Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Young Earth Creationism
Anti vaxx movement
Flat Earth

What other crazy ideas has the internet propagated.

Pizza gate
Russia gate

Obama was not born in the US

The Russia conspiracy theory

Originally posted by Emperordmb
The Russia conspiracy theory

Do you mean this one?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/19/opinion/mueller-report-barr-trump-russian-disinformation.html

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Do you mean this one?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/19/opinion/mueller-report-barr-trump-russian-disinformation.html

No not that one which is an option piece.. The one where he was an agent of Putin and committed Treason.

Now you use option pieces as fact based evidence to back your non existent arguments.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Young Earth Creationism
Anti vaxx movement
Flat Earth

What other crazy ideas has the internet propagated.

Basic Attention Token.

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
No not that one which is an option piece.. The one where he was an agent of Putin and committed Treason.

Now you use option pieces as fact based evidence to back your non existent arguments.

This one?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/politics/russian-interference-in-2016-sets-landscape-for-2020-presidential-campaign/2019/04/19/089dacde-6231-11e9-9ff2-abc984dc9eec_story.html

Trumps Wall

Originally posted by Emperordmb
The Russia conspiracy theory

Bingo, russia is the biggest one. Imagine being so stupid you bought into it? LOL! Same folk who cried over pizza gate too...bought the russia thing hook line and sinker.

So dumb, so funny.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
This one?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/politics/russian-interference-in-2016-sets-landscape-for-2020-presidential-campaign/2019/04/19/089dacde-6231-11e9-9ff2-abc984dc9eec_story.html

Nothing in that says anything about Russian collusion with Trump

Please keep using links to prove your non points

Lol in another thread he legit linked to an article about Stephen Colbert "ripping" the report, as if it was something with substance.

Same guy triggered over Tim Pool. Same. Guy.

Plenty about Russia Interfering with your democracy though 2016.

Remember when this kid plagiarized part of an article? LOL!

A post on either side of me, looks like I've triggered Surt again. he needs a job.

eat

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Plenty about Russia Interfering with your democracy though 2016.

Actually, almost none. Almost a near 0 influence.

A single TV commercial (by the Dems or GOP) run in just one large city in a battle ground state, for a single week, had greater influence on the election than the entirety of Russia's influence on the 2016 election: primaries and general election.

Russia also spent money in the wrong states if they wanted to influence the election. Laughably stupid of the Russians, really. Incompetence, at best. A disturbing distraction, at worst.

"Russian Interference" has been so overblown, by this point, that you have to wonder what the real conspiracy is, here. Why are so many trying to push the clearly false narrative that Russia influenced the US election when you can simply follow the numbers and see how laughably stupid that idea is?

What's really going on?

The Armenian "genocide"
Nanjing "massacre"

Also what do we consider dangerous influence? Like I don't give a shit about facebook ads tbh. People who aren't Americans ***** about Trump and spew their opinions on American politics on the global internet all the time.

I'm not gonna screech about interference in our democracy when the BBC, the public news funded by the British state, bitches about Trump.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Also what do we consider dangerous influence? Like I don't give a shit about facebook ads tbh. People who aren't Americans ***** about Trump and spew their opinions on American politics on the global internet all the time.

I'm not gonna screech about interference in our democracy when the BBC, the public news funded by the British state, bitches about Trump.

I posted on this, before. Posted research. People ignored those ads. A lot. And those that didn't, were far more likely to be responding to their confirmation bias rather than being influenced.

And you make a great point about the BBC. Based on the coverage, they have a far larger influence on the US Populace than Russia could ever dream about. However...be fair. The BBC is less partisan about US Politics than CNN or Fox News. They are still partisan with a left slant, for sure. What CNN used to be in the early 2000s.

Gender-fluidity
Pious Pence

While the BBC is British based the BBC News Service is global so they have every right to report whatever they deem newsworthy regardless of where it happens. (Even though they're a paedophile harbouring organisation)

Originally posted by dadudemon
Actually, almost none. Almost a near 0 influence.

