Comments by "snuffeldjuret" (@snuffeldjuret) on "David Pakman Show" channel.

  1.  @dalimadison7557  so probably the same for Trump and Maxwell, right?
    6
  2. plausible deniability if he doesn't even remember :).
    4
  3.  mister boolord  do you really call Snopes fact checking "post truth drivel"? That is quite wild. If you know what he said, you know that this is what he said right after the hoax line: "But we did something that’s been pretty amazing. We have 15 people in this massive country and because of the fact that we went early." He literally said there that the US had at that time 15 confirmed cases of covid-19. Now that is a funny way of saying the virus itself is a hoax, don't you think?
    4
  4. link to yt-clip and time stamp please. If you know it exist it takes you so little time to provide actual evidence.
    4
  5.  @monicad5270  he said "this is their new hoax". So right there you have failed to provide evidence for him saying "The Coronavirus is Democratic hoax.". Do you concede or do we need to keep going?
    4
  6.  @joemercieca4794  and we have three choices. Interpret it in the worst possible manner, the most reasonable manner or the most charitable manner. I choose the most reasonable manner. Irrational Anti-Trumpers choose the worst interpretation and irrational Trump fans choose the most charitable interpretation. It should give the people in this comment section pause that they are just like irrational Trump fans, choosing the interpretation that satisfied them.
    4
  7. the thing is that the black population in the u.s. isn't immigrants, usually right? :P Most of them was born there?
    3
  8. and you can see John Sullivan talk about how he's gonna buy a Trump hat etc.
    3
  9. seems like assault and you should be in jail.
    3
  10.  @uncockblockable1235  but you would assume that an absolutely Trumpist would have voted for him in 2016 and 2020, right?
    3
  11. tucker just talked about soros because he spends a lot of money to influence people.
    3
  12.  @mattcrammer  who today "sailed over 8000plus nautical miles to plunder a continent of its resources including human, and then travel another 8000plus nautical miles to the americas."?
    3
  13.  @krisrocka5790  also, imagine if Trump said that he wished her ill. People would go nuts about "Trump signaling for people to take her out".
    3
  14.  @paultoc2657  Biden would probably not be a danger while in decline though, compared to Trump.
    3
  15.  @rparl  flat Earth-er?
    3
  16. no, he called the notion that he does nothing to combat it a hoax. Even Snopes agree with me on that: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-coronavirus-rally-remark/
    3
  17.  mister boolord  I'm not trying to exonerate him, just pointing out the truth because the truth matters. I am not a Trumpist, but on the leftist spectrum I fall on the Krystal Ball and Kyle Kulinski side, and I know some people (like you) have a problem with that. We are not going to lie to benefit our side.
    3
  18.  @jons9621  that has to be the most futile attempt at an insult I have seen in my entire life. Congratulations, troglodyte.
    3
  19. I mean, that is what the evidence says, right? The evidence the left was mad about being surfaced :P.
    2
  20. I am neither his minion nor dumb, and I agree with snopes: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-coronavirus-rally-remark/?collection-id=242252
    2
  21.  @jaguarandi2  honestly, I prefer her over Harris though.
    2
  22. PewDiePie speaks Swedish so he is probably as smart :D.
    2
  23. Did David make any snide comment, like many did, when Trump said it would be ready before the end of the year?
    2
  24.  @mosslinden5058  speaking the truth there mate.
    2
  25. democrats should just drop the whole mass mail voting thing and vote in person. It is demonstrated to be a failure and pushing for it only enables Trump.
    2
  26. which is especially easy when there are a lot of legitimate grievances.
    2
  27. "weird covert right wing stances" what is that? Anti-war? :P
    2
  28. this is the nuance the video was lacking.
    2
  29.  @uncockblockable1235  he didn't vote for him in 2016...
    2
  30.  @quiropracticoecuador1  she could be running for president, since Biden isn't.
    2
  31.  @ronanstephens1597  "it's funny I keep hearing this "you can't talk about it without walking on eggshells" but there's a bunch of people, including trans people, here quite happy to talk about it." You don't know when the cancel mob is going to dig up your old comments lol.
    2
  32.  @dolerbom  "something being systemic is pretty fucking wide." Doesn't have to be, there are small systems. " I prefer tangible issues over cultural virtue signals." No idea what you mean, please elaborate if you care. "I think an oppressed group should not be further oppressed just because religious zealots get their feelings hurt by their existence." So what do you say to those who are not religious zealots?
    2
  33.  @alexjay3980  Crowder is a comedian, it is extremely obvious if you listen to the show. It is all about the jokes just like The Daily Show.
    2
  34.  @kimn5687  he should know what "red rose" means and be able to add any word to twitter and understand it's meaning though.
    2
  35. correct, there are multiple groups.
    2
  36.  @crooked_letters  you are misunderstanding what he is saying. To understand something, you actually have to try to understand it :P.
    2
  37. but that wasn't his point, right? His point was that he does not experience any?
    2
  38. no
    2
  39.  @TazTishaPotate  if they are instantly deleted it is youtube doing it (most certainly). Although David can also forbid the usage of certain words, which would insta-delete posts. I.e. if anyone use the t-word, it might be youtube or David blocking the comment through a filter.
    2
  40.  @evolvingsoul2370  it is as if youtube thinks it is good for society to not talk about controversial things.
    2
  41. she was a dem when she was younger.
    2
  42. who says?
    2
  43.  @Missconduct044  and this is him trying to out Crowder? I thought it was a bad thing to out people, at least that is what I am told. Do you disagree with that? Do you think outing others is OK?
    2
  44.  @realsugar7056  what is often missing is that this is fueled by morons with TDS, as that enables the cult.
    2
  45. he was taking it previously, though.
    2
  46.  @mrantmoney1  "transphobic and anti Semitic remarks" is what they said, not what she actually did. Especially the last part, you are reading the wrong news if you think that was anti Semitic.
    2
  47.  Keena Tucker  did you find any?
    2
  48.  @0pt0gy70  Like Trevor Noah on The Daily Show?
    2
  49. funnily enough, that is what they say about all leftist with fake jobs :).
    2
  50. what specifically did you dislike about him saying?
    2
  51. yes, definitely, without any doubt.
    2
  52.  @Vanadisphoto  so by "may very well" you mean "definitely"?
    2
  53.  @Vanadisphoto  hehe OK :D.
    2
  54. why did all the leftist who think Trump is the new Hitler wish him well?
    2
  55.  @Liftheavyrustylbs  same here!
    2
  56.  @moosepocalypse6500  it sounds like we are pretty much in agreement then, which is nice but not absolutely needed. Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions, as I am not sure what and how to think about this it helps to hear what other people think :). I don't know how the rules are for essential medicine that some people need, that may improve performance in certain situations, which seems like a similar and thus interesting situation.
    2
  57.  @susangreene3060  you haven't seen the compilations of Biden being creepy creepy?
    2
  58.  @junior1able  forgive me if my English isn't perfect, I am Swedish. "Now I guess he's shifted the narrative to him calling the media's claim of his lack of response a hoax." He did that over 3 weeks ago: https://youtu.be/ELOZ6fU20Sk?t=214
    2
  59.  @DG-BB  he literally said "and the rest of the world".
    2
  60.  @derfnoslein1178  Why do you think Trump is my master? Because I care about the truth? Is that really how you want to characterize this, that truth is something Trumpsters care about and no one else? :P Also, you should probably tell mister boolord that Snopes is very good at fact checking. That would be the constructive thing to do, not tell me who already know :P.
    2
  61.  @robertgrant7864  herd testing or herd immunity?
    2
  62. @family lowe or West Nile Virus, Ebola Virus, MERS etc... The list is quite long!
    2
  63. I presume that is easily solved for running, but team sports must be a nightmare.
    2
  64. you don't understand the reasoning at all?
    2
  65.  @AnnaBucci  are you really sure about the local level thingy? You've never heard of any case at all? I was mainly thinking about young age sports, but also, heard about Laurel Hubbard?
    2
  66.  @jons9621  haha. Very funny. I understand that you think everyone did as you did it yourself.
    2
  67.  @joemercieca4794  he meant that the democrat perpetrates the hoax that Trump is doing to little about the virus. Obviously he did too little, but that is till what Trump meant. It becomes very clear if you actually listen to what he said, and more than just one sentence.
    2
  68.  @jons9621  do you seriously think I am a fan of Trump? If so, you really need to rethink your view of people. I am not even American, so it is beyond my why you all won't support Bernie.
    2
  69. Beijing Biden is the big thing. Kid fiddler not so much these days, it seems Biden have learned what and what not to do.
    2
  70. how do you know so much about Norway and Finland?
    1
  71. I think the measuring stick is about Biden eating babies :P.
    1
  72. ironically, in Sweden we don't even vote for Prime minister. As I understand it, that is the same in many/most European countries.
    1
  73. cancel culture is a legitimate issue.
    1
  74.  @BrainToMush  "On the spectrum of threats to humanity, it's toward the bottom of the list." We should be able to walk and chew bubble gum at the same time. You can dismiss all issues using this rhetoric. "Also, the right is more guilty of cancel culture than the left. " I'd challenge you on that one. Do you have any recent example other than maybe Kapernick? "Neither of them came to his defense when he was fired." Was he good at his job? "The FCC has been regulating what is allowed on TV and radio since the beginning of those platforms. The difference now is that the internet opened up the playing field so common folk can now broadcast to the world and some of said peons can't get it through their Neanderthal skulls, that some dialogue is not suitable for unfettered dissemination." And how is this related to Gina? Who said basically the same thing Pedro said a few years earlier, yet he gets to keep his job. Also, what did Disney say about that region in China with the Uighur muslims? "Shapenile and Chowder certainly have not acknowledged that" They have, they talk about it all the time.
    1
  75.  @BrainToMush  "I said both Shapenile and Chowder called for Kaepernick's firing." I did read that. If you want to have a conversation, you need to do better on your part.
    1
  76.  @BrainToMush  "And who the hell is Gina? Who is Pedro? Do you mean that racist frog meme? You're digging deep, Man." The fact that you ask these questions shows you are not that informed about this. Both are actors on the Mandalorian. Gina got cancelled for the same thing Pedro did. Pedro is a leftie, so not cancelled. Funny how that is, huh? ;)
    1
  77.  @BrainToMush  "You need to do better on your part." So lead by example, then.
    1
  78.  @BrainToMush  why should I even dispute your points when you have no interest in a constructive conversation?
    1
  79.  @BrainToMush  how so?
    1
  80. but not through violence, you are conflating things.
    1
  81.  @DayneAW  you are conflating their violence part with their desire to political and social objectives part.
