Political cartoon and meme thread for both sides of the spectrum.

[CHEEZY17]

Find where Biden's economic based bills say Bidenomics, you might learn a thing or two about nomenclature.

The current administration has embraced and pushed the term. The erroneous "Dont Say Gay Bill" moniker used by The Left was intentionally meant to mislead dupes.
Are you saying thats what the Shit Show administration is doing here?

"And thanks to Bidenomics, we are working our infrastructure and supply chains even stronger."
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-roo ... pierre-47/

[media]https://www.c-span.org/video/?c5076176/ ... bidenomics [/media]

[dot]

The current administration has embraced and pushed the term.

Not the point, it's about how names get attached. Google the definition if you aren't clear about that, and since you clearly can't do critical thinking, substitute Bidenomics with Reaganomics or trickle down economics.

[CHEEZY17]

The current administration has embraced and pushed the term.

Not the point, it's about how names get attached. Google the definition if you aren't clear about that, and since you clearly can't do critical thinking, substitute Bidenomics with Reaganomics or trickle down economics.

The Left pushed an intentionally misleading term meant to gaslight people. The entire point of the "Dont say Gay" moniker was to dupe people into thinking thats what it was. And then they continued to use it, and still do, even after they were proven wrong.
"Reaganomics" or "Trickle Down economics" arent meant to mislead or gas-light.

[dot]

The Left pushed an intentionally misleading term meant to gaslight people. The entire point of the "Dont say Gay" moniker was to dupe people into thinking thats what it was. And then they continued to use it, and still do, even after they were proven wrong.
"Reaganomics" or "Trickle Down economics" arent meant to mislead or gas-light.

The bill, the movement, the animosity is all about gaslighting. Cry a river that a piece of hate legislation got labeled with an easy to identify sentiment / intent, it still comes down to how names are attached despite said monikers not being word for word literal transcriptions. Because just like how the referenced economic policies are referred to as such, that doesn't mean the nicknames are in the relevant pieces of legislation.

[CHEEZY17]

The Left pushed an intentionally misleading term meant to gaslight people. The entire point of the "Dont say Gay" moniker was to dupe people into thinking thats what it was. And then they continued to use it, and still do, even after they were proven wrong.
"Reaganomics" or "Trickle Down economics" arent meant to mislead or gas-light.

The bill, the movement, the animosity is all about gaslighting. Cry a river that a piece of hate legislation got labeled with an easy to identify sentiment / intent, it still comes down to how names are attached despite said monikers not being word for word literal transcriptions. Because just like how the referenced economic policies are referred to as such, that doesn't mean the nicknames are in the relevant pieces of legislation.

You should have saved yourself some typing and just said "I'm good with my party using a misleading moniker to dupe people."

[dot]

You should have saved yourself some typing and just said "I'm good with my party using a misleading moniker to dupe people."

Did they, or is it just more gaslighting from the gaslighters? Oh, and are we shifting to disliking our politicians for duping people? Cause boy, I tell ya, you must be pissed at yours then. I remember a certain wall Mexico was supposed to pay for, infrastructure week I mean month I mean year I mean 4 years, crowd sizes of dubious numbers, election rigging lies that lead to a violent insurrection at the capitol. Let's not forget your predetermined outcome obsession with a non government civilian that has duped you left and right and you still come begging for more. Wanna go back further? How about Iraq and... well, ya know what, the list is gonna get long. So how about we just end it with if duping the constituency is your red line, you got some self reflection to do.

[Ricrude]

Smh...you are giving me the opportunity to clear up exactly what my personal and political beliefs are so there is absolutely no question as to how you may perceive me? Thats rich...I had to think about this because you did something that you shouldn't have.

I've already addressed several of these things and if you have followed me then you would know...I have never supported Trump, but I am a conservative...leaning towards the middle. I do not condone either of the political cults... (that means the far left or right), I honestly don't think either faction is good for this nation and I've never accused the liberal left of being Nazis...but if they feel guilty so be it.

To the point of being easily misled...I have been guilty of posting memes, gifs, jpegs that I find interesting or just plain funny without comment to elicit response. It allows others to comment on that particular meme, gif, jpeg as they feel or wish they felt...even you. It does not reflect any particular view or stance you may assume that I take.

