380
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2026
380 points (100.0% liked)
Comic Book Shitposting
115 readers
151 users here now
For all your comic/manga/graphic novel shitposting needs.
founded 5 days ago
MODERATORS
Is.this accurate? He was deeply conservative and a creationist. Buy I don't belive there are credible indycators of him being a racist, were there?
It’s accurate if one was and emotional lunatic yes.
If you (vocally) support racists who are actively pushing racist ideology and legislation, then what's the functional difference?
He might have just been very brainwashed, tribalistic.
Actually fuck it, that's is functionaly just as bad.
Who exactly do you mean? I'm not being snarky. Thats genuine question.
As an example, when a known, unrepentant sexual predator runs for a high government office, anything other than "no, they are an evil person" is quiet support of their behavior.
It's much worse when the support is vocal and strong, it means their behavior is acceptable because they agree on other points.
"Oh sure, he raped/abused people/kids, but he really stands up for free-speech/gun rights/lower taxes/lower crime/healthcare."
It doesn't matter, their actions and choices have fundamentally shown they are evil, and are not doing anything to atone.
The fact that my statement applies to SO MANY people in office is just devastating.
So unnamed person is trump, right? Wouldn't that mean that US is almost exclusively KKK racists?
Wut?
I said it applies to a lot, and I mean a lot, of people in office. I didn't even say the US.
Also, what's the leap in logic there?
Supporting a (despicable trait) person doesn't automatically make you a (despicable trait) person, but it does make you someone who thinks there's a level of excuse for (despicable trait)
He's your twice-elected peoples representative. Which by definition means that minority of "the people" "acctively oppose him". So everyone else met the same "anything less" criterion that was set for Norris.
Please read my comment again, slowly, instead of making up your own ideas of what you think I meant.
What your ment is clear. Im talking about logical implication of what you wrote.
Your use of "almost exclusively" completely loses the concept. You are confusing individual support and majority voting. Just because Trump is president doesn't mean everyone supports him regardless of his crimes. Many people did, yes. But not even close to everyone.
No, I'm not talking about people who suported him. I talk about people who didn't oppose him. That's objective majority. And they fail to meet your "anything less than sounding 'no he's an evil person'" standard.
There was a saying in the 40s.
"What do you call a table with 6 nazis and 6 German farmers?"
"A dozen Nazis having dinner."
But... doesn't that mean that Democrats are Nazis, too?
You know, since they are sitting at the table with the Nazis
yes, well...anyone who takes that AIPAC $
no hes asking you to name them, not wax poetic man