Donald Trump running for president

thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
5
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
This might be debatable. It's not like voters left Trump in droves. He got even more votes in 2020 than in 2016.

In the end even more votes turned up for Biden. New votes. An unbelievable 120yr record in voter turnout. Mostly by mail. Many without any proof of identity.
Might be legit, might be ballot stuffing. I'd like to see a thorough independent audit before I ever believe it was an honest/fair win.
with so many people doubting the fairness of the election i don't see why anyone would be against a thorough independent audit?
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
5
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
It’s almost like only Trump supporters worship their politicians, treat them like superstars, and treat their party like a sports team and constantly go to rallies dying a pandemic.
It’s almost like only Trump supporters worship their politicians, treat them like superstars, and treat their party like a sports team and constantly go to rallies dying a pandemic.
why would she schedule a 'welcome home reception' if she wasn't expecting supporters to show up?

i bet kamala would be like a pig rolling in mud if she would have gotten a turnout like what trump got?
 
Ricky10

Ricky10

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
with so many people doubting the fairness of the election i don't see why anyone would be against a thorough independent audit?
Even if that were to happen and the results revealed the rampant fraud that seems exceeding more probable than not, such results would be censored and suppressed. The globalist agenda is far more powerful than the illusion of an election we recently witnessed. The O’Biden administration is obviously part of that agenda, and that is why he barely had to campaign or offer anything rational or alluring in terms of policy.

Nobody can deny that Big Tech censorship/bias, media censorship/bias, civil unrest, along with the pandemic caused the perfect storm of conditions to remove the incumbent president on their terms. Globalists went to extreme measures to obtain control, and now they will stop at nothing to ensure that they maintain it.

For me, the idea of a 2024 Trump campaign is exciting- but it would be naive of me to think that election and everything wrapped around it would be much different. I think the days of presidential elections as we once knew or believed them to be are behind us.
 
xR1pp3Rx

xR1pp3Rx

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
i personally will never bother voting again. its not going to count anyhow, the republic is lost boyos.
 
xR1pp3Rx

xR1pp3Rx

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
and if you think I'm the only one.. you are sadly mistaken. If no one will stand. no one will vote going forward. you will just have accept it and join the fold unless they reeducated u
 
BamBam54

BamBam54

Member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
And we will know the name of the game (loss of free and fair elections) in 2022.

Typically, with a wild left globalist agenda, the Dems would lose one or both chambers in 2022. So if the late night voting counts magically turn into wins again for continued Democrat control, then we know the jig is up (no pun intended...)
 
xR1pp3Rx

xR1pp3Rx

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
the jig is up
you have not looked at any one of the 3 films showing how the steal went down? the Jig is up.. there is nothing more to look at.. the proof is out there. none of the cabal are hearing the cases, and are denying the steal to save their own asses. tell me this.. if they didnt steal the election why is it that no one is allowing a true and real audit?
 
Last edited:
Ricky10

Ricky10

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
And we will know the name of the game (loss of free and fair elections) in 2022.

Typically, with a wild left globalist agenda, the Dems would lose one or both chambers in 2022. So if the late night voting counts magically turn into wins again for continued Democrat control, then we know the jig is up (no pun intended...)
Hmmm...this prompted me to look up what defines a free and fair election. Let’s review the 8 standards in regard to the 2020 presidential “election” shall we!

