| poeTV | Submit | Login   |

Reddit Digg Stumble Facebook

Help keep poeTV running


And please consider not blocking ads here. They help pay for the server. Pennies at a time. Literally.

Comment count is 60
Meerkat - 2020-12-17

The arc of history is long and annoying.


crojo - 2020-12-17

When does the scolding start? Also fuck that asshole for talking over the clips.


Pillager - 2020-12-17

I dunno. When he claimed her spoke about C'ville when others didn't.

Which brings up the poignant question as the whether Senile Joe actually believes what he's saying or is lying...


SolRo - 2020-12-18

Pillager the offlicial republican nickname for Biden is “sleepy joe”, I know you get and read the memos. Get with the program, man!


Pillager - 2020-12-18

Maybe TopCop should start prosecuting killer cops...

https://www.ocregister.com/2020/08/13/kamala-harris-abysmal-re cord-on-justice-issues/

🤣


simon666 - 2020-12-17

Older Black voters in South Carolina made it clear who they thought could beat Donald Trump in the primaries; and Biden put the work in to win those voters by working closely the Rep Clyburn in SC and the Congressional Black Caucus, who, by the way, made it clear that they wanted to see Biden to pick a black woman as VP.

Biden delivered the victory and in doing so got the first black woman (and Asian woman, and woman) into the Vice Presidency. Biden played second fiddle to the first black president for 8 years, disagreed with him on various decisions, but was loyal and worked tirelessly to advance the first black president's vision.

And Biden is fucking right in the first clip played when he says that advancing police reform now, before Jan 5th, is how the GOP beats the living hell out of the Dems in the GA Senate races, since the Dems have been labeled the "Defund the police" party.

It's like jesus fucking christ. Who are these political amateurs? You want progressive legislation? How are you going to get that through Mitch McConnell's Senate? You want Dems to lose the house in 2022? You want to lose the WH in 2024 and a court system packed with conservative judges? Keep pushing defund the police, medicare for all, and green new deal. You'll alienate the easily scared white voters, lose your races, and let the GOP coast.

I swear to god that the GOP releases this stuff to get the progressive/far-left riled up in order to their work for them. The GOP gets the far left to beat the Dems from the inside because the far-left wants to be right more than they want to win.

I'll follow Rep Cyburn on these issues: Be progressive, but be practical. You've got to win races. You've got to control branches of government.


teethsalad - 2020-12-17

^this

the didgeridoo/piss chucker caucus really doesn't give a shit about actual progress that would involve actual compromise or genuine consensus. as long as they get to feel morally superior they're more than fine with leaving those marginalized communities to twist in the wind for-fucking-ever


Gmork - 2020-12-17

everything is the most pathetic attempt at a 'gotcha' moment with these fucks

over and over and over

welcome to the new mccarthyism, thankfully it's only being tacitly endorsed by the wh for a while longer. anyone with a brain ignores the socialism = bad rhetoric, unfortunately that means a large chunk of the population is still succeptible


Nominal - 2020-12-17

Real fucking shame we never got more of Barney Frank, the most pragmatic progressive of our time. Christ almighty how badly I wanted to punch that regressive leftist in that video screeching "single payer! single payer!" over and over at him. Frank tried to calmly explain to him that it would have been nice to get, but they just didn't have the votes and passed what they could.

Same with the Rachel Maddow clip discussing OWS with him. She goes on and on about how sheer FEELS will usher in a progressive utopia. Frank keeps telling her that's all well and good, but it ultimately means nothing if people don't go out and vote.

I think Bort was on to something when he said the Bernie or Bust crowd was just two tax brackets away from being tea partiers. Both crowds view any sort of compromise as weakness, and stubbornly pounding the podium while nothing gets done is "sticking to principles".


Nominal - 2020-12-17

(while ultimately not caring one bit about freedom or progress)


SolRo - 2020-12-18

Fuckin shame we don’t have Franken anymore because of one inappropriate joke.

