I was replying to Gyrate since his post was right above mine and I was talking about trump. I’m not a he either.
Do you need a cite of trump saying it?
See! Sam was right! That ‘army of illegal immigrants’ did lead to terrorism!
If you squint so hard you can’t see light and for certain definitions of ‘Sam was right’.
According to a recent ABC news poll, 57% of voters think both presidential candidates are too old and 29% think that only Biden is too old.
Over in the P/E thread on Biden, Ian Miles Wrong* here spun this as “86% of Americans think Joe Biden is too mentally compromised to be president for four more years.”
Goebbels would be proud.
*I give Sam this name in that, like that person, he seems deeply invested in American right-wing politics despite not being a citizen or living in this country
goddamn, as a Malaysian, this fucker makes me so embarrassed
(In before: Sam starts pontificating on Malaysian politics!)
Can someone (millennial? Gen wtf?) please clue me how “Ian Miles Wrong” is clever or has anything to do with Malaysia? Or to Sam nonsense for that matter. TYVM.
Yes, I can google and find a twitter account and dumb reddit threads that I’m not going to study for hours. A summary is better kthx and much appreciated.
- Grumpy Gen Jones
Ian Miles Cheong is an alt-right influencer and Elmo Husk pal who exclusively posts alt-right talking points despite living in Malaysia and having never set foot in the US, much like Sam, a Canadian who buys into MAGA talking points uncritically and seems deeply invested in promoting them.
He’s also, on an unrelated note, in some hot water with the media in his home country, because it turns out it’s a bad idea to go on about how much you love Israel while living in an Islamic monarchy that jails people for sedition for suggesting that the country should open diplomatic relations with Israel.
Thanks Smapti for the context. Seriously.
(“Elmo Husk”? I mean, we’ve been using Elmo<-Elon lots, I just don’t get “husk”. Thanks again.)
That was a nickname his own Twitter employees gave him.
Yeah, and I get the “Elmo” thing and it’s pretty funny. Just not “husk”.
Oh, wait. “Husk” = “Musk”. Got it. Doy. Facepalm.
Y’know how Instagram has filters to alter the look of your photographs?
I’ve decided that Sam’s brain has a Tucker Carlson filter through which everything passes. Apparently, it isn’t user-selectable and is always active.
So … there may very well be actual facts at the root of his comments. They’re just … programmatically Tuckerized somewhere along the way.
Hi, Sam!!
Are you saying that Sam is too mentally compromised to discuss any political issue in good faith?
While I may not be personally saying this, it’s my understanding that 86% of people polled … are.
Is Sam too mentally compromised to discuss any political issue in good faith?
- Yes
- No
- Covfefe
0
voters
Why are you all still pretending Sam is some disinterested observer when it comes to Trump and Biden?
Do you really think he’s engaging in good faith in these discussions?
You mean Tucker, the useful idiot busy praising Russian grocery stores? Nyet.
You actually don’t pay any attention to what I actually say, do you? I do not like Tucker Carlson. I think he’s an idiot. I’ve been saying so on this board for a long time. I once liked him when he was a late night host with Rachel Maddow. In his current incarnation, he’s a fool.
Bwahahahahahahaha!
Ahhh, good ol’ Sam. Mischaracterizing the nitrogen fertilizer issue again even though he’s been corrected on it numerous times. And he wonders why nobody takes him seriously. A classic case of exactly what I was talking about in the OP.
- Sam makes a “mistake”.
- Sam gets corrected.
- Sam eventually slinks off because reality isn’t on his side.
- Sam repeats same “mistake”. <— we are here
- Sam gets called out for making the same “mistake”.
- Sam gets mad because we’re mean to him. Blames it on ideology.
- Back to 4.
‘Corrected’ meaning “I said something that disagrees with you”. Maybe I just didn’t find your arguments compelling, or we are talking past each other because my objections are different than the ones you are attacking.
You seem to think that “Shut up, he explained” is a valid way to debate.
I have explained to you many times where inflation comes from, backed by cites. Do you agree with me now? Will you accept that Milton Friedman was correct? After all, you’ve been told.
No you’ve been shown to be factually wrong in your representation of the nitrogen fertilizer issue. This is a case of you disagreeing with factual reality. See OP.
Oh, and this isn’t a debate. I’m not trying to correct you. That’s clearly pointless. You have zero interest in being factually correct, only ideologically correct.