    1
  82.  @DayneAW  correct, they generally don't instigate violence, but they defend themselves when they are attacked. Proud Boys actually has a screening process, and kicks out extremists, so I think it'll be hard for you to actually find solid evidence that they actually use violence to accomplish political and social objectives. I would suspect that if a known Proud Boys member was integral in the Capitol raid, we'd never hear the end of it. I am easily persuaded with evidence though, so please enlighten me if I have missed anything.
    1
  83. you are such a good person.
    1
  84. "Conspiracy theory is the refuge of simple unintelligent people." Don't think that one is true mate. A lot of intelligent people go for them, as they are more able to connect dots.
    1
  85. do you know who John Sullivan is?
    1
  86.  m jones  my point is that you can see him in video egging people on, and talking about how he's gonna buy a trump hat, and saying that he frequently uses the "I'm just here to film" excuse. Also: ""John has been kicked from the #SaltLakeCity and #Portland protest scenes due to alarming behaviors including grifting/profiteering, self-promotion/clout chasing, sabotage of community actions, threats of violence, and — maybe most disturbingly — ties to the far-right," Rebellion Baby wrote. "In short — John's brother, James, is the co-founder of a pro-Trump org called 'Civilized Awakening,' and has strong ties to Proud Boys — even having spoken at a Proud Boy rally. The brothers' polarized political stances conveniently bolster the other's public personas. Activists in these cities recommend that he be barred from community actions and totally avoided."" John is nobody's friend, he just wants to see things burn. Sounds familiar? What happened in Portland after Biden's inauguration again? A fun little thing on the side about who's supporting his grifting? "Accused Capitol rioter John Sullivan sold video footage he recorded at the Jan. 6 siege to NBC and CNN for $35,000 each, according to new court papers." Despicable.
    1
  87. how would you go about criticizing soros and what he does with his money?
    1
  88. it will be really interesting to see how that turns out.
    1
  89.  @theoretisch4429  oh no, consistency is really important. Bad is in the eye of the beholder, and you will always think of your ideological enemies as bad, but if they are consistent you can achieve things together.
    1
  90.  @theoretisch4429  "Such bad argument." Not at all, you just didn't try hard enough to understand my point. The alternative to consistency is being against anything you are for, and for anything you are against. Something you actually see people not only think in the dark, but openly argue for. Like, let's not give Trump a win by passing criminal justice reform. "If someone is consistently against helping the people." Ben is not consistently against helping people, so not a very good example. "Plus the Conservative don't believe that there is a human made climate change respectively if it is a real threat." You are living in the past on this one. "But republicans think its only a good idea if their own pockets get filled" If you want to come off as a reasonable person, writing this is not a good idea.
    1
  91.  @theoretisch4429  "The Republican party is a joke rn." I thought we were talking about Ben? "That wasn't "just another option" he was denying facts. Calling covid a hoax." Did Ben say this? If so, citation needed. "claiming there was voter froad in the millions is the biggest joke of all." Did Ben do this? If so, provide evidence, either as a quote or video clip. The latter is preferred as the context is often important when understanding what people say.
    1
  92.  @theoretisch4429  "Well, he is a strong supporter of the party that is denying reality. Do you wanna tell me that still supporting the party after all this doesn't tell you something about his beliefs?" But we were talking about him. Also, this statement would have more value if there were more than two real options. Regarding your link: "Fiction: “The idea that the Arctic ice is disappearing is nonsense.” Fact: Arctic sea ice goes ..." My alarm bells go off here, because if he actually talked about "Arctic ice", the rebuttal can't be about "Arctic sea ice". The crucial difference here is of course the land ice on Greenland, which vast majority is within the arctic circle. I am not cherry picking here, it was literally the first thing I read, and I don't see a reason to read and comment about more until we have talked about this. Focus is our friend here. "Imagine having that stance on something proven to be real." You should not use the word "proven" in this context. Climate science is way too complex for that. There is a big pile of evidence, but there is still a lot of uncertainty, like: "The IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) stated that "there is high confidence that ECS is extremely unlikely to be less than 1 °C and medium confidence that the ECS is likely between 1.5 °C and 4.5 °C and very unlikely greater than 6 °C"" "The equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) is the long-term temperature rise (equilibrium global mean near-surface air temperature) that is expected to result from a doubling of the atmospheric CO2 concentration"
    1
  93.  @theoretisch4429  "Plus he claimed that "patriot prayer is not a white supremacist group"" I usually go with ADL on these kind of things, and they say: "Similarly, members of Identity Evropa/AIM and TWP have joined Proud Boys and fellow right-wing group Patriot Prayer events in Portland." They do not have a page for Patriot Prayer like they have Proud Boys, but an interesting note could be that they do not classify Proud Boys as "a white supremacist group". Are you against the ADL? "He also is homophobic." You can argue that, but you can also argue that he is just against gay marriage.
    1
  94.  @theoretisch4429  ""I'm not cherry picking here" and then you go on and do exactly that." Dude, it is not cherry picking if I comment on the very first thing I read. I am really disappointed in you for going there, really disappointed. "And well even that uncertainty doesn't change a thing about the fact that the human made climate change is real." But what it does is makes it very important that we are accurate in what we are saying, because if we are not, why should we demand Ben is? "When you look at the stuff he said like "the climate has always been changing" yeah ofc it has but he made this argument to argue that what happens rn now is just what happened in the past. But that's not true." Why should I trust that you interpret what Ben says accurately? You had nothing to say about the Arctic ice - Arctic sea ice distinction, so if I go by the evidence I see, I have no evidence that you are good at interpreting what Ben says. I would probably trust you more if you didn't accuse me of cherry picking, but as you did I really have to suspect you are not an honest actor here.
    1
  95.  @theoretisch4429  "Who argues in bad faith so often." I'm not going to take your word for it. "He advocates for state rights but as soon as women make use of state rights to get an abortion he is offended." This is actually not as hypocritical. Just because you are for states right doesn't mean you have to agree with all decisions the states makes. Think about it. "Plus him being against gay marriage is already enough to not stand by his side bc he obviously isn't interested in equality." But he is consistent about it ;). "But so are a lot of his supporters and that's why they watch him.. Just have to take a look at his comments" His supporters are nicer than what people say they are though.
    1
  96.  @theoretisch4429  "Do you seriously think the discrimination of minorities is okay, bc he is consistent in his discrimination?" That is not what we are talking about. As I said before, if you didn't read: "The alternative to consistency is being against anything you are for, and for anything you are against." That would not help reduce discrimination, but rather the opposite. "I don't know about that." So you believe people who don't like them are too charitable when they describe his fans? When does this ever happen when you speak of a group you don't like? "And better doesn't equal good." Of course not, but making them out to be worse people than they are is also not good. "ThErE ArE wOrSe PeOpLe" That is not what I am doing though. I am not saying you should be nice to them because there are worse people out there, I am saying they are not as bad as you think. I wonder, do you honestly read and try to understand what I say? Because it feels like I have to repeat myself here...
    1
  97.  @theoretisch4429  "You act like the only alternative to being consistent (against the right of a certain minority for example) is being against anything I am for" I am talking about ideologically consistent, as in not a flip flopper and holds relatively few to no contradictory views (we all do though). If you think I act that way, and it puzzles you. Assume I don't, because I a, not. THat will make it so, so much easier for you to understand my point. Apply "the principle of charity". "Well if I "don't like" someone in his comment section it is bc they don't believe in equality and discriminate minorities." And you will then use that dislike to exaggerate their positions, it is only human. You should not excuse that behavior, you should work on minimize it. That is what good people do. "And? That doesn't make them good people." That is not what I am saying. I am saying that progress comes from accurate criticism. "And it would be harmful to normalize them and say "well they are not as bad as you think"." Are you saying it is harmful to speak the truth?
    1
  98.  @theoretisch4429  "Believing in equality and applying that value to your positions is incredibly consistent if you want to argue about that." Yeah I am not arguing against that. There are obviously more than one set of consistent thoughts out there :P. "If someone discriminates minorities and his excuse his that he is consistent.." But that is not what we are doing. I am arguing that consistency should be commended, even though you dislike the person, as the lack of consistency is even worse. In the spectrum of inconsistency to consistency, you can't achieve more than consistency, so when that is achieved it should be highlighted for how ideological disagreements should be handled, with consistency. "Then congrats on being consistent on discrimination of that minority." We are talking about over all consistency. "But it goes against my values so therefore I wouldn't ever defend someone for their discrimination. Period." But as no one is perfect, so I hope you will never defend anyone for anything, as no person is perfect and thus hold bad views. Especially if we judge us today by future's standard. "Well you could bring that argument if they actually wouldn't believe what I'm saying they believe." But we talked about this, you talked about climate science and brought up a source that could be exaggerating Ben's position. And you failed to address how that source didn't exaggerate what he said. You see, when you make claims, you have to back them up with actual evidence, and if the evidence points to the opposite, they actually don't believe what you are saying they believe. Ben and his supporters are two different things, but you making claims is the same, not matter if it is about him or your supporters, you should be able to back up what you say with evidence. "When I say they discriminate gays by saying they shouldn't be allowed to marry then this is discrimination and not an exaggeration" The exaggeration could be calling them homophobic for it. "Well then say that and don't say they aren't as bad as I think." Should I really have to? "And being against gay marriage is as wrong as it gets." Then you don't need to exaggerate, by assuming they are against it because of their homophobia, if that is what you do. Or is that just for Ben, not his fans? "Where exactly did I say that? I didn't say that in the sentences you quoted." You said: "And it would be harmful to normalize them and say "well they are not as bad as you think"." Sometimes they are as bad as you think, sometimes they are not. You say that it is harmful to normalize them as a blanket statement, no matter if they are as bad or not. The only logical conclusion is that you think speaking the truth can be harmful, and in this case is. "It is harmful to normalize people who have a stance that is discriminating minorities." Then say that :P. I am not sure I agree, as pushing them away doesn't seem to help, so maybe the opposite will? Have you heard about Daryl Davis? Look him up, really interesting stuff!
    1
  99. but he just mentioned soros though, that is one guy.
    1
  100. what is true and what is myth about him?
    1
  101.  @h.n.814  what is your point? How is he anti science regarding that?
    1
  102.  @bforthigh1617  /whooosh
    1
  103. it really isn't that surprising, they don't think koch etc is doing any damage. You only complain about the money fighting you, not the money helping you.
    1
  104. we knew this would be the case from the start, yet so many people tried to get normal-ish people to quit Trump in the early days and cheered as they did.
    1
  105. I recall Bloomberg spending 500 million. That is how you got the funny bit where msnbc thought that meant he spent 1 million dollar per us citizen :P. Quote: “Bloomberg spent $500 million on ads. The U.S. population is 327 million. He could have given each American $1 million and still have money left over.”