1: Citizens are able to register to vote

Yes, even non-citizens had a voice, as well as dead people

2: Voters have access to reliable information

That’s a big fat negative- sorry

3: Citizens can run for office

Sure, anyone can try

4: All voters have access to a polling place or another method of voting

Yeah, we certainly had alternative methods

5: People can vote free from intimidation

Nope, Trump supporters were intimidated and still very much are

6: Voting is free from fraud

🥵

7: Ballots are counted accurately and the correct results are announced


Debatable, but I am definitely going with no for both

8: The results of the election are respected

Sorry, that falls into the no category




Im afraid the 2020 presidential election does not meet the criteria for a free and fair election :unsure:
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
tell me this.. if they didnt steal the election why is it that no one is allow a true and real audit?
Because if the “true and real” audit doesn’t confirm your desired outcome you’ll just cry that the “global elitists” won’t allow a true audit to be performed and they’re covering it up. For example, Georgia’s THIRD counting confirmed Biden’s victory, and found that the original count was 99.964% accurate. But you don’t want to hear that. Apparently THREE counts weren’t good enough for you. No count by any method would satisfy you unless it confirms what you already claim to KNOW is true, so no audit that doesn’t come to your preordained conclusion will be considered “true and real” to you...
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
5
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
Because if the “true and real” audit doesn’t confirm your desired outcome you’ll just cry that the “global elitists” won’t allow a true audit to be performed and they’re covering it up. For example, Georgia’s THIRD counting confirmed Biden’s victory, and found that the original count was 99.964% accurate. But you don’t want to hear that. Apparently THREE counts weren’t good enough for you. No count by any method would satisfy you unless it confirms what you already claim to KNOW is true, so no audit that doesn’t come to your preordained conclusion will be considered “true and real” to you...
i can guarantee you that if i were the one doing the counting trump would win, even if you asked me to count 4, 5 or 6 times trump would be the winner ;)
 
Ricky10

Ricky10

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
you have not looked at any one of the 3 films showing how the steal went down? the Jig is up.. there is nothing more to look at.. the proof is out there. none of the cabal are hearing the cases, and are denying the steal to save their own asses. tell me this.. if they didnt steal the election why is it that no one is allowing a true and real audit?
Not that I need any confirmation, but what are these films you are referencing? Links?
 
xR1pp3Rx

xR1pp3Rx

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
Not that I need any confirmation, but what are these films you are referencing? Links?
i don't think any of them remain up at this point but the best one with the most stunning info, experts, and visuals is the my pillow guys presentation which is 2 hrs that will make your blood boil. It is statistically impossible for what happened to happen and they show it to you in real time with time stamps and all of it. Just sickening.
 
BamBam54

BamBam54

Member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
Because if the “true and real” audit doesn’t confirm your desired outcome you’ll just cry that the “global elitists” won’t allow a true audit to be performed and they’re covering it up. For example, Georgia’s THIRD counting confirmed Biden’s victory, and found that the original count was 99.964% accurate. But you don’t want to hear that. Apparently THREE counts weren’t good enough for you. No count by any method would satisfy you unless it confirms what you already claim to KNOW is true, so no audit that doesn’t come to your preordained conclusion will be considered “true and real” to you...
EXCEPT - Each recount in Georgia only counted the same way. NONE of the recounts checked if the votes were genuine by comparing signatures on ballots to signatures on record (original voter registration or driver's license)

They only checked signature on application for ballot to signature on ballot. If it was fraud, they only checked the illegal application against the illegal ballot.

And no method was used to check if voters had recently moved out of state and were no longer legal residents at the time of voting. And I believe no investigation into claims of excessive one-sided ballot curing.
 
Ricky10

Ricky10

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
i don't think any of them remain up at this point but the best one with the most stunning info, experts, and visuals is the my pillow guys presentation which is 2 hrs that will make your blood boil. It is statistically impossible for what happened to happen and they show it to you in real time with time stamps and all of it. Just sickening.
Ah yes, censorship of course. I only recently heard about the my pillows dude and his support of Trump and the “election” scandals. Ridiculous that he and his products have been banned from Big Tech and Big Box stores. The censorship and biased has infiltrated everything. Anyone who can’t see what is truly happening would have to be blind, and exceedingly naive to be honest.
 
xR1pp3Rx

xR1pp3Rx

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
EXCEPT - Each recount in Georgia only counted the same way. NONE of the recounts checked if the votes were genuine by comparing signatures on ballots to signatures on record (original voter registration or driver's license)

They only checked signature on application for ballot to signature on ballot. If it was fraud, they only checked the illegal application against the illegal ballot.

