American Politics

[QUOTE=Elvis 2008;2870607]Incel means involuntarily celibate. I do not even think that is an accurate term. Hell, if I had to hang around these delusional 300 pound tattooed man-hating whales showing skin, I would be voluntarily celibate.

As for being an incel, my friends call my gal a ten, and Clarey has a GF too, but facts do not seem to matter to you. You can add he man and incel to Qanon and MAGA.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, the He-man Incel/QAnon/MAGA, does have an interesting low-rent Machiavellian ring to it. Thanks, note to add!

Hey Elvis 2008, that's great news! I hear it's not not many you Incels guys, get to leave the group hoard, with all ten fingers and toes (...kkkk!), let alone manage to find GFs. So good on you and Clarey.

However, even though you guys say you have GFs, one still has to ask and begs the question, [i][b]"Can a 'Incel Zebra' change it's stripes?"[/b][/i]

[i]{Sorry the following article is a short piece only. Sign-up is necessary, for full article}[/i]

[QUOTE=Medium.com][b]What I Learned From Dating an Incel[/b]

it was the year that I was bestowed with the gift of first love. And what a gift it was; I cherished it dearly it was exciting, passionate, and [b]completely rotten to its core.[/b] I didnt realize it at the time, [u]but I was dating an Incel.[/u]

An Incel is someone who identifies as involuntarily celibate, [b]but the classification is more complicated than that.[/b] Inceldom is multipronged like a Devils pitchfork.

Not all who remain chaste can be classified as Incels; its an ideology; a way to define how you feel about sex, regardless of how often youre having it. In this sense, [b]men who are engaging in a lot of sex can still be considered Incels.[/b] And this was the case for my first love. ...

As time went on it became clear that [u]he was nothing more than [b]a rebel without a cause[/b][/u], and that the only system he would be tearing down was his own. ...

Because [b]when youre brought up to believe that simply having women[/b] be that as girlfriends or pretty things to look at [b]is a basic human right[/b], your views of women as a resource will always trump your desire for them to be treated fairly.

[URL]https://medium.com/illumination/what-i-learned-from-dating-an-incel-2ac4b8dceb58 [/URL][/QUOTE]

Take for example above, and what this young women learned, while dating an Incel. If her experience is any indication, then just because Incels, have GFs, doesn't automatically mean men are exempted from still being Incels.

[QUOTE=Elvis 2008;2870607]Thing is Deep Fried Soy Boy, I appreciate women. I just do not fawn over them and imagine they adore me because I am willing to beat the shit out of my own sex like you do. That and a open wallet seem like the only ways that you think that you can get laid.[/QUOTE] Elvis 2008, keep telling yourself whatever gets you too sleep at nights.

I think right now, if you had told me, you [b]counted[/b], your pretty-little "sheep-ish" GFs, before going to sleep at night, it would currently be germane to the economic discussion at hand.

[QUOTE=Elvis 2008;2870607]From what I have seen, women do not like this whole "men suck and women are great" routine, at least not the women I hang with. Those women are more interested in honesty than being lied to and know how important men are. It might be news to you but they have fathers, brothers, uncles ETC that they adore and depend on.

Maybe for once you should try hanging around with women who do not hate men. Oh my bad. You are a white male and think you deserve to be flogged. Keep saving those whales, Deep Fried!
[/QUOTE]

Elvis 2008, once again, making a mountain out of a molehill, and yet somehow still managing to make it, about him. Dude, IT'S NOT ABOUT YOU!!!...To fashion a political idiom, [i]"..it's the economy, stupid!"[/i]

Talk about a fragile "manhood" you have! Is it any wonder, that you do indeed, resemble the ideolog Incels nutjobs, when you blindly jump to the conclusion of "soy boy", after I presented several articles showing a Biden GDP of rise of 4.3% and a thriving billion dollar Q3 2023 economy that was largely driven by women (Beyoncé, Taylor Swift and the Barbie Movie movement), and you had to go and make it personal.

ONE QUARTER of economic success, largely driven women, and Elvis 2008, has to go an blow a gasket on his Chicken-little "manhood"! Ahh...the sky is falling, women are taking over, but hey I'm no Incel, because I have a GF that is a 10! How very Incel-lian of you!

Elvis 2008, perhaps had your so called GF/gal, been working her "[b]ass[/b]-ets" off and had contributed billions to US Q3 2023 economy, I'd say you have something to actually brag about, w/r to the economy and this economic discussion.

But since I'm pretty sure that's not the case, perhaps it would be best to leave the GF pillow talk and the GF bragging, to the [i][b]"Stupid Shit in Medellin"[/b][/i] forums. After all, this is the [b]American Politics[/b] forum.

No need to feel, you need to respond, as I think I've answered my own question w/r to "Incel Zebras".

Do yourself a favor and block sp (dy.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2870607]Incel means involuntarily celibate. I do not even think that is an accurate term. Hell, if I had to hang around these delusional 300 pound tattooed man-hating whales showing skin, I would be voluntarily celibate.

As for being an incel, my friends call my gal a ten, and Clarey has a GF too, but facts do not seem to matter to you. You can add he man and incel to Qanon and MAGA.

