Jump to content


The Democrat Utopia


Recommended Posts


I had never heard of this publisher whose ads on Facebook just got permanently locked do to low quality or disruptive content. It sounds like the ads were rated average for the most part. Some above average and some below average, so I am guessing the lock was due to disruptive content. The books were about Ronald Reagan, Justice Barrett and Thomas Sowell. What if the books were about Barack Obama, Justice Sotomayor and Paul Krugman?
 

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/facebook-permanently-locks-conservative-childrens-book-publisher-heroes-liberty

 

  • Plus1 2
  • Fire 1
  • Oh Yeah! 1
Link to comment
40 minutes ago, nic said:

I had never heard of this publisher whose ads on Facebook just got permanently locked do to low quality or disruptive content. It sounds like the ads were rated average for the most part. Some above average and some below average, so I am guessing the lock was due to disruptive content. The books were about Ronald Reagan, Justice Barrett and Thomas Sowell. What if the books were about Barack Obama, Justice Sotomayor and Paul Krugman?
 

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/facebook-permanently-locks-conservative-childrens-book-publisher-heroes-liberty

 

Depends on their content of course.  

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, knapplc said:

 

"partying"

 

"hypocrite"

 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

She was outside dining - not sure why the hulabaloo with her not wearing a mask - that would have been allowed in NY as well.  


Why is the GOP so anxious to try and make a big deal out of this sort of non issue?

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
Just now, NM11046 said:

She was outside dining - not sure why the hulabaloo with her not wearing a mask - that would have been allowed in NY as well.  


Why is the GOP so anxious to try and make a big deal out of this sort of non issue?

 

Because it allows them to talk about anything other than what we should be focusing on. And it allows the kind of people prone to believing them to "both sides" any issue.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

5 hours ago, NM11046 said:

Depends on their content of course.  

I think the ads had disruptive content….not sure about the books. I think people complained about advertising the books because they didn’t like the publisher.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
27 minutes ago, nic said:

I think the ads had disruptive content….not sure about the books. I think people complained about advertising the books because they didn’t like the publisher.

I guess I don't understand what qualifies for "disruptive content".

 

But my point was, that regardless of the publisher or the person the book is about (yes even if it was the dems you mentioned above), if the ad contained something that was considered "Disruptive content" then yes I think the same thing would have happened.

Link to comment

1 hour ago, NM11046 said:

Why is it that you are posting clips from May 2019?

Am I not allowed to post clips showing the current people in charge of the country are election hypocrites?  
 

Do you agree with our current VP and President who think the 2016 election was illegitimate?  

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Fire 1
Link to comment

Just confused cuz the most recent topic on the thread was about ads by a conservative publisher - I still am unclear why you jumped to this.

 

If you watch the clip you posted on Biden from more than 3 years ago, its a woman in the audience that says she feels Trump is illegitimate president due to Russian involvement in the election, and she also says it's up to the MOC to investigate and determine impeachment.  Joe responds jokingly, "will you be my VP?  Then says he agrees.  Conveniently your video stops there.  But he went on to talk about the investigations being done by congress about outside influences and etc.

 

The old Kamala video too talks about how can a president be duly elected if its known that outside countries like Russia interfered with our election.  She references her position on the Senate Intelligence Committee and the information shared by our own intelligence agencies as well as others from around the world proved that Russia interfered.  Again, at that point your video conveniently stops.

 

So I don't know what the rest of their conversations entailed - your sources cut them out.  But do you agree that no other country should have impact our our USA Elections?  If they do, does that impact your view of the legitimacy of the person to hold that office?

 

And to answer you - yeah, I do think that if it's proven by multiple agencies that another country did impact our election outcome, and the popular vote was significantly different than the electoral college, I'd probably agree he was not legitimately elected BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE.  But did I or other Dems make a big deal about contesting the election?  Did Obama refuse to hand over power?  Nope, Hilary conceded pretty darn quick.  Obamas welcomed them into the WH, gave debriefs and his staff gave ongoing plans to the incoming adminstration etc.  

 

But to come back to my first question - why you and the members of your party are continuing to try and regurgitate old talking points like this from years ago and make a big deal out of them shows your desperation. 

 

 

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, NM11046 said:

Just confused cuz the most recent topic on the thread was about ads by a conservative publisher - I still am unclear why you jumped to this.

 

If you watch the clip you posted on Biden from more than 3 years ago, its a woman in the audience that says she feels Trump is illegitimate president due to Russian involvement in the election, and she also says it's up to the MOC to investigate and determine impeachment.  Joe responds jokingly, "will you be my VP?  Then says he agrees.  Conveniently your video stops there.  But he went on to talk about the investigations being done by congress about outside influences and etc.

 

The old Kamala video too talks about how can a president be duly elected if its known that outside countries like Russia interfered with our election.  She references her position on the Senate Intelligence Committee and the information shared by our own intelligence agencies as well as others from around the world proved that Russia interfered.  Again, at that point your video conveniently stops.

 

So I don't know what the rest of their conversations entailed - your sources cut them out.  But do you agree that no other country should have impact our our USA Elections?  If they do, does that impact your view of the legitimacy of the person to hold that office?

 

And to answer you - yeah, I do think that if it's proven by multiple agencies that another country did impact our election outcome, and the popular vote was significantly different than the electoral college, I'd probably agree he was not legitimately elected BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE.  But did I or other Dems make a big deal about contesting the election?  Did Obama refuse to hand over power?  Nope, Hilary conceded pretty darn quick.  Obamas welcomed them into the WH, gave debriefs and his staff gave ongoing plans to the incoming adminstration etc.  

 

But to come back to my first question - why you and the members of your party are continuing to try and regurgitate old talking points like this from years ago and make a big deal out of them shows your desperation. 

 

 

Well, a lot of points to unpack and help you out with so here goes nothing…

1). It’s a Utopia thread.  Lots of moving discussions.  Just check out the Republican one for a point of reference.  
2) Both POTUS and VPOTUS agreed (wrongly) with the assertion presented to them that Trump was an illegitimately elected President.  Hypocrites the both of them. 
3) No other country should be allowed to impact our elections.  And we should get out of the election influencing business too.  
4) you would be insane for agreeing that he was not legitimately elected and would be a part of the current problem if you do believe that.  Russia didn’t change a single vote.  HRC didn’t campaign in the Rust Belt and that’s why she lost no matter how many times she claims Russia Russia Russia 

5). HRC continues to say the election was illegitimate, Obama had the Fess spy on Trump’s campaign.  Not to welcoming it seems.  
6). Pointing out Democrat hypocrites is kinda fun that’s why.  

  • Plus1 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...