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

[necronomous]

DOJ FBI

Keep changing the argument to admit you can't prove your claim. As for this, it's clear you've got nothing on this subject too.

It's comical how you think you are doing so well but in reality you just keep getting dumber and dumber.

Hey, you're the one that thinks you're onto something when you have yet to show me where I cited a single thing Walz said in 2021 from the Department of Labor.

Yes, retard: job losses caused by the worldwide pandemic include those that occurred in the United States. Was that concept really that difficult for you?

And those job losses were from across the world? Then recorded by the United States and factored into being solely our jobs lost and recovered statistics? That's what you think? Go on, keep digging.

The same job losses that you and the Knee Pads campaign [redundant] are errantly trying to tie to Donald Trump. CNN fact checked your doofus of a VP for making the misleading claim that you dutifully rehashed the next day. CNN fact checking Walz is in effect fact checking you.

Well, it was during Trump's term. And it was Trump's bungling. And it was reported in 2021. But can you guess who wasn't in the chart that I linked?
I feel like you're so close to realizing how drastically you miscalculated but your hack pride won't let you admit it or see it. Keep embarrassing yourself, bud. It's entertaining.

I'll ask again. Do you ever get tired of being so humiliatingly wrong, hack?

the weird thing that he/they purposefully avoid is that those werent' even acutal job losses. they were temporary stay at home notices. they were job losses because the companies had to stop the payroll during the time out.

Is this what you're pivoting to since your own numbers you pulled showed how wrong you were? That your numbers aren't real?

Told you

[CHEEZY17]

DOJ FBI

Keep changing the argument to admit you can't prove your claim. As for this, it's clear you've got nothing on this subject too.

It's comical how you think you are doing so well but in reality you just keep getting dumber and dumber.

Hey, you're the one that thinks you're onto something when you have yet to show me where I cited a single thing Walz said in 2021 from the Department of Labor.

Yes, retard: job losses caused by the worldwide pandemic include those that occurred in the United States. Was that concept really that difficult for you?

And those job losses were from across the world? Then recorded by the United States and factored into being solely our jobs lost and recovered statistics? That's what you think? Go on, keep digging.

The same job losses that you and the Knee Pads campaign [redundant] are errantly trying to tie to Donald Trump. CNN fact checked your doofus of a VP for making the misleading claim that you dutifully rehashed the next day. CNN fact checking Walz is in effect fact checking you.

Well, it was during Trump's term. And it was Trump's bungling. And it was reported in 2021. But can you guess who wasn't in the chart that I linked?
I feel like you're so close to realizing how drastically you miscalculated but your hack pride won't let you admit it or see it. Keep embarrassing yourself, bud. It's entertaining.

I'll ask again. Do you ever get tired of being so humiliatingly wrong, hack?

the weird thing that he/they purposefully avoid is that those werent' even acutal job losses. they were temporary stay at home notices. they were job losses because the companies had to stop the payroll during the time out.

Is this what you're pivoting to since your own numbers you pulled showed how wrong you were? That your numbers aren't real?

Sorry, retard. You can't weasel your way out of this one.
The only reason worldwide job losses were mentioned is because they coincide with the job losses here in United States; all of which were due to the pandemic.
We can happily focus exclusively on the job losses here because that is the claim doofus Walz, the Knee Pads campaign and you [redundant] are making.
That works out nicely because those job losses here in the USA, and the implication made by you and Walz, are exactly the ones that were fact checked by CNN. The CNN fact check of Walz is essentially fact checking your claim as well because you are both pushing the same talking point.
Sorry, bud. Your talking point is bullshit and everyone knows it.

[CHEEZY17]

[dot]

I still got nothin'

Sorry, retard. You can't weasel your way out of this one.

Weasel out of what exactly? You have yet to post what I was citing from Walz. Your problem doing that seems to be because I did no such thing. Watching you flail about it has been most amusing.

The only reason worldwide job losses were mentioned is because they coincide with the job losses here in United States; all of which were due to the pandemic.

And who was in charge during the pandemic and those job losses? And who bungled the pandemic? And what was posted prior to my one single chart, again from 2021, that triggered you so hard? Are you starting to get it now? Or is your hack pride blinding you to the fact you've been barking up the wrong tree the whole time?

We can happily focus exclusively on the job losses here because that is the claim doofus Walz, the Knee Pads campaign and you [redundant] are making.

Feel free to quote my post citing Tim Walz. I get the feeling there's a reason you won't do that.

That works out nicely because those job losses here in the USA, and the implication made by you and Walz, are exactly the ones that were fact checked by CNN.