Thing is Deep Fried Soy Boy, I appreciate women. I just do not fawn over them and imagine they adore me because I am willing to beat the shit out of my own sex like you do. That and a open wallet seem like the only ways that you think that you can get laid.

From what I have seen, women do not like this whole "men suck and women are great" routine, at least not the women I hang with. Those women are more interested in honesty than being lied to and know how important men are. It might be news to you but they have fathers, brothers, uncles ETC that they adore and depend on.

Maybe for once you should try hanging around with women who do not hate men. Oh my bad. You are a white male and think you deserve to be flogged. Keep saving those whales, Deep Fried![/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Spidy;2871064]No need to feel, you need to respond, as I think I've answered my own question w/r to "Incel Zebras".[/QUOTE]You kind of missed the biggest one liner in the whole article Spidy but again facts are not your thing.

"he was a hardcore leftie. ".

He he he. You got to be kidding me Deep Fried Soy Boy! You had "Mr. Incel" here as a MAGA / QAnon type. LOL. ROTFLMAO.

It gets better. "I've come to realize that political identity doesn't mean much when it comes to how people feel about women. " Strike two. Oh, that one had to hurt. The women do not love you soy boys and pretzels more than the MAGA Republicans. LOL. Say it ain't so. I am dying laughing here.

And here we go with the Democratic douche Clintonian trick of redefining a word, what your definition of is is. "An Incel is someone who identifies as 'involuntarily celibate', but the classification is more complicated than that. Not all who remain chaste can be classified as 'Incels'; it's an ideology; a way to define how you feel about sex, regardless of how often you're having it. In this sense, men who are engaging in a lot of sex can still be considered Incels. ".

Yes, incels can have sex now. Strike three. It cannot get worse but it does.

"The year I turned twenty-two marked two important life events. I was immediately attracted to his dirt-bag personality. I loved that he wasn't afraid to speak his mind. My Incel believed that a society that rewarded physical attractiveness over 'merit' was inherently oppressive. He believed that society should reward merit based on his idea of what merit was, and encompassed within 'society's rewards' was the sexual availability of women. He threatened to kill a security guard when he was removed from a bar; he was violent towards animals; he sexually assaulted a mutual friend of ours, he tried to convince me that I was unattractive, by continually poking at 'flaws' in my appearance. To put it bluntly. I've never had an attractive man insult my appearance. The man I loved was attractive, so he made himself unattractive as a form of rebellion against social hierarchies. Despite his rebellion, he still wanted to benefit from said social hierarchies by being gifted with a physically 'superior' girlfriend. I still stuck by him despite all the pain because It's not easy to say goodbye to your first love, and I still believed he had a good heart. ".

So Mr. Dirt Ball is a good looking psychopath, and this 22 year old female ditz you worship Spidy cannot call him the usual names because he is a leftie so she calls him an incel which makes zero sense. Yes, the MAGA guys are crazy but she loved the possessive, sex crazed, violent, and deeply psychopathic leftie.

Well, at least she may have understood what lefties are all about. They do not tell women the truth but what they want to hear to get into their pants. "Men suck. Women are great. See what a good leftie I am? Now give me all that pussy. " LOL. I am dying here. Clearly, Deep Fried Soy Boy, this guy is your role model.

Of course, this naive 22 year old never mentions responsibility, never mentions she screwed up, barely mentions that going for looks and political persuasion over character bit her in the ass. There is nothing positive about men. Some men apparently just suck less than others.

This woman has to be verbally smacked upside the head which will never happen if she hangs around lefties. Hating men rather than being responsible for her own bad decisions is childish. If women really want to be equal to men, they need to step up and walk the walk with responsibility.

Mr. Leftie is not an incel. He is a fucking psychopath, and this 22 year old ditz needs to own that, but I doubt she ever will.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2871064]Yeah, the He-man Incel/QAnon/MAGA, does have an interesting low-rent Machiavellian ring to it. Thanks, note to add!

Hey Elvis 2008, that's great news! I hear it's not not many you Incels guys, get to leave the group hoard, with all ten fingers and toes (...kkkk!), let alone manage to find GFs. So good on you and Clarey.

However, even though you guys say you have GFs, one still has to ask and begs the question, [i][b]"Can a 'Incel Zebra' change it's stripes?"[/b][/i]

[i]{Sorry the following article is a short piece only. Sign-up is necessary, for full article}[/i]



Take for example above, and what this young women learned, while dating an Incel. If her experience is any indication, then just because Incels, have GFs, doesn't automatically mean men are exempted from still being Incels.

Elvis 2008, keep telling yourself whatever gets you too sleep at nights.

I think right now, if you had told me, you [b]counted[/b], your pretty-little "sheep-ish" GFs, before going to sleep at night, it would currently be germane to the economic discussion at hand.



Elvis 2008, once again, making a mountain out of a molehill, and yet somehow still managing to make it, about him. Dude, IT'S NOT ABOUT YOU!!!...To fashion a political idiom, [i]"..it's the economy, stupid!"[/i]

Talk about a fragile "manhood" you have! Is it any wonder, that you do indeed, resemble the ideolog Incels nutjobs, when you blindly jump to the conclusion of "soy boy", after I presented several articles showing a Biden GDP of rise of 4.3% and a thriving billion dollar Q3 2023 economy that was largely driven by women (Beyonc, Taylor Swift and the Barbie Movie movement), and you had to go and make it personal.