A single TV commercial (by the Dems or GOP) run in just one large city in a battle ground state, for a single week, had greater influence on the election than the entirety of Russia's influence on the 2016 election: primaries and general election.

Russia also spent money in the wrong states if they wanted to influence the election. Laughably stupid of the Russians, really. Incompetence, at best. A disturbing distraction, at worst.

"Russian Interference" has been so overblown, by this point, that you have to wonder what the real conspiracy is, here. Why are so many trying to push the clearly false narrative that Russia influenced the US election when you can simply follow the numbers and see how laughably stupid that idea is?

What's really going on?

Bingo, PB's point gets slapped down once again.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I posted on this, before. Posted research. People ignored those ads. A lot. And those that didn't, were far more likely to be responding to their confirmation bias rather than being influenced.

And you make a great point about the BBC. Based on the coverage, they have a far larger influence on the US Populace than Russia could ever dream about. However...be fair. The BBC is less partisan about US Politics than CNN or Fox News. They are still partisan with a left slant, for sure. What CNN used to be in the early 2000s.

https://www.wired.com/story/did-russia-affect-the-2016-election-its-now-undeniable/

According to wired and many others the affect of Russia on 2016 is now Undeniable...

But you know it's fine to take no notice of Muller on that.

. What impact did it have?

We’re only at the beginning of having an answer to this question because we’ve only just begun to ask some of the right questions. But Mueller’s indictment shows that Russian accounts and agents accomplished more than just stoking divisions and tensions with sloppy propaganda memes. The messaging was more sophisticated, and some Americans took action. For example, the indictment recounts a number of instances where events and demonstrations were organized by Russians posing as Americans on social media. These accounts aimed to get people to do specific things. And it turns out—some people did.

Changing or activating behavior in this way is difficult; it’s easier to create awareness of a narrative. Consistent exposure over a period of time has a complex impact on a person’s cognitive environment. If groups were activated, then certainly the narrative being pushed by the IRA penetrated people’s minds. And sure enough, the themes identified in the indictment were topics frequently raised during the election, and they were frequently echoed and promoted across social media and by conservative outlets. A key goal of these campaigns was "mainstreaming" an idea—moving it from the fringe to the mainstream and thus making it appear to be a more widely held than it actually is.

This points to another impact that can be extracted from the indictment: It is now much more difficult to separate what is “Russian” or “American” information architecture in the US information environment. This will make it far harder to assess where stories and narratives are coming from, whether they are real or propaganda, whether they represent the views of our neighbors or not.

This corrosive effect is real and significant. Which part of the fear of “sharia law in America” came from Russian accounts versus readers of InfoWars? How much did the Russian campaigns targeting black voters impact the low turnout, versus the character attacks run against Clinton by the Trump campaign itself? For now, all we can know is that there is shared narrative, and shared responsibility. But if, as the indictment says, Russian information warriors were instructed to support “Sanders and Trump,” and those two campaigns appeared to have the most aggressive and effective online outreach, what piece of that is us, and what is them?

PERSUASION AND INFLUENCE via social media cannot be estimated in linear terms; it requires looking at network effects. It is about the impact of a complex media environment with many layers, inputs, voices, amplifiers, and personalities. All of these elements change over time and interact with each other.

So anyone trying to tell you there was little impact on political views from the tools the Russians used doesn't know. Because none of us knows. No one has looked. Social media companies don't want us to know, and they obfuscate and drag their feet rather than disclosing information. The analytical tools to quantify the impact don’t readily exist. But we know what we see, and what we heard—and the narratives pushed by the Russian information operation made it to all of our ears and eyes.

The groups and narratives identified in the indictment were integral parts of the frenzied election circus that built momentum, shaped perceptions, and activated a core base of support for now-President Trump—just as they helped disgust and dismay other groups, making them less likely to vote (or to vote for marginal candidates in protest).