And yes, you assume... like calling into question something you obviously don't understand...your last line. It doesn't matter who is president or what party is in charge, I and others pledged allegiance to this nation and when I put on that uniform it was to serve and protect everyone regardless of race, religion, political affiliation, sexual orientation...etc., Including you and from all enemies foreign and domestic. Every man and woman who made a commitment to this country serves. When you take the oath everything else is secondary even if you don't like it. You don't choose, you do. You didn't call just me into question with that comment, but you called everyone else that has or is servings loyalty into question. Like we owe you or something...we don't owe you shit. We have already given you our service and, in some cases, lives so you can be some internet dumbass on a forum board that thinks he deserves an answer to every one of his obvious race/religious/political baiting remarks. If you had served you would have never considered that tact.

[saltydog]

Smh...you are giving me the opportunity to clear up exactly what my personal and political beliefs are so there is absolutely no question as to how you may perceive me? Thats rich...I had to think about this because you did something that you shouldn't have.

I've already addressed several of these things and if you have followed me then you would know...I have never supported Trump, but I am a conservative...leaning towards the middle. I do not condone either of the political cults... (that means the far left or right), I honestly don't think either faction is good for this nation and I've never accused the liberal left of being Nazis...but if they feel guilty so be it.

To the point of being easily misled...I have been guilty of posting memes, gifs, jpegs that I find interesting or just plain funny without comment to elicit response. It allows others to comment on that particular meme, gif, jpeg as they feel or wish they felt...even you. It does not reflect any particular view or stance you may assume that I take.

And yes, you assume... like calling into question something you obviously don't understand...your last line. It doesn't matter who is president or what party is in charge, I and others pledged allegiance to this nation and when I put on that uniform it was to serve and protect everyone regardless of race, religion, political affiliation, sexual orientation...etc., Including you and from all enemies foreign and domestic. Every man and woman who made a commitment to this country serves. When you take the oath everything else is secondary even if you don't like it. You don't choose, you do. You didn't call just me into question with that comment, but you called everyone else that has or is servings loyalty into question. Like we owe you or something...we don't owe you shit. We have already given you our service and, in some cases, lives so you can be some internet dumbass on a forum board that thinks he deserves an answer to every one of his obvious race/religious/political baiting remarks. If you had served you would have never considered that tact.

If you're a conservative veteran, do you receive government benefits?

[Animal]

its funny when people post like lawyers and ask questions they know the answer to. as if they are making some kind of larger point.

[B-Tender]

its funny when people post like lawyers and ask questions they know the answer to. as if they are making some kind of larger point.

Everything on this side of the site is a big game of "Gotchya!"

[saltydog]

its funny when people post like lawyers and ask questions they know the answer to. as if they are making some kind of larger point.

I would have expected you to call out Cheezy like this.

[CHEEZY17]

its funny when people post like lawyers and ask questions they know the answer to. as if they are making some kind of larger point.

I would have expected you to call out Cheezy like this.

My questions prove your cowardice and I wouldnt have to ask repeatedly if you'd simply answer.

[Ricrude]

Smh...you are giving me the opportunity to clear up exactly what my personal and political beliefs are so there is absolutely no question as to how you may perceive me? Thats rich...I had to think about this because you did something that you shouldn't have.

I've already addressed several of these things and if you have followed me then you would know...I have never supported Trump, but I am a conservative...leaning towards the middle. I do not condone either of the political cults... (that means the far left or right), I honestly don't think either faction is good for this nation and I've never accused the liberal left of being Nazis...but if they feel guilty so be it.

To the point of being easily misled...I have been guilty of posting memes, gifs, jpegs that I find interesting or just plain funny without comment to elicit response. It allows others to comment on that particular meme, gif, jpeg as they feel or wish they felt...even you. It does not reflect any particular view or stance you may assume that I take.

And yes, you assume... like calling into question something you obviously don't understand...your last line. It doesn't matter who is president or what party is in charge, I and others pledged allegiance to this nation and when I put on that uniform it was to serve and protect everyone regardless of race, religion, political affiliation, sexual orientation...etc., Including you and from all enemies foreign and domestic. Every man and woman who made a commitment to this country serves. When you take the oath everything else is secondary even if you don't like it. You don't choose, you do. You didn't call just me into question with that comment, but you called everyone else that has or is servings loyalty into question. Like we owe you or something...we don't owe you shit. We have already given you our service and, in some cases, lives so you can be some internet dumbass on a forum board that thinks he deserves an answer to every one of his obvious race/religious/political baiting remarks. If you had served you would have never considered that tact.

