Anonymous blue__wave 4w

Look at the person who quoted this post with the sourcing

3

Anonymous dumbegg 4w

The x post lol?

-2

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

The one that has the CNN broadcast of him saying that yes lmfaoooo is anything ever good enough for you?

8

Anonymous dumbegg 4w

This is my problem 1. I think people should look at more than a clip from x 2. If you look at full context he’s not saying we shouldn’t use pronouns he’s saying we should focus on table top issues which is fine to say.

-3

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

the rights of certain people are “table top issues”? seriously??

13

Anonymous #4 4w

Focusing on solutions to the issues that affect most people is what wins elections. All the pronouns in the world and leftists still won’t vote for Democrats in national elections because they can feel more self righteous by endlessly purity testing them over 2% differences in opinion. Please just go make your own party.

3

Anonymous #4 4w

He’s not saying we shouldn’t talk about trans rights he’s saying we shouldn’t focus on culture war issues relating to pronouns. We’re stretching what he’s saying so hard to make it bad.

-3

Anonymous #5 4w

True

-2

Anonymous #4 4w

That or you guys haven’t seen the clip

-2

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

I watched it myself, it reeked of dogwhistles and was fucking disgusting. I’m part of the community he’s abandoning with that rhetoric, and it comes right after he drops dogwhistles towards Black people with that 960 SAT comment. From the bottom of my heart, shut the fuck up. blue maga acting like they’re not the same as maga with a different color hat.

11

Anonymous #5 4w

it’s so easy to say “just go make your own party” when you’re ignorant of why there is no more than two major parties in this country. you choosing to adopt the far-right’s position on abandoning the human rights of some of us is exactly why we see you as the fascists you are. it doesn’t matter if you hide behind a bullshit veil of “progressivism” when you so willingly display how similar you are. you don’t give a flying fuck about the safety of your fellow Americans, as long as YOU are safe.

10

Anonymous #5 4w

fucking “purity testing”. human rights aren’t a purity test, you absolute scumbag. this is why we say “scratch a liberal, and a fascist bleeds”.

7

Anonymous #4 4w

Nobody said abandon anything. Just don’t make these your banner issues. You sound like you desperately need to unfollow Hasan.

-2

Anonymous #5 4w

maybe the issue is all of your performative activism while still expanding the oppression imposed by the state, then turning around and trying to demonize and blame the people who call you out for said egregious behavior. newsome did though, hence why we’re calling out his dogwhistles. maybe take a step back and reflect on your own behavior, as well as the party that claims to be “progressive” as they concede and adopt the same policies as the far-right.

8

Anonymous #5 4w

then again, I doubt that blue-maga would ever be willing to recognize the controlled opposition that is the Democratic Party. and no, get some better insults because I don’t watch hasan. I’m not surprised that you, along with your red counterparts, are both unified in using the “monolith” rhetoric towards groups you don’t like though.

7

Anonymous #4 4w

Nothing I do is performative and everything is focused on actually improving outcomes. This is why you didn’t see me doing completely ridiculous things like voting for Jill Stein over Gaza. The only people who think Democrats are adopting far right policies are commie fucking losers. Which, I reiterate, need to fuck off out of my party and go be worthless somewhere where they aren’t influencing liberals goals.

-2

Anonymous #5 4w

lastly, human rights should always be banner issues. to claim otherwise is a fault in your morality and humanity, at the bare minimum

7

Anonymous #4 4w

Now who’s being performative?

-2

Anonymous #5 4w

Hence why you’re advocating to effectively abandon anyone who’s trans, right? everything you do is performative, regardless of whether you have the decency to acknowledge it or not. don’t even bring up the genocide in Gaza, it’s easy to deduce how important that is to you as you sit here willingly advocating to expand the growing genocide at home.

6

Anonymous #4 4w

I was wrong you don’t need to turn off Hasan, you need to take your fucking meds because you’re just flat out hallucinating 🤣

-1

Anonymous #5 4w

that isn’t performative, because I actually stand behind those beliefs, to no end. I won’t abandon the rights of myself and others for a mere percentage gain in the polls, like you’re essentially advocating for. you can’t claim to be different than MAGA and those openly vocal white suprematists when you’re engaging in and adopting their same playbook

8

Anonymous #5 4w

and what am I hallucinating on? Go ahead and say it for everyone to see.