But with him gone we finally ended sexism.


Hazelnut - 2020-12-18

First thing first: one star for Ashtar / Crackersmack’s usual level of honesty.

I like Al Franken, but it’s disingenuous to say it was ‘one joke’. He made the difficult and honorable decision to resign, putting principle before self-interest; I respect him for it. That snide ‘we finally ended sexism’ line is just SolRo’s next step in his transformation into a bitter MAGA voter whining about “political correctness”.


Crackersmack - 2020-12-18

This thread is beautiful and contains like every shitlib greatest hit:

"We must listen to Black people (but only when they are conservative)",

"Now Is Not The Right Time For Change",

"The historical racial diversity is all that matters",

"Progressive dissatisfaction is a Republican/Russian/Communist plot",

"We're playing 11th dimensional chess/you don't understand consensus",

"Barney Frank's legislation WASN'T designed to be unenforceable/get him a bank lobbyist job",

Even Al Franken makes an appearance! Stay like this forever, Poet Five Television. The next four years are gonna be great fun!


Nominal - 2020-12-18

One (alleged) forced kiss, one inappropriate miming photo, and a (alleged) waist squeeze from years before he became a senator. Hardly the level of Kavanaugh and Moore accusations.

Franken was a very real and practical force for combating ongoing institutionalized rape. Anyone who watches the footage of him grilling the KBR scumbags during Jamie Leigh Jones' trial and claims that the world was safer from sexual assault thanks to him resigning is a goddamn idiot.

Moreover, he was forced out after he supported sending the allegations to the ethics committee to review, but before they could actually investigate. Fucking Kirsten Gillibrand pushed for it, and spineless Schumer went along with it. Franken never even got to defend himself or the accusations vetted. Even full blown serial rapist Kavanaugh got better treatment than that.

"Principles" and purity are going to be the death of liberalism in this country. Fucking imagine if the Gillibrands had decided to stick to "principles" and had forced Biden to drop out in the middle of the election as soon as the Tara Reade accusation surfaced. 4 more years of Trump and an inescapable spiral into fascism, but good golly the mound of leftist corpses atop a hill of worthless litmus tests should would look righteous.


Crackersmack - 2020-12-18

bro the accusations were more than that and you know it, there were multiple unrelated accusers and probably more that we'll never know, that's why they didn't circle the wagons for him like they do for every other powerful Dem sex pest including the current president-elect

cry those tears for Franken though as we watch Dems in the house negotiate apple music gift cards (or whatever) in exchange for legal immunity for corporations that negligently infect their employees, 2022 is gonna make 2010 look like a Dem victory at this pace


simon666 - 2020-12-18

Hi Crackersmack,

I'm not sure how much of your first comment is directed at my comment, but the first line "We must listen to Black people (but only when they are conservative)" I think is most plausibly directed at my comment, so I'll address it.

First, I wasn't advocating "We must listen to Black people (but only when they are conservative)" and if that's the characterization you're using to capture what I said it's way off the mark. Nowhere did I suggest that black folks of a certain political position are the are the only ones to be listened to, let alone a conservative position. So the claim on its face is false.

Second, the black folks I was talking about initially were older black SC voters who were making a pragmatic business decision about who could beat Trump. They were right and they have reason to think Biden was a good choice for the reason I listed above.

Third, the black folks I was suggesting that I would listen to are those like Rep Clyburn who are for progressive policies, but understand the reality on the ground require modest goals and incremental change. If you think Clyburn is conservative, then I don't know what to tell you except that I think the political scale that you're working on is wildly inaccurate and fails to line up with reality.


exy - 2020-12-18

Plus another 661 stars for simon:

******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
******************************
*

******************************


Crackersmack - 2020-12-18

Clyburn has taken more money from the pharmaceutical industry than any other Democrat in congress.


