The deficit is actually down $100 billion since last year, but I guess it’s totally cool to just lie about shit to make yourself seem like the fiscally responsible candidate.
“…he then talked for 35 minutes about how 9/11 and Jan 6th were inside jobs, vaccines cause invisible brain tumors in 100% of people, and how chemtrails made his children Trans.”
“…he then talked for 35 minutes about how 9/11 and Jan 6th were inside jobs, vaccines cause invisible brain tumors in 100% of people, and how chemtrails made his children Trans.”
I didn’t see that in the article. References or links?
Sure gimme a few minutes. I’ll be right back.
Just a reminder that a cornerstone of American libertarianism is the privatization of waterways.
Libertarianism is nestles wet dream.
I recommend you all tag this person so you can see just how much they spam in an attempt to dillute the vote
If you actually see their post history, they look like a normal human and not a MAGA chud or tankie in disguise.
Don’t be a jerk.
I recommend you all tag this person so you can see just how much they spam in an attempt to dillute the vote
I don’t spam at all.
And I didn’t write the article. And also, do you realize with party Libertarian votes would take away from? Think about that.
And again, I didn’t write the article. So if you are mad that things like this make the news, feel free to write the publishers of the news articles. This community is for posting of political news articles.
And this is a political news article. If it breaks the rules of the community, then the mods would remove it.
Posting political news articles to a Lemmy political news community is NOT spam. Please stay civil in your comments rather than throwing out baseless accusations.
In the last 24 hours you have made 34 posts. You absolutely are spamming.
Is there a rule against how many posts I’ve made? And most of the posts are IN ONE CONVERSATION IN ONE THREAD, that has had me and the poster just instantly replying back and forth to each other.
And I also posted several articles to the c/science sub. Some articles to the Green party sub. Some here, and some to a Socialist sub. Both subs of which I created and moderate.
What part of that is “spamming” to you?
In fact, go on, and cut and past the “34 posts” I have made right here to this thread. Let’s let everyone see what I’m posting. They could always just check my profile and history as well, but hey, I’m cool with you cutting/pasting my comments here for all to see.
Which parts are “spamming”?
I said posts, not comments. You’ve made 34 posts in the last 24 hours. Lemmy has maybe 50 new posts every 6 hours. The bottom half of my feed is you and Jimmy Dore posting MLM tier hack bullshit.
You are free to do as you please, but you absolutely are spamming. Maybe if you slowed your roll a little it might come across as less desperate and pathetic?
Then again, given how defensive your response to my last comment was, I doubt you are capable of modifying your behaviour, even if it would help you in the long run.
You are free to do as you please, but you absolutely are spamming.
Posting different NEWS articles about different subjects to different subs is NOT spamming.
You realize they are news articles written by news orgs and posted to news subs, right?
From latest findings in Neanderthal remains, to space news, to quantum physics, to a college starting a new lab, to candidates being on the ballet for the upcoming election. Nothing for sale. No links for sale. Not selling anything. Not implying selling anything. Nothing that gets any kickback for anything.
They are from physics, science, and political news sites.
How in ANY use of the word “spamming” does that count as spam.
Now is really seems you are upset that I post a lot of articles. That’s NOT against the rules.
In fact, it’s recommended so that we can strengthen our subs with diverse, intellectual posts. Lemmy WANTS us to post more content.
If you are mad about that, then maybe Lemmy isn’t a great place for you?
Maybe if you slowed your roll a little it might come across as less desperate and pathetic?
What makes me posting news and science articles “desperate and pathetic”? This is a social forum and the sites I am posting to are sites that request news articles.
I didn’t write the news articles, friend. I just am posting them for people to read or ignore.
Then again, given how defensive your response to my last comment was, I doubt you are capable of modifying your behavior, even if it would help you in the long run.
I wasn’t defensive. You said I was spamming, and I countered how I wasn’t spamming.
Again, POST THE LINKS, so everyone can see what you seem to think is “spamming.”
And you know, you can always just not read them, right?
And how would not posting news articles that I find interesting, “help” me “in the long run”?
You realize this community is based on user-posted content. Right?
If any of the subs I posted to, thought the articles were against the rules, they would remove them.
If you have a complaint about what and when a news article can be posted to a sub, then may I suggest you bring that up to the moderation team of that sub?
Jesus look at the wall of cope you just posted. This is not healthy.
Spam is a question of volume, not intent. You are spamming. No amount of bargaining with me will change what you are doing.
If you want people to listen to you, don’t treat the post button like a sluice gate you can open at will to shower us all with your poorly considered facebook moms group level boomer faux activist fecal matter masquerading as a political position.
Edit: and the wall of text wasn’t enough. You had to reply TO YOUR OWN COMMENT to get in one final zinger. How do you not see how embarrassing this behaviour is?
Jesus look at the wall of cope you just posted.
Explaingin to you how your saying that I am “spamming” is a “wall of cope”?!
Spam is a question of volume, not intent.
Oh, ok, so it is a volume thing for you. So can’t you just not read them? I’m unsure what you are upset about. Don’t you just skip articles that you aren’t interested in?
No amount of bargaining with me will change what you are doing.
Nor will it change what I am doing. I will continue to post subs and help this fediverse the best I know how to.
If you want people to listen to you,
What makes you think that is a concern of mine. I 100 percent respect your right to not read any posts I put on. In fact, I wouldn’t expect you to read anything you don’t want to.
