Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 396: America's Mid(terms)

(+) Yeah! (+)

UshiromiyaEva posted...

Wait...

Who the hell was the regular politics topic left leaning poster who refused to announce their Gamergate ties then??

I was almost certain that was you, but I guess not.

Was it Caelus? I just can't remember anyone who was both gamergate AND progressive (outside of people backing Bernie out of spite for Hillary Clinton, but intended to vote Trump over either).

It 100% wasn't Tony.

I think maybe Biscuit was pro-gg? I wouldn't call him left leaning though. And I could be completely getting that wrong - I don't want to impugn his name there because I'm actually not sure it was him. So long ago now.

UshiromiyaEva posted...

Wait...

Who the hell was the regular politics topic left leaning poster who refused to dennounce their Gamergate ties then??

I was almost certain that was you, but I guess not.

I thought it was kinglicious? Or is he not left presenting?

I think King was Wang, wasn't he?

Fuck man I can't keep track anymore, not that I have a leg to stand on there.

GG had three camps, with the 3rd being pro degen but not siding with GG because of the obviously ramping up harassment campaigns and channer culture / vidya james

Dancedreamer posted...

I thought it was kinglicious? Or is he not left presenting?

that's Wang yes

and despite his claims of progress his history posting has been anything but

Suprak_the_Stud posted...

I think maybe Biscuit was pro-gg? I wouldn't call him left leaning though. And I could be completely getting that wrong - I don't want to impugn his name there because I'm actually not sure it was him. So long ago now.

Lol

I'm pretty sure it was Wang, who was 1,000,000% gamergater, and claimed to be left leaning, but his posts never really reflected it.

Biscuit I don't think was pro GG, and he's generally left wing with a few glaring examples (defending Richard Spencer in the past), but those also aren't very current.

Wang was the poster child of "claims to be left-leaning, but actually isn't, and takes offense whenever someone points that fact out".

Yeah, it was 100% Wang who I was thinking of. My apologies to Biscuit!

Jakyl, how long have these topics been going? Since before 2014? I remember one of the topic titles was Crimea river, which must have been in 2014. I didn't think this series had been going on that long though.

I think Biscuit's most recent "Uh..." moment was the "Just leave poor Kyle Rittenhouse alone, he doesn't want the attention" stuff, but I think he has openly admitted how wrong he was on that since.

Maybe. I honestly don't remember.

Everyone has a stinker in their past, it happens.

I just can't remember what was who's!

SOMEONE used to be Tulsi Gabbard Stan!

someone was hyping up vic's lawsuit defence lmao

UshiromiyaEva posted...

Everyone has a stinker in their past, it happens.

I just can't remember what was who's!

SOMEONE used to be Tulsi Gabbard Stan!

That was like half the topic! Which is why I gave people shit for it all the time.

Luckily, everybody learned while ago, which, admittedly, gave the giving of shit less fun.

Though you're right, everybody has a stinker. Mine was jumping to Hillary quickly as soon as I thought it was obvious she was going to win the nomination, and thus I was hostile to people against it more than I should have been.

That said, if there's anything I'll feel vindicated on almost as much as hating Tulsi, it'll be defending the "deplorables" comment.

I have no stinkers

I am pristine

Oh the deplorables comment was right on the money. Honestly it didn't go far enough.

I mean, Biden did pull the emergency weed lever. It's just Biden also likes to do things by the usual processes so the lever isn't just unitary executive theory "I declare it legal" stuff like Trump governed by and "I've directed the AG to initiate the process of reviewing the classification..." slow shit. Pro side is it should be harder to challenge legally that way (because IIRC Congress put out a report at some point claiming the executive couldn't do this by themselves) downside is it is slow as fuck and also the rules don't apply to the GOP so if they undo this they can just do so by fiat because this country is politically broken.

StealThisSheen posted...

That was like half the topic! Which is why I gave people shit for it all the time.

Yeah, a good chunk of people supported Gabbard. I was with you giving people shit for it. Also had to argue against pro-Greenwald stuff back in the day.

Like, Tony and I agree on things more often than not. But I was in his face about both Hillary and Tulsi. One I was right on, one I wasn't. Granted, it wasn't because I actually supported Hillary over Bernie, but because I quickly accepted the reality that she was gonna be the nominee, whereas Tony was willing to cling on to hope and principles longer than I was. I, admittedly, sold my principles down the river to desperately back the "winner."

And, well, we saw how that went.

Twitter seems to believe the attacker was paul pelosi's homosexual lover.

Also that he is a false flag because of positions he had taken a decade ago before becoming radicalized. "He was a Castro protesting nudist 10 years ago, that sounds more like a liberal than a conservative to me!"

Nevermind the events of the past decade.

Forceful_Dragon posted...

Twitter seems to believe the attacker was paul pelosi's homosexual lover.

Also that he is a false flag because of positions he had taken a decade ago before becoming radicalized. "He was a Castro protesting nudist 10 years ago, that sounds more like a liberal than a conservative to me!"

