ObjectivityIncarnate

They’re not employed by me. Wages are between them and their boss. Any more from anywhere else should not be treated as anything other than the optionally-given gift it is.

Tipping culture essentially amounts to legalized wage discrimination.

Both 2024 and 2016 were total punts by the Democratic party, elections that could have easily been won in large margins, but defeat pulled from the jaws of victory in a way that seemingly only they can.

People know if they live in battleground/swing states. And still, the fact is that despite Trump getting FEWER votes than last time (which is an election he LOST, by the way), he WON this time, simply because millions of blue voters in those key states decided they’d rather not vote at ALL, than vote for the Democrats’ candidate.

There is no excuse for the results of either of these elections, honestly. It’s fucking embarrassing.

Thanks for actually producing something substantial.

Of course, the fact remains that there is already more than enough 100% confirmed stuff to nail him on. Unfortunately the hyper-short attention span of most people today means they usually care more about how new a thing is, than how severe it is.

Cool quotes of things I never said, liar.

Linking to my entire profile and repeating your lie doesn’t cut it. Cite me. Cite a single sentence of me praising Trump. Quote me.

You can’t. Admit it, liar.

The grand irony is that just yesterday, I told a friend that even if Harris does win, if it’s not a blowout, I’m still going to be kinda pissed, because there should be no fucking way Trump should even come close to winning this election.

The electoral map should look like blue Reagan.

But no, because I have actual morals and values and don’t suddenly become okay with dishonesty based on who the target is, your simple binary mind just can’t conceive of me being anything other than one of the ‘bad guys’ on the ‘other team’.

Good, glad to see (well, hear…you know what I mean) it!

But if this is all the bad stuff, why was the guy talking about “hundreds of hours”? No need to exaggerate, just get it out there, you know? Actually, one better: announce it AS you release it, especially when there are multiple instances of similar claims that never materialized. The worst thing you can do with someone like Trump is ‘cry wolf’ yourself and cultivate skepticism. Only makes the real/unexaggerated stuff harder to ‘stick’.

I like how you assumed I was going to try to move the goalposts, though.

so much praise.

What praise? Link it.

you’re incredibly partisan

Stating a fact that favors one group over another isn’t what it means to be partisan.

feeling-driven

I have never taken a stance here that was rooted in “feelings”. I make a very active effort to draw my conclusions based on the evidence I have access to, and failing that, clear, consistent logic.

Show me where I’ve ever done otherwise, if you can.

pretty rude to people who criticise guess what? No, not science, not facts, not rationality, but Donald Trump

Who the target of a lie is does not affect my willingness to correct the lie. That’s called having values, instead of a political team. That’s what it means to be objective.

There is a lot of justified criticism to be levied against Trump, based on facts of what he’s actually done. But there is also a lot of bullshit that’s swallowed whole by people who don’t care what’s true, but will just accept, without scrutiny, anything claimed about him that’s negative.

When I know something is inaccurate, I will say so. Who or what is inaccurate about, is irrelevant, to me. I’d just as quickly debunk bullshit about Harris, or anyone else if I saw it.

the fact that it makes you cross that lots of women are checking that their husbands can’t find out how they voted, or even that Google thought they might, and that you’re calling people names for thinking it might be happening, doesn’t particularly convince me that this is not happening.

Pff, it doesn’t make me cross, I’m simply bringing some facts to a table that’s gone off the deep end with alarmism, clearly because they don’t understand how trending algorithms work.

This is a manifestation of the exact same phenomenon as people thinking, for example, that there is more violent crime now than there was 50 years ago, based on the fact that they are exposed to so much more crime reporting now via the Internet than ever before. I’m the guy who’s coming along saying “actually, all the evidence shows violent crime is way down now compared to then, your recency and exposure biases are just tricking you into thinking differently.”

You’re shooting the messenger trying to clue you in to the fact that your assumptions are clouding your judgement, nothing more.

Okay, so women asking about their husbands baptizing them is right there in the top 5 suggestions beginning with that phrase.

Think for a moment about how many women you really think are actually googling that, and that’ll give you an idea of how many women are actually googling this.

It really doesn’t take a very high absolute number of people to make a Google search trend, especially when it’s a search based on a headline that went viral during an election season.

Fact is, if these hundreds of hours of incriminating audio existed, and especially in the possession of an opponent, they’d have been released already, because there is every reason to do so and no reason not to.