10

Anonymous #4 4w

You’re hallucinating my positions, for one thing. “Don’t make this a banner issue because it’s unpopular enough to decide national elections” does not mean “Abandon the issue and the people it affects.” It means “Do not constantly screech on every platform imaginable about trans rights to the detriment of literally every electoral goal you have including trans rights.”

-2

Anonymous #5 4w

newsome alluded to abandoning these issues for a more “normal culture”. You’re the one who came in here to defend newsome. I thought you were going to engage in direct genocide denialism, so I’ll give you that; but advocating to downplay trans issues in a country with an escalating genocide towards us trans Americans isn’t much better. and no one said to make it into the entire platform, that’s a dogwhistle being used to justify this current push to completely eradicate all advocacy for us.

6

Anonymous #5 4w

and as I mentioned in the other comment before I deleted it (I deleted because I didn’t see your response, and I thought you weren’t going to respond) this doesn’t even take into account the ethnic cleansing going on in our nation at the hands of the federal government, which both parties are effectively in support of (yes, both parties. It’s not like the DNC has adopted the rightful position of “abolish ice”, only a handful of democrats have)

2

Anonymous #4 4w

and that still doesn’t consider how both parties are unified in their financial (and vocal) support of genocide, be it at home or across the world. varying levels of support doesn’t really matter as much when they’re all still fundamentally advocating to fund and expand the genocide of Palestinians. the only acceptable response is outright advocacy against genocide; which seems to be like trying to find a needle in a haystack.

5

Anonymous #4 4w

I’m genuinely not sure what makes you believe this aside from just being a brainrotted tankie who pays no attention to polls. Abolishing ICE is a mainstream/majority position among Independents and Democrats. But it’s easy for you to say “Democrats support this” when you engage in the exact sort of aim-gun-at-foot politics that prevents Democrats from ever gaining the margins that actually let them implement their agenda.

-1

Anonymous #4 4w

I do mean this completely genuinely - please never vote in a Democratic primary, please cease all public political advocacy. We do not need your voice and we will get the things you want done faster without you.

-1

Anonymous #5 4w

is that why mainstream democrats have been funding ICE? Have been advocating for further training? Why dems like Hakeems and Schumer have been advocating that “the issue is a lack of training”?

5

Anonymous #5 4w

this is exactly why I said what I said before, about scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds. You’d rather someone disengage from politics entirely than take a single second to reflect on the party that you’re dogmatically supporting. you’re the exact same as MAGA, except you don a different colored hat and hide behind a thin veil of “progressivism”. Oh I’ll absolutely be voting in those primaries, and I’m making sure my vote goes to prevent that scumbag newsome from getting in office.

5

Anonymous #5 4w

You dont give a fuck about any of us; all you want is to feel “correct” and to be seen as some type of savior, as you stomp on our necks while calling it aid. sit the fuck down and engage in some actual reflection for once, until then keep licking that boot.

1

Anonymous #4 4w

This is pretty precisely what I mean. You have zero capacity for strategic political thought and your priorities do not include harm reduction. You would rather accomplish nothing when you don’t have the power to accomplish everything you want, let Trump rule by edict so you can sit on YikYak and say “Well, I didn’t vote for him.”

-2

Anonymous #5 4w

There is very obviously a training issue. That is not the larger issue, but the larger issue can’t be solved right now. Seven Democrats (six of you don’t count Fetterman) broke with leadership to fund DHS/ICE and were lambasted by the entire party, primary challengers are not letting them forget it.

-1

Anonymous #5 4w

don’t project your own failures onto me. this is exactly your issue. You’ll never be able to see past the concept of “who’d you vote for”; meanwhile the rest of us are performing actual resistance attempting to establish organized communities in preparation to fight back against this dictator, yet you’ll just project your own insecurities of “accomplishing nothing” as you’re still relying on a system that has openly abandoned us (and arguably never represented us)

5

Anonymous #4 4w

Who’d you vote for though

-1

Anonymous #4 4w

Let me know when you vote to end a genocide, until then just keep deluding yourself that you can coddle to a dictator, or even vote one out. you’re merely a fascist sympathizer who’s incapable of seeing your role for what it is.