SolRo - 2020-12-18

I heard AOC murdered a couple astronauts on a spaceship.


simon666 - 2020-12-18

Crackersmack, let's grant that Clyburn has taken money for his campaigns from either people or companies in the pharmaceutical industry.

You implicitly take that fact as evidence of what? Not being progressive? Or of being conservative? Or is it just a moral violation (Clyburn = bad) from which you want to ground a default rejection of all his policies and positions? It's not really clear.

For the sake of argument let's suppose that taking such money is evidence that Clyburn is not progressive. How is this line of reasoning supposed to work? My argument was that Clyburn is both progressive and pragmatic (I said "practical" but same difference in this case). What I am saying is that one can agree with and hold the same progressive political goals as any paradigmatic progressive you want to hold up as your ideal, and still be pragmatic about what steps must occur to reach the mutually agreed upon progressive end.

What you need to argue in order to refute my point is that being pragmatic (taking intermediary steps to reach one's goal, rather than big single steps) is conceptually antithetical/incompatible with hold progressive ideals as end goals. But the problem for you, Crackersmack, is that those two things are not incompatible.

This raises the question then as to why progressives seem to think Clyburn is not progressive. My explanation for that is tactics. The progressives think goal reaching is a zero sum endeavor. And that is a function of holding a goal that is radically different than the status quo and so requires much to change to be achieved. Any adoption of an incremental policy towards the radical goal looks just like the kind of policy a centrist wants. Well, the centrist doesn't want to get to the radical goal, so the small step they took in that direction is all they are willing to do. So the progressive wants to defend against the possibility of the centrist having their way, and so equates a centrist view with a progressive/pragmatic view just in case the progressive pragmatist is a centrist in disguise.

This is a wrongheaded strategy because it wrongly assumes an incremental step to a progressive goal necessarily is incompatible with achieving the progressive goal. Here's an analogy to make the picture sharper: You want to fly. So you can either figure out how wings produce lift first and build a small model or you can just start flapping your arms. One of these ways is actually going to you to your goal, because the facts of the world rule out the other.


Pillager - 2020-12-18

There's a pandemic going on. A shit ton of people are losing their jobs.

Most people's medical insurance is tied to their employment. 🤔

Thus now is the best time for #M4A at the very least.


We have the money, we can chop it out of the bloated war budget.



https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/412545-70-pe rcent-of-americans-support-medicare-for-all-health-care

Looks like the dems are goings to drop the ball on this as well.


simon666 - 2020-12-18

M4A is going nowhere in Mitch McConnell's Senate. It wont be brought to a vote. If you want to get it brought to a vote, figure out how to get Mitch McConnell to bring to a floor vote and stop taking your Democratic allies off at knees. McConnell does not care that people are suffering. Court appointments and handicapping the incoming administration with an eye to 2022 and 2024 are his goals. Full stop. Are you trying to do his work for him by bashing Dems?


simon666 - 2020-12-18

Also this is a great line, Nominal: "4 more years of Trump and an inescapable spiral into fascism, but good golly the mound of leftist corpses atop a hill of worthless litmus tests would look righteous."


Two Jar Slave - 2020-12-18

Heads up, class, simon just gave a masterclass on how you can springboard off a dimwitted troll to make an intelligent point to the rest of the audience.


Gmork - 2020-12-18

Most people (myself included) fail to react properly to creamersmash. Bravo for actually demonstrating how easily defeated his talking points are by simply addressing them and not taking the bait.

The one thing kramersmush can't deal with is an actual rebuttal. He just listens for keywords to play off of.


SolRo - 2020-12-18

Maybe he’s a RNC chatbot?


ashtar. - 2020-12-18

If you have a financial interest in progress not happening, you are not a progressive. This isn't complicated, and the mental gymnastics you're doing to get around it are astounding.


simon666 - 2020-12-18

You've got to say more than that if you hope to communicate your point. It doesn't seem to touch on anything that anyone has said in this thread.