And no method was used to check if voters had recently moved out of state and were no longer legal residents at the time of voting. And I believe no investigation into claims of excessive one-sided ballot curing.
EXACTLY right !! who cares if they do a recount. it means nothing. I want full forensic audits of the machines as well.. even tho I personally believe they are illegal for the most part because the states didn't use proper authority to have mail in ballots to begin with.
 
xR1pp3Rx

xR1pp3Rx

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
Anyone who can’t see what is truly happening would have to be blind, and exceedingly naive to be honest.
or agree with it.. it's them state sponsored commies coming out of the shcools for the most part who think this is ok.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
i don't think any of them remain up at this point but the best one with the most stunning info, experts, and visuals is the my pillow guys presentation which is 2 hrs that will make your blood boil. It is statistically impossible for what happened to happen and they show it to you in real time with time stamps and all of it. Just sickening.
What do you mean they don’t remain up? It’s the internet. Nothing is ever truly gone. Please give me a name of that one. If it’s so amazing, surely you remember the name...
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Ah yes, censorship of course. I only recently heard about the my pillows dude and his support of Trump and the “election” scandals. Ridiculous that he and his products have been banned from Big Tech and Big Box stores. The censorship and biased has infiltrated everything. Anyone who can’t see what is truly happening would have to be blind, and exceedingly naive to be honest.
You do know that some conservatives also have a list of companies that were/are anti-Trump and they boycot them, right? And then there’s the people who were within their rights to boycott the NFL or NBA, etc.

Whatever happened to private companies and individuals can pick who they buy from and what products they stock all that free market stuff? Only when you want it?
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
EXCEPT - Each recount in Georgia only counted the same way. NONE of the recounts checked if the votes were genuine by comparing signatures on ballots to signatures on record (original voter registration or driver's license)

They only checked signature on application for ballot to signature on ballot. If it was fraud, they only checked the illegal application against the illegal ballot.

And no method was used to check if voters had recently moved out of state and were no longer legal residents at the time of voting. And I believe no investigation into claims of excessive one-sided ballot curing.
I’m about 90% sure that most people’s signature could change a bit, or more than a bit, from when they registered to vote at 18 years old to their signature on a ballot at 65 years old. If we’re arbitrarily ruling out ballots for that, that’s ripe for one-sided abuse if a counter wants to toss ballots. Unless we have actual forensic handwriting analysts verifying millions of signatures.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
EXCEPT - Each recount in Georgia only counted the same way. NONE of the recounts checked if the votes were genuine by comparing signatures on ballots to signatures on record (original voter registration or driver's license)

They only checked signature on application for ballot to signature on ballot. If it was fraud, they only checked the illegal application against the illegal ballot.

And no method was used to check if voters had recently moved out of state and were no longer legal residents at the time of voting. And I believe no investigation into claims of excessive one-sided ballot curing.
I’m about 90% sure that most people’s signature could change a bit, or more than a bit, from when they registered to vote at 18 years old to their signature on a ballot at 65 years old. If we’re arbitrarily ruling out ballots for that, that’s ripe for one-sided abuse if a counter wants to toss ballots. Unless we have actual forensic handwriting analysts verifying millions of signatures.
 
Ricky10

Ricky10

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
You do know that some conservatives also have a list of companies that were/are anti-Trump and they boycot them, right? And then there’s the people who were within their rights to boycott the NFL or NBA, etc.

Whatever happened to private companies and individuals can pick who they buy from and what products they stock all that free market stuff? Only when you want it?
That’s largely irrelevant. Unlike censorship, a boycott does not try to hide or suppress anything from the public eye, it does not protect the interests of a government or any type of regime and its objective is not to control the flow of information or culture.

The NFL and NBA are irrelevant on every level.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
That’s largely irrelevant. Unlike censorship, a boycott does not try to hide or suppress anything from the public eye, it does not protect the interests of a government or any type of regime and its objective is not to control the flow of information or culture.

The NFL and NBA are irrelevant on every level.
Parlor censors/bans/blocks people too my man. Every social media app censors people. Go on Reddit and you’ll see plenty of right and left leaning subs censoring the hell out of posts/comments and banning users left and right.
 
Ricky10

Ricky10

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
Parlor censors/bans/blocks people too my man. Every social media app censors people. Go on Reddit and you’ll see plenty of right and left leaning subs censoring the hell out of posts/comments and banning users left and right.
I don’t belong to any social media, unless we include this :)

It wasn’t too long ago that I was considering joining Facebook- mostly for the sake of possibly getting in touch with long lost acquaintances. However, I have stood by my decision to not join. Now more than ever, it seems that keeping your life more private and off of big tech platforms is a wise choice.