3

Anonymous #5 4w

I’m not playing that bs game when the DNC sabotaged the election in the first place. if you so desperately want to blame voters instead of the billionaire class funding this acceleration into deeper fascism, then look at the people they directly conditioned into supporting their dictator. even then, the blame primarily relies with the billionaires funding this, and that funded the conditioning of the masses for the last few decades.

4

Anonymous #4 4w

Yeah, that’s what I thought.

-1

Anonymous #5 4w

you can think whatever you want, but no matter how much you scream and cry, the DNC enabled this. you can try to redirect blame onto the few of us who actually stood up for what we believed in, but independent investigators already determined that 3rd party voters didn’t influence the outcome of the election; and there has ALWAYS been a heavy non-voter population for a variety of reasons. so again, keep avoiding any and all self-reflection as party you claim to be opposition.

4

Anonymous #5 4w

if there was a primary, maybe you’d have a bit of room to make that argument, but alas.

4

Anonymous #4 4w

I can’t tell if this is a bit or if you’re genuinely this fucking stupid, neither would surprise me, but since I have zero incentive (in fact, a disincentive) to you participating in Dem primaries, I will not try to convince you that there are current Democratic primaries occurring. Good day.

-1

Anonymous #5 4w

I understand reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit, but I was quite clearly discussing the lack of a primary prior to the 2024 election. have the day you deserve, sympathizer.

5

Anonymous #4 4w

(meaning, in the simplest terms, you can your savior complex can go fuck yourself😘)

5

Anonymous #4 4w

and*

6

Anonymous #5 4w

It *is* a mainstream position against democrats and independents. It’s also a position utterly rejected by Democratic politicians like Newsom, Schumer, Jeffries etc. The people want to abolish ICE (or even the whole DHS) and conservative Dems say “uhhh let’s give them $75b dollars if they pinky promise to wear body cams.

5

Anonymous #4 4w

There was a primary prior to the 2024 election, which Joe Biden won handily, and when he dropped out of the race the options were open convention or align behind a candidate. The DNC chose the latter. It may piss you off to realize that you’re literally playing into the literal stupidest conservative talking points imaginable, but party processes were followed at every step whether you want to admit it or cry about it.

-1

Anonymous #5 4w

how much of a primary is that when the sitting incumbent was given the primary win, then dropped out immediately after to effectively hand that win down to his vice president? don’t play that bullshit game when you know what I meant.

5

Anonymous #4 4w

So cringe if you have read that deeply into his statements your lost in the sauce idk what else to say. Like what are examples of Gavin targeting trans people ?

-1

Anonymous #4 4w

“When the sitting incumbent was given the primary win” You mean when anyone who wanted to run against him ran and failed to break 10%? If he’d died in May 2024 none of you would be saying shit, stop doing the GOP’s propaganda work for them and shut the absolute fuck up if you don’t even know the party’s nomination procedures.

1

Anonymous #5 4w

he. should. not. have. ran. in. the. first. place. of course no one cleared 10%, he was the incumbent. I cannot make it any simpler for you. maybe instead of insisting that people giving much needed criticism is “GOP propaganda”, why don’t you wonder why the DNC is willfully adopting the GOP’s positions all on their own?

4

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

have you been ignoring everyone attempting to inform you of such?? do I need to repeat his bullshit about “being culturally normal” when making a dogwhistle about us trans folk? how about bringing Charlie Kirk onto his podcast in a favorable light?

2

Anonymous #4 4w

Why are you assuming it’s a dog whistle? thats my disagreement. It wasn’t a favorable light it just wasn’t super confrontational which I agree was kinda cringe but he was pretty selective with what he agreed with.

-1

Anonymous #4 4w

What attempts you replied to me once lol?

0

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

a democratic governor platforming a white supremacist in any way is favorable for them, and “my son is a big fan” it absolutely was a dogwhistle, whether you acknowledge it or not. What does “culturally normal” mean in that context? and did I specifically say me, or “everyone”?

1

Anonymous #4 4w

then again, based off his other recent interview tossing more dogwhistles, I’d go as far as to say that newsome doesn’t have much of an issue with white supremacy as long as it’s hidden well enough.

1

Anonymous #4 4w

You keep begging the question in this convo. Why is it favorable? I looked into “my son was a fan” he never said that lol he said in an interview “my son wasn’t a fan of him as much as he was familiar with him”

0

Anonymous #4 4w

Who tf everyone your the only who’s responded to me aside from dumb egg.

