/pol/ - Today, President Trump retweeted an article from the satirical news website The Babylon Bee. The Babylon Bee is like the onion, but for conservatives. Dumb boomers have been falling for satirical articles for pretty much forever, but this is the first time


/pol/ - Politically Incorrect

[Return] [Go to Bottom] [Catalog]

File: Screenshot_2020-10-16 (Fro….png (157.33 KB, 598x665, 598:665, 1602854457488.png) [Show in Hex Viewer] [Reverse Image search]

 No.1880[D]

Today, President Trump retweeted an article from the satirical news website The Babylon Bee. The Babylon Bee is like the onion, but for conservatives. Dumb boomers have been falling for satirical articles for pretty much forever, but this is the first time that a World Leader has. This is possibly the dumbest thing that Trump has done throughout his entire presidency.

Blumpf is literally over this time.

Link to the Tweets:
https://twitter.com/search?q=(From%3ArealDonaldTRump)%20%22Big%20T%22

 No.1881[D][DF]

File: Screenshot_2020-10-16 The ….png (395.33 KB, 598x422, 299:211, 1602854533105.png) [Show in Hex Viewer] [Reverse Image search]

The Babylon Bee's own twitter calls itself fake news.

 No.1883[D][DF]

>>1880
>Blumpf
Nice meme redditor

 No.1884[D][DF]

>>1883
[spoiler]Drumpf was the reddit meme.[/spoiler]
[spoiler]Blumpf was our ironic mockery of it.[/spoiler]
[spoiler]nigger.[/spoiler]

 No.1885[D][DF]

>>1884
Pretty funny when you search Blumpf reddit is the first result.

 No.1886[D][DF]

>>1885
First result for me is a Snopes article about the gay "Drumpf" thing.

 No.1887[D][DF]

File: 97462952.jpg (10.97 KB, 237x213, 79:71, 1602855869760.jpg) [Show in Hex Viewer] [Reverse Image search]

>>1880
>Blumpf is literally over this time.
lmao
What I know for sure is that leftist media will jump all over this gaffe in order to push their standard agenda.
Biden has done shit like this too many times to count, but the consequences he faces are always much smaller since he's got the giant media outlets on his side like CNN. Look at the latest Hunter Biden info-leak incident. When were you when that was announced?
Why didn't you say then that "Biden blatantly lied and was heavily involved in his son's business".
In the meanwhile you're saying it's "over for Trump" because of a fucken tweet.
So tell me please, which one of these is a larger offense and should have more consequences:
A retarded tweet
or
Abusing your power and taxpayer money to aid your son's private business aswell as publicly denying it several times.
>>1884
From this post it sounds like you were deliberately baiting from the start but it's a terrible unfortune that there are definitely real leftists with that attitude towards this.
>>1885
lolz

 No.1888[D][DF]

>>1886
>>1886
Every search engine I know reddit imagines come up when you search "Blumpf"? And wdym "our ironic mockery of it" this is 22chan we do not use reddit compremised memes.

 No.1890[D][DF]

File: 1600395667900.jpg (260.96 KB, 1024x1024, 1:1, 1602924937906.jpg) [Show in Hex Viewer] [Reverse Image search]

Beware of this thread anons

 No.1891[D][DF]

>>1890
It is clear that this is a slide thread. When he faced little resistance he stopped participating in the thread.

 No.1892[D][DF]

>>1890
>>1891
OP maybe wanted to share this slightly amusing event without getting into an argument of media bias against trump. You can't expect people to always be ready to argue against you.
To call it a "slide thread" because you dislike what it says isn't very fair imo. Nobody was accusing the thread posting an ignorant and deceptive nationalvanguard article of being a "slide thread", but that shit was miles worse than this.
And yeah, saying "blumpf is literally over this time" maybe isn't the most intelligent way to start discussion, but this is /pol/. Don't get your expectations too high (even here on 22chan sadly)

Anyway regardless of what mistakes biden makes which aren't highlighted by the media the fact that trump unironically reposted a parody article is interesting.
I think it showcases his approach to communication, which is to say a lot of bullshit. Don't get me wrong, I don't mean it in a bad or good way. It's just an effective political strategy that has probably been around for a very long time.
And personally I don't like biden or hillary any better than trump

 No.1893[D][DF]

>>1892
There is a /pol/ humor thread for a reason. Making a thread to me is making a statement. OP posted in the /pol/ humor thread prior to making this post. Knowing that I believe OP is being serious and is trying be divisive and sow doubt in potential Trump voters. Shills also do not want honest discussion. OP can always post and clear things up if he wants.