    1
  106. they just dont like how soros spends his money, they want him to spend his money like adelson.
    1
  107. at least if you ingore that democrats would act differently. This is a perfect opportunity to call both sides out on their partisanship.
    1
  108. the fact on the table is that Epstein died in prison. When that happened, the fight against Qanon was lost basically. You don't need any whistleblower for that as his case was all in the open for those who did more than just follow MSM.
    1
  109.  @Steelmage99  I did not imply that. Care to elaborate on why you think I implied that? If you assume I am a reasonable person, what would you guess my point is?
    1
  110.  @Steelmage99  "In my experience that is the kind of rhetoric and the kind of subjects being presented by pro-QAnon people, ie nut cases." Indeed, and that is quite sad. I only knew about Epstein years and years ago because of those kind of people, not because of MSM :P. Same with Jimmy Fallon and Jimmy Kimmel backface stories, there are some shocking actual truths these people talk about, but you never believe them for all the other things they say as well. This is why the Qanon people I have encountered blame powerful people for planting ludicrous Qanon theories out there, to muddle the waters about the real stuff there is, like Epstein. Nutty people are going to be nuts, and all movements have them, so we should not solely judge a movement, or tangents to one, based on those nutty people. Coming back to Epstein and the fight, the amount of jokes and predictions that he would die "by his own hands" in prison was overwhelming, so when it actually happened there is nothing you can say to these people to convince them of anything other than what they believe. Maybe if something big comes from Maxwell spilling the beans, but who knows.
    1
  111. to say that? :P
    1
  112.  @snaplash  you don't think it happens the other way as well?
    1
  113. why would they even have the option? I thought the democrats was against sending in the national guard against civil unrest?
    1
  114.  @waterandafter  oh no they do get it, they know the democrats are hypocrites.
    1
  115.  @ohnoohnonono3458  now try to address what he actually said.
    1
  116. Biden actually might, as long as it is a woman/non-white person, and he will do it "to work with the other side".
    1
  117. David has TDS though, Kyle doesn't. KB rules all though.
    1
  118.  @Bladerunner-yd5lk  what do you mean? Do you know who Kyle and KB are? In this context I assumed I didn't have to spell out their full names...
    1
  119. ​ @Bladerunner-yd5lk  "there's no such thing as tds" Dude, there clearly is, it is when your anger about Trump clouds your judgement to the degree that it hinders your rational thinking. "I'm surprised he hasn't called covid a hoax." I'm sorry, but you do realize how insane that comment is, right?
    1
  120.  @Bladerunner-yd5lk  well.... if you think that about Kyle, you should probably call in on David's show so he can give you an intellectual spanking about that. Who says dds isn't a thing?
    1
  121.  @Bladerunner-yd5lk  do you think he has? If no, why do you even ask? If yes, listening to what he says might make you realize something.
    1
  122.  @Bladerunner-yd5lk  why wouldn't I want you to? David is significantly more reasonable than you and you seem to listen to and take in what he says. That makes it way more likely for it to be a constructive interaction compared to the opposite.
    1
  123.  @mindlessthenie  "I did hear that Sweden is worse off when it comes to blatant racism, more similar to the US, which causes the same type of pockets of segregated housing complexes accompanied by gang wars.". What? the former does not cause the latter, it is the opposite.
    1
  124. then why do you think they haven't been banned by twitter? If what you are saying is actually true?
    1
  125. I remember people talking about it regarding Ted Cruz though... although slightly different situation of course.
    1
  126. quotes like "He cannot be allowed to continue in office." is exactly why people will support him staying in office even if it looks like he lost the election.
    1
  127.  @daniel_sc1024  but you admit they he do spend a lot of money on trying to influence people?
    1
  128. which side is stupid? So far, people have only needed to defend themselves against riots, right?
    1
  129. when the opposition is crazy enough, people will be begging for this. The democrats have been complete nut cases this year, which enables the Republicans.
    1
  130.  @AiguilleVoodoo  I am honestly surprised high jumping doesn't have height categories like many have weight categories. I 100% understand the difference in variation is quite big, but still, I'm surprised.
    1
  131.  @mattk6101  Trump can as well, did you miss the Tulsa rally?
    1
  132. at least coin flips are less prone to cheating (at least correct performed ones)
    1
  133. this comment section is so full of sheep who have no idea what they have an opinion on.
    1
  134.  @az-tl3mh  "... praised him" means absolutely nothing. You have to do better than that.
    1
  135.  @michaelryan4282  sure in terms or narrative it matters, but so does lying. I am only interested in what is true though. "... praised him" means nothing in that it is a statement that contains no information. It is something biased people say when they exaggerate.
    1
  136. what did he do? :P
    1
  137. you mean she wasn't before? So her whole plea against Hillary was not far left?
    1
  138. he was only #4 biggest spender in the 2016 election.
    1
  139. this was an odd call :D
    1
  140. another half a million he could have given every american, according to msnbc :P.
    1
  141.  George MacMovies  haha, funny joke. Stop mate, stop, you are too much!
    1
  142.  George MacMovies  nut sure if they did mate, I'm Swedish :P.
    1
  143. but it is OK to say the same thing as long as it is a normal white billionaire?
    1
  144.  @randomthings1293  "The Left never refers to "white billionaires"." And tucker never referred to soros as a jew. "And unlike you, we are backed by facts." Don't lie about me. Do better. "For example it is a FACT that among the biggest contributors to the GOP there are the Koch brothers, oil companies giants who have a VERY vested interest in denying Climate Change and in maintaining the use of fossil fuels." Why do you think I am not aware of this?
    1
  145.  @randomthings1293  "A straw man fallacy occurs when someone takes another person's argument or point, distorts it or exaggerates it in some kind of extreme way, and then attacks the extreme distortion, as if that is really the claim the first person is making."
    1
  146.  @randomthings1293  "Enlighten me then, what were you really talking about?" I am literally talking about what I am talking about. I asked: "but it is OK to say the same thing as long as it is a normal white billionaire?" A simple question, to bring some nuance to the topic. You answer: "The Left never refers to "white billionaires"." Which misses the point as Tucker didn't refer to Soros as a jew. "If you're saying that I'm strawmanning Carlson" How can you not realize you are strawmanning me?
    1
  147.  @randomthings1293  "You have to INFER that by yourself." And this is my point. By you resorting to this, you can never ever criticize a jew for anything, because anti-antisemitism is therefor automatically inferred no matter if you actually inferred it or not. "Again, I never see any person on the Right criticizing rich white Americans." This is besides the point, especially if you think I am on the right.
    1
  148.  @randomthings1293  are you having a conversation with me or tucker? If you are trying to have one with me, I said "but it is OK to say the same thing as long as it is a normal white billionaire?"
    1
  149.  @randomthings1293  I don't recall what he said specifically, I only recall the terrible things you said about me.
    1
  150.  @bm0redigital508  that is the question. I don't think anyone here even knows who that is. Personally I actually thought he was just there to film, but then I saw his video about how he egged people on and how he admits this is his tactic.
    1
  151. you never know, but then again it is very similar to the facebook scandal where employees admit to just deleting post by Trump supporters, for being Trump supporters. This is definitely something that will happen if people have the opportunity.
    1
  152.  @camelopardalis84  not sure what the difference is between social democracy and democratic socialism.
    1
  153.  @camelopardalis84  tbh, "the furthest left you can go within capitalism" and "the furthest right you can go within socialism" sounds like the same thing :P.
    1
  154.  @camelopardalis84  sure, but I'll explain my thoughts with a math example: 0.9999999999 < 1 < 1.0000000001 You can say that no matter how many more 9's you add, you still have less than 1 and no matter how many more 0's you still have more than 1. Yet the more you do this the closer you get to it all being 1. The difference becomes negligible. Being further left means nothing if the distance is close to zero.
    1
  155. "...it feels more like she is trying to get even with the mainstream Left that has shunned her." ah so that is why she never complains about trump?
    1
  156. most? what is the percentage? 49% would be bad enough.
    1
  157.  @samfetter2968  didn't they say that 95-97% of the protests were peaceful? Not 99.9999% It is not about violence though, but "leftist radicals".
    1
  158.  @samfetter2968  they in this case is MSM. "And no matter what percentage it is...it is miles away from what you tried to imply. " Excuse me? I thought you liked facts.... "While the US has long been home to a vibrant protest environment, demonstrations surged to new levels in 2020. Between 24 May and 22 August, ACLED records more than 10,600 demonstration events across the country. Over 10,100 of these — or nearly 95% — involve peaceful protesters. Fewer than 570 — or approximately 5% — involve demonstrators engaging in violence." "Matter of fact a miniscule percentage of protesters are violent." But that is not what this video is about. "And no matter what percentage it is...it is miles away from what you tried to imply. " What do you think I implied? Remember, this video is about "Most People Arrested at Protests Aren't Leftist Radicals"
    1
  159. ​ @samfetter2968  "And if your comprehention skills were a bit better you would have realized that while i was talking about number of violent people at protests the ACLED Was talking number of violent events where a small percentage of people attending doing violence. " It is not a question about comprehention skills, I was just going as off-topic as you did. "And yes...this video isn't about that. So why did you bring it up in the first place, only to have it debunked by me?" Huh? You brought up the frequency of violence, not me. "This video is about most people arrested at protests weren't leftist raficals. Correct." So you should interpret my original comment in that context then. You didn't, and now you try to repair that damage by attacking me, which is kind of sad. "And it was correct. As the data shows...most people arrested weren't leftwing radicals." And this is where we come back to my original comment. Most = 50+%, but the thing is that: "49% would be bad enough."
    1
  160.  @samfetter2968  "No...you made it about the number of violent protesters. That wasn't me." How hilarious are you? What do you think I talk about when I wrote: "most? what is the percentage? 49% would be bad enough." Not violent protesters, which you started talking about in your first reply. Just go back and read so you can stop embarrassing yourself.
    1
  161.  @samfetter2968  "You tried to imply that it could be still an almost 50%." That is literally the definition of "most". If you have a problem with what the definition of "most" is, I don't think it is me you should run and complain to.
    1
  162.  @samfetter2968  "i don't remember challenging you on the definition of most, now did i?" "You tried to imply that it could be still an almost 50%." so yeah... Get your head of of your ass.