On some level, it’s nice to know that things are going both ways to a certain extent though..
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
5
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
Parlor censors/bans/blocks people too my man. Every social media app censors people. Go on Reddit and you’ll see plenty of right and left leaning subs censoring the hell out of posts/comments and banning users left and right.
didn't parlor itself get shutdown?

asking for a friend who is curious to know.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
didn't parlor itself get shutdown?

asking for a friend who is curious to know.
You can literally google it. Seems to take me to a page to sign up or log in.

Also, even if it is down, it censored users when it was up.

Regardless, do you not support the free market? Shouldn't a web-hosting service be allowed to refuse to host a website they feel violates their beliefs? Think of the web host as a Christian baker, and the website as a gay couple. Maybe that will put it in perspective.
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
5
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
You can literally google it. Seems to take me to a page to sign up or log in.

Also, even if it is down, it censored users when it was up.

Regardless, do you not support the free market? Shouldn't a web-hosting service be allowed to refuse to host a website they feel violates their beliefs? Think of the web host as a Christian baker, and the website as a gay couple. Maybe that will put it in perspective.
it seems funny that when we are talking about social media sites that censer parlor always comes up-and then parlor itself gets censored, lol....i truly find that humorous, lol.

and if the christian bakers had section 230 protection they wouldn't have had any issues-eh? so that is a really bad comparison, in my humble opinion!!! but i'm just asking for a friend and don't have any skin in this game- ;)
 
Last edited:
Ricky10

Ricky10

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
They were fishing and you "bit". LOL
Disappointing..

As I said, I was looking forward to reporting people I know who voted for Biden just to screw around with these supposed “patriots and people of color” behind this website. Now I can’t even bring it back up in a new window. 🤷‍♂️

Maybe I have to clear my cookies..
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
it seems funny that when we are talking about social media sites that censer parlor always comes up-and then parlor itself gets censored, lol....i truly find that humorous, lol.
My friend, can you not see that both sides censor when given the opportunity? It’s just that one side as you perceive it has more, larger platforms. But to suggest that the right doesn’t censor, or censors less, is just nonsense. They just don’t have the same amount of platforms to do so.

And you didn’t answer my question. It’s ok for a Christian baker to refuse to bake a cake that violates their beliefs, but not for a web host to refuse to host a site that violates their beliefs?
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
it seems funny that when we are talking about social media sites that censer parlor always comes up-and then parlor itself gets censored, lol....i truly find that humorous, lol.

and if the christian bakers had section 230 protection they wouldn't have had any issues-eh? so that is a really bad comparison, in my humble opinion!!! but i'm just asking for a friend and don't have any skin in this game- ;)
The Christian baker doesn’t want to participate AT ALL in anything involving in something that they feel violates their conscience. It’s not about legal ramifications or public notoriety, it’s about them not wanting to be a part of something they consider to be sin, even if nobody besides them and God knows. The Christian baker didn’t refuse the cake because they didn’t want to be held legally accountable. There’s no crime in baking a super gay cake. So bad example for you...

And don’t be so cowardly you say you’re “asking for a friend.” Grow a pair and admit you’re the one you’re talking about. We’re not 5, we don’t need those games.
 
xR1pp3Rx

xR1pp3Rx

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
try it on your desktop? it may not be optimized for mobile yet... you know how them big tech fekers like to drag their feet with things like thisz~
 
Ricky10

Ricky10

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
The Christian baker doesn’t want to participate AT ALL in anything involving in something that they feel violates their conscience. It’s not about legal ramifications or public notoriety, it’s about them not wanting to be a part of something they consider to be sin, even if nobody besides them and God knows. The Christian baker didn’t refuse the cake because they didn’t want to be held legally accountable.
My GF‘s second job is at a major supermarket chain in the bakery department. In the midst of all the George Floyd chaos, a lady came up to my GF with a 1/2 sheet cake and asked her to write “Blue Lives Matter” on it as she wanted to drop it off at the police station. My GF did it, but another associate saw what happened and told the manager. After the fact, my GF was told to never write anything potentially controversial on a cake ever again.

