• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Are people already regretting their choice?

I have criticized an action - blaming Palestinian/Lebanese Arabs as a whole - or "Dearborn", which by the way is home to a lot of people and cultures - for the rise of Trump,
The Arab/Muslim groups and their handmaidens on the far Left who refused to vote for KH over the Gaza War certainly did their share of damage and helped reelect Trump. Why should we not point that out?
using this as a post facto excuse for ignoring or celebrating as schadenfreude both their persecution at home, and turning a blind eye to the targeted religious ethnocide of their people abroad.
"Their people abroad" committed targeted religious ethnocide when they attacked Israel, murdering >1000 people and kidnapping hundreds of others. The kidnapped people, mostly civilians, were then used as a bargaining chip to effect the release of religious ethnociders who were imprisoned by Israel.
 
That doesn't mean their current strategy for attracting those potential voters is working. Look out the window. It isn't.
KH came close to winning. I think that if she embraced the strategy favored by you, the loss would have been far worse.

The problem is that KH had fully embraced the leftward lunge of the Democratic Party in her Senate career and also in her ill-fated 2020 presidential run. She was thus an untrustworthy vessel for the message she was trying to put forward in her 2024 race. This was the flaw of the messenger, not the message.
 
Last edited:
I don’t know if Poli voted
Of course I voted. I've never missed an election and I wasn't about to miss what might be the last one. Not being willing to shit on Palestinians has nothing to do with whether or not I voted.
Nobody is shitting on Palestinians, except Trump. The fact is that some of his supporters were pro-Palestinian Arabs who didn't seem to grasp that Trump has long supported Likud and Bibi, and are now outraged to hear him continue his long held vision.

Enjoying the schadenfreude of that situation is a very reasonable response IMNSHO.
Tom
Are you saying Iran hasn't been shitting on the Palestinians??
 
The idea anyone who votes for the other guy "deserves what's coming to them" is not the dictum of a liberal society. Let alone the idea all members of a group should be punished if some portion of them do something.
Regardless of what anyone deserves, the dictum of a truly good society is that it will build Heaven for them, anyway.
 
That's what happens when you vote for the LeopardsEatingPeople'sFaces.org party.

It was okay when it was going to happen to other people.
 
Last edited:
Is there any way to tell the difference between genuine social media videos and ones that are just for show and clicks these days?
Some common red flags. Most aren't the death knell on their own, but if a creator indulges in a bunch of them you might have a paid shill or a Russian troll farm on your hands:

-Superlatives in the video title.

-"You'll never believe what happens next."

- A company brand name is visible on still image. Unless it's a review of the product itself.

- Racy and/or heavily photoshopped still image.

- Posting history is a mix of personal/self-help/fashion advice half the time and politics the other half.

- Anything with "slime" in the title.

- "I don't usually post about this, but..." (especially if obviously untrue!)

- Very frequent "collabs" with other dubious content creators.

- User posts very frequently, or conversely, they only appear to have posted one or two videos under a given name.

- It's about George Soros, AOC, or the Koch Brothers.

- An AI is reading the script.

- It's a slide show with a voice over.

- Comic Sans

- "Why is no one talking about..." (topic of the week that everyone is talking about)

-"What they don't want you to know about..."

-Lots of grievance videos about other creators, platforms, or alleged mistreatment by the "mainstream media".
.. so, all of it then.
 
Is there any way to tell the difference between genuine social media videos and ones that are just for show and clicks these days?
Some common red flags. Most aren't the death knell on their own, but if a creator indulges in a bunch of them you might have a paid shill or a Russian troll farm on your hands:

-Superlatives in the video title.

-"You'll never believe what happens next."

- A company brand name is visible on still image. Unless it's a review of the product itself.

- Racy and/or heavily photoshopped still image.

- Posting history is a mix of personal/self-help/fashion advice half the time and politics the other half.

- Anything with "slime" in the title.

- "I don't usually post about this, but..." (especially if obviously untrue!)

- Very frequent "collabs" with other dubious content creators.

- User posts very frequently, or conversely, they only appear to have posted one or two videos under a given name.

- It's about George Soros, AOC, or the Koch Brothers.

- An AI is reading the script.

- It's a slide show with a voice over.

- Comic Sans

- "Why is no one talking about..." (topic of the week that everyone is talking about)

-"What they don't want you to know about..."

-Lots of grievance videos about other creators, platforms, or alleged mistreatment by the "mainstream media".
.. so, all of it then.
Well, it's always best to keep your mind on while watching stuff, I think.
 
All I can saw to Mr Levendofsky is I hope you learned your lesson for the future and, until then, FUCK YOU.

He's not a Trumper.
The Kansas Farmer's Union supported Trump. And he is whining that Trump needs to remember who put him in office. So, if he is not a Trumper, he is hides it well and I apologize for my false conclusion. However, my comment stands for all the members of the Kansas Farmers Union who voted from Trump. Serves them right.
 
Is there any way to tell the difference between genuine social media videos and ones that are just for show and clicks these days?
Some common red flags. Most aren't the death knell on their own, but if a creator indulges in a bunch of them you might have a paid shill or a Russian troll farm on your hands:

-Superlatives in the video title.

-"You'll never believe what happens next."

- A company brand name is visible on still image. Unless it's a review of the product itself.

- Racy and/or heavily photoshopped still image.

- Posting history is a mix of personal/self-help/fashion advice half the time and politics the other half.

- Anything with "slime" in the title.

- "I don't usually post about this, but..." (especially if obviously untrue!)

- Very frequent "collabs" with other dubious content creators.

- User posts very frequently, or conversely, they only appear to have posted one or two videos under a given name.

- It's about George Soros, AOC, or the Koch Brothers.

- An AI is reading the script.

- It's a slide show with a voice over.

- Comic Sans

- "Why is no one talking about..." (topic of the week that everyone is talking about)

-"What they don't want you to know about..."

-Lots of grievance videos about other creators, platforms, or alleged mistreatment by the "mainstream media".
.. so, all of it then.
Well, it's always best to keep your mind on while watching stuff, I think.

even better, I don't watch social media videos. Nor do I watch real news videos. I think that the only videos that I watch is the weather forecast when a storm is coming.
 
All I can saw to Mr Levendofsky is I hope you learned your lesson for the future and, until then, FUCK YOU.

He's not a Trumper.
The Kansas Farmer's Union supported Trump.

Says who?
It is definitely implied by the following two sentences in the photo linked:

“I guess We should have paid closer attention to what was in [project 2025].”

And

“I think it’s time for this admin to recognize who put them into office.”

Based on those two sentences and the context of the entire quote it is perfectly reasonable to conclude that both he and the farmers union supported (or majorly) Trump.
 
No, that guy speaking is an anti-trumper himself.


And if you look at the Union's website, they have liberal policy positions, you won't find any endorsement for Trump. Same goes for the National Farmers Union which they are part of.


In the quote, he's likely speaking about farmers who largely did vote for Trump.

Learn to google, people.
 
Then I guess it's just very confusing language on his part to use the word "we" (which in plain reading would include him) and refer to 'who put the admin into office'. I did not google, I just interpreted the text presented.
 
Back
Top Bottom