DISCLAIMER: this is not my content that was removed, I just came across it in the modlog and found it to be absurd. If it’s not allowed, I totally understand.
Reason removed was because it’s unrelated.
Unrelated……
The guy was illegally deported without due process. And yet for some reason, suggesting so is somehow “unrelated” to a meme that is trying to say that because he is affiliated (no charges were ever filed against him for gang-related activity) with a gang, he is by default, guilty.
What’s ironic, is that the entire point of the meme is that the bullshit about him being in MS-13 is unrelated to the fact that people want accountability for this administration illegally deporting a man without due process.
This mod has definitely chosen the correct name.
And even taken into consideration that the instance is essentially a troll haven for wayward 4Chan refugees, they should still have to adhere to the rules of common sense.
no she wasn’t
Wake up.
prove the claim.
No, I’m not interested in doing your homework for you. Prove I’m wrong.
Usually people making claims need citations. Republicans don’t give citations to their claims. Maybe we can be better than them?
Its a common tactic by the MAGA Nazis to make their opposition endlessly chase their tails proving what is already thoroughly established. NO matter how much proof is offered, they will completely deny it with propaganda and bullshit, and demand more proof. I won’t play their game. They are blissful in their ignorance, and I stopped caring about educating them long ago.
So that’s a “no I won’t give citations to my claims like Republicans do”.
Not if they are arguing in bad-faith, which is usually. In an actual respectful debate, Im glad to offer sources. I consult them myself before making my arguments, so it’s no problem linking them, but Im not going to bother if they are obviously going to ignore them in favor of their MAGA delusions.
I just went through it with a MAGA Moron who insisted that the wrongly deported guy was a well-established MS-13 gang member, and thus Due Process wasn’t necessary. He kept saying he got due process, and the court determined that he was MS-13.
I countered with sources proving him wrong, and he just kept insisting he was right and I was wrong.
Then I offered up the actual link to the extraordinary 9-0 SCOTUS decision in which they specifically state that he did NOT recieve Due Process, and demanding his return. That should be the final word, right?
Not only did he STILL insist that the guy got Due Process in multiple courts, with no citations, despite being asked several times, he finally came out and said that SCOTUS was just wrong, and nobody is obligated to follow their directives.
Bottom line for him was that the government is whatever HitlerPig claims it to be at any given moment.
You’re the one that made the claim. if you can’t support it I have every reason to doubt it.
Third party candidates are always spoilers, Ralph Nader and Ross Perot being major ones.
Stein is such a good spoiler, that Republicans worked to get her on ballots, knowing she’d draw off more Dems than Reps.
This is basic political knowledge, and you arguing against it marks you as a troll or an idiot. Which are you?
i don’t tolerate abuse. i’ll accept your apology any time.
I’m sorry I think you should go take a flying fuck at a rolling donut.
disengage
according to the post-election analysis, ross perot decreased the margin of victory for clinton, and nader never spoiled any elections.
Perot made it possible for Clinton to win over GHW Bush and it is well established that Nader absolutely did spoil the 2000 election for Gore.
Nader always denied it, because he can’t face the blame that his ego-driven campaign was ultimately responsible for the GW Bush administration, whose negligence, incompetence, and corruption was responsible for the avoidable deaths of at least 10,000 American citizens, and countless foreign nationals, and the worst economic downfall since the Great Depression.
this just isn’t so. analysis of that election found that perot actually cut into clinton’s margin of victory
gore won that election.
this does not mean that her goal was to spoil the election. her goal was to win as many votes as she could.
She’s never had a chance to win, and she knows it. Her candidacy was heavily influenced by Russian propaganda social media accounts. She sat at Putin’s table at at least one Russian state dinner.
She’s a Russian-backed traitor, like all MAGA Nazis, supported only to be a spoiler.
none of this proves her goal was to spoil the election.
Oh yes, I forgot democracies can only have two candidates to choose from, both with the same to eign policy towards Israel. Do you want a democracy or not? If so, there’s got to be room for more parties and candidates.
If you want democracy you want to end winner-takes-all elections and go for proportional representation, and you want ranked choice voting or equivalent.
Attacking people for explaining the consequences of choices with the current terrible voting system doesn’t promote democracy
Totally agree with your first point. But the US democratic system is barely democratic imo, and tactical voting simply reinforces the existing 2 party system. The only chance they have for meaningful policy change is breaking the two party monopoly.
Edit: but that’s exactly what the Democrats and Republicans don’t want to happen.
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-says-jill-stein-favorite-politicians-1980202
https://fairvote.org/jill-stein-and-spoiler-season/
this doesn’t prove your claim.
There was a reason she didn’t run in 2020 and that’s because her interference wasn’t needed that year.
that’s the year I voted for Howie Hawkins. you’re just spreading a baseless conspiracy theory
It’s baseless that she didn’t run in 2020?
your claim about why she wasn’t the candidate is baseless
She ran in 2016 and 2024 though right?
Was she too busy to run in 2020?
you made up a conspiracy theory to explain it,instead of finding literally any research
No we’re having a difference of opinion but you’re unwilling to explain your side of it.
I did. you made an unproven claim.