Obviously that is a pretty grey area, so I asked if there is now a written policy regarding writing on cakes. Apparently there isn’t. I would imagine there must be at other supermarket retailers though and privately owned bakeries.

try it on your desktop? it may not be optimized for mobile yet... you know how them big tech fekers like to drag their feet with things like thisz~
I suppose it could have something tot do with the iPad format, but it was coming up just fine earlier this morning. I would try it on my PC, but that has become barely functional after many years of abusing it with free porn.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
My GF‘s second job is at a major supermarket chain in the bakery department. In the midst of all the George Floyd chaos, a lady came up to my GF with a 1/2 sheet cake and asked her to write “Blue Lives Matter” on it as she wanted to drop it off at the police station. My GF did it, but another associate saw what happened and told the manager. After the fact, my GF was told to never write anything potentially controversial on a cake ever again.

Obviously that is a pretty grey area, so I asked he if there is now a written policy regarding writing on cakes. Apparently there isn’t. I would imagine there must be at other supermarket retailers though and privately owned bakeries.


I suppose it could have something tot do with the iPad format, but it was coming up just fine earlier this morning. I would try it on my PC, but that has become barely functional after many years of abusing it with free porn.
Yeah, I could see why a major supermarket chain would try to stay as inoffensive as possible on either side. I can also see why a store of any size may not want a "normal" worker (as in a non-owner, or at least a non-manager) to make the decision to accept or deny a controversial cake on either side of the political/ideology spectrum.

I think there is a distinction between refusing service that you feel is participating in something you disagree with, and refusing service to someone because they do something you disagree with. That is, it's NOT acceptable IMO to refuse to bake a birthday cake for someone because they're gay, or because they're a Satanist. But there is more of an argument to be made for, say, a Christian baker refusing to make a custom cake for a gay wedding, or a cake that says "praise Satan."
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
5
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
My friend, can you not see that both sides censor when given the opportunity? It’s just that one side as you perceive it has more, larger platforms. But to suggest that the right doesn’t censor, or censors less, is just nonsense. They just don’t have the same amount of platforms to do so.

And you didn’t answer my question. It’s ok for a Christian baker to refuse to bake a cake that violates their beliefs, but not for a web host to refuse to host a site that violates their beliefs?
my wife wants to know if you are asking for my opinion or what the law says? she said the websites are protected under section 230 and can sensor for whatever reason, in the baker case the scotus gave a very narrow ruling in favor of the bakers but didn't give clear guidelines to the lower courts. this is the law...


my opinion however is that if someone can show evidence of consistency of belief then they should be entitled to this belief-much the same as a conscientious objector must be opposed to all war and not just one war in particular.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
my wife wants to know if you are asking for my opinion or what the law says? she said the websites are protected under section 230 and can sensor for whatever reason, in the baker case the scotus gave a very narrow ruling in favor of the bakers but didn't give clear guidelines to the lower courts. this is the law...


my opinion however is that if someone can show evidence of consistency of belief then they should be entitled to this belief-much the same as a conscientious objector must be opposed to all war and not just one war in particular.
If you read my most recent comment to Ricky, I think that a private company should be able to refuse to engage in or condone an activity that violates their morals/conscience/etc., but not able to refuse service or products in general to a person or group because they don't agree with something they do.

Examples:

I DO think there is a very valid argument for a Christian baker not having to bake a custom cake for a gay wedding, or a cake that says "praise Satan."

I DO NOT think there is a valid argument for a Christian baker refusing to sell a random or generic cake to someone because they are gay, or a Satanist, or a Gay Satanist. What they do with the cake once they buy it from you is not in your control. You aren't actively participating in something that violates your beliefs, unless your belief is that gay people shouldn't exist, in which case you suck.

I hope this makes sense.
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
5
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
If you read my most recent comment to Ricky, I think that a private company should be able to refuse to engage in or condone an activity that violates their morals/conscience/etc., but not able to refuse service or products in general to a person or group because they don't agree with something they do.