In the indictment, Trump campaign officials are referred to as “unwitting” participants in Russian information warfare. This gives the White House an out—and a chance to finally act against what the Kremlin did. But the evidence presented in the indictment makes it increasingly hard to say Russian efforts to influence the American mind were a failure.

Molly K. McKew (@MollyMcKew) is an expert on information warfare and the narrative architect at New Media Frontier. She advised Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili’s government from 2009 to 2013 and former Moldovan Prime Minister Vlad Filat in 2014-15.

RELATED VIDEO

CULTURE
How the Internet Tricks You Into Thinking You're Always Right
A guide to busting through confirmation bias, the cognitive fallacy that's destroying our discourse.

#RUSSIAN#INDICTMENT#AMERICAN#2016 ELECTION#RUSSIA#ROBERT MUELLER

Lol this is going to be good.

Another article that has a title that does not match it's content. Should be a red flag when the article you posted even says what I just said:




Also, the article talks about something that has long since been debunked: the Russians tried to cost Hillary the election by taking votes from her and giving them to Bernie.

This is called the "Sanders Effect." And it doesn't exist.

Bernie did not cause Hillary to lose the election as the article implies.

http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/did-bernie-sanders-cost-hillary-clinton-the-presidency/



Also, we've long since reviewed the margins of loss and victory in each state and compared those to the targeted Russian propaganda. Russia completely missed the boat. They targeted the wrong states, lol.


Careful consuming that scare-propaganda, Whirly. There are a ton of media sources trying to misrepresent Russia's part in the 2016 election. It's obviously partisan politics. Read more than just the headlines - those are almost assuredly propaganda to get quick reads from people who are too dumb or lazy to read the articles.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Another article that has a title that does not match it's content. Should be a red flag when the article you posted even says what I just said:




Also, the article talks about something that has long since been debunked: the Russians tried to cost Hillary the election by taking votes from her and giving them to Bernie.

This is called the "Sanders Effect." And it doesn't exist.

Bernie did not cause Hillary to lose the election as the article implies.

http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/did-bernie-sanders-cost-hillary-clinton-the-presidency/



Also, we've long since reviewed the margins of loss and victory in each state and compared those to the targeted Russian propaganda. Russia completely missed the boat. They targeted the wrong states, lol.


Careful consuming that scare-propaganda, Whirly. There are a ton of media sources trying to misrepresent Russia's part in the 2016 election. It's obviously partisan politics. Read more than just the headlines - those are almost assuredly propaganda to get quick reads from people who are too dumb or lazy to read the articles. Actually DDM it mainly talks about shifting perception and it's knock on affect now and it says no tools exist for measuring that. Read it all, it's really saying no methods exist for measuring how far the Overton Window was shifted. But, you know.

Targeted propaganda is only a part of what was going on, it's very clear that wasn't the main attack method or aim.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Actually DDM it mainly talks about shifting perception and it's knock on affect now and it says no tools exist for measuring that. Read it all, it's really saying no methods exist for measuring how far the Overton Window was shifted. But, you know.

Targeted propaganda is only a part of what was going on, it's very clear that wasn't the main attack method or aim.

I read it all. As evidenced by me addressing multiple elements from the article in my reply. You would know that if you read the entire article and my reply.

Feel free to go through my many previous replies on this topic, including the actual propaganda that I posted for all to see. You don't have to hid behind abstracted ideas, like this. You can review the actual identified propaganda yourself. Sure, it's thousands. But it definitely removes this imaginary boogeyman you believe in once you delve into the content.


Unless, of course, you think the majority of that propaganda; which was about how Native Americans should be valued, black people are important, immigrants are people, too; caused Hillary Clinton to lose the election. By all means, I'm ready to read those arguments. Please, be my guest: show me the specific ads that influenced the US Election to cause Hillary to lose and Trump to win.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I read it all. As evidenced by me addressing multiple elements from the article in my reply. You would know that if you read the entire article and my reply.

Feel free to go through my many previous replies on this topic, including the actual propaganda that I posted for all to see. You don't have to hid behind abstracted ideas, like this. You can review the actual identified propaganda yourself. Sure, it's thousands. But it definitely removes this imaginary boogeyman you believe in once you delve into the content.