Nevermind the events of the past decade.

Ah, so this is another case where the "back the blue" party thinks the cops are lying. Interesting.

They can't get enough of the fact that the attacker was in his underwear.

Nevermind that at this point in his life it sounds like he's a borderline homeless person with a history of substance abuse. One with a history of Nudism to boot.

So they want you to remember his political speech from 10 years ago, and ignore everything more recent than that.

I'm also curious to find out some more specifics about the attack and I hope there are security cameras on the residence to paint a more undeniable sequence of events, but it's all fairly consistent so far.

Forceful_Dragon posted...

Twitter seems to believe the attacker was paul pelosi's homosexual lover.

Also that he is a false flag because of positions he had taken a decade ago before becoming radicalized. "He was a Castro protesting nudist 10 years ago, that sounds more like a liberal than a conservative to me!"

Nevermind the events of the past decade.

RW figures love to *pretend* that being left/right is a cemented-in part of someone that never changes, and that no right-winger could've possibly had a left-wing past

they did the same thing for I think the Boston Shooter who was specifically cited the Great Replacement Theory for his motives... but because in his manifesto he claims he used to have left-wing ideals before becoming redpilled, they call him a "lefty" shooter (at least in public)

ffs they quite famously do the same thing with "the KKK are democrats"

I emphasize *pretend* though because they also love calling themselves Classical Liberals who the party left behind when in reality they're just a bunch of Wangs

Grimlyn posted...

RW figures love to *pretend* that being left/right is a cemented-in part of someone that never changes, and that no right-winger could've possibly had a left-wing past

they did the same thing for I think the Boston Shooter who was specifically cited the Great Replacement Theory for his motives... but because in his manifesto he claims he used to have left-wing ideals before becoming redpilled, they call him a "lefty" shooter (at least in public)

ffs they quite famously do the same thing with "the KKK are democrats"

I emphasize *pretend* though because they also love calling themselves Classical Liberals who the party left behind when in reality they're just a bunch of Wangs

Let's not forget their greatest hit "Abraham Lincoln was a Republican!"

In 1860:
Republicans support A, B and C
Democrats support X, Y and Z
Lincoln supports A, B and C, and therefore is a Republican.

In 2022:
Republicans support X, Y and Z
Democrats support A, B and C

Modern day Republicans (who support X, Y and Z): "Don't forget that Lincoln was a Republican!"
Usually when discussing race as though to imply that being in the party that shares the same name (but few of the same ideals) as though it makes racism magically impossible.

Oh jeeze, just realized that the attackers from Berkeley. Thatll definitely feed into any narratives trying to paint him as being left-wing!

Based on the picture I dont think Ive ever seen him around.

LordoftheMorons posted...

Oh jeeze, just realized that the attackers from Berkeley. Thatll definitely feed into any narratives trying to paint him as being left-wing!

Based on the picture I dont think Ive ever seen him around.

I think it's fairly safe to say that at one point in his life it would be entirely accurate to have called him left-wing.

But that point was years and years ago.

like again, my brother who used to be a staunch lefty voter here, adamant about not caving to the "lesser of two evils" centrist party under any circumstances.............. and now he's the carbon copy of literally every other alt-right gamer male in existence

redpilling's a thing

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1586121294701002752?t=DNO18fPrwbS85gGrfzco1Q&s=19

Its too bad people cant vote to banish Fox News.

when conservatives don't understand that getting hammered means something else

EVERYONE'S getting hammered guys, what's the problem?????

I hope we get more clarity on the 911 call that resulted in the cops arriving, because that's a major point of contention.

It has at points been reported as a "welfare check" and at other points cited as "Paul managed to dial 911 after the assailant was in the house".

And so I'm hoping it's something that tracks logically like "Paul dialed 911, but couldn't speak with the dispatcher so the dispatcher ordered a welfare check based upon the silent 911 call received from the Pelosi residence".

Because there's a fair bit of question of "what were the cops doing making a random welfare check at 2:30 AM?" and "why did they say welfare check if paul called the cops?"

Sorry, what exactly are you suggesting FD?

LordoftheMorons posted...

Oh jeeze, just realized that the attackers from Berkeley. Thatll definitely feed into any narratives trying to paint him as being left-wing!

Based on the picture I dont think Ive ever seen him around.

There's a house in Northwest Berleley that has a lot of insane anti-Hillary/vax/5G signs, and I've always wondered who lives there.

But realistically it's probably a different crazy person and not this guy.

Suprak_the_Stud posted...

Sorry, what exactly are you suggesting FD?

I'm not suggesting anything nefarious, quite the opposite.

Its just frustrating that there are small so-called inconsistencies that are being used as ammunition for speculation.

The fact the he was formerly left-wing being one and the initial reports citing a "wellness check" being the other.

Forceful_Dragon posted...

Because there's a fair bit of question of "what were the cops doing making a random welfare check at 2:30 AM?" and "why did they say welfare check if paul called the cops?"