Are they? Because it seems you still think I posted something that I never posted. But I can tell you, again, that I posted a simple graph of the job growth by president. That graph came from the statistics presented by the Labor Department. That graph was first published in 2021. That graph is readily available via a simple Google search that's already been provided for you. And thanks to Animal, we have supplemental numbers that prove my point the graph was making. The best part of that is I already had checked those stats for the original post but I chose instead to go with a graph more easy to read for simpletons. Apparently, what I didn't know is how infuriated you'd get over facts.

The CNN fact check of Walz is essentially fact checking your claim as well because you are both pushing the same talking point.
Sorry, bud. Your talking point is bullshit and everyone knows it.

Are we? Because once again, you still can't seem to find where I cited anything Tim Walz said about this. In 2021. Via the Labor Department. Reported by the Washington Post. On January 8, 2021. By Andrew Van Dam. But please, go ahead and find where Tim Walz had anything to do with that. Because clearly, the only one believing tripe between you and me has turned out to be you. And for that, you have no one to blame for it but yourself.

I'll ask again. Do you ever get tired of being so humiliatingly wrong, hack?

[CHEEZY17]

Good Lord you are absolutely retarded.
You and Walz are using the same data to imply the same thing; that's it. Go ahead and quote where I say you are citing Walz you fucking retard. That same thing that you and he are implying is that the job losses incurred due to the pandemic are somehow Trumps fault. You're not quoting him directly you're using the same information as he is to make a misleading claim.
CNN fact checked Walz's claim which in effect fact checked you.
He made the claim on Monday and then you dutifully followed up making the exact same claim on Tuesday.
Sorry, bud. You can try to weasel all you want but that is what happened and you and your doofus choice for VP got fact checked into next week for trying to errantly use the same data to make the same misleading implication. Own it.

[necronomous]

I still got nothin'

Sorry, retard. You can't weasel your way out of this one.

Weasel out of what exactly? You have yet to post what I was citing from Walz. Your problem doing that seems to be because I did no such thing. Watching you flail about it has been most amusing.

The only reason worldwide job losses were mentioned is because they coincide with the job losses here in United States; all of which were due to the pandemic.

And who was in charge during the pandemic and those job losses? And who bungled the pandemic? And what was posted prior to my one single chart, again from 2021, that triggered you so hard? Are you starting to get it now? Or is your hack pride blinding you to the fact you've been barking up the wrong tree the whole time?

We can happily focus exclusively on the job losses here because that is the claim doofus Walz, the Knee Pads campaign and you [redundant] are making.

Feel free to quote my post citing Tim Walz. I get the feeling there's a reason you won't do that.

That works out nicely because those job losses here in the USA, and the implication made by you and Walz, are exactly the ones that were fact checked by CNN.

Are they? Because it seems you still think I posted something that I never posted. But I can tell you, again, that I posted a simple graph of the job growth by president. That graph came from the statistics presented by the Labor Department. That graph was first published in 2021. That graph is readily available via a simple Google search that's already been provided for you. And thanks to Animal, we have supplemental numbers that prove my point the graph was making. The best part of that is I already had checked those stats for the original post but I chose instead to go with a graph more easy to read for simpletons. Apparently, what I didn't know is how infuriated you'd get over facts.

The CNN fact check of Walz is essentially fact checking your claim as well because you are both pushing the same talking point.
Sorry, bud. Your talking point is bullshit and everyone knows it.

Are we? Because once again, you still can't seem to find where I cited anything Tim Walz said about this. In 2021. Via the Labor Department. Reported by the Washington Post. On January 8, 2021. By Andrew Van Dam. But please, go ahead and find where Tim Walz had anything to do with that. Because clearly, the only one believing tripe between you and me has turned out to be you. And for that, you have no one to blame for it but yourself.

I'll ask again. Do you ever get tired of being so humiliatingly wrong, hack?

Told you.

[Who]

Told ya? Brilliant put down

[necronomous]

Told ya? Brilliant put down

It wasn't a put down. It was stating that even when presented with evidence of how wrong he is, he still won't admit when he's wrong. And that's exactly what he did. You failing to understand that is the real eyeroll here.

[CHEEZY17]

[dot]

Good Lord you are absolutely retarded.

And yet you're the one that keeps claiming I cited something I never cited.

You and Walz are using the same data to imply the same thing; that's it.

Are we? Because you have yet to show where I cited anything that Walz said.

Go ahead and quote where I say you are citing Walz you fucking retard.

What a weird coincidence! Doofus Tim Walz comes out with new [misleading] "job loss" talking point and later Desperate Dodgin' Dot just happens to post a jobs graph with no context whatsoever.