1

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

he platformed a vocal white supremacist as a sitting governor. That’s in part how it was favorable. I said that in my previous response too. It doesn’t matter if we only agreed with “some stuff”, him giving a white supremacist a major platform among democrats with a familiar face was immensely dangerous. and he’s now adopting the same type of ideological rhetoric that Kirk espoused.

1

Anonymous #4 4w

He didn’t define culturally normal but the example he gave was focusing less on pronouns. If I had to guess he’s saying most Americans don’t engage with the dynamics of non binary or trans pronouns. They do engage with table top issues which is what he said we should focus on. Idk why we would think that’s supposed to be a dog whistle.

0

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

and apologies, I had you and #2 mistaken. Still, others have been explaining in this thread how newsome has been spreading dogwhistles and engaging in troublesome rhetoric, which you still attempt to downplay and dismiss

1

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

because those are the rights of myself and countless others that he’s describing as not “culturally normal”, in a time where the federal government is attempting to criminalize us. why the fuck do I need to explain basic human decency to you?

1

Anonymous #4 4w

Why is it dog whistle? Why are we assuming that still? Again we’re begging the question.

0

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

holy fucking shit, are you blind or just willfully ignorant? read my last response to you for the already provided answer to your question. hiding discrimination behind coded or suggestive language, in order to minimize backlash while garnering support, is a dogwhistle.

3

Anonymous #4 4w

Why are you assuming he’s referring to your rights. We’re assuming so many weird things to make this statement bad. He said nothing about your rights when he elaborated on the phrase. It’s fine to say a thing is a dog whistle but you have to contextualize why you think it’s a dog whistle otherwise probably almost any statement could be construed as a dog whistle.

0

Anonymous #4 4w

No you didn’t why are you assuming it’s coded language?

0

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

and many of us already have, but YOU have not provided any reasoning as to why it isn’t. The only shit you’ve said is “oh we’re just assuming” “oh you don’t know what he meant” go ahead and tell us what he meant then. he quite plainly alluded to a subset of my community, which I am a part of said subset, and he previously stated that his support for gay marriage was a mistake as 7 has pointed out. why are YOU defending the straight white politician making homophobic and transphobic comments?

1

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

as I said above, scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds.

1

Anonymous #4 4w

How am I supposed to prove a negative lol what? I’m supposed to prove his statement isnt coded language to anti trans people how would I possible prove that? I already told you what it probably meant. No he didn’t when did ever say his support was a mistake? pls show me. He’s not making homophobic comments the burden of proof for that is on you not me.

1

Anonymous #4 4w

Can you prove unicorns aren’t real?

1

Anonymous #5 4w

It’s literally just a factual statement? Biden was clearly unfit for office, and yes the DNC keeps pivoting to the right. For fucks sake the heir apparent of the DNC (Gavin Newsom) is literally saying that his early support for gay marriage was a mistake, that we need to abandon LGBT rights to be a more “normal culture”, and let us not forget that his son “loved” Charlie Kirk, arguably the most famous white supremacist of the 21st century.

3

Anonymous #7 4w

When did he say it was mistake? pls post what you’re referencing. He didn’t say we should abandon lgbt rights he said we shouldn’t focus on pronouns over table top issues. When did his son say he loved Charlie Kirk?

4

Anonymous #7 4w

Post what you’re referencing for any this. If you’re referencing the recent cnn interview you’re just blatantly lying.

4

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

Tankies just fucking lie

2

Anonymous #5 4w

I don’t think it’s intentional, I just think they’re desperate to smear any mainstream dem presidential candidate so they justify not voting for them later. This is about keeping up the world view.

-2

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

He was literally expressing that he gets why other politicians waited to support gay marriage (i.e. that it was a bad move on his part, but which fortunately worked out). The man is a sociopath, he makes it extremely clear he believes in absolutely nothing. In the same interview he said we’ve gone way too far with transgender equality for instance, referring to his song bringing certain instances to his attention. Watch the interview. Oh and also watch the Charlie Kirk interview, where he says

5

Anonymous #7 4w

his son is a big fan

7

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

Half of it is from the CNN interview (all true), the rest is from when he literally had Charlie Kirk on his show and agreed with him and said how his kid is a big fan.

