Current Events > Social Media Users Fume After Free Palestine Flag Removed at Sanders Rally

(+) Yeah! (+)

Humble_Novice posted...

Sharing posts from them is considered spreading hate now??

You know what you did.
Picking every chance to spread the hate on pro-palestine movement

loafy013 posted...

Gotta wonder if these angry people have a post history of getting upset about this at all political functions, or if, once again, they raise a stink about democrats while ignoring republicans.

Take a guess

The puritopians work is almost done... they've almost completely destroyed America, thanks to their useful idiots.

wanderingshade posted...

Not fucking twitter squirrel. Listen the whole Gaza thing is bad, Israel is wrong for occupying and killing civilians but can you guys stop purity testing the Democrat party? Can you stop doing brownie points for who cares more and using it police behavior and build your social hierarchy?

i'm convinced these people don't vote anyway. we'll be on trump's 5th term and they'll still be at each other's throats on anonymous twitter accounts tearing each other apart. just ignore them and do what you can do help your local democratic leadership especially if you're in a purple area

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/e/e925cc33.jpg
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/a/ac8f39c0.jpg
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/9/9719afdc.jpg

KhlavicLanguage posted...

i'm convinced these people don't vote anyway. we'll be on trump's 5th term and they'll still be at each other's throats on anonymous twitter accounts tearing each other apart. just ignore them and do what you can do help your local democratic leadership especially if you're in a purple area

My local area isn't very purple, I don't think. I know a guy who is big into the local politics though and he's pretty liberal and environmentalist. He was involved in something against the Moroun Family (they suck ass) and I trust him. City is kinda filled with Boomers though, let me tell you.

I'm all for a presidency with AOC at the helm, but we'll never get one if certain people keep on attacking her relentlessly like this.

Most of CE believes we should never question Democrats. We just need to keep voting blue even if the Dems keep going further right. If you disagree you support Trump.
Humble_Novice posted...

I'm all for a presidency with AOC at the helm, but we'll never get one if certain people keep on attacking her relentlessly like this.

If she can't handle these folks what makes you think she can handle the right wing media going after her? I forget CE has this narrative where you can never ever question Democrats or criticize them. We are never going to win. Ever if we don't hold them to a higher standard. Vote blue no matter what got us Trump. If your only reason for voting blue is'Well it aint TrumP" we are doomed.

Dio posted...

Most of CE believes we should never question Democrats. We just need to keep voting blue even if the Dems keep going further right. If you disagree you support Trump.

There's a distinct difference between questioning Democrats and attacking them no matter what they do.

Dio posted...

Most of CE believes we should never question Democrats. We just need to keep voting blue even if the Dems keep going further right.

Literally no one has a problem with Democrats being questioned.

Question them all you want. Primary them if you want. Pressure them when you can. But once that's done suck it up and vote for the choice you have. Too many morons making perfection the enemy of good.

Humble_Novice posted...

No there isn't. At the end of the day why should I support Democrats if they're just going to keep on dumping truckloads of money to Israel? Why would I support if they'll let Palestine burn? How long before they start conceding on trans-issues? If they can't handle this then theres no fucking way they can stand up to the conservative media running attacks 24/7.

aarrgus posted...

Literally no one has a problem with Democrats being questioned.

Question them all you want. Primary them if you want. Pressure them when you can. But once that's done suck it up and vote for the choice you have. Too many morons making perfection the enemy of good.

It'll never be a good fucking time. There's always goal posts you people make. Just admit you don't want them to be criticized.

Dio posted...

Vote blue no matter what got us Trump.

Fuck no it didn't. People unwilling to vote blue because they got butthurt that Sanders didn't get handed a win he didn't earn in 2016 is why we have to deal with Donald Dumbass now.

Voting blue no matter who would have avoided ALL OF THIS.

aarrgus posted...

Fuck no it didn't. People unwilling to vote blue because they got butthurt that Sanders didn't get handed a win he didn't earn in 2016 is why we have to deal with Donald Dumbass now.

Lol no, Hillary won the popular vote. The endless scandals ruined her. Harris was tied to the deeply unpopular Biden admin and she herself elected to do everything in her power to tie herself to him. Worst, she tied herself to republicans. CE still believes she did nothing wrong and we should keep flirting with Republicans.

Dio posted...

It'll never be a good f***ing time. There's always goal posts you people make. Just admit you don't want them to be criticized.

If you think it's unreasonable to make a decision when you are literally down to two people on wither or not to vote for objectively better one based on one or two issues that you wish they were better on then you are a lost fucking cause.

It's not moving the goal posts, it's acknowledging reality, making the best decision in the moment, and preparing for the next game.

