I hate linking to Twitter, but the community notes are just too good this time.
You might as well just continue not linking to it because community notes don't show up on embedsI see the notes in the embed?
If you care that much, screenshot the post.
I see the notes in the embed?
This is all I see
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/d/ddbc23ef.jpg
Weird, I see the community notes.same here too
it's almost as if these hecklers were paid agitators
Weird, I see the community notes.
Interesting, I see the community notes on mobile, but not on my laptop. I'm guessing something with FireFox or uBlockDoes the link in the OP automatically display on one of those but have to be manually opened on the other?
Good if they think both sides are bad they should protest both sides.
It makes no sense to protest anyone who isn't in a position to do anything about Gaza. What would be the point of the protest?Moral grandstanding
Do you think there might be a reason for that?I do wonder a bit why it took so long for someone here to show some examples.
Genocide is bad no matter which politicians are funding it and its inexcusable that the Biden administration embarrassed themselves and ruined Bidens legacy for a political move that benefitted Trump.That's great and all, but...
Still doesn't make up for poisoning the well for months on end before the election.Just remember, the Gazans in Gaza said "do whatever it takes for Trump to lose".
When people on here throw out the term "champions of gaza" are they referring to protest voters? Or anyone who voices opposition to the genocide? I feel like I've seen it used as a catch all term but maybe I'm wrongDifferent people use the term in different ways.
People did during the campaign, and you refusing to find out the truth isnt on anyone else.Crazy how it took this long for anyone to show it here then considering how heated all those arguments got.
I would not call funding and arming a genocide great under any circumstances.shockthemonkey posted...
I wish the Biden administration had done that, too. They certainly had more ability than whoever youre mad at.
Still doesn't make up for poisoning the well for months on end before the election.Until any of the people that did that explain how that behavior was realistically supposed to net votes for Kamala and not depress turnout, I'm not even going to pretend to entertain your rationalizations.
It makes no sense to protest anyone who isn't in a position to do anything about Gaza. What would be the point of the protest?Today's opposition may be tomorrow's government.
When people on here throw out the term "champions of gaza" are they referring to protest voters? Or anyone who voices opposition to the genocide? I feel like I've seen it used as a catch all term but maybe I'm wrong
You might as well just continue not linking to it because community notes don't show up on embeds
If you care that much, screenshot the post.
Blue MAGA's called me that, and I've stated numerous times that I had voted for Harris.Blue MAGA is one of the only terms sillier than Champions of Gaza.
People did during the campaign, and you refusing to find out the truth isnt on anyone else.The Biden admin had the ability to press charges against Trump but did not. Weird! Maybe people should direct more anger towards them instead of people that protested Gaza
I would not call funding and arming a genocide great under any circumstances.
I wish the Biden administration had done that, too. They certainly had more ability than whoever youre mad at.
Blue MAGA is one of the only terms sillier than Champions of Gaza.
The Biden admin had the ability to press charges against Trump but did not. Weird! Maybe people should direct more anger towards them instead of people that protested Gaza
Except Blue MAGA is an established term for liberals who have the same fervor for the democratic party that MAGA has for Trump. You're welcome to disagree or think it's silly, but it's a pretty apt description. Many respected journalists and people in politics have used the phrase.LOL.
Except Blue MAGA is an established term for liberals who have the same fervor for the democratic party that MAGA has for Trump. You're welcome to disagree or think it's silly, but it's a pretty apt description. Many respected journalists and people in politics have used the phrase.The whole point of MAGA is their worship of a cult leader as opposed to an organization. It's not a good comparison.
Except Blue MAGA is an established term for liberals
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jul/15/democrats-joe-biden-magaLOL x2. A column by the same dipshit who is the subject of a different CE topic because he think a Harris presidency would be no better for trans people than the Trump regime.