

replaces the ghillie suit model with a suit made of traffic cones
lol


replaces the ghillie suit model with a suit made of traffic cones
lol
Actually thinking that there are OVER ONE HUNDRED MILLION people in the US who think FAVORABLY of child molestation is deep, deep brain rot. You’ve dived to a seriously dangerous depth of radicalized dehumanization. And dehumanization kicks the door to atrocity wide open.
You’re literally on the same ideological level as the Pizzagate-rs right now, do you really not realize that?
Do you feel like you need someone to be THAT evil for you to justify opposing them?
Trump is GOP. Group of pedophiles.
That alone is 99% probability.
Are you seriously implying that 99% of self-identified Republicans are pedophiles?


Can’t say I’m shocked that pointing out clickbait and misleading elements in the headline led to a bunch of downvotes. He’s on the Wrong Team, you see, so if you do anything but swallow the headline whole, reading not a single word past it, with absolutely zero scrutiny, you’re defending him, defending child molestation, and basically a pedophile yourself, you know. /s


It’s about damned time. We honestly should have nothing smaller than quarters right now, going by the same logic as discontinuing the half-penny forever ago (which had more equivalent purchasing power than the dime does now).


it makes me wet af.
cis he/him
insert ‘I’m gonna pre’ compilation


If repeating your meaningless slogan is the only response you can muster to someone actually trying to offer substantive explanation, you’re the one that lacks understanding, whether willfully or not.
Writing it in all caps only further emphasizes this.


You’re right, every piece of evidence that doesn’t confirm your biases must be fabricated.
There’s no other possibility.


Groypers disrupted college events by asking provocative questions
This is pretty much the opposite of what Robinson did, so…what are you talking about?
Also, groypers didn’t criticize Kirk because he ‘spreads too much hate’—if anything, they think he’s not extreme enough. Another direct contradiction.
I think you’re believing what you want to believe, not what the evidence points to.


I’ve never played it. But it looks like most people who did, liked it, especially considering that it’s much more likely for someone who hated it to leave a bad review, than it is for someone who likes it to leave a good one.


deleted by creator


Given that, while Trump got ~3 million more votes in 2024 vs. 2020, and Harris got nearly 7 million fewer votes in 2024 than Biden did in 2020, and that the US’s population increased about 8 million in that span of time, are you suggesting that there’s that much misogyny and racism among the Democrats?


Obama winning didn’t prove that racism didn’t exist.
But it did prove that racism does not have enough of an impact to move the needle in any substantial way—it failed so hard to move the needle that, again, literally no candidate since has even matched, let alone topped, his popular vote %.


The game was released for Nintendo 64 on August 31, 1999
Well, gramps, every game mentioned in that article has mostly positive reviews on Steam. Have you considered that you’re just set in your ways and clinging to what you enjoyed last century? lol


You can’t “spy” on public profiles.


right-wing nutjob
Didn’t he directly criticize Kirk as being hateful shortly before the shooting? Where’s this coming from?
Agreed that Steam is a really stupid place to be looking for anything of substance.
Well, maybe the fact that he left a negative review for a game he has over 2000 hours in signifies derangement on some level, if not political, lol.


I like when people claim racism was a major factor in Harris’s loss, given that Obama was elected in 2008 with a larger piece of the popular vote than any President since.


deleted by creator
Many, many people are single-issue voters. As one example, if someone genuinely believes that abortion is equivalent to murder, it can be very difficult for them to justify voting against a pro-life candidate, even if they agree with them on nothing else. It’s been found that one’s views on abortion (in either direction) will trump (pardon the pun) everything else for a whopping THIRD of all voters.
Because of the way our voting system works, and the fact that there are only two candidates, it’s very inaccurate overall to equivocate a vote for a candidate to a vote for a specific X that said candidate did or endorsed, etc. The same kinds of rhetorical ‘games’ are played with legislation. A bill has X provisions in it, one of them is a dealbreaker for congressperson Y, so they vote against it, and later, that person is criticized by their opponents for “voting against” any/all of the other X-1 provisions.
I know it’s easier and takes a lot less brainpower to just assume that everyone who votes for the Other Candidate is emphatically supportive of the worst thing that person ever did, but that just isn’t the reality, and only adds to the polarization that is deteriorating political discourse in the present day.
There is no shortage of real things to criticize—there is no justification for these absurd generalizations of massive swaths of citizens.