ONE QUARTER of economic success, largely driven women, and Elvis 2008, has to go an blow a gasket on his Chicken-little "manhood"! Ahh...the sky is falling, women are taking over, but hey I'm no Incel, because I have a GF that is a 10! How very Incel-lian of you!

Elvis 2008, perhaps had your so called GF/gal, been working her "[b]ass[/b]-ets" off and had contributed billions to US Q3 2023 economy, I'd say you have something to actually brag about, w/r to the economy and this economic discussion.

But since I'm pretty sure that's not the case, perhaps it would be best to leave the GF pillow talk and the GF bragging, to the [i][b]"Stupid Shit in Medellin"[/b][/i] forums. After all, this is the [b]American Politics[/b] forum.

No need to feel, you need to respond, as I think I've answered my own question w/r to "Incel Zebras".[/QUOTE]I have heard the he-Man Woman-Haters Manosphere Club is begging for a cease fire with women who keep winning the Bigger Balls War (case in point, Cassidy Hutchinson). And during the pause they will adopt a new club name that at least includes the plural of "Man" in order to entice more terrified men to join.

After much deliberation the most popular new name by limp-wristed show of hands appears to address the plural issue and commemorate the cease fire all at once:

"The Menopause Club".

Catchy name. I think they should go with it.

In March he told loyalists in Waco, Texas:

I am your warrior. I am your justice. And for those who have been wronged and betrayed, I am your retribution.

"With you at my side," Trump went on to say.

We will totally obliterate the deep state, we will banish the warmongers from our government, we will drive out the globalists, and we will cast out the communists and Marxists, we will throw off the corrupt political class, we will beat the Democrats, we will rout the fake news media, we will stand up to the RINOs, and we will defeat Joe Biden and every single Democrat.

Send all campaign donations to.

[URL]https://www.donaldjtrump.com/[/URL]

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2871145]I have heard the he-Man Woman-Haters Manosphere Club is begging for a cease fire with women who keep winning the Bigger Balls War (case in point, Cassidy Hutchinson). And during the pause they will adopt a new club name that at least includes the plural of "Man" in order to entice more terrified men to join.

After much deliberation the most popular new name by limp-wristed show of hands appears to address the plural issue and commemorate the cease fire all at once:

"The Menopause Club".[/QUOTE]Sorry Uncle Twisty the Pretzel Man, there is no woman hating on going on in the new manosphere. It is now more reactionary to the blatant sexism and racism from the male, female, and trans lefties like yourself. "The first thing we got to do is get all the white men out". I did not like the man hating ways of the MGTOW movement and I like this one much more where being real is key. The guys in the manosphere have wives and GFs and tell others what to watch out for with women.

But then again, I was talking to a married California Democrat struggling with the cost of living there. Also the homeless who have set up in his neighborhood. He is afraid for his kids and said, "These homeless guys keep shitting on my lawn. " And he is all in on the LGBTQ+/ women's rights "you go girl" movement. I admire his tenacity, but like I said, it is hard being a Democrat these days.

And then there is you, Uncle Twisty slumming it in Thailand after voting in the mess that my friend has to endure. Yes, nothing says you support American women more than moving to Thailand and fucking Thai women. And you are calling the manosphere he man, American women hating? Isn't like one in seven women in Thailand a hooker, and you are out supporting that? That is like saying you support single moms and spending all day in a strip club.

Well, the new Democratic theme song should be from the appropriately named musical Something Rotten. The bard had it easy compared to those writing speeches for the Dems, [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hnI7yhIWGY[/URL].

My days are so busy it's making me dizzy.

There's so much I got to do.

There's lunches and meetings and poetry readings.

And endless interviews.

Got to pose for a portrait.

And how I deplore sitting there for eternity.

Then it's off to the inn.

Where my innkeeper friend.

Wants to name a drink after me.

Then it's back to my room, where I resume.

My attempt to write a hit.

Just me and my beer and the terrible fear.

That I might be losing it.

And it's hard.

It's hard.

It's hard.

It's hard.

It's really hard.

So very very hard.

It's really hard.

Very very hard.

I make it look easy but honey believe me.

It's hard.

It's hard.

It's hard.

It's hard.

It's so incredibly hard.

So inconceivably, unbelievably hard.

[QUOTE=MarquisdeSade1;2871410]In March he told loyalists in Waco, Texas:

I am your warrior. I am your justice. And for those who have been wronged and betrayed, I am your retribution.

"With you at my side," Trump went on to say.

We will totally obliterate the deep state, we will banish the warmongers from our government, we will drive out the globalists, and we will cast out the communists and Marxists, we will throw off the corrupt political class, we will beat the Democrats, we will rout the fake news media, we will stand up to the RINOs, and we will defeat Joe Biden and every single Democrat.

Send all campaign donations to.

[URL]https://www.donaldjtrump.com/[/URL][/QUOTE]Remember this Mainstream Media favorite?