5

Anonymous #5 4w

Not a tankie…. blue_wave is a blue MAGA pos. Literally epstein’s strongest soldier.

4

Anonymous #7 4w

You can define Blue MAGA however you want, clearly none of you fucking vote so it really makes no difference to me, just please it might be more comfortable for you to jerk off alone in private.

0

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

I voted for Kamala Harris. I will vote for Gavin Newsom if he is the nominee. If Gavin Newsom is the nominee we are almost guaranteed to lose and I will end up in a concentration camp, so unfortunately I won’t be able to say “I told you so” when running an amoral, sociopathic neolib fails once again, because the average voter is basically cattle, and will always prefer sincere evil over evil insincere good.

1

Anonymous #7 4w

Take your fucking meds

-1

Anonymous #7 4w

There’s a difference between saying you understand why politicians waited bc of tactical political reasons vs saying you understand why they waited bc you think gay marriage is wrong. Don’t conflate the two. You’ve misrepresented most of this interview .

0

Anonymous #7 4w

No he’s not I can send you an interview where Gavin clarifies his statements during the Charlie Kirk interview and explains that his son isn’t a fan he’s just familiar with him. Literally this “his son was a fan” talking point came from rightwing podcasters who reacted to the interview.

-1

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

No I haven’t actually… he was saying that what they did was fine. Which is morally abhorrent. His words make it clear that his support of marriage equality was entirely a strategic move, not based on any principled moral position.

3

Anonymous #7 4w

To be clear you are just misrepresenting the interview and that’s where you gotten all of this from. I’m not blue maga I’ve criticized democrats before I just think the blatant lying is bad and gross.

-1

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

He literally fucking said his son was a fan dude what do you want me to say? He’s brought it up several times since, he literally brought it up recently in the context of his son showing him a video about trans athletes that swayed his opinion.

4

Anonymous #7 4w

When? pls post the source I’ll send you the interview clip.

-1

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

Blatant lying is when you analyze what people say and what it means instead of twisting yourself into knots to give them an unearned charitable interpretation. Explain to me how calling LGBT equality not a “real issue” isn’t reactionary, in a climate where the other side literally talks about “eradicating” them and gets applause for it?

5

Anonymous #7 4w

No blatantly lying is when you can’t produce the source for a quote you’ve repeated multiple times at this point when did he say his son was a fan?

0

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

Literally google it, I just pulled it up in a clip from WAAY 31 News and it’s right at the start of the video. He literally describes his son jumping up and down excited about the prospect of Kirk coming, and then insisting he has to skip school to be there for his interview with Kirk. And then after that Newsom claims he was “just familiar”. Does that sound like just familiarity? Afterwards news continues to marvel at how much his son “knows” about a bunch of other far right media figures.

6

Anonymous #7 4w

When did he say it wasn’t a real issue? Source anything you’re saying pls

0

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

Literally just commented it. He literally describes his sons major excitement about the interview, and only when asked again goes “he wasn’t a fan of him, as much as he was familiar” which anyone with a brain can tell is a lie.

3

Anonymous #7 4w

Pls watch the video you just referenced he literally explicitly says his son wasn’t a fan. You must actually be rage baiting you referenced a video where he says the opposite of what you’re claiming go to time stamp 0:50.

-1

Anonymous #7 4w

Omg you didn’t watch the full video

-1

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

You can’t send links here dumbass. We’re talking about the ABC interview. “we need to be less prone to spend a disproportionate amount of time on pronouns… identity politics. more focused on table top issues. *things that really matter*”. Democrats literally don’t talk about pronouns or identity politics, basically at all. These issues are in the current discussion politically entirely because Conservatives are obsessed with them. Why is he embracing the far right’s framing of the issue here?

6

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

He literally describes the behavior of an excited fan and then afterwards says “well I’d say he’s just familiar”. You people are so fucking disingenuous oh my god.

6

Anonymous #7 4w

Wait so you know the actual quote but you think he's pro Charlie Kirk bc he said his son knows him and wanted to see him? What's even claim at this point?

0

Anonymous #7 4w

So when you said “he literally fucking said his son was a fan” you realize that was a blatant right?