If you're a conservative veteran, do you receive government benefits?

I'm eligible but have never taken them. I'm very lucky with my health and career and think that there are those that need them way more than I do.

[saltydog]

its funny when people post like lawyers and ask questions they know the answer to. as if they are making some kind of larger point.

I would have expected you to call out Cheezy like this.

My questions prove your cowardice and I wouldnt have to ask repeatedly if you'd simply answer.

Your questions are incredibly irrelevant and asinine to keep asking.

Find some actual proof. Oh, you can't.

[stonedmegman]

[Ricrude]

lol

[dot]

Smh...you are giving me the opportunity to clear up exactly what my personal and political beliefs are so there is absolutely no question as to how you may perceive me? Thats rich...I had to think about this because you did something that you shouldn't have.

I've already addressed several of these things and if you have followed me then you would know...I have never supported Trump, but I am a conservative...leaning towards the middle. I do not condone either of the political cults... (that means the far left or right), I honestly don't think either faction is good for this nation and I've never accused the liberal left of being Nazis...but if they feel guilty so be it.

To the point of being easily misled...I have been guilty of posting memes, gifs, jpegs that I find interesting or just plain funny without comment to elicit response. It allows others to comment on that particular meme, gif, jpeg as they feel or wish they felt...even you. It does not reflect any particular view or stance you may assume that I take.

And yes, you assume... like calling into question something you obviously don't understand...your last line. It doesn't matter who is president or what party is in charge, I and others pledged allegiance to this nation and when I put on that uniform it was to serve and protect everyone regardless of race, religion, political affiliation, sexual orientation...etc., Including you and from all enemies foreign and domestic. Every man and woman who made a commitment to this country serves. When you take the oath everything else is secondary even if you don't like it. You don't choose, you do. You didn't call just me into question with that comment, but you called everyone else that has or is servings loyalty into question. Like we owe you or something...we don't owe you shit. We have already given you our service and, in some cases, lives so you can be some internet dumbass on a forum board that thinks he deserves an answer to every one of his obvious race/religious/political baiting remarks. If you had served you would have never considered that tact.

That's kinda the thing. I have observed your posting habits, and a lot of it does come out if not pro Trump then at least pro Trump causes. And mind you, that is not necessarily pro conservative except in name or identity only, lord knows not in practice. So that's not really leaning towards the middle, that's leaning towards the unraveling of our democracy. That's why I ask, if you are a vet that fought for our rights, why would you support the undoing of them? But let's get into the gritty details which is what I wanted you to discern for yourself. I'll do my best to keep this short.

Let's establish the baseline, without which there's no point in proceeding. Is our democracy at risk because of the previous president and the threat of another term should he swindle his way back in? First, the norms being broken, the outright corruption he exhibited from day one. Monetizing the office and the government to put our money in his pocket and the bank accounts of his businesses. That's an indisputable fact. Second, skipping all the everyday corrupt BS he did on the way in the vein of keeping this post as short as possible, did he try to usurp power by trying to stay in office because he lost the election? Also indisputable, he lost. And as it's unfolding before our eyes via the justice system, there was a multi pronged attack by Trump and his allies to change that outcome by way of fake electors, fake vote counts, fake conspiracy theories, culminating in a violent insurrection at the capitol designed to cause chaos to enable him to stay in power. This is what happened, but if you don't agree with reality, then that tells me all I need to know.

Moving on, your aims or beliefs here. You've shared a lot of things between the two sub forums, but when it comes to politics you lean conspiracy and make believe. Disavow if you can, but you've shared things on the Hunter Biden conspiracy, which is directly linked to Trump loyalists muddying the waters ala Benghazi playbook. Also, sup Cheez, even you're now admitting you can't prove it. You've pushed the echo chamber's narrative against Biden, which is designed to make Trump more appealing by pretending both sides are equally bad so as to make voting for a fascist feasible. You share pro Trump video messages, like black people thinking he's now one of them because he's a criminal. Looking back to why I had to establish a baseline, you share video clips questioning what actually took place at the attack on the capitol. Again, in the aim to keep this as short as possible, your posting habits are why I ask what exactly is your limit when you say you've "never done any of those things." To sum it up, you claim to not be pro Trump or pro cult of "either side." But your behavior pattern is distinctly cultish, you believe what they believe. You push what they push. So, once again, if you've never done any of "those things," exactly where do you draw your line?