AnsestralRecall posted...

Or

Get this

The Democrats could...stop supporting shit policies

Or you can be more realistic in your purity tests. This all or nothing approach is regressive. Worse than that, we are actually going backwards since purity warriors tend to aid Republicans. Agreeing with your cause partially is better than aiding the side who deliberately wants to go backwards.

The purity tests has not helped, but only harmed the people purity warriors claim to care about. Gaza and even more disenfranchised people are actually in a worse spot now thanks to this push to help MAGA win.

Dio posted...

Lol no, Hillary won the popular vote. The endless scandals ruined her. Harris was tied to the deeply unpopular Biden admin and she herself elected to do everything in her power to tie herself to him. Worst, she tied herself to republicans. CE still believes she did nothing wrong and we should keep flirting with Republicans.

If people had voted blue no matter who in 2016 without being brats then Clinton would have won, Donald Dumbass would have been gone, the SC would be left leaning, the country would have been better off, and nearly everyone would have prospered.

But no. Some butthurt people decided that they just had to make Clinton pay and believed in accelerationist bullshit.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/f/f1dc13e0.png
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/2/2f15be90.jpg
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/6/66c24b34.png
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/c/c9b8ce7b.png

aarrgus posted...

Fuck no it didn't. People unwilling to vote blue because they got butthurt that Sanders didn't get handed a win he didn't earn in 2016 is why we have to deal with Donald Dumbass now.

People were not butthurt about Bernie not being handed wins. People are butthurt about his campaign being treated so differently by party elites.

In 2016 he was gonna lose no matter what, he had relatively little name recognition and polled behind Hillary the whole time. But in light of that it's even more ridiculous that DNC figures (who publicly pledged neutrality) collaborated with media outlets to peddle smear articles about him. Like why? Just fuck off and let Hillary get a clean win.

In 2020 Jim Clyburn had promised to not make an endorsement in the South Carolina presidential primary. This pledge was the whole reason he was able to maneuver SC into an early voting position back in 2008. Yet come SC, the frontrunner just so happens to Bernie, so guess what Clyburn does? He breaks his commitment and specifically endorses the only other competitive candidate in the state, Biden, because god forbid Bernie go into Super Tuesday with the momentum.

It's not that Bernie loses but that his losses often involve certain Dems being treacherous deviants purely to take him down. Just let the natural process play out.

Dio posted...

How long before they start conceding on trans-issues?

They already have started

asdf8562 posted...

Or you can be more realistic in your purity tests. This all or nothing approach is regressive. Worse than that, we are actually going backwards since purity warriors tend to aid Republicans. Agreeing with your cause partially is better than aiding the side who deliberately wants to go backwards.

The purity tests has not helped, but only harmed the people purity warriors claim to care about. Gaza and even more disenfranchised people are actually in a worse spot now thanks to this push to help MAGA win.

It became very clear certain types of those people didn't actually care, when actual Palestinians were saying "Please, anybody but Trump," and those people went "Nah, sit down and shut up, I know better than you."

AnsestralRecall posted...

They already have started

You want to know why they've already started? Because they lost after running hard on them, when people claiming to care about those issues didn't vote for them, sending the message that those issues weren't as important.

HashtagSEP posted...

You want to know why they've already started? Because they lost after running hard on them, when people claiming to care about those issues didn't vote for them, sending the message that those issues weren't as important.

Unfortunately, the drawback of intersectionality is that people who would have voted for the Democrats chose not to because of Palestine. As a result, it's becoming much harder for activists to organize as Trump's admin systematically targets them.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/9/9cbb1238.jpg
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/7/78af8ce8.jpg
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/2/25c1b779.png

AnsestralRecall posted...

Punish them for supporting bad policies by electing progressives

Is it that hard to understand or do I have to bring out the crayons and construction paper?

Progressives AREN'T RUNNING FOR OFFICE!

HashtagSEP posted...

You want to know why they've already started? Because they lost after running hard on them, when people claiming to care about those issues didn't vote for them, sending the message that those issues weren't as important.

They were dropping support for it the second the GOP started targeting businesses supporting DEI policies which was happening before they lost.

If they are willing to abandon us because "it wasn't important" to voters then they never wanted what was best for us. Our blood is on their hands for being willing to sell us out like that

They didn't lose because of pro-Palestinian voters not voting for them. They lost because the party had the perception amongst the voters that they were awful on the economy after seeing cost of living increases across the country without any attempts being made to get across to voters just how good the Biden admin had been handling the economy relative to the rest of the world

Such a crack up that Sanders gets a pass by so many on this board. This had been anyone else and they would be literally destroyed.