[B]Biden Trails Trump In 5 Battleground States. But Odds Are Much Better For Another Democrat, Poll Says.
Nov. 5, 2023[/B]

[URL]https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2023/11/05/biden-trails-trump-in-5-battleground-states-but-odds-are-much-better-for-another-democrat-poll-says/?sh=431cdc7e4b08[/URL]

[QUOTE]But the poll found that another [b]generic[/b] Democrat running against Trump would win five of the six battleground states by seven to 12 points, and Nevada by three.[/QUOTE]And all while Trump has been out there holding rallies and campaigning, saying a lot of really stupid things to rile up his stupid base like the crap you quoted from him, while Joe Biden has not. Yet. He has been busy with his day job.

Now, that "generic" thingy seems to be repeating itself in other polls as well.

The 81.2 Million voters who chose Biden over Trump's 74.2 Million, 7 Million more than Trump and enough to win a Trump-defined Electoral College "Landslide" victory, are beautifully and justifiably terrified of another horrific Trump so-called presidency. So much that they want his Democratic opponent to be "perfect" this time around, no risk of losing. All while your side's reliable benefactors in MSM, Bill Maher and so on are insisting that soooo many people think Joe is too old and won't vote for him.

So those voters really, really want that "perfect" Democratic candidate to run against Trump instead.

However, unless Joe does step aside for whatever reason, when it is time to vote next year all 81.2 Million of those voters are going to look at their ballot, see Trump's name on it, see Joe's name on it and Guess What?

Joe Biden will be the [B]"generic"[/B] Democrat on that ballot.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2871145] I have heard the he-Man Woman-Haters Manosphere Club is begging for a cease fire with women who keep winning the Bigger Balls War (case in point, Cassidy Hutchinson). And during the pause they will adopt a new club name that at least includes the plural of "Man" in order to entice more terrified men to join. [/QUOTE] (...kkkk!) Is this you foreshadowing that the [b]"he-Man Woman-Haters Manosphere Club" [i]aka."The Menopause Club"[/i][/b], could see the Baddest Biggest Balls Buster Biotch (5-in. heels), from SC, lead them in the 2024 Presidential race?

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2871145]After much deliberation the most popular new name by limp-wristed show of hands appears to address the plural issue and commemorate the cease fire all at once:

"The Menopause Club".

Catchy name. I think they should go with it. [/QUOTE]

Jackpot! That's very on point and very much on brand, for He-Man Woman-Hater/Incel/QAnon/MAGA Repubs! Yeah, you nailed it, the Repubs solution to 95% of their polices, is just to "rebrand", "rebrand" and "rebrand" again. It's magically [i]"fairy, pixie dust"[/i], don't ya know?

When all else fails (especially at the ballot-box), they chalk up their failures, as a "branding" or "messaging" problem. For example, with the currently loss in the 2023 Elections, mostly due to their stance on abortion, their answer to the losses in the 2023 Election and Primaries was to [b]"rebrand"[/b] abortion as [b]"a 15-week limit on abortion"[/b], instead of [b]"a 15-week ban on abortion"[/b], as if Americans would think there's a difference....kkkk!

BTW, would the "He-Man Woman-Haters Manosphere Club", even allow a Bigger Bad-Ass Ball Busting [wo]MAN (5-in. heels) represent? You think?

Well...if all else fails, they can always "rebrand" her as a man, after all, just like [i][b]"a 15-week abortion limit"[/b][/i], Americans will never know the difference...right!

[QUOTE=Elvis 2008;2871137] ... "he was a hardcore leftie. ".

He he he. You got to be kidding me Deep Fried Soy Boy! You had "Mr. Incel" here as a MAGA / QAnon type. LOL. ROTFLMAO. [/QUOTE] (...kkkk!) That's a nice, wild and crazy working theory, you got going on, but despite your active imagination, there's [b]not one thing[/b] that would suggest said dude, is a "leftie".

Let me put it to you, like Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) on Nov, 13th, 2023, when trying his damndest, to find [u]anything meaningful[/u] his woeful Republican party had done:
[LIST]Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) - [b]"One thing[/b]...I want my Republican colleagues to give me, one thing...one, that I can go campaign on and said we did?", "One?...anyone sitting in the complex wanna come down to the floor and explain to me, [u]one[/u] material, meaningful and significant thing... the Republican majority have done, [b][u]besides[/u]...well I guess it's not as bad as the Democrats?"[/b]

{...Muffled silent chuckles abound from Democrats and some Republicans...}[/LIST]
Much like poor old, Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), all arguments in the article, suggest right-wing Incel/QAnon/MAGA Republican, traits of ineptitude.

[QUOTE=Elvis 2008;2871137]Mr. Leftie is not an incel. He is a fucking psychopath, ... [/QUOTE] You said it yourself, he's [i]"a fucking psychopath"[/i]. If that's true, with such traits and behavior, that would put said dude, as far psychopaths Incels, go...more so, squarely in the camp of the right-wing QAnon/MAGA Republican conservatism.

[u][b]DARK SIDE OF CONSERVATISM - Republicans have more psychopathic traits than Democrats, according to a psychology survey [/b][/u]
[URL]https://qz.com/1462622/republicans-have-more-psychopathic-traits-than-democrats-according-to-a-psychology-survey[/URL]
[URL]https://www.psypost.org/2018/11/study-suggests-psychopathic-traits-are-higher-in-republicans-than-in-democrats-52566[/URL]

Yes indeed, QAnon/MAGA Repubs own [i][b]"crazy"[/i][/b], not to mention, have a lock-on [i][b]"scary crazy"[/i][/b]!!!