Unless, of course, you think the majority of that propaganda; which was about how Native Americans should be valued, black people are important, immigrants are people, too; caused Hillary Clinton to lose the election. By all means, I'm ready to read those arguments. Please, be my guest: show me the specific ads that influenced the US Election to cause Hillary to lose and Trump to win. I'll have a look, did you look at the overlap with useful fools like Infowars and the idea of putting extreme views out there through actors on web forums etc. Not being a dick mate, but if you did, people would be interested. Link me up

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Do you mean this one?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/19/opinion/mueller-report-barr-trump-russian-disinformation.html

Equalization is the only move Trumpers have.

Because believing Russia interfered in our election process is as whacky as believing pedo rings in the nonexistent basement of a pizza palor or that the Earth is flat.

Originally posted by Robtard
Equalization is there only recourse Trumpers have.

Because believing Russia interfered in our election process is as whacky as believing pedo rings in the nonexistent basement of a pizza palor or that the Earth is flat. Exactly

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I'll have a look

Great. I had a spreadsheet I was categorizing stuff into. It became tedious after a while so I stopped categorizing. It was a whole lotta nothing. As I went through more and more of those ads, I realized how terrible the US Propaganda machine is. Mostly just Democrats mad about Trump winning making those ads into something they never were.



Originally posted by Putinbot1
did you look at the overlap with useful fools like Infowars and the idea of putting extreme views out there through actors on web forums etc. Not being a dick mate, but if you did, people would be interested. Link me up

If you know how to parse through that information and could come up with something actionable, the CIA and Federal Security Service (successor to KGB, in Russia) would probably detain you and force you to teach them how.

Until then, how about not moving the goalposts or trying to toss a red herring into the conversation?

Probably stick with what I was talking about. We can start a new thread and talk about how AI can be used to do what you're talking about. It was the subject to one of the episodes in House of Cards, I believe.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Great. I had a spreadsheet I was categorizing stuff into. It became tedious after a while, so I stopped categorizing. It was a whole lot of nothing.





If you know how to parse through that information and could come up with something actionable, the CIA and Federal Security Service (successor to KGB, in Russia) would probably detain you and force you to teach them how.

Until then, how about not moving the goalposts or trying to toss a red herring into the conversation?

Probably stick with what I was talking about. We can start a new thread and talk about how AI can be used to do what you're talking about. It was the subject to one of the episodes in House of Cards, I believe. i'm not tossing a red herring in mate, the main thrust of the article i posted is the chaotic cascade effect the Russians were looking to do. I think the memes themselves may have done nothing a climate was perhaps being created to introduce extreme idea's to the mainstream. So people discuss said idea's and more radical ideas could be added. Whilst the Russians were happier with either Bernie or Trump; they wanted the people questioning the entire structure. With a slant towards the far right. I thinknonly post Muller can the rightvquestions be asked.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
i'm not tossing a red herring in mate, the main thrust of the article i posted is the chaotic cascade effect the Russians were looking to do. I think the memes themselves may have done nothing a climate was perhaps being created to introduce extreme idea's to the mainstream. So people discuss said idea's and more radical ideas could be added. Whilst the Russians were happier with either Bernie or Trump; they wanted the people questioning the entire structure. With a slant towards the far right. I thinknonly post Muller can the rightvquestions be asked.

I'm still open to reading arguments for how you think the majority of that propaganda; which was about how Native Americans should be valued, black people are important, immigrants are people, too; caused Hillary Clinton to lose the election.

I'm interested to see how a Black Lives Matter ad on Instagram, which got 2400 views and 24 "taps" resulted in Hillary Clinton losing the election especially when those ads were targeted in non-battleground states.


I've setup your argument, perfectly. All you have to do is make an evidenced based argument. It's very easy to prove your position...if the evidence is actually there. Stay away from opinion pieces and shoddy headlines. Go straight to the evidence.

