I can think of several that should disappear too. Where’s Amstel?
Can you point us to one?
I do not bookmark random videos I’ve seen on the net over the years. If this is a serious request, you’re on the internet obviously… do your own research. I’d try on a right leaning venue like Rumble if you really want to see this other side of the spectrum.
I don’t think videos that would be considered equivalent exist, at least not in significant numbers. I’m sure there are nutty leftists out there, but I doubt you could find gatherings of left leaning people all echoing talking points shared with the party’s politicians. Who is the right wing equivalent to Jordan Klepper or Jimmy Kimmel?
We’ve finally advanced the whataboutism argument to the point that we no longer even need to provide the whataboutism.
Saying big words doesn’t impress me. That’s also a discussion diversionary tactic… toss out terms like red herring, straw man, whataboutism and seemingly ignore reality. To give it an added bonus, claim the intellectual high ground. Game, set, match… wrong!
To summarize my view briefly… In my eyes, Jimmy Kimmel is some late night TV show host, I really have no weight on what he thinks or in content he produces. My point and the TRUTH is that the video in this first post isn’t some new unique idea. Nor is it a liberal only phenomena.
Here’s the summary… create some questions/comments from someone but attribute to someone else on the oppositio. Poll people going into a rally of the opposition, election primary location, etc. You’re behind the camera, can control what you show or don’t show, how you cut the material to sensationalize or make people look like idiots. Sometimes it’s deserving, to be honest not being informed properly isn’t a left or right wing problem these days. I’m not here to defend idiots but what I’m saying is they (someone saying something idiotic) do not define people that believe in MAGA and creating some wide sweeping “MAGA mind” stereotype from it is a pretty ill thought out exercise.
It exists, it isn’t some ‘whataboutism’
Your attempt to “Both Sides!” this has failed badly.
Ha ha! Whatever happened to that guy?
I’m pretty sure he popped back up once or twice under another name, his posting style was relatively distinct, and then was gone for good.
Shut up all of you.
You are going to Beetlejuice him back.
Ha ha! Whatever happened to that guy?
I’m pretty sure he popped back up once or twice under another name, his posting style was relatively distinct, and then was gone for good.
Shut up all of you.
You are going to Beetlejuice him back.
I remember the first time I interacted with him when he first started posting. There was a story about a teenage girl that was stabbing someone and got shot by the police when they showed up. He posted stuff about it that as best as I could tell he was just making up out of thin air and did not jive at all with the reports in the media. Didn’t seem to have any purpose to it, no agenda, he was just making stuff up.
He’s up there on the list of one of a kind posters.
I can think of several that should disappear too. Where’s Amstel?
I couldn’t stand this place when Big Kahuna was spamming the forum with anti Obama posts. I remember it wouldn’t be uncommon for the main page had like 10-15 of his posts on it at any one time.
I would like him to explain what “being into abortion†means.
It’s actually pretty simple, most liberals are for abortion in some form. To be presented with a question… what do you think about Biden oppossition to abortion and then go on without missing a beat… oh yeah we’re for that too is exactly what this thread is ‘about’. Uninformed people holding the party line no matter what and I dare say with no personal morality or public stances.
Sorry I’m not spending my time to dig up videos but they were definitely more prevalent in the algorithms, especially around election time.
I would like him to explain what “being into abortion†means.
It’s actually pretty simple, most liberals are for abortion in some form. To be presented with a question… what do you think about Biden oppossition to abortion and then go on without missing a beat… oh yeah we’re for that too is exactly what this thread is ‘about’. Uninformed people holding the party line no matter what and I dare say with no personal morality or public stances.
Sorry I’m not spending my time to dig up videos but they were definitely more prevalent in the algorithms, especially around election time.
Yet another strawman. You are flailing.
Biden is against late term, elective, abortion. Most Democrats agree with him.
I would like him to explain what “being into abortion†means.
It’s actually pretty simple, most liberals are for abortion in some form. To be presented with a question… what do you think about Biden oppossition to abortion and then go on without missing a beat… oh yeah we’re for that too is exactly what this thread is ‘about’. Uninformed people holding the party line no matter what and I dare say with no personal morality or public stances.
Sorry I’m not spending my time to dig up videos but they were definitely more prevalent in the algorithms, especially around election time.
Yet another strawman. You are flailing.
Biden is against late term, elective, abortion. Most Democrats agree with him.
What are the odds that every position a presidential candidate holds, you also hold? That would seem like to me to indicate a person who doesn’t think for themselves and just adopts someone else’s, or a political party’s positions.
I voted for Biden last time and I’ll vote for him this time because I can’t see the Republicans putting up anyone who would more closely align with my views.
That being said, I don’t think Biden has any business being president again, but the alternative is almost certainly going to be someone is has orders of magnitudes less business being the president.
