even need to get started on Jussie Smollet.
Let's not pretend that there isn't some partisan reasoning for what stories they wanted to publish and which stories they choose to ignore.
@thegreatchomp said:
@ad1x2: Covid is Trumps fault and Biden didn’t say he ban it, just phase it out.
You’re kinda going a little overboard here.
I may have misspoken in regards to what he said during the debate, but phasing it out pretty much means eventually banning it. Biden did say he would outright ban it on more than one occasion and Kamala Harris said she was in favor of it as well.
Yes, it's a Trump ad that, like many other attack ads will be edited to show his opponents in the most negative light, but it's still a video of both Biden and Harris talking about their plans for fossil fuels:
Loading Video...
Instead of mocking the person that commented, maybe you should try to understand why he commented instead of just dismissing him as being some flyover country moron voting against his own interests.
For example, why did he lose his job? Where was his job (was he in a major city with massive layoffs due to COVID)? Did he own a business that was burned to the ground during the mostly peaceful riots that happened after George Floyd died? Is he someone that is trying to get a job in the fracking industry, which Biden promised to eliminate before trying to walk it back after he was told his comments could have cost him states that heavily rely on it like Pennslyvania?
I know some of you won't ask those questions and will just pat each other on the back while talking about how stupid Trump supporters are, but that doesn't get to the bottom of the issue. Smug dismissal of people with different political beliefs or living situations than you are why so many Trump supporters are unwilling to have a conversation with you that may have convinced them to consider voting for Biden.
@nepu7supastar7 said:
@ad1x2:
If we were seeing a rush of articles being published about a scandal involving Trump, then I'd say the Hunter Biden story is fair game. But we're not and simply put, no one cares about Hunter Biden's story. And it's painfully obvious that it was a last ditch attempt to sway the election from the get go. But regardless, it doesn't offer any reason to convince me to vote for Trump. And I still voted for Biden. So far, it looks like Trump is the only candidate trying to cheat.
Just because you don't care doesn't mean nobody cares. For example, over seven and a half million people watched Tucker Carlson interview Hunter Biden's ex-business associate Tony Bobulinski on Tuesday; the interview was beaten only by the Voice and game six of the World Series. It beat the season premiere of This is Us.
Besides, if nobody cared, then Facebook and Twitter wouldn't have censored the story. They didn't censor fake stories such as China's bogus claim that Patient Zero of COVID was a soldier from the U.S. Army, but they went out of their way to censor the story about Hunter and block leaked pictures showing him smoking crack.
A lot of you keep missing the point of this thread. The thread isn't about convincing you to vote for Trump or that Hunter is guilty of what he was accused of. It is about Glenn Greenwald being censored because his media outlet wanted to prevent him from posting negative information about the Bidens and Glenn's resignation as a result.
@Vaasman said:
@ad1x2 said:
@Vaasman: I can see that our conversation isn't going to go anywhere. Rather than discuss the topic, you are trying to discredit it because the person the topic is about wanted to publish a story critical of your preferred presidential candidate.
Greenwald accuses the Intercept of censoring him, so your proclamation that he wasn't censored because he was able to post his story at another website is inaccurate because guess what, the Intercept still censored him.
If I walk into a McDonald's and they refuse to serve me, walking over to Burger King and getting served doesn't negate the fact that McDonald's refused to serve me first.
Yes I would say since you have an utterly nonsensical concept of what censorship is, this won't go anywhere. And don't blame me because you didn't do your due diligence and look for the second side of the story dude. You discredited it and yourself by posting only half of what there is.
Also your analogy is horrible. Mcdonalds doesn't pay you, and they aren't associated with you once you eat their food, and so long as their reasoning was legitimate, they are in fact allowed to not serve you.
I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt, but it is now obvious you are intentionally gaslighting in an attempt to win your argument while simultaneously derailing this thread that isn't even about Hunter Biden's guilt, but Glenn being forced to remove negative information about a certain presidential candidate.
My scenario about McDonald's is hypothetical under the assumption that I did nothing wrong, and they just told me to leave. You're trying to bring up some fantasy scenario that I must have done something crazy to give McDonald's legitimate justification to kick me out and discredit my scenario.
If you don't want to discuss the subject and instead want to continue to gaslight because you can't stand the idea of your preferred presidential candidate possibly having some negative press sent their way, then you are no longer worth my time discussing with.
@LJS9502_basic said:
@ad1x2 said:
No @LJS9502_basic, that response does not end the thread. If you choose not to post in the thread anymore, I would assume that would end it for you, but it will still be there for everyone else unless a mod locks it.
He pretty much demonstrated that your OP was one sided and devoid of facts. But keep digging in and pretending to be neutral.
For one thing, the post just makes it look like a he said-she said scenario between Glenn and the Intercept editors he accuses of censoring him to protect Biden. It doesn't exonerate the Intercept of any wrongdoing.
For another thing, the Intercept's rebuttal was not online when I posted the original thread, so at the time, I only had Greenwald's word of what happened. While I'm sure you want to accuse him of lying, the fact that several other outlets outright refused to cover the story due to fears that it may help Trump in the election gives his accusations some credibility in regards to motivations.
By the way, if your standard for posting a story is that both sides need to be addressed first, then I will stand by while you criticize people that posted about Jussie Smollett, Nick Sandmann, the McCloskey's and every other sensitive topic that got a lot of posts before the other side was able to present their side of the story.
Log in to comment