Originally posted by Robtard
Equalization is the only move Trumpers have.



Bring me great joy to see Trump still triggers you on a daily basis

Originally posted by dadudemon
I'm still open to reading arguments for how you think the majority of that propaganda; which was about how Native Americans should be valued, black people are important, immigrants are people, too; caused Hillary Clinton to lose the election.

I'm interested to see how a Black Lives Matter and on Instagram, which got 2400 views and 24 "taps" resulted in Hillary Clinton losing the election mainly when those ads were targeted in non-battleground states.


I've set up your argument, correctly. All you have to do is make an evidence-based argument. It's effortless to prove your position...if the evidence is there. Stay away from opinion pieces and shoddy headlines. Go straight to the evidence. I think we are talking about two different things, because what I'm talking about is still ongoing and aimed to shift perception, not just get Trump in, the two are part of a larger whole.https://www.scmp.com/news/world/united-states-canada/article/2178483/russian-disinformation-campaign-help-donald-trump

You and us are still being undermined. This is a long game.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I think we are talking about two different things, because what I'm talking about is still ongoing and aimed to shift perception, not just get Trump in, the two are part of a larger whole.https://www.scmp.com/news/world/united-states-canada/article/2178483/russian-disinformation-campaign-help-donald-trump

You and us are still being undermined. This is a long game.

How many times has Britain interfered in elections in the past 50 years?

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I think we are talking about two different things, because what I'm talking about is still ongoing and aimed to shift perception, not just get Trump in, the two are part of a larger whole.https://www.scmp.com/news/world/united-states-canada/article/2178483/russian-disinformation-campaign-help-donald-trump

You and us are still being undermined. This is a long game.

Okay, fair enough, then. My apologies.


Supra beat me to the next point, then.

China, Japan, the UK, Canada, Mexico: all countries doing the same work but arguably in far far vaster resource quantities than Russia. The Chinese are purchasing up holding interests in multiple American companies that have large public-sway.

Where are the news headlines about those? Why isn't this what everyone is talking about? It's far more important and larger of a problem.

We can start with Mexico, if you'd like. Then work our way up to China. IIRC, Mexico spends the least out of the top countries, influencing our politics and business. But it still greatly eclipses Russia.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Okay, fair enough, then. My apologies.


Supra beat me to the next point, then.

China, Japan, the UK, Canada, Mexico: all countries doing the same work but arguably in far vaster resource quantities than Russia. The Chinese are purchasing up holding interests in multiple American companies that have large public-sway.

Where are the news headlines about those? Why isn't this what everyone is talking about? It's far more important and larger of a problem.

We can start with Mexico if you'd like. Then work our way up to China. IIRC, Mexico spends the least out of the top countries, influencing our politics and business. But it still greatly eclipses Russia. Britain and the US will always influence each other unduly. You created Rock music; we improved it with the Beatles etc. You created comic books we developed them with the likes of Morrison, Ellis, Moore, Gaiman, Millar etc. You created Hip Hop; we improved it with Grime. We gave you a lot of your language and culture and... I sort of jest here, but whether Star likes it, we intertwined. Are we allies? Usually, do we share the same values? Generally.

Are Russia and China your traditional allies? Mexico is a neighbour. Do you think Putin had forgotten and forgiven the US, despite the 20 Billion in his bank account he was head of the KGB when the Soviet Union collapsed? It was on his watch.

Your secret services certainly don't see Russia as an ally in the way they see the UK, even if you President does allow his son to forget talking to Russians etc.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Britain and the US will always influence each other unduly. You created Rock music; we improved it with the Beatles etc. You created comic books we developed them with the likes of Simon Furman, Morrison, Ellis, Moore, Gaiman, Millar etc. You created Hip Hop; we improved it with Grime. We gave you a lot of your language and culture and... I sort of jest here, but whether Star likes it, we intertwined. Are we allies? Usually, do we share the same values? Generally.