    1
  163.  @samfetter2968  it does, as the only thing I said was that using "most" only meant it could mean up to 49%. It is funny to see you sit on your high horse at the same time as you say things like "Sweety..." and "idiot" etc. What do you think you are accomplishing here by behaving like that? :P
    1
  164.  @samfetter2968  haha no, that was not implied, that was your interpretation. That misinterpretation really opened the floodgates for your sad behavior. You'll never accept that it was a misinterpretation though because you are too emotionally invested in it. Yeah you really accomplish the goal to have no one take anything you say seriously :P. Since I am a bigger man than you, I'll let you have the last word (if you want it) by ending my participation here. Feel free to write anything you need to make you feel good inside.
    1
  165. They'll do more than fine indeed, I'm surprised the question is even asked.
    1
  166.  @paultoc2657  but you can guide Biden.
    1
  167.  @roboman2445  did you watch the last debate? That was not Bernie and a vegetable debating.
    1
  168. I thought it was Futurama at first :D.
    1
  169. "antifa is just an idea"
    1
  170. it doesn't matter what the passive people want. The majority is against riots among the protests, yet there are riots.
    1
  171. if you think it is clear, provide a citation, including the context, where he says it and explain why your interpretation is more reasonable than mine.
    1
  172.  King Yellowman  you ought to know that that line does not address my point.
    1
  173.  King Yellowman  I am not saying that the democrats criticism was a hoax, I am saying that is what he meant. So it is useless for you to explain to me something I already know. The only think you get wrong is that "He called the virus a hoax". He did not, literally. And that is why the fact checking websites side with me, not you: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-coronavirus-rally-remark/
    1
  174.  King Yellowman  no need to repeat yourself. Go read the snopes article and then tell me what they get wrong in it.
    1
  175.  King Yellowman  OK so because you can't say what they got wrong you just say they got it wrong. Brilliant. And as I said, no need to repeat yourself.
    1
  176.  King Yellowman  what exactly did he say? Citation needed. Cite what snopes got wrong. You can't go on presenting your interpretation as the truth, you have to provide citations.
    1
  177.  King Yellowman  if you won't make the effort and cite him I have no interest in taking this conversation further. An honest discussion about what a person have said must include citations.
    1
  178.  King Yellowman  well, regarding the hoax line. That is what we are discussing. "15 cases, soon to be zero" is in line with him saying that he is on top of the problem. So you are not really presenting an argument for why he says the virus is a hoax.
    1
  179. @UCBR20WjA4kGijvAKZpNvpdw "your defense is that..." I am not defending anything, I am only interested in what Trump said. Out of curiosity, did you notice that he said that the lack of cases in the U.S. at that time didn't mean that there wouldn't be deaths from the virus in the future?
    1
  180.  King Yellowman  https://youtu.be/G5TZ6fTYrsE?t=92 There you have it. For full context, start at 1:20
    1
  181.  King Yellowman  nope, he is calling it a hoax that he isn't prepared. He wasn't prepared, but that is not what we are talking about. If you would cite him literally saying it is a hoax, you would have legs to stand on. But you don't dare citing his sentence he is using hoax in because it hurts your argument. That shows how dishonest you are, and you call me brainwashed when I can easily disprove you by providing a video with a timestamp. Unless you have something great to say in your next reply, i am done with this nonsense.
    1
  182. tbh the gender pay gap is even worse. If all men would just identify as women, the gender pay gap issue would be solved in a second.
    1
  183. yea this question is something for republicans to answer, not democrats.
    1
  184. imagine if they would be courageous enough to vote in person :P.
    1
  185. you forgot that he is running for the senate.
    1
  186. are you ever allowed to criticize how a billionaire spends money to influence people?
    1
  187.  @andrewsphone84  "The sports thing is a convenient excuse for them to hide that behind." is a convenient excuse for you to hind behind. Funny how that is, huh?
    1
  188. Crowder seems to be a little scared about taking on potholer54 regarding climate science though.
    1
  189. I don't understand how anyone can look at the original video and not understand what he said as "the Dems new hoax they are perpetrating is that I (Trump) am not doing enough about it". I challenge anyone reading this to cite, word for word, what Trump said. In full context, and show me how I am wrong.
    1
  190.  @randomthings1293  you would seem more reasonable if you didn't use the same three emojies, in the exact same order, all the time.
    1
  191.  @randomthings1293  "And that's all the criticism you're capable of?" I don't know, I didn't really read what you wrote as the risk of wasting my time was too high.
    1
  192.  @randomthings1293  "You're allegedly the Party of "personal responsibility"" I'm not a Republican. I would have voted for Bernie or Yang in the Dem primary if I could (I'm Swedish). So don't pretend I am the one remaining in "ignorance and stupidity" here. It is true though that the Dems say all kinds of bad things about me, but that is because I live in and support a "socialist country" :).
    1
  193.  @randomthings1293  Thanks. Now with that said, how do you think: "56% of your Party's base believed that the Dems were all Satanist pedophiles before Biden was sworn in" Accurately represents the source you cited? You seem to take the text: "Some 56% of Republicans believe that QAnon, a far-right conspiracy theory, is mostly or partly true" And rewrite it as: Some 56% of Republicans believe that QAnon, a far-right conspiracy theory, is ALL true.
    1
  194.  @randomthings1293  "Even if you believe this partially , you're still definitely out of your mind, IMO." That might very well be true, but I don't know how they defined partial belief so I can't say for sure. What I do know is that you misrepresented the source, and that is the interesting thing here. If they are as crazy as you say, why do you feel the need to exaggerate their beliefs? Aren't they bad enough as it is? If you exaggerate when making a point, it looks like you don't have a point at all, and that is sort of what I tried to get at with your usage of the emojies, it just oozes of erratic irrationality. You are not helping your cause this way, you are hurting it! "If you know about some rational thing believed by specifically QAnonists you're free to let me know of it." They talked about Epstein and his sweetheart deal before it got popular to do it, and they predicted that he would off himself under suspicious circumstances in prison.
    1
  195. but do you agree that it is possible that in 30 years, there is a scenario where we could be better of if Trump was elected to a second term compared to Biden's first?
    1
  196.  @astrotherapist  " If trans women are women, period; then they should be allowed to participate in all things that Cisgender woman participate in." there are rules regarding cisgender women as well.
    1
  197.  @lordofleaves257  "My problem with doing a case-by-case basis is that there are a lot more factors that go into the biological differences of men and women besides just the height, weight, and physical appearance." If that is the case, isn't a case-by-case a good idea, as there as so many thing you would have to strictly define otherwise? IIRC, the Olympics have some defined rules, but on top of that are going case-by-case, which seems like a good place to start. These rules can change, so there is no point in making them too lenient or too strict.
    1
  198.  @nathandrake253  we are not saying cancel culture is against the law, we are saying it is bad. When we talk about "cancel culture", we talk about excessive stuff like the Gina and JK Rowling stuff.
    1
  199.  @mehdihatami3391  do you think it is bad to be triggered by something that is objectively bad for the country?
    1
  200.  @mehdihatami3391  as long as you acknowledge that it is an issue/a problem, I am satisfied. "Oh and Twitter and other social media companies have every right to cancel conservatives. That's called capitalism" Not sure why you say this after I've said "we are not saying cancel culture is against the law". It is as if you don't really care about what I actually say when you write to me.
    1
  201.  @mehdihatami3391  "That makes no sense because as you said, cancel culture isn't illegal and certainly not a 1A case." Not 100% accurate. It might be a 1A case, even though it is not again the law currently. It is all about interpretation, and that might change in the future. I think it makes sense to argue for or against why it is a 1A case, nothing that should be scoffed at. "The way I feel about cancel culture is the same way many conservatives feel about COVID: the reaction to the problem is overblown" Not very descriptive. It is a bit difficult to have a conversation when you reference some diffuse group of people who supposedly think a certain way.
    1
  202. I thought there were no background checks needed. At least that is what I heard during the Dem primary.
    1
  203. this was a weird recommendation YouTube :P.
    1
  204.  @QuiqueColon  that is not what the discussion is about. Hate Trump as much as you like, but 7PlayingWithFire7 is as far as I know correct on this one. When you criticize Trump, it is important to be very accurate, as if you are inaccurate your failure to criticize is used as an example that all criticism against Trump is exaggerated. Think about that.
    1
  205.  @QuiqueColon  I am an observant person. Who are you to think that you could never benefit from directions?
    1
  206.  @drunkensailor3736  but, but, but, there is no voter fraud I heard left say over and over again.
    1
  207.  @Junksaint  ???
    1
  208. maybe he was referring to a person who likes the whine Gato Negro? :)
    1
  209.  @ilarious5729  doesn't the state favor it, though?
    1
  210.  @ilarious5729  but are they killed for this reason? That is what is relevant in this case, is it dangerous in SA to say that you favor women driving?
    1
  211.  @ilarious5729  so first you were talking about being murdered by the state and now you are down to shunning from relatives. I guess that proves my point.
    1
  212.  @ilarious5729  but you do not back up your original claim, which is the one I oppose. Look up "moving the goalpost" and you'll understand my point.
    1
  213.  @ilarious5729  if you still want to support your initial comment "I bet he was in favour of women driving, he just didn't want to get murdered by the state.", then talk about murder, not shunning. If you do not specifically talk about murder in your next reply, we both know you do not support it and we are done with this conversation.
    1
  214.  @ilarious5729  "My whole point was that the situation is more nuanced than you guys try to make it look like." That is actually my point when I challenge you on the notion that he would face substantial risk of getting murdered for saying he supports women driving.
    1
  215.  @ilarious5729  "Yea go ahead act like you know everything" You are the one that act like you know everything (up until this point). "... if challenging your worldview hurts you so much i have better things to do" You are the one that seems upset here, not I. "... se don't know what kind of trouble he might be facing for voicing his opinions on politically difficult subjects." Exactly, so don't claim might be facing death.
    1
  216. Didn't Biden say it is happening and is not a bad thing?
    1
  217. what, you just gonna ignore to comment on how the democrats would also talk differently about it?
    1
  218.  @Onus6688  key word here might be "usually". I think what is often missing from one side is that they say "most of the time, no problem", when we humans usually think about things like "sometimes, this is a problem". Imagine if we'd settle for "usually" in other issues regarding sex, gender, sexuality etc.
    1
  219. how are they grifters?
    1
  220. "wacky right-wing Christian movies" you just made that up.
    1
  221. at least she is of age compared to the girls Biden is after.
    1
  222.  @unapatton1978  it is as if it isn't even racism :P.
    1
  223.  @unapatton1978  "It still is" How can you know?
    1
  224.  @Trottelheimer  "but when a Swede starts whining about Norway" It is as if the past is the past and today is today. What percentage of people alive today were alive back then?
    1
  225.  @unapatton1978  not a convincing argument.
    1
  226. or the other way around :P.
    1
  227.  @brianpguil  but some are more likely to be infected than others.
