That’s a cutie pie.

Tobogganing.

deleted by creator

Poisoned by repeatedly using the “explains a lot” dismissive and rude passive aggression, since your very first response to me.

We’re done.

See that’s the problem. You’ve poisoned the space between us, I have no patience to engage with you further and have this discussion on the actual merits of the fucking political point which I would have liked to have in the first place. Do better by our community next time.

Hate the guy all you like. I’m not a fan either. But that’s not what I was talking about. I was talking about the political point he made. You turned it into a debate about his character, and with the weird “explains much” shit, into a debate about my character. You could have said “that guy’s a douche” and I’d have responded with “yup but the douche is making a good point”. Instead you chose toxicity and vitriol. Maybe chill a bit.

The passive aggressive “explains much” angle you have now repeated twice is kind of weird.

You’re judging his internal state of mind and disposition. I don’t give a flipping fuck about it right now. Even if he is just a champagne socialist virtue signaling, the objectively observable thing is “popular influencer is putting a political blackmail of the dem establishment in the discourse agenda”. Even under your set of assumptions his champaign socialist virtue signaling is not without real political impact.

I mean fuck, an even shallower piece of nothing is sitting in the white house and his vapid brainfarts are for sure creating political impacts.

My sibling in christ, even virtue signaling is a kind of politics.

What a bizarre response. Nowhere did I claim that he’s an organizer. Public political speech by a prominent political broadcast commentator (yea that’s what “viral streaming influencer” used to be called in the 1900s) is …not nothing. Saying he isn’t doing anything is like saying that political speech doesn’t do anything.

Edit: you added the champagne socialist bit. Do I look like I care about this guy personally? He’s an influential political commentator that made a good point. In this thread it drew reactions from the “blu no matter whu” crowd and I called that out. That’s it.

If your reaction to this is outrage, you’re politically juvenile. It’s early 2026, this is exactly the time to be doing this kind of politics. If you already now signal to the Democratic Party establishment your capitulation, why should your concerns even be taken into account. Piker is putting the gun on the table at exactly the right time. Grow up.

I didn’t make fun of them though.

That’s how you got Irish Americans

Motherfucker, Dickens told you exactly the answer 200 years ago. Here’s the fucking Muppet version: https://youtu.be/UIaJcjJReCU

What a ridiculous characterization.

This guy was making sure to tick every antisemitic trope in the book.

Timothy Snyder made a great point recently about how in the post-Trump Maga landscape, the Vance camp could take a hard antisemitic turn as a way to consolidate itself by purging Miller.

I wouldn’t at all be surprised if the whole Epstein saga is used as the “stab in the back” myth to also cut the trumpists losses with Israel. The MTG crowd is already taking this course, not because of any kind of solidarity to Palestinian liberation of course.

Edit: and who would be targetted first? Progressive jews of course.

Dangerous times, very dangerous.

I think it’s such an important issue that the implementation of the law should be delayed until a consensus opinion is reached.

So you mean the state will make a decision about …dogma? 😈

Ask very innocently: which version.

The problem with this framing is that it still places Israeli authorities at the position of arbiter of truth.