That’s all there is to it.

Not that it even really matters. To say there is no shortage of genuine, provable bad/immoral action taken by the man is a colossal understatement. We don’t NEED to latch on to bullshit like this that’s obviously just trying to make headlines. Hammer home the shit that CAN’T be plausibly denied.

I swear, if this dipshit actually wins this election, after everything that’s happened…

But no, let’s all pretend he was sucking an invisible dick on stage instead, let’s spend a lot of time on that. It’s like you WANT to lose.

So frustrating.

Learn how trending on Google works. Then realize that right under the voting thing on the list of suggested autocompletes is a question about being baptized by your husband.

Do you think tons and tons of women are Googling that, too? How many women do you think are out there who got baptized by their husbands?

How gullible can people be?

Nothing came out that proved anything, lol. “Hundreds of hours of audio but I won’t share any of it even though the election is right around the corner”, huh?

Please.

Still waiting on that n-word tape, and the pee tape, and so on, by the way.

Trump has said and done enough stupid shit without people like this making up random bullshit and never producing the evidence they pretend to have, while idiots like the OOP run with it.

“imagine” is the key word.

Or, much more likely, it became a meme and most of the people searching it are doing so for the same reason you are, like everything else that ‘goes viral’ on the Internet in 2024.

Don’t be so gullible.

P.S. Also in the top recommendations is “can my husband baptize me?” This is truly a situation that also affects millions upon millions of women. Or maybe Google trends don’t actually mean shit in the real world.

And which orifice did you pass this take from, exactly?

It isn’t really absurd though, I don’t think. If one genuinely believes abortion is murder, it makes perfect sense for that person to not be pro-choice, the same way the rest of us are against people being allowed to legally kill newborns. Whether that individual person is capable of being pregnant does not actually factor into it at all, it’s just a matter of what one believes about how the unborn should be ‘considered’ (i.e. baby vs. ‘clump of cells’).

I have no problem with abortion, so I don’t agree with pro-lifers, but I am not at all confused by it. The opposition to abortion directly follows from their beliefs about the unborn.

That said, though the two are often conflated, just because someone is pro-choice doesn’t necessarily mean they’re okay with abortion, they could very well be someone who believes more strongly in the individual’s right to choose, than in everyone copying them. I’ve met a large number of women who are fiercely pro-choice but have said they couldn’t bear to abort their own pregnancy, even if it was unwanted.

It isn’t really shocking if you look at it objectively and see from their perspective for a moment.

A genuine pro-lifer, by definition, believes that abortion is morally equivalent to murdering a newborn, because the unborn is equivalent to a baby, to them.

So imagine how such a person would read what you just said:

It is perfectly fine being against murder for personal beliefs, but to be against giving others the choice to murder is shocking.

It’s understandable that the above sentiment would come off like the words of a madman.

Because there is truly no ‘debate’ to actually be had about whether or not one believes the unborn ‘count’ as babies, it’s completely futile to argue with pro-lifers on that axis.

Nor should one be surprised that they are ‘anti choice for others’ when itI comes to this, as I am sure you are against others having the choice to murder at will, regardless of whether you wish to murder anyone.

It’s like saying that it’s shocking that a hypothetical group of people who believe theft is the worst possible crime you can commit, believe in capital punishment for thieves. Sure, it sounds bizarre to everyone else, but it shouldn’t be surprising at all that they feel that way, given that they believe.

Those numbers are horseshit though, lol. There is no significant difference between the sexes on this topic:

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/fact-sheet/public-opinion-on-abortion/

Majorities of both men (61%) and women (64%) express support for legal abortion.

Abortion isn’t a ‘battle of the sexes’ topic, and you should be wary of anyone perpetuating this myth. In my experience, those most likely to do so, are those who see men in general as ‘the enemy’, and use this narrative as a tool to confirm and spread their bias.

The average wealth could be $1,990,000 and they’d still be incorrect, lol (assuming the minimum value for “multimilion”, $2 million).

The 50 richest people in the US have a collective net worth of about $3 trillion. If you could wave a magic wand and turn that net worth (which is not an amount of cash money) directly into cash, something that obviously can’t actually be done, but I digress, and you distributed that $3 trillion evenly among the ~340 million people in the US, everyone would get about $8800, lmao. Not quite multimillionaire level.

It amuses me how confidently people will state complete bullshit, even when it’s so easily debunked.