If the dude broke in by smashing a window or something it probably triggered an automatic call to 911 via whatever security system they have. Doesn't seem unlikely that would happen.

I find it quite plausible that the Pelosis might think to invest in a security system

VintageGin posted...

There's a house in Northwest Berleley that has a lot of insane anti-Hillary/vax/5G signs, and I've always wondered who lives there.

But realistically it's probably a different crazy person and not this guy.

Right wing nutjobs with sterotypical left-wing nutjob aesthetic are truly a sight to behold, and I didnt realize that they existed before moving here! Its like theyve been genetically designed to maximally trigger me.

Paratroopa1 posted...

I find it quite plausible that the Pelosis might think to invest in a security system

Right, this is also fairly logical.

Which is why I just want that timeline and sequence of events to be made clear so it's not a supposed plot hole.

Forceful_Dragon posted...

Which is why I just want that timeline and sequence of events to be made clear shop it's not a supposed plot hole.

Not a single person who legitimately thinks this was a false flag will be swayed no matter how detailed it all gets.

UshiromiyaEva posted...

Not a single person who legitimately thinks this was a false flag will be swayed no matter how detailed it all gets.

That might be true, but there might be people who haven't taken that dive yet who might BECOME redpilled on the back of "suspicious" sounding circumstances. People who might stay sane longer if there were clearly nothing ambiguous to be pointed at.

Forceful_Dragon posted...

Right, this is also fairly logical.

Which is why I just want that timeline and sequence of events to be made clear shop it's not a supposed plot hole.

Who cares what small brained MAGA morons think? Like UE said, there is absolutely nothing that could happen that they wouldn't just claim false flag.

This took me two seconds of Googling to find:

What we know:
Pelosi made a coded plea for help: Paul Pelosi called 911 when he encountered a threatening man in his home early Friday morning, according to a law enforcement source. He left the line open so a dispatcher could hear his conversation with the intruder, speaking surreptitiously but making it clear that he needed help.
Officers witnessed the attack: San Francisco police entered the couples home around 2:27 a.m. local time (5:27 a.m. ET) to find Pelosi, 82, struggling over a hammer with another man, according to the citys police chief. Officers saw the intruder violently assault Pelosi with the hammer before they tackled him to the ground and arrested him.
The intruder seemed intent on finding the speaker: The person who attacked Paul Pelosi was searching for the Speaker of the House, according to a source briefed on the attack. He shouted Where is Nancy? at least twice and later, as he tried to tie up Paul Pelosi and said he would wait until Nancy got home, the source said. The speaker was in Washington, DC, at the time.

Unless you're a small brained conspiracy nut, that's all the info that's needed. Lunatics who are so blinded by their partisan hackery that "need more info" aren't worth coddling. They won't believe you no matter how much info you give them.

Suprak_the_Stud posted...

Unless you're a small brained conspiracy nut, that's all the info that's needed. Lunatics who are so blinded by their partisan hackery that "need more info" aren't worth coddling. They won't believe you no matter how much info you give them.

This is also where I stand.

I mean I get where you are coming from, we don't need more fringe nuts leaning into more misinformation or misrepresentation of the facts that is likely to spread, so to have the full story and context right away is always for the best...but if they are fringe nuts to begin with they are going to go down that hole no matter what eventually.

i dialed past some local radio guy on my way back home today. it was interesting hearing their emphasis on certain words

i'm paraphrasing here as closely as i can, imagine dramatic pauses everywhere

"now i'm going to talk about this thing with paul pelosi. this was a horrible event. a NUDIST ACTIVIST, from BERKELY, attacked him with a hammer. it's a good thing the police showed up right when they did, and the democrats should APOLOGIZE to them IMMEDIATELY. now paul is in his 80s and the guy was in his 40s, so i think one or more hits woulda killed him... "

and that's about when i got tired and moved on. i'm guessing that's gonna be the right-wing deflection- 'the guy is basically a lib and democrats hate police'

Anyone feeling like crying?

Look how well this man speaks:

https://twitter.com/dannydevito/status/1586187590398459905

We were so close.

Paratroopa1 posted...

I find it quite plausible that the Pelosis might think to invest in a security system

But not before buying stock in the company and then announcing their choice in brands

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

We were so close.

We really weren't. I just don't have enough faith in America to do the right thing anymore. The choices could be between Bernie Sanders saying "I want to give you all healthcare and I've found a way to do it without raising taxes." and Satan himself saying "I want to murder 75% of you, and cut taxes for the top 1%" and roughly 49% of voters would go "Yeah, that Satan guy's got my vote." And then he'd win Georgia and Arizona and the election because our electoral system is stupid.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Anyone feeling like crying?

Look how well this man speaks:

https://twitter.com/dannydevito/status/1586187590398459905

We were so close.

Can't believe we missed out on a DeVito presidency

I'm the trash POTUS! I eat bloated spending!

After SCOTUS overturns ROE: "Can I protect your egg in this trying time?"

So Bernie is asserting that the Republicans are gonna win a veto proof majority or that Biden is on board?