And there are no mental gymnastics being done. The view I've advocated is quite clear. Progressiveness is defined by goals relative to a status quo. Attending to those goals is to be progressive. Again, if you want to refute my position you have to show how being pragmatic is conceptually incompatible with being progressive.


ashtar. - 2020-12-18

One of the fundamental liberal brain diseases is the inability to accept that social classes have fundamentally incompatible interests.

The pharmaceutical industry makes much of their money from hurting people.

You either advance their interests, or you advance the interests of the people. Their interest is ripping off people with diabetes, our interest is that not happening. There is no mutually beneficial solution.

Progress means destroying them. If you take their money, you are opposed to progress.

The same goes for the finance, fossil fuels, health insurance, big tech, defense, etc. Progress means destroying them. Trying to frame this as a question of tactics is bad faith bullshit. The generation of bad faith "not yet" bullshit is why they give money to democrats.


jfcaron_ca - 2020-12-18

I feel like it's possible to take money from these antithetical interests, then use that money to work against said interests until they stop giving you money. I think that's called integrity or something. Now if you stop working against those interests in order to continue getting their money and maintain the status quo, that's not integrity, that's corruption. I hope we get integrity instead of corruption. Either is possible.


Two Jar Slave - 2020-12-18

Golly ashtar, I hope you're not posting comments here using a device made by the same "big tech" you've sworn to destroy and whose goals are antithetical to your existence, because I'd hate to think you're making a pragmatic compromise in order to engage in a political debate like the rest of us brain-diseased liberals.

You're gonna skip the pfizer vax too, right? Because taking a shot that lets you survive long enough to keep working towards your other goals would just show what a status quo warrior sellout you really are.


Two Jar Slave - 2020-12-18

Y'know what, I regret engaging even sarcastically. Anyone who unironically says the tech, fuel, pharmaceutical, and financial industries need to be "destroyed" (by whom? how? completely?) and presumably prevented from resurfacing (how? why? for how long?) is less thoughtful than my five-year-old, and is obviously just soapboxing his level-20 hipster morality.


exy - 2020-12-18

Jesus Christ.

OF COURSE M4A represents a minimal standard of human decency, and the fact that it's off the table is a real tragedy whose cost will be measured in human lives lost. OF COURSE everything that falls short of true M4A is more than disappointing, but shameful.

BUT (are you still listening)

OF COURSE M4A is off the table because the fucked up rules we lucky Americans were born into are anti-revolutionary, AND between Citizens United and the general trend of lobbyist fuckery that's become the norm in DC, with the for-profit medical-industrial complex, if we can call it that, that we can thank Nixon for, the system as it stands is not going to support these changes.

It might, incrementally, let us eke out some progress that way. Golf clap.

Or it might collapse and then we get our very own French Revolution, toward which end some of you are hereby invited to return Mr Happy to your pants. Because if you think Constitution 2.0 is going to enshrine progressive values--and believe me, I'd love for that to happen--you're ON THE OPIUM AND YOU NEED TO QUIT IT.

No. No. That's not going to happen. Say hello to "How much further can I bend over for the multinational corporations? I don't mind tearing my ligaments!" version of the Constitution. That's where we end up after the revolutionaries start chopping each other's heads off.

Probably the US ends up Balkanized, and I'd be kind of ok with that, since the US hasn't been great for planet earth's future, but it sure is insulting that it's courtesy of senor sociopath over in the Kremlin. Then again we've earned the insult.

I can see my rant is outpaced by my cheap wine, so I'm embarking on an ill-advised mission for the Submit button.


ashtar. - 2020-12-18

"We should improve society somewhat."

"Yet you participate in society. Curious! I am very intelligent."

Cool that you're just straight up posting republican arguments now. Maybe you should say something about VENEZUELA next?