Oh, and if you don't think liberals are Nazis, kinda begs the question why you'd share such a meme with all the subtlety of a tank. But yeah, you don't "believe it."

[saltydog]

The whole cult is based on theater of the unserious.

[CHEEZY17]

Smh...you are giving me the opportunity to clear up exactly what my personal and political beliefs are so there is absolutely no question as to how you may perceive me? Thats rich...I had to think about this because you did something that you shouldn't have.

I've already addressed several of these things and if you have followed me then you would know...I have never supported Trump, but I am a conservative...leaning towards the middle. I do not condone either of the political cults... (that means the far left or right), I honestly don't think either faction is good for this nation and I've never accused the liberal left of being Nazis...but if they feel guilty so be it.

To the point of being easily misled...I have been guilty of posting memes, gifs, jpegs that I find interesting or just plain funny without comment to elicit response. It allows others to comment on that particular meme, gif, jpeg as they feel or wish they felt...even you. It does not reflect any particular view or stance you may assume that I take.

And yes, you assume... like calling into question something you obviously don't understand...your last line. It doesn't matter who is president or what party is in charge, I and others pledged allegiance to this nation and when I put on that uniform it was to serve and protect everyone regardless of race, religion, political affiliation, sexual orientation...etc., Including you and from all enemies foreign and domestic. Every man and woman who made a commitment to this country serves. When you take the oath everything else is secondary even if you don't like it. You don't choose, you do. You didn't call just me into question with that comment, but you called everyone else that has or is servings loyalty into question. Like we owe you or something...we don't owe you shit. We have already given you our service and, in some cases, lives so you can be some internet dumbass on a forum board that thinks he deserves an answer to every one of his obvious race/religious/political baiting remarks. If you had served you would have never considered that tact.

That's kinda the thing. I have observed your posting habits, and a lot of it does come out if not pro Trump then at least pro Trump causes. And mind you, that is not necessarily pro conservative except in name or identity only, lord knows not in practice. So that's not really leaning towards the middle, that's leaning towards the unraveling of our democracy. That's why I ask, if you are a vet that fought for our rights, why would you support the undoing of them? But let's get into the gritty details which is what I wanted you to discern for yourself. I'll do my best to keep this short.

Let's establish the baseline, without which there's no point in proceeding. Is our democracy at risk because of the previous president and the threat of another term should he swindle his way back in? First, the norms being broken, the outright corruption he exhibited from day one. Monetizing the office and the government to put our money in his pocket and the bank accounts of his businesses. That's an indisputable fact. Second, skipping all the everyday corrupt BS he did on the way in the vein of keeping this post as short as possible, did he try to usurp power by trying to stay in office because he lost the election? Also indisputable, he lost. And as it's unfolding before our eyes via the justice system, there was a multi pronged attack by Trump and his allies to change that outcome by way of fake electors, fake vote counts, fake conspiracy theories, culminating in a violent insurrection at the capitol designed to cause chaos to enable him to stay in power. This is what happened, but if you don't agree with reality, then that tells me all I need to know.

Moving on, your aims or beliefs here. You've shared a lot of things between the two sub forums, but when it comes to politics you lean conspiracy and make believe. Disavow if you can, but you've shared things on the Hunter Biden conspiracy, which is directly linked to Trump loyalists muddying the waters ala Benghazi playbook. Also, sup Cheez, even you're now admitting you can't prove it. You've pushed the echo chamber's narrative against Biden, which is designed to make Trump more appealing by pretending both sides are equally bad so as to make voting for a fascist feasible. You share pro Trump video messages, like black people thinking he's now one of them because he's a criminal. Looking back to why I had to establish a baseline, you share video clips questioning what actually took place at the attack on the capitol. Again, in the aim to keep this as short as possible, your posting habits are why I ask what exactly is your limit when you say you've "never done any of those things." To sum it up, you claim to not be pro Trump or pro cult of "either side." But your behavior pattern is distinctly cultish, you believe what they believe. You push what they push. So, once again, if you've never done any of "those things," exactly where do you draw your line?

Oh, and if you don't think liberals are Nazis, kinda begs the question why you'd share such a meme with all the subtlety of a tank. But yeah, you don't "believe it."