SecretBase posted...

In 2016 he was gonna lose no matter what, he had relatively little name recognition and polled behind Hillary the whole time

To be frank, Hillary saved the DNC from their overspending on Barack Obama and neither they nor Obama prepared monetarily for the future. The DNC was never going to back Bernie when Hillary had more money.

Sandalorn posted...

Such a crack up that Sanders gets a pass by so many on this board. This had been anyone else and they would be literally destroyed.

Because he's not actually promoting a genocide or apartheid state? For politicians who are the tweets are valid and they can go fuck themselves.

wanderingshade posted...

To be frank, Hillary saved the DNC from their overspending on Barack Obama and neither they nor Obama prepared monetarily for the future. The DNC was never going to back Bernie when Hillary had more money.

Yes, in general the DNC had already grown an aversion to "rockstar" candidates who basically draw all the donations towards themselves while indirectly crippling the national party, potentially leading to midterms devastation. Bernie was basically Obama turned up to 11 in that regard, pushing the party to shun wealthy donors and keeping a private donor list that IIRC still hasn't been shared with the party.

Meanwhile Hillary's main asset in Congress was party fundraising and she bailed the DNC out from their post-Obama financial woes.

Not saying it's not understandable why the DNC as a private organization favored Hillary, but just that they shouldn't pledge to be neutral and then secretly not actually be neutral.

If Bernie knew XYZ party figures would break their pledges just to take him down he may have conducted himself differently. But politicians aren't honest ahead of time out of fear of public repercussions.

SecretBase posted...

In 2020 Jim Clyburn had promised to not make an endorsement in the South Carolina presidential primary. This pledge was the whole reason he was able to maneuver SC into an early voting position back in 2008. Yet come SC, the frontrunner just so happens to Bernie, so guess what Clyburn does? He breaks his commitment and specifically endorses the only other competitive candidate in the state, Biden, because god forbid Bernie go into Super Tuesday with the momentum.

Ah yes, he had a truly insurmountable lead of... hang on. (Checks notes) two out of three states, one of which was his homestate. Truly truly he was doing so well.

Well the other thing about Bernie and the DNC is that he's not really a democrat. He's been an independent his entire life and only changes to democrat to run in national elections. He ran independent in 2012, ran as a Democrat in the 2016 primaries, and then went right back to running as an independent in 2018 after he lost against Hillary. He again ran as an independent in 2024. His entire time as governor he ran against dems and was in the "Liberty Union" party in the 70s also running against democrats. I get frustrations around the DNC not supporting him harder, but the dude spent 30 years running against them before he started using them so I don't know what people really expect.

Metal_Gear_Raxis posted...

Ah yes, he had a truly insurmountable lead of... hang on. (Checks notes) two out of three states, one of which was his homestate. Truly truly he was doing so well.

What is your point? If anyone else was in that position then Clyburn wouldn't have said anything, like how he remained neutral between Obama and Hillary. Only kneecapping Bernie is worth breaking pledges.

Metal_Gear_Raxis posted...

one of which was his homestate

???

Bernie was born in New York, and serves in Vermont, neither of which voted until Super Tuesday or later.

He never lived in New Hampshire lol.

SecretBase posted...

What is your point?

You're acting like he had such a commanding lead with only 6% of the states having voted.

Bernie was born in New York, and serves in Vermont, neither of which voted until Super Tuesday or later.

That's what I get for doing this on my smart phone at work.

I want to ask these supporters do they prefer and enjoy Dummy tRump instead?

Frosted_Midna posted...

I want to ask these supporters do they prefer and enjoy Dummy tRump instead?

Better to be Red and dead than compromise with Blue.

Frosted_Midna posted...

I want to ask these supporters do they prefer and enjoy Dummy tRump instead?

The answer is yes.

Its the old trolley dilemma. Should you sacrifice 1 person to save 5, by diverting a runaway unstoppable train onto a different track where only one person is present?

To appear morally righteous and clean they will insist a 3rd option, but ignore the reality no 3rd option exists that can actually be implemented. So 5 people end up dying, but they will swear up and down they are still righteous and clean in their contribution of letting those 5 die. With their logic being, "no one should be dying, so I choose doing nothing" ultimately letting 5 die instead of 1.

All or nothing/the world should burn is their motto.

asdf8562 posted...

The answer is yes.

Its the old trolley dilemma. Should you sacrifice 1 person to save 5, by diverting a runaway unstoppable train onto a different track where only one person is present?

