Not including us, obviously. But on a public political level, holy shit lmao imaging being a dead-souled loser to allow yourself to get owned by fucking soyboy jones
Unfortunately he's probably doing it because he's actually anti-semitic, which will be ammo in lib's guns pointed at us, because "wow you stupid tankies agree with ALEX JONES? That's just MORE PROOF in horseshoe theory! You tankies are just like the right!"
No you dumbass libs we don't agree with Alex Jones. Yes, we want a ceasefire and an end to the genocide, but for entirely different reasons. Context matters. Well, to us anyway. Context doesn't matter to libs, they are incapable of understanding context.
Unfortunately he's probably doing it because he's actually anti-semitic
Who knows what propagandists actually believe. They’re actors playing a characters to influence public opinion and make money.
One of things i learned observing Polish politics is that Hanlon's razor is blunt like a round rock from riverbed. Murican one is probably the same.
Right.
Jones wants a ceasefire because he wants all the Jews to be wiped out by Hamas.
We want a ceasefire because we don't want to watch Palestinians be killed off and forced out of Palestine by Israel.
Not defending Jones here obviously, but how could a ceasefire hypothetically help Hamas wipe out the Jews?
The right wing thought is that Isreal is defending itself against terrorists that will surely immediately and completely destroy Isreal the moment Isreal stops the killing.
It's absolutely positively ridiculous but this is what they actually think. Similar to how they thought if we didn't blow up Iraq or Afghanistan they would continue to do 25 9/11s every single day until America is completely destroyed. Right wing folks aren't too smart.
I suppose 'wiped out' is far too strong, more like 'let Hamas kill as many Jews as possible while trying to demonize Israel'. Like Infamousblt pointed out, I was going with the defacto rightwing mode of thinking, which is 'the evil brown people will kill as many people as possible unless they themselves are being wiped out'
It also occurs to me he may be trying to poison the well here by himself wanting ceasefire, trying to make it seem less palatable for anyone left of him.
Right wing grifters learned from Trump to occasionally attack from the left, especially on the western war machine.
Tucker is an odd one because he shifted from being a bog standard neoconservative to an ur-conservatism of the state protecting traditional hierarchies/groups. So some of his rhetoric that sounds leftish is really a revival of pre-market absolutism conservatism.
Trump stole the media being the enemy of the people from Lenin
God I fucking hate it here
Psychiatrist: Milenin it's not real, it can't hurt you.
Milenin:
imaginging a conversation between 2020 me and 2024 me on Bernie Sanders
there would be a lot of yelling
2016 me and 2024 me definitely. By 2020 I was not taking him seriously, I still had hope for sure but any candidate who fails a presidential run and runs again should be viewed highly skeptically (HEY HILLARY!).
Oof man the OGs remember leftbook back in 2017-2018...what a time that was. My first real experience with politics lol
By what metric are you considering 2016 a failed run?
...he uh, didn't win.
Now you could make arguments about what his campaign did achieve in 2016 engaging many disenfranchised people. However a second presidential run is not going to do anything beyond what the first already did, and becomes more of a fundraising opportunity than a credible presidential campaign.
I'm so confused why you're asking. Feels like a question from a Repub who thinks Trump is still in control but from a Bernie supporter.
Biden.
...whose second run was in 2008, and which achieved just a bit more than fundraising?
I don't know if I have the time to explain how the democratic party has shifted its solidification of primary power since that time, largely because of outside runs like Obama and more specifically Sanders. Or the difference in running a second presidential run directly after a failed campaign compared to running after serving as VP.
This is not a gotcha or some kind of flaw in my reasoning. Ultimately it doesn't fucking matter because working people will not see substantial change through electoral politics.
Edit: also I'm going to add you should just state your point in your first reply instead of trying to bait out people your conversing with a stupid question. It is much more respectful of peoples time and effort.
My friend, I'm well aware of modern political history within the Democratic party. That doesn't change the fact that your heuristic is not a good one; there are plenty of reasons to run a second presidential campaign besides fundraising, even if you don't think you're likely to win (and Biden had to know he wasn't in '08).
Moreover, Bernie's campaign strategy in '16 was poor, and his run in 2020 amended that by focusing a lot more resources into Iowa early on. Unfortunately, Buttigieg played the same angle and the caucuses were a total debacle besides, which robbed the campaign of the momentum it had hoped to generate with a big win in Iowa (which, you'll note, is exactly how Obama won in 2008.)
Edit: I'd be a lot more inclined to listen to your request for respect if it didn't follow an incredibly condescending comment. Also, I'm well aware of the uselessness of electoral politics--but it was 2020 that cemented that for me, and for many others as well, particularly here. So even in that sense, Bernie's 2020 run had real impact.
the capitulation and bending of the knee at the end. He should have spited the democrats and tanked their chances and hopefully caused a schism or collapse of the party
Just imagine a room filled with yous representing every year since you were in high school and imagine the level of arguing and shitflinging there would be.
Klandace Owens got fired from Daily Wire for reporting Gaza death figures as well.