If I not mistaken, these days, it's a [b][u]MUST have requirement[/u][/b], when running for the Repubs! (...kkkk!)

"Remember this Mainstream Media favorite?

Biden Trails Trump In 5 Battleground States. But Odds Are Much Better For Another Democrat, Poll Says.

Nov. 5, 2023.

[URL]https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2023/11/05/biden-trails-trump-in-5-battleground-states-but-odds-are-much-better-for-another-democrat-poll-says/?sh=431cdc7e4b08[/URL]

And all while Trump has been out there holding rallies and campaigning, saying a lot of really stupid things to rile up his stupid base like the crap you quoted from him, while Joe Biden has not. Yet. He has been busy with his day job.

Now, that "generic" thingy seems to be repeating itself in other polls as well.

The 81.2 Million voters who chose Biden over Trump's 74.2 Million, 7 Million more than Trump and enough to win a Trump-defined Electoral College "Landslide" victory, are beautifully and justifiably terrified of another horrific Trump so-called presidency. So much that they want his Democratic opponent to be "perfect" this time around, no risk of losing. All while your side's reliable benefactors in MSM, Bill Maher and so on are insisting that soooo many people think Joe is too old and won't vote for him.

So those voters really, really want that "perfect" Democratic candidate to run against Trump instead.

However, unless Joe does step aside for whatever reason, when it is time to vote next year all 81.2 Million of those voters are going to look at their ballot, see Trump's name on it, see Joe's name on it and Guess What?

Joe Biden will be the "generic"Democrat on that ballot."

Joe Biden lost in 2020 and will lose again, you know he knows it and so does everyone else espec those that rigged the swing states in 2020 in black precincts ie Milwaukee Detroit Atlanta Philadelphia Phoenix.

"However, unless Joe does step aside for whatever reason" However? LMAO.

Sounds like you are really praying for it LOL.

A perfect Democrat LMAO wow holy fuck you're hilarious.

Newsom? That turd destroying California? He isn't even popular there.

[URL]https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/dr-jeffrey-sachs-covid-19-democrats/2023/11/24/id/1143515/[/URL]

Democratic Party AKA the CCP.

A bunch of scumbag shills for Xi.

[URL]https://www.foxnews.com/politics/californias-newsom-surprise-meeting-beijing-chinas-xi-torched-climate-fearmongering[/URL]

California aka CCP occupied territory.

[QUOTE=MarquisdeSade1;2871978]"Remember this Mainstream Media favorite?

Biden Trails Trump In 5 Battleground States. But Odds Are Much Better For Another Democrat, Poll Says.

Nov. 5, 2023.

[URL]https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2023/11/05/biden-trails-trump-in-5-battleground-states-but-odds-are-much-better-for-another-democrat-poll-says/?sh=431cdc7e4b08[/URL]

And all while Trump has been out there holding rallies and campaigning, saying a lot of really stupid things to rile up his stupid base like the crap you quoted from him, while Joe Biden has not. Yet. He has been busy with his day job.

Now, that "generic" thingy seems to be repeating itself in other polls as well.

The 81.2 Million voters who chose Biden over Trump's 74.2 Million, 7 Million more than Trump and enough to win a Trump-defined Electoral College "Landslide" victory, are beautifully and justifiably terrified of another horrific Trump so-called presidency. So much that they want his Democratic opponent to be "perfect" this time around, no risk of losing. All while your side's reliable benefactors in MSM, Bill Maher and so on are insisting that soooo many people think Joe is too old and won't vote for him.

So those voters really, really want that "perfect" Democratic candidate to run against Trump instead.

However, unless Joe does step aside for whatever reason, when it is time to vote next year all 81.2 Million of those voters are going to look at their ballot, see Trump's name on it, see Joe's name on it and Guess What?

Joe Biden will be the "generic"Democrat on that ballot."

Joe Biden lost in 2020 and will lose again, you know he knows it and so does everyone else espec those that rigged the swing states in 2020 in black precincts ie Milwaukee Detroit Atlanta Philadelphia Phoenix.

"However, unless Joe does step aside for whatever reason" However? LMAO.

Sounds like you are really praying for it LOL.

A perfect Democrat LMAO wow holy fuck you're hilarious.

Newsom? That turd destroying California? He isn't even popular there.

[URL]https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/dr-jeffrey-sachs-covid-19-democrats/2023/11/24/id/1143515/[/URL]

Democratic Party AKA the CCP.

A bunch of scumbag shills for Xi.

[URL]https://www.foxnews.com/politics/californias-newsom-surprise-meeting-beijing-chinas-xi-torched-climate-fearmongering[/URL]

California aka CCP occupied territory.[/QUOTE]Yes, it's really bad when the people of a governor's own state don't even like him:

[B]Ron DeSantis' Popularity Compared to Other Governors Is Abysmal.
Nov. 1, 2023[/B]

[URL]https://www.newsweek.com/ron-desantis-popularity-rating-governors-1839827[/URL]

[B]Poll: Ron DeSantis among least popular Governors in America.[/B]

[URL]https://floridapolitics.com/archives/642242-poll-ron-desantis-among-least-popular-governors-in-america/[/URL]

[B]DeSantis popularity drops in Florida.
Nov. 17, 2023[/B]

[URL]https://www.politico.com/newsletters/florida-playbook/2023/11/17/florida-starts-turning-on-desantis-00127753[/URL]

Hmm. So loony Dr. Sachs who worked for non Democrat Bernie Sanders claimed to be a "lifelong" Democrat until the evil Dems somehow forced typically pro Repub Mainstream Media to largely ignore that conspiracy theory that actually Trump's Pandemic virus was created and leaked from a USA lab.