Are Russia and China your traditional allies? Mexico is a neighbour. Do you think Putin had forgotten and forgiven the US, despite the 20 Billion in his bank account he was head of the KGB when the Soviet Union collapsed? It was on his watch.

Your secret services certainly don't see Russia as an ally in the way they see the UK, even if you President does allow his son to forget talking to Russians etc.


Little edit for posterity.

It's like he's f*cktarded. Damn.

Originally posted by Surtur
It's like he's f*cktarded. Damn.

Surt only just noticing I'm ****tarded.

Originally posted by cdtm
Surt only just noticing I'm ****tarded. I think he's angry ad hominem is at me mate. ,)

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Britain and the US will always influence each other unduly. You created Rock music; we improved it with the Beatles etc. You created comic books we developed them with the likes of Morrison, Ellis, Moore, Gaiman, Millar etc. You created Hip Hop; we improved it with Grime. We gave you a lot of your language and culture and... I sort of jest here, but whether Star likes it, we intertwined. Are we allies? Usually, do we share the same values? Generally.

Are Russia and China your traditional allies? Mexico is a neighbour. Do you think Putin had forgotten and forgiven the US, despite the 20 Billion in his bank account he was head of the KGB when the Soviet Union collapsed? It was on his watch.

Your secret services certainly don't see Russia as an ally in the way they see the UK, even if you President does allow his son to forget talking to Russians etc.

So how long do we keep this cold war going, though?

It ended almost 30 years ago.

Economically, Mexico is harming the US far more than Russia.

China is harming the US more than the rest of the world combined.

Yet, we still focus media on big scary Russia.


If Democrats really cared about US Sovereignty, they wouldn't tolerate foreign interests and interference in any of our elections even from our allies. But you don't see the news covering the tens of millions the UK spent on our US election, do you? Why is that?

Why don't you read about UK Collusion unless it's from conspiracy theory nutjobs?

Originally posted by dadudemon
So how long do we keep this cold war going, though?

It ended almost 30 years ago.

Economically, Mexico is harming the US far more than Russia.

China is harming the US more than the rest of the world combined.

Yet, we still focus media on big scary Russia.


If Democrats really cared about US Sovereignty, they wouldn't tolerate foreign interests and interference in any of our elections even from our allies. But you don't see the news covering the tens of millions the UK spent on our US election, do you? Why is that?

Why don't you read about UK Collusion unless it's from conspiracy theory nutjobs?

Indeed DDM why don't you unless it's from conspiracy nutjobs. Will reply tomorrow mate properly, always a pleasure, I enjoy our polite and pleasant discussions. Have a good night!

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Indeed DDM why don't you unless it's from conspiracy nutjobs. Will reply tomorrow mate properly, always a pleasure, I enjoy our polite and pleasant discussions. Have a good night!

You too. Kiss the wife a bit more because 25% of the population has no one to love.

Need to make an incel dating app. I thought of it first, no stealies.

#nofap

Originally posted by dadudemon
So how long do we keep this cold war going, though?

It ended almost 30 years ago.

Economically, Mexico is harming the US far more than Russia.

China is harming the US more than the rest of the world combined.

We still focus media on big scary Russia.


If Democrats cared about US Sovereignty, they wouldn't tolerate foreign interests and interference in any of our elections even from our allies. But you don't see the news covering the tens of millions the UK spent on our US election, do you? Why is that?

Why don't you read about UK Collusion unless it's from conspiracy theory nutjobs? China and India are destined to inherit the world. It's becoming inevitable. The UK for all its internal faults wants the America of Old and the Britain of old; it has your best interests at heart... As it has its own. Unfortunately, the ship may have sailed for freedom and democracy with the resurgence of popularist leaders in it for themselves. They are everywhere, not just Russia, Turkey and Egypt. You have one; we may get one; they result in enormous problems for freedom. And yeah, I kissed and hugged the wife muchly.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
China and India are destined to inherit the world. It's becoming inevitable. The UK for all its internal faults wants the America of Old and the Britain of old; it has your best interests at heart... As it has its own. Unfortunately, the ship may have sailed for freedom and democracy with the resurgence of popularist leaders in it for themselves. They are everywhere, not just Russia, Turkey and Egypt. You have one; we may get one; they result in enormous problems for freedom. And yeah, I kissed and hugged the wife muchly.