Example. Keeping global temperature increase under 2ºC means leaving trillions of proven fossil fuel reserves in the ground. These reserves are already on the balance sheets of fossil fuel companies. Thus, preventing the worst effects of climate change means bankrupting fossil fuel companies, which are some of the richest and most profitable companies in the world.

It's us or them. There is no "pragmatic compromise" because their interests and our interests are fundamentally incompatible.

The same is true of many other industries. They make their money off hurting people.


ashtar. - 2020-12-18

Exy: You're more or less right! I'm all for incremental change, in fact! Marginal improvement would be wonderful. I don't think, even in a world where Bernie had just been elected, that we'd be able to have m4a tomorrow.

BUT. It is important to realize that this is not a question of tactics. It is, contrary to what simon claims, a question of ends. Establishment democrats are very much opposed to m4a, and will do whatever they can to prevent it. They will say this if you ask them.

This is because they take a lot of money from industries that profit off of the current untenable and brutal status quo. It is important to recognize this. They are not inconsistent friends, they are obstacles to be overcome.


exy - 2020-12-19

What I hearing is "revolution!" And the fuckers deserve to be thrown out on their ear. I'm just skeptical of whatever replaces this hot mess not being an even hotter mess.


Two Jar Slave - 2020-12-19

ashtar, with your powerful instincts for deflection and straw-manning it's too bad your complete lack of a personality has stymied what might have been a successful political career.


ashtar. - 2020-12-19

You posted "You think big tech is bad, yet you use a computer."
This is very dumb.
You are insufficiently embarrassed about how dumb you are.


Exy: I don't think we're going to have a revolution, but a slowly growing civil unrest is increasingly likely. A revolution would be great, honestly, but I think the people are too divided and too atomized for that to happen on a national scale. To be clear, a civil war is bad and should be avoided. I'm not sure how to do that, though lowering the Gini coefficient and mitigating the worst effects of climate change would be a good start. I'm all for taking any small steps that move us in this direction, but I do not think that center right neoliberals either want to or actually will move us in this direction at all.


Two Jar Slave - 2020-12-19

What I said was all our lives are a daily compromise with industry and most of us are honest enough to recognize that, but the real question here is: if you get another level in hipster, do you automatically wake up with anarchosyndicalist stars tatted on your knuckles that you can show off at the co-op bookstore? Or do you have to complete a special quest for that?


Nominal - 2020-12-19

You end up like my hipster former Bushwick roommate: smoking too much pot and freaking out, going around the apartment and throwing everything in the trash because "We have to get rid of everything corporate!"


ashtar. - 2020-12-20

That is the same argument, and yet is somehow even dumber.

Forced capitulation is not "pragmatic compromise." And having the choice (for example) between using fossil fuels or not being able to live a normal life doesn't have any bearing on the truth of the fact that the interests of fossil fuel companies are antithetical to your interests as a human living on earth.

People paid to serve interests incompatible to our own are not on our side. This is not a question of tactics. Framing it as such is an attempt to obscure the issue and obstruct progress.

You guys really need to decide on whether you're going to make fun of me for being a trust fund hipster or for working a gross blue collar job.


exy - 2020-12-20

>>> I think the people are too divided and too atomized for [a revolution] to happen on a national scale.

This is one consequence of legalized propaganda. I've been racking my brain for a couple of years for how to legislate against Faux News without replicating MinTru. I've been humbled by the power of misinformation; I used to think I was cynical, but I was naive all along.

>>> I'm all for taking any small steps that move us [away from civil war], but I do not think that center right neoliberals either want to or actually will move us in this direction at all.

Unfortunately, this seems to be true. I agree that entrenched Dems are basically "good cops," who like Lincoln Project are largely parasites who've adopted a "don't kill the host" strategy.

More education, in the vein of critical thinking, would be nice.


John Holmes Motherfucker - 2020-12-21

When I take Pillager's words, and try to figure out what they actually mean, I'm not finding much.

>>>The pharmaceutical industry makes much of their money from hurting people.