    1
  228.  @brianpguil  not directly, but indirectly. Surely you are aware of the discrepancy in how this hit rich communities less than poor communities, right? And I am not talking about job loss etc, just infection rate.
    1
  229.  @EVIL-C  it is not all bullshit though. I give you: Epstein.
    1
  230. you two should have a discussion about John Sullivan.
    1
  231. so what we know is that tornadoes are less common than people then. I.e. racism is rare in Norway, that is the point.
    1
  232. didn't Trump poo-poo the Moon plan, as he thought it was "been there done that", and rather focus on Mars?
    1
  233. then why is Biden declining to add more debates to the schedule?
    1
  234. to be very level and realistic would be to mention that democrats would be less upset about it.
    1
  235. this would have been better if you explained the Republicans arguments, like why Lindsey Graham changed his mind.
    1
  236. Lying on purpose is kind of Biden's thing though. Even plagiarizing, which is a formal way of lying :P.
    1
  237. very poorly argued. If David says you have to look deeper, and I have looked deeper than what he explains in this video, it is a problem for his narrative.
    1
  238.  @fatlacesthedon  boycotts are not morally right if they are done for bad reasons.
    1
  239. it is also on the democrats to have, for so long, pushed too hard against election security. That has enabled the Trump supporters to completely lose faith in the Democrats willingness to have a fair election.
    1
  240.  @Tocaraca  the funny thing is that I couldn't confidently guess why you say that, as there are a few quite different reasons :D.
    1
  241. ?
    1
  242. you predicted the virus? :P
    1
  243. @Mainely I am sure you say that at the same time as you call Kyle a terrorist, with no valid reason for self defense...
    1
  244.  @ForceSounds-u5e  the U.S. wouldn't be in nearly as bad shape without the virus.
    1
  245. the ultimate battle royal, Trump, Biden and Bernie and a bunch of effected people.
    1
  246. if you exchange soros with billionaire, the entire left would agree with what tucker said though.
    1
  247. everyone is rude these days... Well, David is not that rude tbh, but he is just one guy.
    1
  248.  @wolfman8449  "People that disagree with Shapiro listen to him because he is fairly reasonable most of the time." perfectly describes me. I am not a centrist though as I would have voted for Bernie or Yang if I could have.
    1
  249. you don't think they want to a debate against Biden?
    1
  250.  @pokerstar2004  what makes me not think it is that is because Trump is out there way more than Biden is. And Trump does it better than Biden. So I can't really understand how you can believe that the trump people wants to shy away from debating Biden. That in of itself would look really bad as well.
    1
  251.  @pokerstar2004  but a debate is where he shines, because debates are not about what is true. They will have to counter the narrative somehow, and the debates is perfect for that. You'll understand/see that I am right in about 6 months or so?
    1
  252. "why is this subject so hard to discuss" Because people have learnt that it is effective to not address what is said, but the person saying it or what the person saying it might secretly mean.
    1
  253.  @dolerbom  "Because its not a real systemic issue, and it certainly doesn't need a federal response." I think you need to look at it at a wider perspective. This is more of a cultural issue, which is why it is a world wide issue, including the Olympics.
    1
  254. Hillary already said that Biden should never concede the election, so she is just as bad.
    1
  255. @blueflame lol, can you quote her on that? ;) She said: "Joe Biden should not concede under any circumstances because I think this is going to drag out, and eventually, I do believe he will win if we don't give an inch and if we are as focused and relentless as the other side is,"
    1
  256. @blueflame and the same can be said about what Trump says.
    1
  257. @blueflame we are talking about conceding the election. Hillary says that Biden shouldn't do it until everything checks out, and Trump says the same.
    1
  258. @blueflame to bring in some nuance into this discussion, what is the biggest problem you have seen so far, with actual mail in ballots, this year? Has everything been perfect, or has there been at least some issues?
    1
  259. @blueflame so you haven't heard about this then, I suppose? "Board of Election documents obtained by The Intercept show that in New York’s 12th Congressional District, which covers Manhattan, Queens, and Brooklyn, 20 percent of mail-in ballots will be thrown out for a variety of reasons."
    1
  260. @blueflame quantify "rare" for me, including an error margin that takes known unknowns into account.
    1
  261. @blueflame how does that quantify "rare", including an error margin?
    1
  262. we hear what we expect to hear.
    1
  263. I would say that it is irrational.
    1
  264. I am leaning more towards that than a bastard.
    1
  265. yea and proud boys are just proud boys.
    1
  266.  @gerri577  white supremacy is an idea as well, and you can talk about white supremacy organized in groups without a group being named "the white supremacists".
    1
  267. how has Ben lost any credibility?
    1
  268.  @pm71241  I haven't listen to enough of what he has said about the topic in the past, I just have a general sense of what he says these days. Including the context, what is the worst thing he has said regarding that you think?
    1
  269.  @pm71241  yeah, I am curious what he has specifically said as I can't recall him saying anything that has upset me or whatever. Usually I just hear him and Crowder talk about "alarmists" that say things like "the world is going to end in 12 years", Greta and AOC stuff, that is.
    1
  270. Soros spends a lot of money supporting left leaning causes.
    1
  271. who says that's illegal?
    1
  272. when did they say that? I call BS on that :P.
    1
  273.  @allangibson8494  that does not back up the claim "they already said 1% death amongst students is "reasonable"" though. If you interpret it as if it does, please cite what specifically in that article that does.
    1
  274.  @allangibson8494  still nothing about kids though...
    1
  275. I mean, exchange soros for any other billionaire and the entire left nods and agrees.
    1
  276. are you sure UK started having them daily first?
    1
  277. the fictional power of all billionaires?
    1
  278.  @gunnarroth2410  is that actually true? Some idiot here in Sweden tried to argue Sweden did as well, because Denmark did :P.
    1
  279.  @Aoderic  and? That's insignificant.
    1
  280.  @Aoderic  how big percentage was it? You say 63 years as if it means anything. It is insignificant. What I am insinuating is only in your head, and relatively speaking your insinuation is even more incorrect.
    1
  281. You can't blame Trump for the violence if the democrats in the states refuse to do anything about it. Republicans are the state rights party.
    1
  282. that isn't the point though, and not what he says. He just spoke his truth.
    1
  283.  @ChinaxxlGreen-hq2eq  cite it then. I have never see anyone give a citation of where Trump says it.
    1
  284.  @kylemcdonnell86  I believe this is what people call fact resistant. I remember when people at least tried to act as if the truth mattered.
    1
  285.  @ChinaxxlGreen-hq2eq  as you are not blind and deaf, what EXACTLY did he say? Cite him and I will prove you wrong if you are wrong on even just one word, so don't be careless now.
    1
  286.  Monkeys on Wheels  the only redeeming quality of Tim Pools comment section is the large number of people trashing Tim :P.
    1
  287. this is obviously fake news. There is no voter fraud.
    1
  288. he is not. He is just not an insane person who has to either agree or disagree with 100% of what a person does or says.
    1
  289. You remember when Biden says he can't wait to get to debate Trump? Now Biden says he doesn't want to add more debates...
    1
  290. how many people know if he actually said it or not?
    1
  291.  Antonio Perales del Hierro  that doesn't really answer the question though :P.
    1
  292. the answer is: of course not, don't be ridiculous. This sentiment is why Trump had to send well wishes to ghislaine maxwell, in case she wouldn't make it, to not get people to think he off-ed her.
    1
  293. lol, the caller thinks he knows what he is talking about :P.
    1
  294. exchange soros with any billionaire and the left would be happy.
    1
  295. I was going to say that you should not describe what we are looking for before watching the clip, but no harm done on this one because it was a spot on description ton something so obvious it can't be misinterpreted :P.
    1
  296. 4:21 no, not just. He spends a lot of money to influence people.
    1
  297. "I don't think Tulsi Gabbard is acting out of concern for these young women; she wants it ingratiate herself with the right." I don't think you are acting out of concern for these young women; you want to ingratiate yourself with the Tulsi Gabbard haters.
    1
  298.  @dannycarrington1601  wait until you hear what Obama said about marriage :D.
    1
  299.  @AnnaBucci  there would be no point in that, but that isn't my point.
    1
  300.  @AnnaBucci  the fact that you say "pretty sure" is enough for me to prove my point.
    1
  301. 8:19 I disagree. He could go out with the two of them without them being married, so going out with them does not celebrate their marriage.
    1
  302.  @Imsuper656  in the same way, you can say that white people are not safe from the police.
    1
  303.  @kathleenmcquillan3895  that doesn't mean much to me, that isn't that strange for people who have an opinion "forced" upon themselves.
    1
  304. Trump has great delivery though, and does humor well. Two things Biden is terrible at.
    1
  305. why? because they fight back when antifa attack?
    1
  306. not even the ADL calls them white supremacists. Don't be an extremist, mate.
    1
  307. exactly, only reason to be anti biden is if you believe biden is worse in the long run, even if he would be better in the short term. It is important to not confuse anti-biden with anti democrat hypocrisy though, which I believe Krystal is leaning more towards than Kyle. Kyle lives in California, so his vote wont matter anyway, he has the luxury to take a stance without facing any consequences.
    1
  308.  @Jcewazhere  that is not hypocrisy though, it's "at best" ironic. CA and NY are interchangeable for my point so I chose to writer something shorter even though I wasn't sure if he actually lived in CA. I was also curious if anyone would correct me and how they would if so, and I guess that payed off :).
    1
  309.  @Jcewazhere  not everything that is true is believable. Maybe you should consider the possibility of me being completely honest as I am right about it being ironic, not hypocritical, and that my point still stands if you exchange CA with NY. That should tell you that I am no dummy and probably can think ahead when writing comments. Although I have gotten two interesting replies from you, it is not nearly enough to satisfy my interest in you. What made you the way you are to write what you did? If you have time, please inform me :).
    1
  310. child dies from school reopening, child dies from protests. Whatever we do, children will die.
    1
  311.  @lovelyriver321  given how afraid the democrats are of covid, I can't imagine they are actually brave enough in any larger numbers to take up arms.
    1
  312. It certainly isn't black or white, but the issue isn't new. The current rules for the Olympics are: "Athletes would also be required to demonstrate that their total testosterone level in serum has been below 10 nanomoles per litre for at least 12 months prior to their first competition - with the requirement for any longer period to be based on a confidential case-by-case evaluation, considering whether or not 12 months is a sufficient length of time to minimize any advantage in women’s competition. An athlete's total testosterone level in serum must remain below 10 nmol/L throughout the period of desired eligibility to compete in the female category." I think the best discussion that could be held have to have that in mind.