On Trump's watch.

LOL. The mind reels at the complexities.

[B]beloved Repub candidates so they can reliably deliver the terrifying headlines they crave and need in order to sell more of their product and get wealthier:[/B]

The study linked (see below) in this report captures it well. However, I would add that typically pro Repub Mainstream Media ought not to just cite the "policies" of each Party and candidate in an election run for a change but also cite the many times that Party and its similar policies produced and presided over Great Depressions, Great Recessions, Massive Job Losses, etc "results" and none of the Great Recoveries, Great Expansions, Historic Job Gains, etc "results" over the past, oh, 100 years or so.

[B]Report Confirms Major Newspapers Threaten Democracy: All Horse Race, No Policy.
When historians set out to determine why Donald Trump happened, from initial campaign to attempted coup to authoritarianism-premised comeback, the role of this nation's press will be hard to overlook[/B]

[URL]https://crooksandliars.com/2023/11/report-confirms-major-media-threatens[/URL]

[QUOTE]When historians set out to determine why Donald Trump happened, from initial campaign to attempted coup to authoritarianism-premised comeback, the role of this nation's press will be hard to overlook. In a piece published for the Columbia Journalism Review, five researchers who examined The New York Times' campaign coverage leading up to the 2016 presidential election returned to similarly examine the 2022 race.

We did expect, or at least hope, that in the years that followed, the Times would conduct a critical review of its editorial policies. Was an overwhelming focus on the election as a sporting contest the best way to serve readers? Was obsessive attention to Clintons email server really justified in light of the innumerable personal, ethical, and ultimately criminal failings of Trump? It seemed that editors had a responsibility to rethink both the volume of attention paid to certain subjects as well as their framing.

As any New York Times or Washington Post reader could likely tell you, the new results are just as dismal. Political coverage at even the largest and most consequential newspapers consists almost exclusively of horse race reporting and campaign gossip. Actual issue and policy examinations were nearly nonexistent.

After the 2022 midterms, we checked back in, this time examining the printed front page of the Times and the Washington Post from September 1, 2022, through Election Day that November. As before, we figured the front page mattered disproportionately, in part because articles placed there represent selections that publishers believe are most important to readersand also because, according to Nielsen data we analyzed, 32 percent of Web-browsing sessions around that period starting at the Times homepage did not lead to other sections or articles; people often stick to what theyre shown first. We added the Post this time around for comparison, to get a sense of whether the Times really was anomalous.

It wasnt. We found that the Times and the Post shared significant overlap in their domestic politics coverage, offering little insight into policy. Both emphasized the horse race and campaign palace intrigue, stories that functioned more to entertain readers than to educate them on essential differences between political parties. The main point of contrast we found between the two papers was that, while the Post delved more into topics Democrats generally want to discussaffirmative action, police reform, LGBTQ rightsthe Times tended to focus on subjects important to RepublicansChina, immigration, and crime.

By the numbers, of four hundred and eight articles on the front page of the Times during the period we analyzed, about halftwo hundred nineteenwere about domestic politics. A generous interpretation found that just ten of those stories explained domestic public policy in any detail; only one front-page article in the lead-up to the midterms really leaned into discussion about a policy matter in Congress: Republican efforts to shrink Social Security. Of three hundred and ninety-three front-page articles in the Post, two hundred fifteen were about domestic politics; our research found only four stories that discussed any form of policy. The Post had no front-page stories in the months ahead of the midterms on policies that candidates aimed to bring to the fore or legislation they intended to pursue. Instead, articles speculated about candidates and discussed where voter bases were leaning. (All of the data and analysis supporting this piece can be found here.)

If one set out to design a national press that would be most conducive to undermining democracy, you could hardly do better. In focusing on horse race coverage, campaign speculation, and the superficials of each race, the actual policy differences between each candidate are brushed aside.

Even when the race features a conventional political figure paired against a coup-attempting alleged felon whose policy prescriptions call for the restructuring of government into a one-party, authoritarian-premised tool determined to bend the nation's laws in unprecedented waysas the 2024 presidential race will likely have itthe public cannot exercise its democratic rights if those differences are intentionally hidden from them. In ignoring the policy differences between each and every pairing of candidates, the nation's press is hiding the stakes of each election. It is hiding the most existential of policy debates in darkness, shining a light instead only on candidate sound bites, gaffes, and infighting.

In particular, the researchers call out the journalistic fiction of "objective" reporting. "What appears in a newspaper is less a reflection of what is happening in the world than what a news organization chooses to tell about what is happeningan indicator of values," they write. And they emphasize that the papers are not being inaccurate in their reporting, but that coverage is "misleading" nonetheless.