It's not that I disagree with any of that. But allowing any other country to directly interfere and influence our elections should be considered a threat and a negative.

The US needs better anti-corruption laws and multiple provisions in the Anti-Corruption Act would force political activists to not be able to hide their activities. This kind of thing would be a non-issue if the ACA was passed. Which is what the "Represent Us" movement is about.

Originally posted by dadudemon
It's not that I disagree with any of that. But allowing any other country to directly interfere and influence our elections should be considered a threat and a negative.

The US needs better anti-corruption laws and various provisions in the Anti-Corruption Act would force political activists not to be able to hide their activities. This kind of thing would be a non-issue if the ACA was passed. Which is what the "Represent Us" movement is about. I don't disagree, Brexit in the UK tapped into a misplaced pride and a hatred of change. I know many people who were Brexiteers, and I wouldn't want to be any of them. Those people didn't need much manipulation to have a set of views they had repressed for 20 years built around ideas that no longer fit the global society nations function in but fit well the leafy predominantly white Suburbs of Britain they live in. They just needed to be told it was O.K. to spout rhetoric outmoded in the '80s when I was a teen. The influencers did that and are still doing that. They are saying things are O.K. that clearly aren't. This is the legacy of the continuing interference and yes. No one should be interfering, but reporting a story with the BBC is undoubtedly different from offering the dirt on an opponent, isn't it?

It's not that Brexiteers might have principled reasons for opposing you, no they're just racist idiots who are irrationally afraid of change.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
It's not that Brexiteers might have principled reasons for opposing you, no they're just racist idiots who are irrationally afraid of change.

They can't have principles cuz they are far right.

How am I defining "far right"? Just like they do: anyone who disagrees with even a snippet of progressive policy. Purify yourself, lest ye be cast down.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
It's not that Brexiteers might have principled reasons for opposing you, no they're just racist idiots who are irrationally afraid of change. Pretty much.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/08/vote-leave-racism-brexit-uncivil-war-channel-4

giggle

Surts still triggered lol.

More than two genders.

Originally posted by Impediment
More than two genders.

https://media.giphy.com/media/Nm8ZPAGOwZUQM/giphy.gif

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I don't disagree, Brexit in the UK tapped into a misplaced pride and a hatred of change. I know many people who were Brexiteers, and I wouldn't want to be any of them. Those people didn't need much manipulation to have a set of views they had repressed for 20 years built around ideas that no longer fit the global society nations function in but fit well the leafy predominantly white Suburbs of Britain they live in. They just needed to be told it was O.K. to spout rhetoric outmoded in the '80s when I was a teen. The influencers did that and are still doing that. They are saying things are O.K. that clearly aren't. This is the legacy of the continuing interference and yes. No one should be interfering, but reporting a story with the BBC is undoubtedly different from offering the dirt on an opponent, isn't it?


You are tapping into an important topic:

Is it really free speech if you can influence the outcome of millions of people's lives, secretly? That seems like conspiracy speech. Not freedom of speech.

If people can secretly influence the entire country, that should be consideration corruption. These things should be above board. Out in the open for all to see.

From what I understand of the Brexit controversy, quite a few secret things happened to influence an outcome. I want those donors and players to be brought out in the open.

Originally posted by dadudemon
You are tapping into an important topic:

Is it really free speech if you can influence the outcome of millions of people's lives, secretly? That seems like conspiracy speech. Not freedom of speech.

If people can secretly influence the entire country, that should be consideration corruption. These things should be above board. Out in the open for all to see.

From what I understand of the Brexit controversy, quite a few secret things happened to influence an outcome. I want those donors and players to be brought out in the open. We had blatant lis told. The lies weren't one sided but the number from leave werr magnitudes higher.

https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/list-of-brexit-lies

Christianity