Here is doofus Walz making the false claim of Trump losing record jobs on The View:



The talking point went out on Monday. You followed like the loyal soldier you are with that graph on Tuesday.

Nobody is buying the shit you're selling, homeschool.

And pretty much every post since, you've been challenged to find where I said a single thing Walz said and you've failed to do so. Now I know why that is, but can you man up and admit it in public why you can't come through for the class?

That same thing that you and he are implying is that the job losses incurred due to the pandemic are somehow Trumps fault. You're not quoting him directly you're using the same information as he is to make a misleading claim.

I'm not quoting him at all. That is your hurdle to figure out, when you catch up and can talk about what I actually posted and has since been confirmed, maybe then you can have lines in this play.

CNN fact checked Walz's claim

Good for them, let me know when you accept their fact checks of your convicted felon criminal idol which are far more egregious and damning. The amount of fascism you're willing to overlook says way more about you than what you're trying to pull here ever will about me. But as we've seen with Mark Esper, you're only willing to parrot the talking points that coincide with your narrative. The second the truth is exposed about what's actually said, you don't bring it up anymore.

which in effect fact checked you.

Maybe if I'd quoted anything Walz said. I didn't. I get that you're still super butthurt about getting out over your skis, but that's your problem. Not mine.

He made the claim on Monday and then you dutifully followed up making the exact same claim on Tuesday.

Did I? Because here you are still saying I'm claiming what Walz claimed. I don't seem to see any such evidence of that. I do see where I showed you linked source reporting, and you haven't yet acknowledged you were clearly wrong in your assumptions. But partisan hacks gonna do hack things, huh?

Sorry, bud. You can try to weasel all you want but that is what happened and you and your doofus choice for VP got fact checked into next week for trying to errantly use the same data to make the same misleading implication. Own it.

Let me know when you can find where I cited anything Walz said from 2021's Labor Department as reported by the Washington Post. Seethe harder, hack.

It wasn't a put down. It was stating that even when presented with evidence of how wrong he is, he still won't admit when he's wrong. And that's exactly what he did. You failing to understand that is the real eyeroll here.

You're welcome to chip in where your fellow hack has clearly failed. Go ahead and find where I posted anything cited from Walz. If you're feeling brave enough, maybe you can also dispute Animal's statistics he so kindly provided that affirmed my single simple graph that has you guys so triggered. Good luck, Red.

[Animal]

Good Lord you are absolutely retarded.

And yet you're the one that keeps claiming I cited something I never cited.

You and Walz are using the same data to imply the same thing; that's it.

Are we? Because you have yet to show where I cited anything that Walz said.

no one said you cited Waltz, dummy. they said you were parroting the exact same talking points that Waltz has been going on about. At exactly the same time. And both of you are stupid. That's all they were saying.

[dot]

no one said you cited Waltz, dummy.

If you got hacks coming here screaming that I got the marching orders from Walz, then yes, that's exactly what they're saying.

they said you were parroting the exact same talking points that Waltz has been going on about. At exactly the same time. And both of you are stupid. That's all they were saying.

Feel free to identify where I did any such thing. That's like three of you now that have that task in front of you. Much like the insurrection claim before, none of you can do the actual work for what it is you're claiming. The very simple timeline is: an idiot propaganda video was posted, I cited a simple graph disproving the claims. From there, the lot of you have lost your minds but are unable to disprove said graph, instead turning to argue about Walz. What's more, you yourself have gone the extra mile to confirm exactly what I did post. I knew it already, but thanks for trying to help yourself and in turn affirming the facts I posted.

Aside from proving me right, I'll ask again. Do any of you get tired of being so humiliatingly wrong?

[Animal]

you're welcome. dummy.

[necronomous]

Good Lord you are absolutely retarded.

And yet you're the one that keeps claiming I cited something I never cited.

You and Walz are using the same data to imply the same thing; that's it.

Are we? Because you have yet to show where I cited anything that Walz said.

Go ahead and quote where I say you are citing Walz you fucking retard.

What a weird coincidence! Doofus Tim Walz comes out with new [misleading] "job loss" talking point and later Desperate Dodgin' Dot just happens to post a jobs graph with no context whatsoever.

Here is doofus Walz making the false claim of Trump losing record jobs on The View:



The talking point went out on Monday. You followed like the loyal soldier you are with that graph on Tuesday.

Nobody is buying the shit you're selling, homeschool.

And pretty much every post since, you've been challenged to find where I said a single thing Walz said and you've failed to do so. Now I know why that is, but can you man up and admit it in public why you can't come through for the class?

That same thing that you and he are implying is that the job losses incurred due to the pandemic are somehow Trumps fault. You're not quoting him directly you're using the same information as he is to make a misleading claim.