On any given day there are many accurate and arguably newsworthy stories that could appear on a front page. (In our study period, the overlap in front-page-story selection at the Times and the Post was only about a third.) Which topics editors choose to emphasize is neither accurate nor inaccurate; they simply reflect subjective opinions. Likewise, the way an article is written also involves a series of choiceswhich facts are highlighted, whose voices are included, which perspectives are given weight. Words such as objectivity and independenceeven truthmake for nice rhetoric but are so easily twisted to suit ones agenda as to be meaningless.

Democracy is premised on an electorate that knows what they are voting for and can make rational decisions about which of multiple approaches is best. Campaign coverage is flashy, but its valueless to voters. It emphasizes politics as sporting event. It may be pleasing to follow for interested partisans, but is worse than valueless for voters seeking to understand the sometimes-critical policy decisions they are expected to vote on. By emphasizing candidate claims and counterclaims and broadcasting potentially deceptive arguments as far and widely as truthful ones, the front pages do damage to democracy and readers both.

There has never been an American election in which the would-be beneficiary of an attempted coup came back, upon losing, to call for the indictment and imprisonment of his political foes, mass deportations and an end to birthright citizenship, and a purge of government to ensure only partisans loyal to himself can remain. It is a fascist manifestoand you would not know it from the front pages, whose editors find such dangers to be no more important than whether his opponent is old, or analyses of how voters in Iowa are reacting to various campaign pitches.

It is dreadfully dangerous. This is how democracies die.

And the free press, as those same editors should know perfectly well, cannot itself survive in a nation that has decided it is addicted to the flash of political upheaval but indifferent to its consequences.[/QUOTE][URL]https://www.cjr.org/analysis/election-politics-front-pages.php[/URL]

[URL]https://github.com/jennyw23/2022AgendaSetting[/URL]

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2872186]



When historians set out to determine why Donald Trump happened, from initial campaign to attempted coup to authoritarianism-premised comeback, the role of this nation's press will be hard to overlook. In a piece published for the [b]Columbia Journalism Review[/b], five researchers who examined The New York Times' campaign coverage leading up to the 2016 presidential election returned to similarly examine the 2022 race....

[URL]https://www.cjr.org/analysis/election-politics-front-pages.php[/URL]
[/QUOTE]


OK, the New York Times and the Washington Post are both Pro Democrat on their editorial pages. But true, they don't necessarily spout non stop Democratic Party propaganda in their other sections. They're not like MSNBC.

The Columbia Review of Journalism however has shown real gumption, telling both sides from time to time, for example in this excellent four part series about the Press' witch hunt to tie Trump to Russian collusion in the 2016 campaign. People like Elvis and the Marquis may enjoy it. And you should read it. It might broaden your views.

[URL]https://www.cjr.org/special_report/trumped-up-press-versus-president-part-1.php[/URL]

[URL]https://www.cjr.org/special_report/trumped-up-press-versus-president-part-2.php[/URL]

[URL]https://www.cjr.org/special_report/trumped-up-press-versus-president-part-3.php[/URL]

[URL]https://www.cjr.org/special_report/trumped-up-press-versus-president-part-4.php[/URL]

[QUOTE=Spidy;2871647](...kkkk!) That's a nice, wild and crazy working theory, you got going on, but despite your active imagination, there's [b]not one thing[/b] that would suggest said dude, is a "leftie".

Let me put it to you, like Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) on Nov, 13th, 2023, when trying his damndest, to find [u]anything meaningful[/u] his woeful Republican party had done:
[LIST]Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) - [b]"One thing[/b]...I want my Republican colleagues to give me, one thing...one, that I can go campaign on and said we did?", "One?...anyone sitting in the complex wanna come down to the floor and explain to me, [u]one[/u] material, meaningful and significant thing... the Republican majority have done, [b][u]besides[/u]...well I guess it's not as bad as the Democrats?"[/b]

{...Muffled silent chuckles abound from Democrats and some Republicans...}[/LIST]
Much like poor old, Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), all arguments in the article, suggest right-wing Incel/QAnon/MAGA Republican, traits of ineptitude.[/QUOTE]The Republican House has done a great job in 2023. Remember the negotiations to raise the national debt ceiling back in May. The House Republicans managed to claw back $1.5 trillion over 10 years from the $5 trillion+ in spending legislated by Biden and Democrats in 2021 and 2022. Chip Roy's problem is that he believes they should have clawed back more. Fair enough, but $1.5 trillion is quite an accomplishment considering Democrats control the Senate and the Presidency.

I was watching CNBC last week, and Jared Bernstein, the chairman of President Biden's Council of Economic Advisors was expounding on the accomplishments of the President. Chief among them was saving $1 trillion through passage of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023! This is the money that the Republicans clawed back! In other words, Biden's economic advisor is taking credit for something that got passed only because Republicans threatened not to increase the debt limit. Democrats were shouting Armageddon and now they're taking credit for the legislation! Unbelievable!

Anyway, Bill Clinton and Barrack Obama might have been crappy ass presidents, if Republicans hadn't controlled the House during their second terms, and played a similar role to House Republicans this year. Instead, Clinton will go down in history as a very good president, having balanced the budget, passed welfare reform, promoted free trade, and cut the capital gains tax, all thanks to Republicans. Maybe House Republicans will also help President Biden preserve his legacy, after two years of crappy ass results with one party rule.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2871647]You said it yourself, he's [i]"a fucking psychopath"[/i]. If that's true, with such traits and behavior, that would put said dude, as far psychopaths Incels, go...more so, squarely in the camp of the right-wing QAnon/MAGA Republican conservatism.