It’s actually pretty simple, most liberals are for abortion in some form.
No, they’re not. Hardly anyone (liberal or conservative) is FOR abortion. Most liberals are “for” allowing the pregnant woman and her doctor to make a medically informed choice about whether abortion is the right option. That’s not the same as being “for abortion.”
It’s actually pretty simple, most liberals are for abortion in some form.
No, they’re not. Hardly anyone (liberal or conservative) is FOR abortion. Most liberals are “for” allowing the pregnant woman and her doctor to make a medically informed choice about whether abortion is the right option. That’s not the same as being “for abortion.”
You’re missing my point… the interviewer said THEIR candidate was AGAINST abortion and they jumped on board with the false assertion. Is that more clear? As you stated many are at least for it in some form, especially liberals.
It’s actually pretty simple, most liberals are for abortion in some form.
No, they’re not. Hardly anyone (liberal or conservative) is FOR abortion. Most liberals are “for” allowing the pregnant woman and her doctor to make a medically informed choice about whether abortion is the right option. That’s not the same as being “for abortion.”
You’re missing my point… the interviewer said THEIR candidate was AGAINST abortion and they jumped on board with the false assertion. Is that more clear? As you stated many are at least for it in some form, especially liberals.
The interviewer in the video you said you saw, don’t have, can’t find and don’t want to look for?
It’s actually pretty simple, most liberals are for abortion in some form.
No, they’re not. Hardly anyone (liberal or conservative) is FOR abortion. Most liberals are “for” allowing the pregnant woman and her doctor to make a medically informed choice about whether abortion is the right option. That’s not the same as being “for abortion.”
You’re missing my point… the interviewer said THEIR candidate was AGAINST abortion and they jumped on board with the false assertion. Is that more clear? As you stated many are at least for it in some form, especially liberals.
Granting the premise that this video he speaks of actually exists: one, it’s a semantic difference he’s quibbling over, and two, a policy difference is materially different than condemning condemnable personal behavior and then defending it in almost the same breath when the perpetrator is revealed. Apples and orangutans.
It is easy to imagine an uninformed Obama voter showing outrage over Trump expanding the right to carry firearms in a national park before being told that it was Obama who extended those rights, and quickly tamping down their outrage. I suppose that’s an analogous situation that xeon could reference. The difference, of course, is that a President expanding an existing right to include certain federal lands–a strict policy matter that people can reasonably disagree over–is fundamentally different than a voter condemning morally reprehensible personal behavior when they believe it was perpetrated by one politician then flipping to defend it upon learning it was committed by their preferred politician.
It isn’t ignorance of policy positions that is problematic. It’s calling a politician corrupt and unfit for office when one guy cheats with and pays off a porn star, then saying “Hmm. Well, my dad cheated on my mom and I still respect him (shrugs shoulders)” when it’s their guy.
But I’m sure xeon knows this. Projection and deflection have been their only defense weapons for years now.
It’s actually pretty simple, most liberals are for abortion in some form.
No, they’re not. Hardly anyone (liberal or conservative) is FOR abortion. Most liberals are “for” allowing the pregnant woman and her doctor to make a medically informed choice about whether abortion is the right option. That’s not the same as being “for abortion.”
You’re missing my point… the interviewer said THEIR candidate was AGAINST abortion and they jumped on board with the false assertion. Is that more clear? As you stated many are at least for it in some form, especially liberals.
The interviewer in the video you said you saw, don’t have, can’t find and don’t want to look for?
Don’t be too hard on him. I looked and couldn’t find it either.
It’s actually pretty simple, most liberals are for abortion in some form.
No, they’re not. Hardly anyone (liberal or conservative) is FOR abortion. Most liberals are “for” allowing the pregnant woman and her doctor to make a medically informed choice about whether abortion is the right option. That’s not the same as being “for abortion.”
You’re missing my point… the interviewer said THEIR candidate was AGAINST abortion and they jumped on board with the false assertion. Is that more clear? As you stated many are at least for it in some form, especially liberals.
Granting the premise that this video he speaks of actually exists: one, it’s a semantic difference he’s quibbling over, and two, a policy difference is materially different than condemning condemnable personal behavior and then defending it in almost the same breath when the perpetrator is revealed. Apples and orangutans.
It is easy to imagine an uninformed Obama voter showing outrage over Trump expanding the right to carry firearms in a national park before being told that it was Obama who extended those rights, and quickly tamping down their outrage. I suppose that’s an analogous situation that xeon could reference. The difference, of course, is that a President expanding an existing right to include certain federal lands–a strict policy matter that people can reasonably disagree over–is fundamentally different than a voter condemning morally reprehensible personal behavior when they believe it was perpetrated by one politician then flipping to defend it upon learning it was committed by their preferred politician.