    1
  313.  @S58PSHIFTING  you are just anti-Semitic, admit it. You like "the good ones", but both you and I know that doesn't fly. Are you one of those who used names for black people who don't vote Democrat as well?
    1
  314. You just cant handle people changing opinions a bit. That is what grown ups do, change opinions when the situation changes.
    1
  315. and if Bernie wasn't holding back because of friend status.
    1
  316. same for me.
    1
  317. I've been wondering the same. Not sure who the other biggest spenders are left leaning like soros is. I don't think it's gonna be Bloomberg.
    1
  318. and how do you explain me founding out I am a classical liberal?
    1
  319. closet case?
    1
  320.  @andrew_35  doesn't seem like the difference is big enough. If outing someone is bad, then doing it to someone you think is just as bad.
    1
  321.  @Missconduct044  oh, so can I use the n-word here? :D It is just the comment section of YT, you know.
    1
  322.  @Missconduct044  my point is that so often see "resistance type people" seemingly trying to out conservatives as gay, even though everyone knows it is bad to out someone. It is one of those hypocrisy things that just never stops. Same with fat shaming, which is bad I've been told, but "resistance type people" fat shame conservatives all the time.
    1
  323.  @andrew_35  Would you consider a rumor as private information? Would you consider a good gay-dar private information? This "private information" doesn't hold up in moral court. Outing is outing, and outing is wrong.
    1
  324.  @Missconduct044  "Your assuming " What am I assuming? "What’s makes no sense? is conservatives get irate when they are called “white nationalist”" Hm, what if they are not? "They complain that they get lumped in with the far right of the party." If they aren't far right, why lump them in? "YET...they do the same to the left." It is as if... they can.. be hypocrites as well. Shocker, right? "That’s what your doing now." Eh no, I am calling out hypocrisy. I am not saying everyone is, I am saying some are, surprisingly many.
    1
  325.  @Earthad23  the thing is that liberal seems to be less aware of their hypocrisy, only rivaled by religious nuts.
    1
  326.  @Earthad23  are you attempting whataboutism? I am not talking about fringe people trying to out conservatives as gay, I am talking about regular liberals.
    1
  327.  @MichaelSmith-fj7di  just random quotes. When will Biden denounce white supremacy?
    1
  328. @justburrito are you making fun of gender pronouns?
    1
  329.  @MichaelSmith-fj7di  Trump did, and has previously numerous times. But why hasn't Biden? I've never seen him do it.
    1
  330.  @MichaelSmith-fj7di  He did with a short and sweet "yes". Dishonest of you to ignore that.
    1
  331.  @hemidas  I dunno, would a three state solution really be that bad? (east, central and west)
    1
  332. what is the double standard?
    1
  333. Ironic that Biden vets VP picks when he hasn't vetted himself.
    1
  334.  @Nickelodeon81  the north lost more soldiers than the south during the civil war...
    1
  335.  @Nickelodeon81  the don't write nonsense like "They can't fight anymore than they did in the Civil War...they will die and lose...again."
    1
  336.  @Nickelodeon81  oh nooo, I didn't press down on the n key hard enough, call the police!
    1
  337.  @Nickelodeon81  hahahahahahahahaha. You truly are nuts, but aware enough to edit out m* when complaining about my typing, so I'll give you that.
    1
  338.  @Nickelodeon81  oh honey... that is you.
    1
  339.  @Nickelodeon81  glad we agree on that :).
    1
  340. sounds quite incorrect. What makes you say that?
    1
  341. Didn't Trump talk about Bolton, not Obama, regarding Afghanistan?
    1
  342. and Trump will make more sense during the debates than he ever does.
    1
  343.  @mrantmoney1  "She mocked trans people and others with pronouns on Twitter" No, she mocked those who bully people to force them to have theirs there.
    1
  344. so every person who say they aren't racist isn't racist them. Got it.
    1
  345. 10:37 fake news? I saw marks.
    1
  346. as long as youi recognize both republicans and democrats would act differently.
    1
  347. please....
    1
  348. it is the other way around, it is Biden who is trying to avoid debates with Trump.
    1
  349.  @ejb7555  same with Biden, they'll dope him up.
    1
  350. bad to not mention that demcroats are hypocrites as well in this thought up scenario.
    1
  351.  @AnnaBucci  you are trolling, right? :P
    1
  352. @Luke dream on.
    1
  353. so you are OK with not voting for Biden, as long as people go to the voting booth and vote green party? ;)
    1
  354.  @theprotector6099  if that is the case, then you should probably edit out "That's what adults do. Children stay home and cry in protest." from your original comment. It just comes of as petty and disingenuous.
    1
  355.  @theprotector6099  holy duck, what is wrong with you? I am just giving you solid advice, which you seem to really need.
    1
  356. at least they are not blocking the road.
    1
  357.  @birchtree2274  https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-coronavirus-rally-remark/?collection-id=242252
    1
  358.  @yolandadenny8692  https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-coronavirus-rally-remark/?collection-id=242252 Do I really need to spam this?
    1
  359.  @Spencerwalker21  but you get the point? If you argue against Trump in a poor way, it sounds like you are arguing against Biden.
    1
  360.  @Spencerwalker21  I didn't mean you specifically, just that the argument "'It's irresponsible and stupid not to vote against the war criminal, racist, sexual assaulting, wealth worshipping, mentally incompetent Presidential candidate!'" is poor.
    1
  361.  @Spencerwalker21  you have videos of him sniffing little girls and tells them no dating until they are whatever age, grabs at least one by the not yet existing boob. Many of them clearly reacting negatively to his advances. "Biden did vastly more than just vote for the war. Yet his role in bringing about that war remains mostly unknown or misunderstood by the public. When the war was debated and then authorized by the US Congress in 2002, Democrats controlled the Senate and Biden was chair of the Senate committee on foreign relations. Biden himself had enormous influence as chair and argued strongly in favor of the 2002 resolution granting President Bush the authority to invade Iraq." https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/17/joe-biden-role-iraq-war "Wealth worship idk but free college and student loan forgiveness doesn't mesh with that." Only because he is very pressured to do so. He would not have done it himself and as far as I know he argued against it since forever. "Mentally incompetent yeah when someone takes a 15 second clip out of a hour speech you can make anyone sound incompetent." So the same as Trump, which is my and SSky06's point. "even if people don't want to vote for biden we need to be careful and still express that you need to vote down ballot and for any ballot initiatives" Indeed, which is why voting 3rd party should not be demonized.
    1
  362.  @Spencerwalker21  you don't think by demonizing people voting 3rd party, more people will stay home and thus not vote down ballot? How is what you said congruent with saying "even if people don't want to vote for biden we need to be careful and still express that you need to vote down ballot and for any ballot initiatives" If you get control of the Senate you can block Trump from putting more people on the SC.
    1
  363.  @Spencerwalker21  not sure what you rant about. I already asked you "but you get the point? If you argue against Trump in a poor way, it sounds like you are arguing against Biden." to which you replied "yeah I get that...". No need for you to attack my character for no reason.
    1
  364.  @Spencerwalker21  I had a point, which you said you agreed with. Not sure what you want from me.
    1
  365.  @Spencerwalker21  if the alternative is not voting at all, voting all democrat except for president would be beneficial, no?
    1
  366.  @Spencerwalker21  I am not interested in having that discussion with you as you have shown you are in this discussion with bad faith.
    1
  367.  @Spencerwalker21  you previously said "so you didn't have an argument just offense ... an argument on why voting third party over Biden helps the progressive cause." To which I replied "if the alternative is not voting at all, voting all democrat except for president would be beneficial, no?" And you answered "it would be better ..." Yet now again you say "So you had no arguments just offense." That is an example of the bad faith I am talking about. You are not talking to me because you are not listening to what I am saying, you are talking to your twisted idea of me. I would like to give you the advice of reading up on, and following, "the principle of charity", to get away from that destructive habit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity Another example is this statement you made "even if people don't want to vote for biden we need to be careful and still express that you need to vote down ballot and for any ballot initiatives". When I express that I agree with you on this, instead of finding satisfaction in this, you instead scold me by claiming that I "... don't care about LGBT rights student loan forgiveness climate change fixing our Healthcare system ect." Unless you surprise me and write something meaningful in return, this will be my last reply to you. Btw, even Trump says LGBTQ, so maybe you should at least as well. You sound like a fake ally.
    1
  368.  @Spencerwalker21  actually it's not LGBTQA+, it's LGBTQIA+. You didn't say anything meaningful, but I had to correct you. And since you didn't look up and apply "the principle of charity", I'll quote the description right here in case you are too lazy to look up a link: "In philosophy and rhetoric, the principle of charity or charitable interpretation requires interpreting a speaker's statements in the most rational way possible and, in the case of any argument, considering its best, strongest possible interpretation. In its narrowest sense, the goal of this methodological principle is to avoid attributing irrationality, logical fallacies, or falsehoods to the others' statements, when a coherent, rational interpretation of the statements is available." Maybe you should not have forgotten about the golden rule btw: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".
    1
  369.  @Spencerwalker21  I am not breaking the rule as I do onto you as I wish you would do onto me. I want you to argue in good faith, so I do that myself. I am showing you a moderate amount of respect because that is how I want to be treated as well. I am not assuming things about you as I don't want you to assume things about me, instead I solely go based on what you write. If there is something I want to know about you, I ask instead of assume. I try to follow "the principle of charity", because I want others to do it as well, so it is possible to have good conversations. I correct others when they are wrong as I think people should correct me when I am wrong. I do my very best to not stoop so low and belittle or insult those I have an argument with as I don't want others to do that while talking to me, not because I get easily offended but because avoiding that helps fostering a good conversation. Maybe this will make you reflect upon how you have treated me. Never did I say it is better to vote for Trump than Biden, or better to vote 3rd party than Biden. I am not even American so I can't vote, I live in Sweden.
    1
  370.  @Spencerwalker21  not sure why you think I am/got upset. I am only talking to you to see if I can find a reasonable person behind the words. You are the one that appears to be terribly upset given the tone in which you have written. You might have attempted to argue in good faith, but it wasn't something you did.
    1
  371. how can you be so sure? Summer 2020 seems to indicate otherwise.
    1
  372. who would be fantastic though? And given the state of Biden, would DNC accept that fantastic VP?
    1
  373. only indication that it is a joke is that it is too stupid to be true, it is not funny in any single way and there is no joy in the delivery.
    1
  374.  @dalimadison7557  I think you missed my point. Read OP comment again :).
    1
  375.  @jamesguilford6807  why do you write "How on earth are you looking over this fact ?" when I was speaking about something completely different? That would be like me asking you why you look over the fact that there are so many starving children in the world.