And again, feel free to post all the links of this “spam” that I have been posting.
to shower us all with your poorly considered facebook moms group level boomer faux activist fecal matter masquerading as a political position.
Reported for uncivilty.
One of the rules of this sub is to be respectful and civil in our discussions here. If you disagree with me, that is fine. But when you get personal and call names, that is disrespectful.
If you can remain civil, then I would have to kindly ask you to not engage in debate with me. Thank you.
You are free to do as you please,
Thank you. And I am doing as I please. And the rules here allow it.
This Lemmy community explores and respects diverse viewpoints.
Posting a political news article to a political news community is not spam.
“The Libertarian Party’s platform calls for significantly reducing the scope of the federal government by getting rid of regulations and cutting spending.”
I’m open… which regulations? Which spending?
How do Libertarians do again?
2020:
Joe Biden 81,283,501 - 51.31% 306 EC votes.
Donald Trump 74,223,975 - 46.85% 232 EC votes.
Jo Jorgensen - Libertarian - 1,865,535 - 1.18% 0 Howie Hawkins - Green - 407,068 - 0.26% 02016:
Donald Trump 62,984,828 - 46.09% - 304 EC votes.
Hillary Clinton 65,853,514 - 48.18% - 227 EC votes
Gary Johnson - Libertarian - 4,489,341 - 3.28% - 0
Jill Stein - Green - 1,457,218 - 1.07% - 02012:
Barack Obama - 65,915,795 - 51.06% - 332
Mitt Romney - 60,933,504 - 47.20% - 206
Gary Johnson - Libertarian - 1,275,971 - 0.99% - 0
Jill Stein - Green - 469,627 - 0.36% - 02008:
Barack Obama - 69,498,516 - 52.93% - 365
John McCain - 59,948,323 - 45.65% - 173
Ralph Nader - Independent - 739,034 - 0.56% - 0
Bob Barr - Libertarian - 523,715 - 0.40% - 0
Chuck Baldwin - Constitution - 199,750 - 0.15% - 0
Cynthia McKinney - Green - 161,797 - 0.12% - 02004:
George W. Bush - 62,040,610 - 50.73% - 286
John Kerry - 59,028,444 - 48.27% - 251
John Edwards - 5 - 0.00% - 1
Ralph Nader - Independent - 465,650 - 0.38% - 0
Michael Badnarik - Libertarian - 397,265 - 0.32% - 0
Michael Peroutka - Constitution - 143,630 - 0.12% - 0
David Cobb - Green - 119,859 - 0.10% - 02000:
George W. Bush - 50,456,002 - 47.86% - 271
Al Gore - 50,999,897 - 48.38% - 266
Ralph Nader - Green - 2,882,955 - 2.74% -
0
Pat Buchanan - Reform - 448,895 - 0.43% - 0
Harry Browne - Libertarian - 384,431 - 0.36% - 0Edit Yes, you read that right. In 2004, one faithless elector cast an electoral college ballot for John Edwards. It’s commonly believed this was an error, but it counted anyway. Meaning a mistaken EC vote has counted more than all Libertarian and Green candidates combined in the past 1/4 century.
Because what we all need is our food and water to be even more poisonous. To burn to death cuz we couldn’t afford our subscription to firefighters service this month. Or to die of sepsis because of no medical regs at the hospital.
Right-Libertarians aren’t serious people. At least not any more serious than a 14 year old ancap.
Hillary didn’t and it cost her the election. Any reasonable, well-informed person should have voted against Trump, and she acted as if that applied to most voters.
If voters were well informed, the GOP wouldn’t exist. The two parties would be progressives and liberals. Treating voters as a rational group is, in itself, irrational.
This Lemmy community explores and respects diverse viewpoints. I wouldn’t advocate that the GOP shouldn’t exist. Just as I wouldn’t advocate that the DNC shouldn’t exist.
And I believe 3rd parties are good for a healthy society.
The counterpoint to progressive action is moderation. The GOP do not represent useful ideas to a happy populous. They rely on lies and a skewed perception of reality. I don’t respect a party whose core values are harming others, and I live in a red state so I live through that every day.
I accept and respect various diverse viewpoints on how to best serve the country, including actual libertarian values. I would be more than happy if Joe Manchin was a typical opposing argument to progressive ideals.
The GOP do not represent useful ideas to a happy populous.
In YOUR opinion (and mine!). Almost half of the country disagrees with you though.
I respect people’s right to vote for any one they want to vote for, even if it’s a Republican.
Well yeah, I don’t disagree with the legal right to vote for a candidate that wants to hurt people.
I still think the GOP only exists due to ignorance. And I won’t respect their values.
Well yeah, I don’t disagree with the legal right to vote for a candidate that wants to hurt people.
That’s YOUR opinion. Many others don’t agree with you. That’s what I am saying.
I’m confused. You’re saying that some people don’t believe in the right to vote for their candidate?
Obviously Trump is an exception because of the 14th amendment. But in general…
I’m confused. You’re saying that some people don’t believe in the right to vote for their candidate?
No, I was referencing your point of legal right to vote for a candidate that “wants to hurt people.”
Not everyone thinks that the GOP wants to “hurt people.” That’s your opinion. I mean, it’s a strong opinion of yours, but an opinion nonetheless.
Which you are welcome to. But the people who DON’T think that, have a right to their opinions as well.
The news source of this post could not be identified. Please check the source yourself. Media Bias Fact Check | bot support