It isn’t ignorance of policy positions that is problematic. It’s calling a politician corrupt and unfit for office when one guy cheats with and pays off a porn star, then saying “Hmm. Well, my dad cheated on my mom and I still respect him (shrugs shoulders)” when it’s their guy.
But I’m sure xeon knows this. Projection and deflection have been their only defense weapons for years now.
Yes - and it is going to be pretty damn hard to find those videos of most other politicians because they aren’t absolute POS’s in their personal behavior - a lot make some questionable decisions but paying a porn performer to have sex with you and stay quiet about it right after you had kids is pretty unique - the closest you are going to find is John Edwards and he got abandoned pretty dang quickly
some (friendly) advice.
looks like you’ve been a member of ST for a while.
looks like you’ve stumbled, accidently or on purpose, into the LR for the first time (or first time in a while).
lots of shiny objects in here
this room is not your fathers tri forum.
this room is not (in my opinion) for the relatively unprepared. Especially if they espouse a viewpoint like yours.
I suggest you regroup. If you have something to say you best know what that is and be prepared to defend your position quickly and multiply.
Or just use it as a source of entertainment (a few of those you are sparring with here have veiwpoints so radically different than yours that it’s like dealing with an alien).
Most here are good folks with strong viewpoints. Beware, be prepared and have tough skin. Or stick to tri and selling stuff.
Good luck!!
There are plenty of videos out there of lots of different people looking very stupid in “man on the street” interviews. This is literally an all sides thing.
https://youtu.be/7zSaW69YFAg?si=gmBEuoQkGGoaUmeb
It’s actually pretty simple, most liberals are for abortion in some form.
No, they’re not. Hardly anyone (liberal or conservative) is FOR abortion. Most liberals are “for” allowing the pregnant woman and her doctor to make a medically informed choice about whether abortion is the right option. That’s not the same as being “for abortion.”
You’re missing my point… the interviewer said THEIR candidate was AGAINST abortion and they jumped on board with the false assertion. Is that more clear? As you stated many are at least for it in some form, especially liberals.
Granting the premise that this video he speaks of actually exists: one, it’s a semantic difference he’s quibbling over, and two, a policy difference is materially different than condemning condemnable personal behavior and then defending it in almost the same breath when the perpetrator is revealed. Apples and orangutans.
It is easy to imagine an uninformed Obama voter showing outrage over Trump expanding the right to carry firearms in a national park before being told that it was Obama who extended those rights, and quickly tamping down their outrage. I suppose that’s an analogous situation that xeon could reference. The difference, of course, is that a President expanding an existing right to include certain federal lands–a strict policy matter that people can reasonably disagree over–is fundamentally different than a voter condemning morally reprehensible personal behavior when they believe it was perpetrated by one politician then flipping to defend it upon learning it was committed by their preferred politician.
It isn’t ignorance of policy positions that is problematic. It’s calling a politician corrupt and unfit for office when one guy cheats with and pays off a porn star, then saying “Hmm. Well, my dad cheated on my mom and I still respect him (shrugs shoulders)” when it’s their guy.
But I’m sure xeon knows this. Projection and deflection have been their only defense weapons for years now.
Yes - and it is going to be pretty damn hard to find those videos of most other politicians because they aren’t absolute POS’s in their personal behavior - a lot make some questionable decisions but paying a porn performer to have sex with you and stay quiet about it right after you had kids is pretty unique - the closest you are going to find is John Edwards and he got abandoned pretty dang quickly
Don’t forget, Al Franken pointed at some boobs.
This is literally an all sides thing.
If by “this” you mean ignorance of basic things an adult should know–yes, this is ubiquitous. But of course that’s tangential to the subject of this thread and not directly relevant.
I would like him to explain what “being into abortion†means.
It’s actually pretty simple, most liberals are for abortion in some form. To be presented with a question… what do you think about Biden oppossition to abortion and then go on without missing a beat… oh yeah we’re for that too is exactly what this thread is ‘about’. Uninformed people holding the party line no matter what and I dare say with no personal morality or public stances.
Sorry I’m not spending my time to dig up videos but they were definitely more prevalent in the algorithms, especially around election time.
Yet another strawman. You are flailing.
Biden is against late term, elective, abortion. Most Democrats agree with him.
What are the odds that every position a presidential candidate holds, you also hold? That would seem like to me to indicate a person who doesn’t think for themselves and just adopts someone else’s, or a political party’s positions.
I voted for Biden last time and I’ll vote for him this time because I can’t see the Republicans putting up anyone who would more closely align with my views.
That being said, I don’t think Biden has any business being president again, but the alternative is almost certainly going to be someone is has orders of magnitudes less business being the president.
The MAGA crowd assumes that the Democrats are the same as them, blind devotion to an all-powerful leader. The reality is the Democrats are a bunch of feral cats with a wide variety of ever-changing positions.