    1
  376.  @jamesguilford6807  "Do you not understand the question ?" I am not answering irrelevant questions from people who interject themselves in conversations. "Now maybe I was wrong to assume you were defending Trump" Only thing I did was to think rationally about what he said, trying to make sense of it. If that looks suspicious in your eyes, you probably need to work on that.
    1
  377.  @jamesguilford6807  of course, I am just explaining to you why I didn't answer your irrelevant question. I never told you not to ask it, so it seems we have another case of you having trouble correctly interpreting comments.
    1
  378.  @jamesguilford6807  "I have correctly interpreted your idiotic comments and have concluded most likely correctly, that you are dishonest , deceitful, and possibly, not very intelligent." HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Btw, I am not a fan of either. #1 for me during the Dem Primary was Yang, then Bernie.
    1
  379.  TruthalwaysMATTERS!  I don't watch FOX. If you want to put me down, you have to do better than that.
    1
  380. and you never hear the left talk about soros yet they talk a lot about billionaires.
    1
  381. Kamala got more speaking time overall.
    1
  382. yea, discord audio quality is great!
    1
  383. you can't call it selfish if they aren't doing it for themselves.
    1
  384.  @jasonk8190  that is your perspective, and I could call you selfish. You all want the best thing and if wanting the best thing is selfish, you are selfish.
    1
  385.  @jasonk8190  and the fact is that e.g. Kyle is not selfish when he considers not voting for Biden. That is just a fact, that a Trump-fan-like person like you have to deal with. You can argue that it is bad, destructive etc, but it is not selfish.
    1
  386.  @jasonk8190  I am mirroring the nonsense I see coming from you.
    1
  387.  @jasonk8190  I am not allowed to vote as I am not an American citizen, so no need to try to shame me. But hey, it doesn't matter anyway as Trump already has the power and is now Hitler, so why bother voting at all according to your analogy?
    1
  388.  @jasonk8190  what says what about me? Be specific now. All this is besides the point though, you can argue that not voting Biden is bad, destructive etc, but it is not selfish if you do it because you think it is better in the long run for other people. You can argue that it isn't better in the long run for other people, but a motive is a motive even if doesn't turn out to be the outcome. Do you understand what I am saying?
    1
  389.  @jasonk8190  you claim you understand what I am saying, but your next sentence clearly shows you don't understand. How do you define selfish? If I do something, is the selfishness of that act based on my intent or the outcome?
    1
  390.  @jasonk8190  you talk about pride at the same time as you refuse to answer my question, which is critical to this conversation. That is quite ironic.
    1
  391.  @jasonk8190  again, this discussion is about selfishness, and selfishness is about intent, not outcome. It is not about what might be obvious to you, it is about intent, not outcome. That is why Kyle and Krystal aren't selfish, you have to look at their intent, not what you believe the outcome will be from their actions. Last time you said you understood that, but then went on to write something that contradicted that claim of understanding. Do you still claim to understand me? This discussion is about the definition of selfishness. Unless you define what selfishness is in your next reply, I am going to go ahead and ignore you because as it is now, this is a complete waste of time.
    1
  392.  @omadjourney  lol remember when that american rapper was in sweden and complained about racism? that was funny :P.
    1
  393. I have basically taken the same turn as Dave, basically over the same time period. So I have no trouble at all believing Dave is honest. Something really messed up the left recently and it really has effected us.
    1
  394. if they are banned from the regular apps, they have to go to the new apps.
    1
  395. what disadvantage was there to give him a chance?
    1
  396.  @falchion1966  that does not answer my question though...
    1
  397.  @falchion1966  I read all this as an argument not to vote for him, not as a "let's make the best of the situation once he is president".
    1
  398.  @falchion1966  did the democrats give Trump a chance though? This discussion was not about the advantages of giving him a chance though, but the disadvantages of not doing it, which you have provided none. To me, it seems like you forget that his agenda coming in was much more aligning with the democrats than his agenda a few years in. The democrats could have capitalized on that.
    1
  399.  @falchion1966  sure, let's not call it an agenda. Now address the point. "The Democrat leadership did almost nothing but give him everything he wanted." Like what?
    1
  400.  @falchion1966  this is more about you actually making a coherent argument. If you don't want to do that, I am not going to force you.
    1
  401.  @falchion1966  what on Earth are you talking about?
    1
  402. there are way more people who condone political violence though, way more than 1%. There was a recent study/poll about it.
    1
  403. ​ @kentclark6420  "• In September, 44 percent of Republicans and 41 percent of Democrats said there would be at least “a little” justification for violence if the other party’s nominee wins the election. Those figures are both up from June, when 35 percent of Republicans and 37 percent of Democrats expressed the same sentiment. • Similarly, 36 percent of Republicans and 33 percent of Democrats said it is at least “a little” justified for their side “to use violence in advancing political goals”—up from 30 percent of both Republicans and Democrats in June. • There has been an even larger increase in the share of both Democrats and Republicans who believe there would be either “a lot” or “a great deal” of justification for violence if their party were to lose in November. The share of Republicans seeing substantial justification for violence if their side loses jumped from 15 percent in June to 20 percent in September, while the share of Democrats jumped from 16 percent to 19 percent. • These numbers are even higher among the most ideological partisans. Of Democrats who identify as “very liberal,” 26 percent said there would be “a great deal” of justification for violence if their candidate loses the presidency compared to 7 percent of those identifying as simply “liberal.” Of Republicans who identify as “very conservative,” 16 percent said they believe there would be “a great deal” of justification for violence if the GOP candidate loses compared to 7 percent of those identifying as simply “conservative.” This means the ideological extremes of each party are two to four times more apt to see violence as justified than their party’s mainstream members. " from: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/10/01/political-violence-424157
    1
  404. would you see it as a problem if 50% of the records were held by trans women?
    1
  405.  @moosepocalypse6500  but if we would see that (50%), would you think that would be a problem?
    1
  406.  @moosepocalypse6500  but if you say "We still have yet to see all women's records broken and trans women the top of every sport.", is it fair of me to interpret that as you would see a problem if we did? Also, you can't complain about me talking about them winning 50% if you talk about them winning 100%, right? Try to have a conversation with me here instead of trying to dismiss me, that would be better for everyone.
    1
  407.  @moosepocalypse6500  I agree that what currently happens is highly relevant as there is no obvious answer, and when there isn't equal representation it is worth having a look at it, but doesn't have to be a deal breaker. So many times in sport we do not see equal representation, but that is fine! When you say "To me trans women are women, so that would still be women winning in their chosen sport.", I wonder if you think the current rules are unfair to trans women?
    1
  408.  @xvi1128  what are you talking about?
    1
  409. same thing with murder :P.
    1
  410. they will only side with him if it is reasonable enough. Gorsuch and Kavanaugh have already demonstrated their independence.
    1
  411. I would assume Biden steps down after an appropriate amount of days. No need for 25th.
    1
  412. maybe, maybe not. I have had a similar change of heart and I haven't seen a penny from Koch cocks.
    1
  413. at this point it seems like a good idea to split the union. Sure, most people are for the union when they are in power, but I wonder what the numbers say if they are not.
    1
  414. he thought the issue was exaggerated and remembered that Bill Maher had wished for the economy to tank so Trump could lose.
    1
  415.  @bobyoung1698  is Beto a republican?
    1
  416. wasn't it his lack of handling of the situation he called a hoax? I only recall him calling it "a regular flu".
    1
  417.  keith gould  I prefer Monty Hall.
    1
  418.  @camelopardalis84  the social democrat party of Sweden does indeed use the red rose as the party symbol. The significant party to the left of them is using another red flower :P.
    1
  419. 1:40 to be fair though, Soros pumps an insane amount of money into influencing politics, no?
    1
  420.  @_sam_marquez  maybe she is talking about before two years? XD
    1
  421. why do you write "claims"?
    1
  422.  @thecircledk8597  what is the difference between: claims and "claims" to you?
    1
  423.  @thecircledk8597  well, you tell me :P.
    1
  424. If democrats do that, they show themselves to be even bigger hypocrites than the republicans.
    1
  425.  @zipjay  but you have to measure your response. If you get punched in the face, you should punch back, not shoot the other guy.
    1
  426.  @zipjay  is it possible o fight too hard, though? Or are you straight up advocating for civil war?
    1
  427.  @zipjay  that is appropriate :). So if the Reps don't pack the court, so shouldn't the Dems.
    1
  428. not all republicans think the same, that is your answer. People think antifa was integral because there are suspicious videos out there.
    1
  429. what percentage of them should have been white?
    1
  430.  @syedjunaidyusuf  so you wouldn't mind if the U.S. would create reeducation camps to eradicate Islam in America?
    1
  431. @Mohamed Nail where do you draw the line though? If a religion legitimately advocate oppression, isn't that even worse than it just being a state law that can be changed? It is hilarious that you think secularity is immoral when you literally excuse the bad things in religion with "oh well, it's just religion".
    1
  432. @Mohamed Nail "in secularism what makes oppression objectively wrong?" What is objectively right and wrong doesn't change, but we rely on ourselves rather than old books because humans today are better equipped to make the right calls than humans were back then when the old books were written. This is what most religious people do anyway as the interpret the book to conform to their own morality anyway. "Islam brings an objective rule for what's right/wrong and moral/immoral. You cannot really object to it using subjectivity." You could literally say the very same thing about the law of the land, as that is literally what laws are. "may I ask about what you meant when you said "where do you draw the line though?"" When is it no longer religion, but oppression. What would the religion have to advocate for for it to no longer be religion, but straight up oppression.
    1
  433. @Mohamed Nail "how are we better equipped? Because of technology?" We know more. The more you know, the easier it is to make the correct calls. "I sense the fallacy of presentism here. Believing that things are more correct (whimsically) because it is recent and modern." Well, then that is your error, not mine. There is a difference between saying that you are better equipped to do better and actually doing better. "Well Muslims take their morality from the book and Hadith itself." Try to argue your point about the perfection of religions without mentioning Islam. Let us instead talk about how perfect Hinduism is, seems like a more honest exercise. Now that is a religion of 100% truth and perfect morality, don't you agree? "There is not much interpretation needed" Even if that would be the case, that is not how religion works. Most people do not act the way you think, they don't read the religious texts, they project onto the texts what they want them to say. "About the laws, if they are based upon the whims of the people and not an objective foundation, these laws are subjective." They are always based on something objective, like a country's constitution. That is actually more objective than a made up religion. As I said before, let's not talk about Islam as that is just one religion in the vast sea of religions. It is easier for you to talk objectively about religion if you are further removed from it, so let's talk Hinduism. I don't know much about it, so let us together find out how true and morally pure it is.