I'm not quoting him at all. That is your hurdle to figure out, when you catch up and can talk about what I actually posted and has since been confirmed, maybe then you can have lines in this play.

CNN fact checked Walz's claim

Good for them, let me know when you accept their fact checks of your convicted felon criminal idol which are far more egregious and damning. The amount of fascism you're willing to overlook says way more about you than what you're trying to pull here ever will about me. But as we've seen with Mark Esper, you're only willing to parrot the talking points that coincide with your narrative. The second the truth is exposed about what's actually said, you don't bring it up anymore.

which in effect fact checked you.

Maybe if I'd quoted anything Walz said. I didn't. I get that you're still super butthurt about getting out over your skis, but that's your problem. Not mine.

He made the claim on Monday and then you dutifully followed up making the exact same claim on Tuesday.

Did I? Because here you are still saying I'm claiming what Walz claimed. I don't seem to see any such evidence of that. I do see where I showed you linked source reporting, and you haven't yet acknowledged you were clearly wrong in your assumptions. But partisan hacks gonna do hack things, huh?

Sorry, bud. You can try to weasel all you want but that is what happened and you and your doofus choice for VP got fact checked into next week for trying to errantly use the same data to make the same misleading implication. Own it.

Let me know when you can find where I cited anything Walz said from 2021's Labor Department as reported by the Washington Post. Seethe harder, hack.

It wasn't a put down. It was stating that even when presented with evidence of how wrong he is, he still won't admit when he's wrong. And that's exactly what he did. You failing to understand that is the real eyeroll here.

You're welcome to chip in where your fellow hack has clearly failed. Go ahead and find where I posted anything cited from Walz. If you're feeling brave enough, maybe you can also dispute Animal's statistics he so kindly provided that affirmed my single simple graph that has you guys so triggered. Good luck, Red.

Already did. Proved you wrong. Showed evidence. You denied. Same song and dance. You're still doing it. It's ok. You're retarded. So no worries.

[CHEEZY17]

More absolute errant bullshit.

You can argue all you want retard, you can deflect until the cows come home and you can say I said things I never said. The answers will be the same. It's not our fault you can't understand the answers you've been given.

Here they are again. Give them another read. Maybe this time it will click in your little retard brain.

Good Lord you are absolutely retarded.
You and Walz are using the same data to imply the same thing; that's it. Go ahead and quote where I say you are citing Walz you fucking retard. That same thing that you and he are implying is that the job losses incurred due to the pandemic are somehow Trumps fault. You're not quoting him directly you're using the same information as he is to make a misleading claim.
CNN fact checked Walz's claim which in effect fact checked you.
He made the claim on Monday and then you dutifully followed up making the exact same claim on Tuesday.
Sorry, bud. You can try to weasel all you want but that is what happened and you and your doofus choice for VP got fact checked into next week for trying to errantly use the same data to make the same misleading implication. Own it.

[dot]

More of the same from Red, then.

You can argue all you want retard, you can deflect until the cows come home and you can say I said things I never said. The answers will be the same. It's not our fault you can't understand the answers you've been given.

That's the thing, I fully understand what you've been saying. Your issue comes from me never having done what you desperately want me to have done. Your playbook is not exactly new. Even after giving you the sources, you still stamp your feet and throw your temper tantrum over being wrong. That is your problem, not mine. Hack shifting the goalposts in order to argue, fighting a strawman because the facts don't benefit you, these things have always been a you thing for you to fix. Entirely up to you, so til then, hacks do hack things.

[necronomous]

More of the same from Red, then.

You can argue all you want retard, you can deflect until the cows come home and you can say I said things I never said. The answers will be the same. It's not our fault you can't understand the answers you've been given.

That's the thing, I fully understand what you've been saying. Your issue comes from me never having done what you desperately want me to have done. Your playbook is not exactly new. Even after giving you the sources, you still stamp your feet and throw your temper tantrum over being wrong. That is your problem, not mine. Hack shifting the goalposts in order to argue, fighting a strawman because the facts don't benefit you, these things have always been a you thing for you to fix. Entirely up to you, so til then, hacks do hack things.

Yes, you have nothing.

[dot]

Yes, you have nothing.

Projection. Run along until you're brave enough to contribute, Red.

[necronomous]

Yes, you have nothing.

Projection. Run along until you're brave enough to contribute, Red.

Yes, you are projecting.

[dot]

I still got nothin'

[necronomous]

You're retarded

You are right

I know

[dot]

I still got nothin'

[necronomous]

You're retarded

youre correct

I know

[dot]

I still got nothin'

[necronomous]

You're retarded

youre correct

I know