Message from @Recombined
Discord ID: 513812066084061199
@ExternalPepsi yeah I'm starting to wonder if Trump has any goals at all. So many things he could literally EO.
Holy cow
What a great tweet.
IKR? HAHAHAHA!
t right next to f on a qwerty keyboard
God I hope it was intentional
that's the irony of it. Trump does it on purpose, man.
Lmfao
Yeah that has to be purposeful. We'll see if he deletes though. Sadly, the checkmarks of twitter might be correct that Mueller was confirmed in the Senate but I'm not 100%.
He was confirmed as FBI director in 2001. Not the same.
Right
But, you know, lefties will grasp onto that technicality.
Otherwise we could say: "Kavanaugh didn't need a 2nd Senate confirmation for SCOTUS, because he was confirmed to the Senate as a district judge."
Different (or higher) jobs need new confirmation, sorry checkmarks. You're wrong, Trump is right (again)!
Just like how Congress has to confirm every new star a General is nominated for.
Good points.
@Grossly Incandescent The gumball guy is cool, but everyone should have a basic version of this argument memorized since it's so simple and effective. The way @NateDahl76 summarized it was well said, though there's other ways to explain it, too.
It's probably one of the strongest arguments we have, because it breaks the frame. Generally both sides in the immigration debate argue assuming that allowing immigration does help people from the third world, it's just a question of whether it's worth it for us.
It's especially effective combined with the brain drain argument. Not only are we doing nothing to alleviate poverty, but we're making it worse. This really messes with them.
All well and good... but when was the last time you argued with a leftist who was arguing in good faith?
The only people you can really reach are people that want to be
What did they mean by this?
(and no, I didn't bring IE stickers)
@Recombined Last time I argued with a leftist who was arguing in good faith was probably in class this quarter. I mean, their arguments are shitty, but I wouldn't say it's bad faith.
Leftists who argue in good faith aren't leftists. They're apolitical people who go with the flow.
Interesting. I've found genuine far leftists to be easier to speak to than NPCs a lot of the time.
To whomever can answer this, do businesses have requirements for having mixed race advertisements? I see it everywhere, especially white women with black men, and the thought that almost every marketing team at almost every business makes their ads this way just by their own choice seems unlikely. Then again, some businesses don't do it, so is it a choice? Does anyone know if the businesses even do the ads themselves?
no lol
Consider this. A company doesn't do mixed race ads, it just makes normal ones with ratios of people that you would see in real life. Then someone points out that they don't have any mixed race ads, and leftists start a big conspiracy theory about how that company is "racist".
@Gregory - NC i have read that it's because blacks and women are more susceptible to advertising which is why companies feature them in so many ads. Although personally I think there's much more to it than that.
@Gregory - NC I feel like the “requirements” are self imposed. These people no longer need a quota or outside pressure to do these things.
There are two new shows on CBS where the plot revolves around a white guy adapting to an all black society
@Jacob @TV @Grossly Incandescent Thanks for feedback. I’ll read the counter currents article when I get back from work.
@Gregory - NC it's really apparent on clothing sites which use almost all black models yet feature styles and brands they would never wear.
well here's the thing
no one is going to criticize a company for having too much diversity unless they want to be branded racist