-1

Two separate issues? You’re on the wrong chain. He literally presents “identity politics” (the right wing’s term for any sort of social progressivism) as opposite to “things that really matter”. You don’t see the significance in saying this when the entire GOP platform is based on racism, homophobia and transphobia? There’s no value in refuting that nonsense or more importantly in protecting the rights of the millions of people that are affected by those issues?

5

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

He literally described his son being an exited fan of Kirk, and then when it was repeated by the interviewer he backtracked. So his kid is a nazi AND he’s a snake of a politician who just says what people want to hear.

4

Anonymous #7 4w

Do we seriously think a 12 year old is hard core conservative? Couldn’t he just see Charlie Kirk memes and want to see him bc of that or his friends know Charlie or some bs bc he’s 12? And even if we grant that he was a fan, does that mean Gavin is pro conservative bc his 12 year old son is a fan of Charlie Kirk? Ignoring the fact you just blatantly lied.

0

Anonymous #7 4w

He just said it shouldn’t be the focus. We’re delulu land right now.

-1

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

He didn’t say it shouldn’t be the focus, he said it wasn’t an issue that mattered. Republicans are fantasizing about murdering us all, it’s very clearly an issue that matters.

4

Anonymous #7 4w

You think a 12 year old believes in Nazism, from that? Again couldn’t he just be a stupid kid who saw a Charlie Kirk meme with his friends. Have you ever met a 12 year old? Why are we assuming so many things? Again after you lied btw.

0

Anonymous #7 4w

What do you think he’s talking about when he’s talking about “identity politics”? You think he means anything socially progressive why would you think that?

0

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

because that’s what it means in the current political climate? he’s literally using right wing language to describe what he objects to about purported democratic stances, what does he have some special unique definition of his own? when conservatives cry about identity politics that’s what they mean.

3

Anonymous #7 4w

Ok so we don’t know what identity politics mean. Identity politics is usually when your policy or rhetoric is aimed at a specific identity group instead of broad political body of some kind. You can have identity politics that’s trying to appeal to white cis people it’s not exclusive to progressive things.

1

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

Do you think that when conservatives (like Newsom) complain about identity politics that they’re upset about things that benefit cis white people?

3

Anonymous #7 4w

Why are you assuming hes a conservative? We have do so much mental gymnastics for each quote here 🫩. No when he’s complaining about identity politics if I had to guess he’s complaining about things like the trans bathroom debate, Neo pronouns, latinx. Stuff like that

-1

Anonymous #7 4w

I brought up cis people bc your definition of identity politics = anything progressive is just wrong.

1

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

So one important human rights issue that is kind of politically irrelevant (bathroom bills aren’t particularly popular, they’re literally a losing issue for the GOP because their voters are bored of it), and two nonissues that exist entirely in the minds of mentally ill conservatives? Why is he ceding ground like this? You don’t see any issue in him confirming the false picture of the DNC that Republicans present, because that’s basically what he’s saying.

5

Anonymous #7 4w

So if no one gives af, it’s a non issue and it just exists so conservatives can end any convo with questions like “what is women?” Etc. why tf would you focus on it?

0

Anonymous #7 4w

Yeah and you can confirm that false image by fighting on every stupid culture war issue that no one gaf about. Why do you think conservatives bring it up over and over bc they want liberals to fight them on that ground.

-1

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

Mask just slipped lmao, you think equality for LGBT people is “every stupid culture issue that no one gaf about”. Go burn in hell, Blue MAGA pos, people like you are precisely why we have Trump.

4

Anonymous #7 4w

Nope I said the bathroom debate is a stupid culture war issue that no one gaf about. You literally said it was non issue. I’ll pretend to be you so you understand how much of a dipshit you are “so you think trans rights are a non isssue??” You have to try so desperately to find evil intent in every statement so you can keep living in this wacky world You live in.

-2

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

there’s no point in continuing this nonsense. follow your leader, enjoy Trump 2028-2032, I’ll pray for you etc. You should really register as a Republican, you’d fit in better.

7

Anonymous #7 4w

You’re delusional, take a year long break from whatever mind fucking algorithm you’re in before you talk about politics again.

-2

Anonymous blue__wave 4w

I hope you’re getting paid to be this much of a shill

9

Anonymous #7 4w

You’re the only one who very purposefully just made up a quote that’s closer to shill behavior than anything I’ve done.

-2