To appear morally righteous and clean they will insist a 3rd option, but ignore the reality no 3rd option exists that can actually be implemented. So 5 people end up dying, but they will swear up and down they are still righteous and clean in their contribution of letting those 5 die. With their logic being, "no one should be dying, so I choose doing nothing" ultimately letting 5 die instead of 1.

All or nothing/the world should burn is their motto.

Agreed.

Metal_Gear_Raxis posted...

You're acting like he had such a commanding lead with only 6% of the states having voted.

No. I'm just saying he was in front. If say Warren was in front I doubt we'd have seen the movement that happened.

asdf8562 posted...

With their logic being, "no one should be dying, so I choose doing nothing" ultimately letting 5 die instead of 1.

To be fair pulling the lever in the trolley problem at least doesn't somehow benefit whoever tied the people to the tracks.

Voting for someone supporting a genocide secures their power and gives the feedback that they're doing fine and can get away with it. Harder sell than just pulling a lever.

SecretBase posted...

To be fair pulling the lever in the trolley problem at least doesn't somehow benefit whoever tied the people to the tracks.

Voting for someone supporting a genocide secures their power and gives the feedback that they're doing fine and can get away with it. Harder sell than just pulling a lever

Even if we entertain that thought process....
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/1/1f7acc7a.jpg

At this point, I'm convinced most online leftists only care about the aesthetics of leftism and not about material outcomes.

It's performative bullshit, but I guess throwing all the people hurt by Trump under the bus doesn't matter so long as they can earn brownie points from other e-"progressives".

loafy013 posted...

Gotta wonder if these angry people have a post history of getting upset about this at all political functions, or if, once again, they raise a stink about democrats while ignoring republicans.

Do you seriously think the critics of genocidal Zionists (and their allies) don't attack them everywhere they find them?

Or are you just doing a little performance on an online message board for fun?

Metal_Gear_Raxis posted...

And there's the terminally online left circular firing squad, lining up their shots.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/b/b6858b21.jpg

Kaitouace posted...

Months of Trump and Republicans destroying America and ruining the world in the process and hardly a peep. AOC and Sanders start traveling to actually attempt to do something to stand up to Trump and these guys show up like clockwork. I'll just say I've gone from "leave these protestors alone as they have a real point" to "I can't help but be suspicious".

Yep.

TC, do you spend your free time term searching on twitter to find terminally online perpetually outraged nobodies? Half your images have words in bold which means you specifically looked for those words and names. You literally have people with 0 retweets and single digit likes in your compilations.

asdf8562 posted...

Even if we entertain that thought process....
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/1/1f7acc7a.jpg

If everyone's in deep shit they can unite and try to fight back.

snake_5036 posted...

TC, do you spend your free time term searching on twitter to find terminally online perpetually outraged nobodies? Half your images have words in bold which means you specifically looked for those words and names. You literally have people with 0 retweets and single digit likes in your compilations.

You sure don't ever see him criticize Trump or Republicans to nearly the same extent.

Even then, it's just to post some clumsy sarcasm 'thanking' 'leftists'.

It's funny that he condemns pro-Palestinians for not protesting Trump, when he has so little to say on the subject himself.

Makes you wonder.

ai123 posted...

You sure don't ever see him criticize Trump or Republicans to nearly the same extent.

Wait, are you really serious? Humble_Novice has a reputation of borderline flooding 261 and now CE about Republicans being stupid or Leopards eating faces.

012yArthur0 posted...

Wait, are you really serious? Humble_Novice has a reputation of borderline flooding 261 and now CE about Republicans being stupid or Leopards eating faces.

Look at the threads he has posted recently.

How many criticize Trump? How many criticize protesters, or 'leftists' with 50 social media followers?

He even uses right wing publications like the Telegraph to do so.

Bernie has been critical of Israel and Netanyahu specifically. Some of those comments about him are ridiculous.

They were disrupting his event of course they were gonna be removed.

ai123 posted...

Look at the threads he has posted recently.

How many criticize Trump? How many criticize protesters, or 'leftists' with 50 social media followers?

There's already one in page 2 about Leopard eating faces.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/400-current-events/80965754
Just by the titles alone:

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/400-current-events/80963138
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/400-current-events/80968059
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/400-current-events/80966637

Keep in mind there was a time he made so many topics about it that some even joked about him being news bot at some point, and now seeing the same guy that probably did the most anti-GOP topics being on the crossfire is really ironic to me.

I don't really understand this lavish desire to go inquisition mode and consider anyone sus for not 100% kotowing to a stance. Or rather, merely imply as such.

When people complain about the left being full of purity-testers, this is why. And then wonder why the left can't help itself but cannibalize each other and hoping that the duct-tape lasts long enough to keep the fractured groups together until the election.