What a compelling rebuttal of their points /s

Republicans never claimed not to be pedophiles, so I think that’s on us for assuming

AIPAC is funded by Israel, Republicans, and Democrats, so you can’t draw any strong conclusions about party affiliation from involvement in AIPAC alone. Further, AIPAC isn’t the only, or even the biggest, donor to Biden and Harris, so claiming they’re “bought and paid for” strains credulity.

MAGA isn’t solely characterized by Zionism, and not all Zionists are MAGA, so going from “Zionism” to “MAGA” is an unsubstantiated leap.

Finally, receiving donations from a death cult does not make one part of a death cult. Morally reprehensible? Yes.

They might label some people incorrectly as russian agents, but the reality is that there is a concerted effort by russia to undermine the US democracy, mostly directed at the Democratic Party, and making some mistakes doesn’t make them delusional.

It’s pretty hard to prosecute propaganda in the US due to the First Amendment, so it’s not accurate to say that just because the Greens can run, they must not be russian agents.

The concern about the Greens is eminently logical: they are never going to win, so the best they can do is take votes from the Democrats, allowing the fascists to win. This is in fact what happened in the election of Polk, leading to the Mexican-American war and the theft of Texas from Mexico, which was then admitted as an additional slave state. Further, the Greens do little to nothing other than run in big national races, so it’s not a leap to think they’re deliberately running a spoiler campaign.

Finally, none of that has anything to do with the silly attempt to label Democrats as “Blue MAGA”, since MAGA is a quasi-religious fascist personality cult, none of which can be credibly attributed to Democrats.

Blue MAGA

Lol. Lmao, even

I lost all confidence in it when it rated Jerusalem Post and Euronews (associated with Viktor Orban) as “highly reliable”. Both push the pro-fascist narratives of their associated governments. It’s better to have no labeling than to label fascist propaganda as “highly reliable”

I feel so bad for that girl. She looks shell shocked in every picture I’ve seen of this

I don’t, because there isn’t any

Because the liberal Supreme Court largely supported democracy, while the conservative one isn’t even trying to hide its promotion of fascism. There is no both sides here

I wonder what the trend of homicides by police looks like

“We will rebuild!”

Yeah, I read the good message, but then saw Homelander and thought, “makes fascists happy?”

It’s not

“Bolsheviks aren’t leftists” is an argument, bud. And what you’re supposed to do, if you want to respond, is address the argument, not something else that you find easier to attack

When we’ve decided on what the leftmost remaining instance is, we’ll know which one to call the tankie instance and say it has been promoting tankie propaganda.

No

I see a lot more whining about tankies than I see actual tankies.

It’s incorrect to assume that your personal experience is a good representation of reality in general

It won’t be that hard. When another instance promotes tankie propaganda, it’s the tankie instance. Dialectics really rots the brain, comrade.

Red fascism playbook: when there’s nothing bad to accuse leftists of, make up some future offense

Nothing about that changes the fact that Bolsheviks aren’t leftists. You guys have never seen an argument that you didn’t dodge with a red herring or straw man.

No, stating that a popular revolt against a corrupt leader is the result of our actions is denying their agency

How much do you bet?