[u][b]DARK SIDE OF CONSERVATISM - Republicans have more psychopathic traits than Democrats, according to a psychology survey [/b][/u]
[URL]https://qz.com/1462622/republicans-have-more-psychopathic-traits-than-democrats-according-to-a-psychology-survey[/URL]
[URL]https://www.psypost.org/2018/11/study-suggests-psychopathic-traits-are-higher-in-republicans-than-in-democrats-52566[/URL]

Yes indeed, QAnon/MAGA Repubs own [i][b]"crazy"[/i][/b], not to mention, have a lock-on [i][b]"scary crazy"[/i][/b]!!!

If I not mistaken, these days, it's a [b][u]MUST have requirement[/u][/b], when running for the Repubs! (...kkkk!)[/QUOTE]The main stream media can't say Blacks or Whites or Jews or Muslims are psychopaths. And heaven forbid that they'd call Democrats psychopaths. But it's fine to call Republicans psychopaths.

The articles quote a study that came out of that great bastion of higher learning, the University of Southern Mississippi. They conclude that "Republicans surveyed had a small but statistically significant higher level of psychopathic traits than Democrats. ".

Well, the problem is that they only surveyed 164 Democrats, 85 Republicans and 55 independents. Notice how closely that correlates with the make up of the American electorate. And actually they didn't conduct the survey but rather outsourced it to Amazon's Mechanical Turk crowdsourcing consultancy. Gallup they ain't.

Now, "about 1.2% of USA Adult men and 0.3% to 0.7% of USA Adult women are considered to have clinically significant levels of psychopathic traits. " See.

[URL]https://www.apa.org/monitor/2022/03/ce-corner-psychopathy#text=About%201.2%25%20 of%20 USA %20 adult,10%2 C%202020).[/URL]

So among this sample of 304 people, being 157 females and 147 males, you'd expect to have 2 or 3 people who have clinically significant levels of psychopathic traits. How statistically significant is that? And somehow this study shows that Republicans have a "[B]small but statistically significant higher level of psychopathic traits[/B]" than Democrats. I'm calling bull shit on this study, or rather the press' description of it.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2871647](...kkkk!) That's a nice, wild and crazy working theory, you got going on, but despite your active imagination, there's [b]not one thing[/b] that would suggest said dude, is a "leftie".

Let me put it to you, like Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) on Nov, 13th, 2023, when trying his damndest, to find [u]anything meaningful[/u] his woeful Republican party had done:
[LIST]Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) - [b]"One thing[/b]...I want my Republican colleagues to give me, one thing...one, that I can go campaign on and said we did?", "One?...anyone sitting in the complex wanna come down to the floor and explain to me, [u]one[/u] material, meaningful and significant thing... the Republican majority have done, [b][u]besides[/u]...well I guess it's not as bad as the Democrats?"[/b]

{...Muffled silent chuckles abound from Democrats and some Republicans...}[/LIST]
Much like poor old, Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), all arguments in the article, suggest right-wing Incel/QAnon/MAGA Republican, traits of ineptitude.

You said it yourself, he's [i]"a fucking psychopath"[/i]. If that's true, with such traits and behavior, that would put said dude, as far psychopaths Incels, go...more so, squarely in the camp of the right-wing QAnon/MAGA Republican conservatism.

[u][b]DARK SIDE OF CONSERVATISM - Republicans have more psychopathic traits than Democrats, according to a psychology survey [/b][/u]
[URL]https://qz.com/1462622/republicans-have-more-psychopathic-traits-than-democrats-according-to-a-psychology-survey[/URL]
[URL]https://www.psypost.org/2018/11/study-suggests-psychopathic-traits-are-higher-in-republicans-than-in-democrats-52566[/URL]

Yes indeed, QAnon/MAGA Repubs own [i][b]"crazy"[/i][/b], not to mention, have a lock-on [i][b]"scary crazy"[/i][/b]!!!

If I not mistaken, these days, it's a [b][u]MUST have requirement[/u][/b], when running for the Repubs! (...kkkk!)[/QUOTE]Repub Chip Roy could just have well asked what Repubs have EVER done of significance for America when they controlled the Presidency, the House and the Senate, not just the Repub Pink Tinkle House over the past few months, and gotten the same utter silence I get here when I ask a similar question of anyone.

They momentarily buckled on their usual overriding Repub Party plan to destroy the economy and wipe out millions of jobs by "keeping the government open"? They pulled back on the Biden / Dem proposals that are always higher than they expect they can get as a matter of ordinary intelligent negotiation technique and thereby left it as only a 50-50 shot at America experiencing a soft landing vs a Great Recession in the wake of Trump's Great Repub Economic Disaster rather than a near 100% certainty? LOL. So impressive. Give them a trophy for that. Oh, then they shit-canned the Repub Squeaker of the Repub Pink Tinkle House for ruining their usual overriding Repub Party plan (see above) and replaced him with ChristoFacist Mike who is searching for every conceivable way to get back on track with that usual overriding Repub Party plan. Lolol.

Or, as typically pro Repub MSM would spin it, "handling the economy better than Democrats". Lolol.