Who said anything about it being illegal or a violation? I was just pointing out that you keep saying you didn’t vote for him but you keep spamming giant amounts of positive press for him.
The most charitable I can be towards you is that you’re like the press who would keep giving air time to the “scientists” who argued against the notion that humans were causing climate change, even though they were less than one percent of the scientific community. Lots of people came away thinking it was a big debate among scientists when it wasn’t, and that contributed to the problem we have today.
More likely, I think, is that for whatever reason you’re trying to get Trump elected and so you’re doing the disingenuous Joe Rogan thing of trying to look unbiased while pushing an agenda.
Nobody said it was illegal or a violation. I just put it out there for others who seem to not realize it.
Also, there is no way Trump is going to win. In fact, I disagree with the polls that are saying it’s a tight race. I think Harris will win by a landslide, friend. I’ve always thought that, and I’ve always said that.
So now, not only am I not trying to get Trump elected, I don’t think there’s any chance he will get elected.
Plus, I don’t think there is anything wrong with having some opposing viewpoints in this community so that voters can decide for themselves who they want to vote for. Thank you! :)
Okay, so you really are like those news organizations giving the air time to climate deniers. “Just airing the opposing view,” even though that view is bullshit and destructive.
Destructive in YOUR point of view. You do realize that almost half the voting public actually likes him, right? So not everyone thinks he’s destructive.
I get it. You don’t like him. And that’s fine. Others do. And that’s fine too.
Just realize that not everyone shares your opinion. Welcome to Democracy. Thanks, friend! :)
And you realize that a hunk of his popularity is because of blatant, I mean extremely blatant, propaganda, right? You have outlets like Fox refusing to run anything negative and continuing to air verifiably false information, and they aren’t the worst offender, just the most popular.
You could have said the exact same stuff about the climate deniers. Almost half of people believed them, so they couldn’t be wrong. It’s just an opinion that they’re harmful. There’s nothing illegal about airing their nonsense.
Again, you do you, but let’s be up front about what you’re about here.
But I didn’t vote for him. I’ve already told you that he has no chance of winning. So why in the world would I have an agenda? Could it be that I just post articles that I find interesting?
Who said anything about it being illegal or a violation? I was just pointing out that you keep saying you didn’t vote for him but you keep spamming giant amounts of positive press for him.
The most charitable I can be towards you is that you’re like the press who would keep giving air time to the “scientists” who argued against the notion that humans were causing climate change, even though they were less than one percent of the scientific community. Lots of people came away thinking it was a big debate among scientists when it wasn’t, and that contributed to the problem we have today.
More likely, I think, is that for whatever reason you’re trying to get Trump elected and so you’re doing the disingenuous Joe Rogan thing of trying to look unbiased while pushing an agenda.
Nobody said it was illegal or a violation. I just put it out there for others who seem to not realize it.
Also, there is no way Trump is going to win. In fact, I disagree with the polls that are saying it’s a tight race. I think Harris will win by a landslide, friend. I’ve always thought that, and I’ve always said that.
So now, not only am I not trying to get Trump elected, I don’t think there’s any chance he will get elected.
Plus, I don’t think there is anything wrong with having some opposing viewpoints in this community so that voters can decide for themselves who they want to vote for. Thank you! :)
Okay, so you really are like those news organizations giving the air time to climate deniers. “Just airing the opposing view,” even though that view is bullshit and destructive.
Got it, thanks for the clarification.
Destructive in YOUR point of view. You do realize that almost half the voting public actually likes him, right? So not everyone thinks he’s destructive.
I get it. You don’t like him. And that’s fine. Others do. And that’s fine too.
Just realize that not everyone shares your opinion. Welcome to Democracy. Thanks, friend! :)
And you realize that a hunk of his popularity is because of blatant, I mean extremely blatant, propaganda, right? You have outlets like Fox refusing to run anything negative and continuing to air verifiably false information, and they aren’t the worst offender, just the most popular.
You could have said the exact same stuff about the climate deniers. Almost half of people believed them, so they couldn’t be wrong. It’s just an opinion that they’re harmful. There’s nothing illegal about airing their nonsense.
Again, you do you, but let’s be up front about what you’re about here.
What is it you think I am “about” here?
I think you have an agenda to push Trump - no clue what your motives are.
But I didn’t vote for him. I’ve already told you that he has no chance of winning. So why in the world would I have an agenda? Could it be that I just post articles that I find interesting?
People say a lot of things. I can’t begin to grasp your motives.
No, the fact that so many people like a dangerous fascist and wanna-be dictator is not “fine, too”.
Ok, so have you told the half of the country that doesn’t agree with you, that?
I’m not afraid of Trump.
I will tell them, gun in hand, when they knock on my door, while “just following orders”.
Such a brave defender of fascism! ❤️