    1
  434. @Mohamed Nail "How can we discuss while none of us know anything?" By learning. If you want to talk about how good religion is, don't you think you need a wider perspective than just one religion? Haven't there been like 5000 of them so far? How can you argue that all of them are morally pure if you only know one of them?
    1
  435. @Mohamed Nail "... that affects a deed being moral or immoral?" I am not saying it does, I am saying that better understanding of the morality of a deed makes it easier for us to act appropriately. As an example, better understanding what causes pain and suffering in human beings and animals, or better understanding what effect today's actions have on the future.
    1
  436. @Mohamed Nail the thing is that the way you argue for Islam's perfection is the way you would argue for Hinduism's perfection. Not in the exact things you reference, but how you reference them and how you motivate them as "true" or "moral". Basically you end up with arguments that are as weak as "because God". You recognize this flaw in other religions, but not your own because you are literally blinded by your blind faith. We Atheists see this for the hypocrisy it is, and realize that all religious texts and doctrines are just made up by people long time ago. And as we are better informed today than ages ago, it is easier to be a good moral human as a secular human because my actions are not restricted by what some ignoramus thought ages ago.
    1
  437.  @syedjunaidyusuf  so when you said "if u don’t like our laws okay then but u don’t have to force ur views onto us." you didn't really mean it then?
    1
  438. @Mohamed Nail "still, what does better informed mean here?" I already answered that one. "I notice that in one religion one thing may be moral and something else immoral while totally contradicting each other. But, there are morally common grounds between all religions (most major ones)." Sure, but for a religion to be 100% moral as you argue it is, they all have to be perfect and the same. "Problem with secularism is that subjective morality is rampant. "Because I feel this is correct it is correct morally" type of morality is problematic." The same with religion though, you can't ignore that. "Now one thing is that we as Muslims try not to go into the morality debate with another religion unless something allowed is disallowed in their source of morality." Why debate if religion is 100% moral? You are contradicting yourself as you defense of Islam is that it is 100% moral "because God", but it is a religion just like all the others, and you recognize that the other religions doesn't have to be 100% moral. "Instead we look at the advantage and disadvantage of making certain moral decision in regards to one's religion to see which gets the best score. " Yeah, and secularism gets the highest score ;). "... where anything could be justified as atheists." Same for religions. You pick and choose how the religion should motivate your subjective morality.
    1
  439. @Mohamed Nail youtube censored my last comment and I don't want to waste time trying to get it past the filters. It's OK though as you really drove my point home by what you wrote in your last comments. I'll just point the most important thing out though: "But as an atheist you can justify homosexuality ..." Yeah, you hit the nail on the head with that one, that is why atheism is morally better.
    1
  440.  @syedjunaidyusuf  and I can say "y do u need to force ur own values on us" to you as well. "Bro but that’s the thing, what is ur yard stick to measure what is morally good and bad?" We can think about it, and debate it, just like we figure out any other thing. Using religion only hinders this exercise and ensures a worse understanding of what is good and bad. "How do u have consistent values?" Consistent is not the same as good. "we believe with certainty to be divine revelation from a Divine Creator" belief and truth are different. "What is it that tells u that killing is bad and helping others is good and not the other way around?" Empathy. "Now who will tell u if homosexuality is morally okay or bad?" Empathy. "Now look, I told u now where we get our morals and values from" But that doesn't make it morally perfect. "So basically to convince the other I need to prove Islam to u and u need to prove it wrong" not really, because this is about morals, not faith. "And so my point is that either we agree to disagree and end the discussion" yeah because this is a waste of time, like debating if the earth is flat or not.
    1
  441.  @syedjunaidyusuf  Bro. Y can’t u please just respect our opinions and stop cancelling us for not having a religion that tells us things. See? "the only way u can convince me to change my values and morals is my disproving that source." Not at all. If that was the case, all religious people of the same religion would have the same values, but they don't. "We respect ur views, now u respect ours." But that is not what we are discussing. We are discussing how one best can create a moral society (I guess).
    1
  442.  @nickhewes6860  still, they have rules that seem quite reasonable for the moment. It will take a long time before we are confident in that we have figured this out.
    1
  443. 2:43 is it really them tweeting though? Biden is not going to tweet one signle time :P.
    1
  444. 0:38 well, he is.
    1
  445. does tucker though?
    1
  446.  @ItsJustLisa  Bernie could announce he identifies as a woman. Sry, that she identifies as a woman.
    1
  447.  @robertgrant7864  how would herd testing build immunity? Just to make sure we are talking about the same thing, how would you describe "herd testing"?
    1
  448.  @robertgrant7864  well, what did he say, specifically? I tried googling Trump and Herd Testing and I didn't find anything obvious. Can you quote him on what he said?
    1
  449.  @robertgrant7864  I am trying to find out exactly what he said. Where did you hear him say that? About this specifically, about herd testing. How can you be so sure he was talking about "herd testing" and not "herd immunity"?
    1
  450.  @robertgrant7864  is that interview anywhere on the internet? So far all I have found is things about Herd Immunity, nothing about Herd Testing, so I hope you understand that I am skeptical. You want me to watch the interview, where can I find it?
    1
  451.  @robertgrant7864  Are you 100% sure that Trump talks about Herd Testing in that ~30 min interview? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FHQyiQ74dk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tF4LH-ebovQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bvMMZpUYag
    1
  452.  @robertgrant7864  let's not shift focus, I want to find evidence of him actually saying "herd testing", and I want to know what he said before and after that. Was it this one with Laura Ingraham? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7mDddUjZx8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytonHk4C1_I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBP8TnfN95k
    1
  453.  @xvi1128  the ADL doesn't call them white supremacists. Are you really going to say that the ADL is too soft om them? When is the ADL ever too soft?
    1
  454. since when? Or has it always been like that?
    1
  455.  @_sam_marquez  "Recent studies show that trans women perform like cis women after two years on estrogen." but that wasn't athletes though, right?
    1
  456. what do you mean?
    1
  457. how do you define murder?
    1
  458. and they'll have plenty of content as soon as Biden does anything but let every person enter the U.S.
    1
  459. @Nikolai Ninja why don't you? You have as much reason to elaborate on that as I.
    1
  460. yes, just regular counter-culture or anti-cancelling. I enjoy a lot of their content for that reason.
    1
  461.  @dolerbom  "Do you really think 1 or 2 trans women in a few school districts is some threat so women? Really?" It can be, if there is one scholarship they are all fighting for.
    1
  462.  @AnnaBucci  are you talking local level or global? Both matters.
    1
  463.  @AnnaBucci  how do you know?
    1
  464. as a European, it was quite surprising David didn't know that. I thought that was common knowledge, especially for politically minded people.
    1
  465.  @jons9621  It was a nod to how you were projecting. I did use it correctly: "a stupid person who ... behaves in a way that is not considered socially acceptable"
    1
  466.  @jons9621  you are conducting yourself very poorly. That is not socially acceptable. And again you are projecting with the "Pathetic attempt to save face" comment.
    1
  467.  @jons9621  starting a conversation by saying "Did you eat paint chips as a kid?" is not conducting yourself quite well. "You are just embarrassed that you have been outwitted." Again, you are projecting. If you do this more we probably need to exchange your lamp.
    1
  468.  @vidguy007  I have watched it, and he says "and this is their new hoax" as I said 16 hours ago when I watched that specific video. So what is your point? You should expect me to get that far when there is proof in this very comment thread that I did. Trying to make me look stupid only makes you look stupid.
    1
  469.  @vidguy007  that is a moot point though because the discussion is about if he called the virus a hoax or his supposed lack of action a hoax. I am not a Trump supporter btw, I am not even American. As I am Swedish I obviously "support" Bernie regarding your (I presume) election. I am amazed that this has to be pointed out for people to correctly interpret what I write. Can you shed some light on why that is?
    1
  470.  @darkeimp555  the discussion is about the distinction. Don't like it, don't participate.
    1
  471.  @jons9621  weak.
    1
  472.  @vidguy007  he used both the words politicizing and hoax. Did you watch the entire clip? Not sure what you mean with "Is politicalization of a hoax?"
    1
  473.  @jons9621  I didn't call you weak if that was what you were thinking, I was calling your argument weak. The fact that this is a YouTube comment sections doesn't make your behavior OK. Funnily enough I didn't take your for a person frantic enough to post numerous comments to one comment, so I missed a rant of yours. "Sure it is." No it isn't. "... save face in an argument you lost a long time ago." You don't even know what my argument is. "...at that point you had zero context to make that claim." I had your comment. "...you have difficulty using proper English..." I am not a native English speaker, so sew me. Oh well, this was incredibly useless and boring. As you are so focused on winning and saving face, I'll give you the last word you so desperately need. Don't worry, I won't read it so you can say whatever you like.
    1
  474.  @vidguy007  don't repeat yourself, clarify your thoughts.
    1
  475.  @TheOzthewiz  he didn't phrase it like that. If you phrase it like that I understand why you make the interpretation you do. But if you actually look at the exact words he used, the reasonable interpretation is the one that snopes did.
    1
  476.  @vidguy007  well, at least you agree with me.
    1
  477.  @vidguy007  the nonsense is you thinking you disagree with me, because you think I support Trump. You actually agree with me, but you won't see that until you accept the possibility that you might actually agree with me. Also, I thought you blocked me?
    1
  478.  @scotthullinger9955  oh no, observing all the shenanigans you are up to is great entertainment :). It is also good to widen your perspective, to not just look at things going on withing your own country (even if it is a big one).
    1
  479.  @scotthullinger9955  my arguments are solid, the problem is that he had none and started with unbridled nonsense.
    1
  480.  @scotthullinger9955  Because I care about other people.
    1
  481.  @scotthullinger9955  Nothing? I am just saying that I care about other people, not just myself. So what happens within the borders of other countries is not something I ignore, even if those things doesn't directly affect me. Not sure how this can be confusing to you.
    1
  482.  @adreanqq7276  "If we start preventing people from participating in sports based on hormones" but if we don't?
    1
  483. or they won't, but by reading your comment they'll think that is what she meant, and then go do it. Congratulations :).
    1
  484.  @frannanderson4165  I thought Trump had the bikers xD.
    1
  485.  @WalkTuahthePolls  you have to be more specific than that, exactly which shirt?
    1
  486. or maybe some people think the first thing and some other people think the other? You think all people think the same?
    1
  487.  @YourRealDaddy100  it is many groups in a loose organization.
    1
  488.  @LostintheTwilightZone  this is what the ADL writes: "These violent counter-protesters are often part of “antifa” (short for “antifascist”), a loose collection of groups, networks and individuals who believe in active, aggressive opposition to far right-wing movements." Are you saying they are wrong? Are you Anti-ADL?
    1