Examples:

I DO think there is a very valid argument for a Christian baker not having to bake a custom cake for a gay wedding, or a cake that says "praise Satan."

I DO NOT think there is a valid argument for a Christian baker refusing to sell a random or generic cake to someone because they are gay, or a Satanist, or a Gay Satanist. What they do with the cake once they buy it from you is not in your control. You aren't actively participating in something that violates your beliefs, unless your belief is that gay people shouldn't exist, in which case you suck.

I hope this makes sense.
i didn't follow the case that closely but i believe i read that the gays who wanted the cake were regular customers. the bakery owners said they had no problem selling their baked goods to the gay couple, they just weren't going to bake them a wedding cake...so you should be good to go-eh?

as far as consistency goes, i don't think a website should ban a conservative for a harmful post and then allow farrakhan and the ayatollah of iran to post the harmful stuff they post, but this is just my opinion.
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
i didn't follow the case that closely but i believe i read that the gays who wanted the cake were regular customers. the bakery owners said they had no problem selling their baked goods to the gay couple, they just weren't going to bake them a wedding cake...so you should be good to go-eh?

as far as consistency goes, i don't think a website should ban a conservative for a harmful post and then allow farrakhan and the ayatollah of iran to post the harmful stuff they post, but this is just my opinion.
Yeah, then I would say there’s a valid argument to be made for the baker. I am not exactly aware of all the nuances and intricacies of the case either, so I guess I can just speak on the general scenario we seem to be discussing and assuming to be the case. I try to be consistent you know. Freedoms I grant to others are given to me, and what I take from others is taken from me, in a broad, general, theoretical sense.

If you know me, you’ll know I am VERY critical of the Nation of Islam, for example, given my Jewish heritage, and dislike of racists and antisemites in general. I would NOT complain if anything relating to NoI was banned from social media and if they were classified as a hate group, as they’re INSANELY hateful and spew bigotry and racism.

My point about social media platforms is that they ALL censor in hypocritical ways. Left leaning ones censor right sentiments more, and right leaning ones ban left sentiments more. That is pretty “logical” when we think about how polarized American politics have become. It’s just that there are less right-leaning social media sites, so it seems like the left censors more, when it’s really just them having more opportunities and platforms to censor on. Both sides do it equally as often when given equal opportunity to do so.
 
thebigt

thebigt

Legend
Awards
5
  • Best Answer
  • Established
  • Legend!
  • RockStar
  • First Up Vote
Yeah, then I would say there’s a valid argument to be made for the baker. I am not exactly aware of all the nuances and intricacies of the case either, so I guess I can just speak on the general scenario we seem to be discussing and assuming to be the case. I try to be consistent you know. Freedoms I grant to others are given to me, and what I take from others is taken from me, in a broad, general, theoretical sense.

If you know me, you’ll know I am VERY critical of the Nation of Islam, for example, given my Jewish heritage, and dislike of racists and antisemites in general. I would NOT complain if anything relating to NoI was banned from social media and if they were classified as a hate group, as they’re INSANELY hateful and spew bigotry and racism.

My point about social media platforms is that they ALL censor in hypocritical ways. Left leaning ones censor right sentiments more, and right leaning ones ban left sentiments more. That is pretty “logical” when we think about how polarized American politics have become. It’s just that there are less right-leaning social media sites, so it seems like the left censors more, when it’s really just them having more opportunities and platforms to censor on. Both sides do it equally as often when given equal opportunity to do so.
larry king once said it was impossible for blacks to be racists since whites hold the power...could this be worded to mean the right cannot sensor since the left controls the power?
 
muscleupcrohn

muscleupcrohn

Legend
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
larry king once said it was impossible for blacks to be racists since whites hold the power...could this be worded to mean the right cannot sensor since the left controls the power?
When have I ever given the impression that I agree with Larry King or value his opinion? Also no. Just because the majority of power is held by white people doesn’t mean an individual or group of black people can’t have an advantage over an individual white person or a group of white people. Just like a conservative platform can have power on their platform to censor liberals if they want to. How does happening less often mean it can never happen? That makes absolutely no sense. Just because it’s not typical or the most common thing doesn’t mean if can’t happen. Sometimes a white guy runs a 4.4 40 or does a 360 windmill dunk. It’s not common, but it does happen. Saying that anything that deviates from the default norm doesn’t exist is asinine.