Not exactly. I mean, there are exceptions, like Perdue pushing OxyContin, but the source of their power is that we want and need what they're selling, because they help us.

>>>You either advance their interests, or you advance the interests of the people. Their interest is ripping off people with diabetes, our interest is that not happening.

I have type 2 diabetes, and my primary interest is to keep the Metformin, Jardiance, and Trulicity coming. If I can't get omeparazole to treat my acid reflux, I'm going to need invasive surgery for my hiatal hernia, and I'm going to face an elevated risk of esopogeal cancer.

>>>There is no mutually beneficial solution.

I get my drugs through medicare. Latelty, there's been no copay. That seems mutually beneficial. What happens in other countries?

>>>Progress means destroying them.

Is this supposed to be a metaphor for something? If you DESTROY the pharmaceutical industry, the drugs stop. I think you must mean something other than destruction, but WHAT?

Right now, according to a story that I read in today's Washington Post, Trump is meeting with advisors like Michael Flynn who thinks he should declare Martial Law and call a new election., so I'm not really interested in pushing Biden on anything right now.

However, if we get through the next month without a fascist takeover, I think we're going to need substantial police reform. I didn't watch the video, because it was posted by a zero credibility troll, but if Biden drags his feet on this issue, I'll all for pushing back.


ashtar. - 2020-12-22

Exy: It's really surreal and terrifying how unmoored from reality so many people are. I know a couple of nice white people who have a bunch of Qanon stickers on their van. Almost everyone I meet seems to believe in like crystals or aliens or some batshit conspiracy. It's especially frustrating when people have a justified rage about they way the public is fucked over, and then channel that into vociferously supporting the same people fucking over the public.

No idea how to fix this. Fox News has a big share of the blame, but so does the death of local reporting, sensationalism, and algorithmically moderated content on social media. We're obsessed with the news, but it's a terrible time for journalism.

JHM: Like, abolishing feudal serfdom didn't mean that we got rid of farming and all starved to death. Changing how we produce pharmaceuticals doesn't mean no more drugs. Change the patent laws to put more stuff in the public domain more quickly. Establish public drug research institutions. Actually put people in jail for abuses that kill people.
https://tinyurl.com/y96h23f4


casualcollapse - 2020-12-18

These stars are for your sexy brain simon666


simon666 - 2020-12-18

Can you rip this twitter video and put it on youtube and submit it here?
https://twitter.com/RexChapman/status/1340058092034256896


casualcollapse - 2020-12-18

I'm glad I stopped listening to Sam Seder months before this.


Marlon Brawndo - 2020-12-18

What I got from this video is that Biden wants everyone to shut up between now and the inauguration, which is...typical. I'm not surprised. He and Obama thrived off of telling everyone to shut up while they did their thing, but then they never had to deal with the Squad. Nancy Pelosi has had them up her crack since 2016. Now Biden is gonna have to deal with them. I can't wait to watch the fireworks there as those bitches go at it with Biden instead of Trump.

A lot of people voted for Biden hoping he would do all these far left ideological moves without actually reading up on him. Which is hilarious.


Nominal - 2020-12-19

The turds obsessed with being republican operatives may or may not be pathetic trolls, but the arguments and self defeating sentiments of holier than thou moral high ground hipsterdom absolutely exists in the wild.

Some real Facebook replies to a friend who made a post urging voting back when Biden's nomination became official:

"Its the progressive voters and candidates that theyre snuffing out. And to your point about morality, Joe Biden is also a rapist, like Trump. Harris has put away tons of black people for a long time for petty crimes. Morality, is a super super low pedestal to be standing on when it comes to the candidates in question. But accusing someone (I know youre not accusing me) of coming from a position of amorality because they aren't wanting voting for someone who is only slightly better than trump is a 'one finger pointed at me, three pointing back at you' type deal. The "moral" position to take is to vote 3rd party because none of them are segregationists or rapists. Again, im not telling people how to vote, but there is no moral or ethical choice in this election. "

"no, the point youre making is blue no matter who. I get it. even though Biden and Harris are among the worst possibly people they could have picked and represent nothing but being subservient to the establishment which does not have the best interests of anyone but themselves in mind."