Fucking bullshit. Dude Ive brought the proof a million fucking times you fucking hypocrite, pussy, clownshow. You just refuse to see it. Is that why you cant admit the docs or shell companies are real? The subpoenaed banking docs into the Biden Brand shell companies dispersed to the Biden family members including one labeled "JRB", the fake names when discussing business, the speaker phone on business meetings among others...thats called circumstantial evidence you fucking retard. Fuck off with your childish "nuh uh" bullshit

Circumstantial evidence is proof of a fact or set of facts from which one could infer the fact in question.
Both direct and circumstantial evidence are considered legitimate forms of proof in federal and state courts. A person may be convicted of a crime based on circumstantial proof alone.
https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/le ... -evidence/

Looks like the saltydot defense of "Nuh uh!" and "You cant believe the evidence" is actually the most common trial form of defense when presented with circumstantial evidence.

"In trials for criminal cases, the prosecution commonly relies on circumstantial evidence. Defense lawyers typically respond with one of two strategies. The first is to cast doubt on the circumstantial proof itself. If the premise(s) are not proven, then the inference should not be drawn."
https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/le ... -evidence/

Following the criminal playbook. Great job!

[dot]

*whine*

Just gonna leave this here:

Unless there is something we dont know about I think this is pretty dumb.
The committee has unearthed lots of circumstantial evidence but I'd rather they have something that packs more of a punch. Maybe they do and thats why theyre doing this. Its probably just for show though.

[CHEEZY17]

*whine*

Just gonna leave this here:

Unless there is something we dont know about I think this is pretty dumb.
The committee has unearthed lots of circumstantial evidence but I'd rather they have something that packs more of a punch. Maybe they do and thats why theyre doing this. Its probably just for show though.

And? Are you new to politics? They want headlines. They have lots of circumstantial evidence. I'd rather they have more even if its just more circumstantial evidence. I want the case to be iron clad with no room for delusional cowards like you to say "Nuh uh!" because they dont want to put the dots together. Its premature because they feel like they have to do something and they want revenge; thats not the same as saying they dont have anything...which is YOUR ridiculous position.

[saltydog]

*whine*

Just gonna leave this here:

Unless there is something we dont know about I think this is pretty dumb.
The committee has unearthed lots of circumstantial evidence but I'd rather they have something that packs more of a punch. Maybe they do and thats why theyre doing this. Its probably just for show though.

And? Are you new to politics? They want headlines. They have lots of circumstantial evidence. I'd rather they have more even if its just more circumstantial evidence. I want the case to be iron clad with no room for delusional cowards like you to say "Nuh uh!" because they dont want to put the dots together. Its premature because they feel like they have to do something and they want revenge; thats not the same as saying they dont have anything...which is YOUR ridiculous position.

Go to court with a mountain of "circumstantial evidence" and let us know how it works out.

You'll be shamed out of the discovery process by lunchtime.

Keep up the Jim Jordan cosplay though.

[Animal]

if i'm not mistaken, circumstantial evidence is what leads to subpoenas and search warrants. And subpoenas and search warrants are what lead to real evidence.

[saltydog]

if i'm not mistaken, circumstantial evidence is what leads to subpoenas and search warrants. And subpoenas and search warrants are what lead to real evidence.

Thank you very little.

[CHEEZY17]

*whine*

Just gonna leave this here:

Unless there is something we dont know about I think this is pretty dumb.
The committee has unearthed lots of circumstantial evidence but I'd rather they have something that packs more of a punch. Maybe they do and thats why theyre doing this. Its probably just for show though.

And? Are you new to politics? They want headlines. They have lots of circumstantial evidence. I'd rather they have more even if its just more circumstantial evidence. I want the case to be iron clad with no room for delusional cowards like you to say "Nuh uh!" because they dont want to put the dots together. Its premature because they feel like they have to do something and they want revenge; thats not the same as saying they dont have anything...which is YOUR ridiculous position.

Go to court with a mountain of "circumstantial evidence" and let us know how it works out.

You'll be shamed out of the discovery process by lunchtime.

Keep up the Jim Jordan cosplay though.

Cool story, bro. Except:
Circumstantial evidence is proof of a fact or set of facts from which one could infer the fact in question.
Both direct and circumstantial evidence are considered legitimate forms of proof in federal and state courts. A person may be convicted of a crime based on circumstantial proof alone.
https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/le ... -evidence/