I’m honestly not sure if you’re just trying to stir s**t up at this point by bringing up things that no logical person would suggest. It’s a straw man.

You’re essentially asking “if this stupid thing is true, can I then say this other stupid thing is also true?” I mean, sure, if the first stupid thing is true, sure. But it’s not. And I never even came close to suggesting it is.
 
Ricky10

Ricky10

Well-known member
Awards
4
  • RockStar
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • Best Answer
If the Baker comes from a broken home and has a tattoo of Satan on his right leg, should there be a valid argument made for him to be able to give a free angel food cake to an Arab woman who is unknowingly planning to donate it to a gay sex offender who also has a tattoo of Satan on his right leg?

Then, if she slips on the ice while attempting to put the cake in her car and destroys the cake, should the baker be obligated to make a new angel food cake?

CC397BDE-6DB2-49BC-B022-91F359D9581F.jpeg
 
Iwilleattuna

Iwilleattuna

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
I am not sure if true, but I just heard a rumor that Biden lessened the punishment for pedophiles... They are already treated less harshly than most non violent criminals
 
dixonk

dixonk

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
Yeah, I could see why a major supermarket chain would try to stay as inoffensive as possible on either side. I can also see why a store of any size may not want a "normal" worker (as in a non-owner, or at least a non-manager) to make the decision to accept or deny a controversial cake on either side of the political/ideology spectrum.

I think there is a distinction between refusing service that you feel is participating in something you disagree with, and refusing service to someone because they do something you disagree with. That is, it's NOT acceptable IMO to refuse to bake a birthday cake for someone because they're gay, or because they're a Satanist. But there is more of an argument to be made for, say, a Christian baker refusing to make a custom cake for a gay wedding, or a cake that says "praise Satan."
If I remember right, they didn’t refuse to bake them a cake. They refused to make them a cake celebrating their gay wedding. They could have gotten any cake they wanted but not with gay messaging on it. So his comparison was apples to apples. The supermarket engaged in the same thing.
 
dixonk

dixonk

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • RockStar
I am not sure if true, but I just heard a rumor that Biden lessened the punishment for pedophiles... They are already treated less harshly than most non violent criminals
For the life of me I don’t know why that isn’t the absolute worse crime you can commit. If murder is 25 to life then pedophiles should be executed, revived, then executed again. And all that after the prison bubbas have had their way with them. Hell I will go back to a previous example in this thread. Let’s fillet them alive one inch at a time. Wood chippers work well in this case as well. In my honest opinion I don’t see a crime that is worse than pedos.

I haven’t verified if he has or not, but I truly honestly believe that he is a pedophile. I am sure of it. Of course he would take care of his own.
 
Iwilleattuna

Iwilleattuna

Well-known member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
For the life of me I don’t know why that isn’t the absolute worse crime you can commit. If murder is 25 to life then pedophiles should be executed, revived, then executed again. And all that after the prison bubbas have had their way with them. Hell I will go back to a previous example in this thread. Let’s fillet them alive one inch at a time. Wood chippers work well in this case as well. In my honest opinion I don’t see a crime that is worse than pedos.

I haven’t verified if he has or not, but I truly honestly believe that he is a pedophile. I am sure of it. Of course he would take care of his own.
I agree 100%. Biden is a pedo, though so it would make sense... They're all pedophiles actually
 
BamBam54

BamBam54

Member
Awards
3
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
  • RockStar
The cake baking issue was more about "selective" banning under what appeared to be an anti-conservative slant.

For example - when Walmart refused to bake a cake with a confederate flag, but gladly make one with the ISIS logo instead.


This then goes back to the major social media platforms selectively banning and false fact-checking conservative stories, while suppressing anything negative about democrats, such as the Hunter Biden drug/pedophile laptop story.

Private companies can do what they want as long as that right, and ALL rights, are applied equally to both ends of the political spectrum. AND that those who choose to exercise selective political banning of speech lose their special Section 230 protections. Neither of which is currently the case!
 

Top