"Joe biden is essentially a republican in every way except that he has a (D) next to his name, and Harris is as aggressive and ruthless of a prosecutor as any other republican we've seen. "

"I dont feel like im "doing" anything to keep people from voting for the democrats, my whole point is that they did that to themselves and I'm merely pointing out that what they're doing is so obviously in no ones best interests but their own. Its infuriating to watch them so proudly cobble together this losing ticket with the questionable candidates they've chosen, and then turn around and gaslight progressive voters and say its our fault they're losing. Its total bullshit. Progressives didn't want hair sniffing joe or copmala, and we're being blamed for the lack of enthusiasm toward blindy following the establishment."


ashtar. - 2020-12-19

Cool facebook comments. Thanks for posting!


Hazelnut - 2020-12-19

To summarise: trolls gonna troll


John Holmes Motherfucker - 2020-12-19

Release the crackersmack.


Crackersmack - 2020-12-19

yeah I'm not reading all this shit but it looks like this turned to the AOC/Jimmy Dore thing so I have just one thing to ask about that; if Democrats are going to try to rub the left's face into shit every chance they get (look at the committee votes two nights ago) - AND we are definitely going to have a Republican house in two years - what is lost by the left going full "tea party" mode right now?

Fucking everybody in America hates Nancy Pelosi. What's lost by derailing her speaker bid? It would only take 7 votes.


Hazelnut - 2020-12-19

Ashtar, I'm really sorry that Trump lost, I can see how bitterly you're taking it. Just remember he's still got another month to do all kinds of harm.

Meanwhile, let me ask you: aside from fantasizing about "definitely going to have a Republican house" what are you actually DOING to promote left-wing candidates, police reform, BLM? Pretty sure I know the answer already.


Crackersmack - 2020-12-19

bro not everything is about Trump and how he disrespected Mother, it's gonna take you folks years to get over this shit isn't it?

I live in Florida so I don't have the option to support left wing candidates or causes except nationally or in other districts with my money, and I did that in 2020 to whatever capacity I could

at this point all I can really make myself give a shit about is policing on the local level because it is the most immediate daily life-or-death threat to my family, and that topic is a fucking joke to the useless assholes that you just elected, so fuck you

and I'm certainly not going to do shit to help promote anything related to the Democratic Party anymore, pretty clearly you all think that you got this on your own now, I think a lot of the left feels the same way


SolRo - 2020-12-19

Replacing moderate dems with republicans will fix all your local problems.


John Holmes Motherfucker - 2020-12-19

>>>yeah I'm not reading all this shit but

Don't tell anyone, I didn't watch the video either.


Hazelnut - 2020-12-20

Like I said Ashtar, I’m really sorry you lost after wasting a whole year confidently predicting a Trump victory and urging everyone not to vote. If sad fantasies about a Republican congress make you feel better, well, just keep playing pretend.


John Holmes Motherfucker - 2020-12-20

ZCT stands for zero credibility troll.


John Holmes Motherfucker - 2020-12-20

>>>bro not everything is about Trump and how he disrespected Mother, it's gonna take you folks years to get over this shit isn't it?

I think "Mother" here is supposed to be Hillary Clinton. I've never been able to figure out Smacky's, but he does echo dumb right wing talking points at random moments. The idea that Democrats are somehow obsessed with Hillary Clinton, and endlessly desperate for vengeance for her loss is too stupid to come from Ben Shapiro. Its more like Paul Joseph Watson, or maybe Charlie Kirk


Register or login To Post a Comment







Video content copyright the respective clip/station owners please see hosting site for more information.
Privacy Statement