I predict we're gonna see alot of the softer leftist-politics-as-personal-branding types start to waffle and water down their rhetoric to the point of uselessness to avoid being associated with these guys.
Klandace Owens got fired from Daily Wire
Woah, really? Is she just going to be fulltime TPUSA now?
https://variety.com/2024/digital/news/candace-owens-daily-wire-out-1235949509/
As of right now looks like she's just going back to Youtube, I think there's beef between her and Charlie Kirk these days but I haven't been paying as much attention to this stuff as I used to.
Love how at the end of the day all these assholes know it's a grift and don't trust each other if they don't already have a knife at their throat.
We do not in fact have to hand it to Alex Jones.
Like, he's the kind of guy who's actually just pushing this because of a slightly different strain of antisemitic brainworms. This isn't an outflank from the 'left'.
Even acknowledging all that he's still objectively better on the topic than Biden.
Fuck Alex Jones, but fuck him slightly less than the DNC ghouls pretending to be morally superior to him while continuing the genocide.
I got that, but why is the use of the term by Alex Jones notable? Tabitha wouldn't have brought it up if there wasn't another meaning.
I've always had the feeling that Alex Jones was a limited hangout. Call me a conspiracy nut or whatever idc.
I have literally zero proof of him being one either but he seems to swoop in, take a narrative that is inconvenient to the government and either be completely honest about it while sandwiching it between some completely unhinged bullshit or he'll take that narrative, dial it up to 11 and start talking about how it's a plan by the interdimensional Anunnaki to steal our souls, just like what happened to the Aztec empire 5,000 years ago and that's when the Aztec recorded predictions in stone engravings, which have been suppressed by the Mexican government, that there would be a resurgence of Anunnaki activity right now as a herald of the impending apocalypse or some shit.
Does it say something that people like Detestiny are being completely outflanked by Alex Jones? Yes.
Does it trouble me that Alex Jones has suddenly weighed in on this matter? Also yes.
Now double up on the tinfoil for my concluding thoughts...
Given everything that I've said above, does Alex Jones weighing in on this signal that they've completely lost control over the narrative and this is one of their last-ditch attempts at trying to reassert control? Actually yeah, it kinda does.
Yeah, anything coming out of Alex Jones' mouth is going to be assumed to be a "crazy conspiracy theory" by default, so it can be a great way to ensure that people never look deeper into something (like the genocide in Gaza).
Woah, that was all like... coherent and stuff. Didn't know he had it in him. Didn't even talk about gay frogs once.
He can't be the caricatured buffoon he comes off as bc A/V equipment is too hard for that character to figure out and he's been portraying the character for a long time.
as another commenter mentioned, the word "robotic" kinda gives it that scifi/illuminati/conspiracy vibe
This is starting to align again with all the people who predict Biden will still win. Once the Palestinian cause becomes politicized and turns into the same blue vs red team, once the genocide becomes a question of whether or not you're handing it to Trumpists, it is over.
The neoliberals were definitely correct in pushing the whole Ukraine war as a matter of "western values" and if the Gaza genocide becomes "we can't allow the Axis of Evil/Trump allies to dictate terms" shit then libs will support Biden even harder.
The only reason the Israel propaganda is less effective is the generational issue(gen z doesn't care about Ukraine) and maybe Israel/Zionism went too hard and too fast on the whole "right to defend itself" narrative and it is hard to back off from that.
I can't imagine a spin that Isntreal could have spun to make people like it when you kill a fuckload of people for no reason. Cause they sure pushed a hostages angle but then they killed hostages themselves. They pushed the human shield thing and nobody believed in tunnels under hospitals and then they used civilians as shields themselves. At some level it can't just be narrative and the simple fact is that genocide is cringe. That's why it's not even left right - it's not even left right as lefties know it. Nobody wants to give these freaks a goddamn dollar, some of us want to give them... a piece of our mind at the polls. I'd be shocked if you could spin a genocide in 4k as inevitable and just but a question whether Biden or trump do it. When it happened at the border people fucking hated Biden for it
Most people don’t really care about Ukraine and Gaza though. It works great for people that were already going to vote for Biden.
Biden still had an uphill battle with majority of non-voters outright hating him for the stupidest reasons.
I'll be interested to see the knowledge fight take on this tbh.
imma be real, genocide is not right/left question tbh (for purposes of electoralism, where you take politicians as bundled packages of dogshit - it is, but not).
All the libs being like "omg can't you see he's just doing this tonfgrift I can't believe leftists are saying this makes him better than Biden, damn tankies."
Yea we know he's a totally full of shit right wing bigot and genocidal asshole.
That doesn't change the fact he's still better on this topic than Biden even acknowledging this is just completely empty lip service.
That's still better than what Biden has done.
Also Jones hasn't personally authorized the continuation of the genocide, a second way he's better on the topic than Biden.
Buying into his narrative is buying the grift. This entire conversation is moot because he doesn’t actually believe anything he says.
Social Democracy increasingly losing the title of moderate wing of fascism.
imagine being more on the right than this guy 
