robinnn

LMAO LMAO LMAO

To call Zelenskyy “President Putin” at that critical moment was offensive and totally unacceptable.

I think it was funnier

Holy brainrot

You're right, and by God... I'm worried. We need someone who can get in that seat and do the duties of the president. Imagine Biden's not in his right state of mind and weapons shipments to Nazis in Ukraine need to be approved, or a railroad workers' strike needs to be put down, or Israel needs more bombs to drop on Palestinian villages. Who is going to pull through? Who's going to get up and say, "put those migrants in concentration camps and close the border, escalate tensions with China even if we sabotage renewable energy transition, and tonight I'll make a speech where I lie through my teeth without stuttering or losing my train of thought"?

Well, this may be controversial, but, in my opinion the torch needs to be handed down to the next generation of CIA directors' children, Star Trek: The Next Generation. These youngsters might just have both the patriotism and cognitive abilities to keep the child killing machine well-oiled. Slava Amerkani!

If we're stuck in a two-party system and people consistently vote for democrats despite not being democrats themselves simply because they think it's the "lesser evil" of effectively two options, why should these people's opinion about which democratic candidate is available not matter?

The gun is in my mouth

A right wing nationalist movement of the past that supported a monarchy

You have no clue what you’re talking about. The monarchy was already leading, and the movement was aimed at combating the brutal imperialist exploitation of China, so was objectively progressive. Nationalism can be both a good (progressive) and bad (regressive) thing depending on the situation (development of the nation, relationship with other countries, etc.). Using right-wing in this sense is strange, because we could argue numerous historically progressive movements were “right wing” by today’s standards, it means nothing.

A corporate-controlled genocidal fascist who's incapable of speaking is the ideal leader under liberalism. Saying mean things destroys democracyTM.

Can you actually explain the difference between the options and reconcile the fact that Hillary and the DNC purposefully elevated Trump behind the scenes (entire "lesser evil" rationale is a farce)? Thx!

It’s like I’m talking to a character in Disco Elysium who has two preprogrammed responses and maybe a third if I forget to wear a shirt. Completely off in your own world huffing nasal spray.

I’m arguing the U.S. is no less psychopathic and countries need protection from Western imperialism.

The US was the one that initiated it regardless, and I think China and Russia’s support for UN sanctions on Iran was incorrect.