 No.1895[D][DF]

>>1893
>is trying be divisive and sow doubt in potential Trump voters
You are accusing him of an ulterior motive, but personally I don't see any grounds for it. He's reporting a real, worthwhile fact, with source. He's being bait-y, but this is /pol/, what did you expect?
So to me it's "innocent until proven guilty"
I'm not sure what is meant by "slide" thread, but as far as I understand the goal is to fill the catalog with shitty threads pushing an idea. This is only one thread, as such doesn't look like a slide thread. Maybe OP will make a bunch of other threads later, but until then it doesn't make sense to call this a slide thread imo
>OP can always post and clear things up if he wants.
What is there to "clear up"? That he's not a shill because you said so?

 No.1896[D][DF]

>>1895
>He's reporting a real, worthwhile fact, with source
>Twitter
Pick one
>He's being bait-y, but this is /pol/, what did you expect?
I want standards I am not on 4chan for a reasons. I want an actual discussion rather than hah hah Trump is a dumb boomer. Slide threads take away from actual discussions by just angering and distracting people.
>So to me it's "innocent until proven guilty"
Heh heh, his inaction shows what kind of person he is. On a imageboard you will face resistance if you say something objectable to another user. If you are honest you would explain yourself. He is either a newfag or a shill.
>That he's not a shill because you said so?
The person who posted that slide thread poster agrees with me. He needs to explain his intentions if he wants to not be known as a shill.

 No.1897[D][DF]

>>1896
>>He's reporting a real, worthwhile fact, with source
>>Twitter
>Pick one
A link to a tweet is a reliable source that that tweet was made.
A tweet is a thing a person says. What the US president says is relevant to /pol/.
It follows I can pick two.


>I want standards I am not on 4chan for a reasons.

Personally I find a lot of posts on 22chan/pol/ low quality, with little thought put into them, and often end up "baited" by them. Calling this thread a "slide thread" is an example of that.
On the other hand I suspect 4chan/pol/ is worse. That's why I'm here, and that's why I bother replying.


>I want an actual discussion rather than hah hah Trump is a dumb boomer.

Where's the actual discussion m8? Have you seen the catalog? We have a rule-breaking ylyl thread, "Who wants to punch his face?", "drop redpill" and many other gems.
Only one thread every three or four isn't shit here. A shitty nazi thread with no discussion is still a shitty nazi thread. However somehow you only care when there's a shitty thread carrying an opinion you don't agree with.


>Heh heh, his inaction shows what kind of person he is. On a imageboard you will face resistance if you say something objectable to another user. If you are honest you would explain yourself.

Heh heh, you are implying that all honest people on ibs like getting in long-winded arguments with strangers on the internet, no matter the circumstance.
Also OP at first replied to initial criticism. And again:
>you would explain yourself
You are attacking him on no grounds, therefore he doesn't have anything to explain. He can't counter-argue if there is nothing to argue against, as your accusations are completely baseless.


>The person who posted that slide thread poster agrees with me

So that makes you two people baselessly accusing a third one, great argument.


Also, good job at ignoring my point that a solitary slide thread like this one doesn't make any sense.

 No.1898[D][DF]

>>1897
>plebbit spacing
kill yourself

 No.1899[D][DF]

>>1898
>plebbit spacing.
No, paragraph division. Specifically for retards like you I put an effort into dividing paragraphs with three newlines


Instead of 2,

which is what reddit spacing is considered to be from my understanding. You could've also noticed my ample use of single
newlines, but oh well. I ask too much. Thanks for the example of 22/pol/ post quality though

 No.1900[D][DF]

File: 2 newlines.png (1.58 KB, 110x72, 55:36, 1603040770134.png) [Show in Hex Viewer] [Reverse Image search]

>>1899
You dumb fuck that's exactly what plebbit spacing is. 2 blank newlines between "paragraphs." I see enough plebbit kikes incorrectly greentexting and doing retarded spacing like this enough already on 4cuck, I don't want to see that shit here aswell.
How difficult is it to keep that shit out of here?

 No.1901[D][DF]

>>1900

I always thought this

was

reddit

spacing

 No.1902[D][DF]

>>1901
Congrats, you thought wrong.
Now that this retarded part of your post is out of the way let's get to your other points.
>>1892
>You are accusing him of an ulterior motive, but personally I don't see any grounds for it.
Yes, because saying "blumpf is literally over" truly is an unbiased statement, which is coming from a competent expert of politics.
An anti-trump leftist gets called out on being an anti-trump leftist and for whatever reason that somehow is "debatable" and "needs to be proven."

 No.1903[D][DF]

>>1902
>Congrats, you thought wrong.
According to the urban dictionary, I am correct.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=reddit%20spacing
>Using two newlines to separate paragraphs, instead of only one
I used three, because I still wanted to have visually distinct paragraphs, but also wanted to avoid using reddit-spacing.
You must've confused two newlines with two empty lines (which is 3 newlines)

 No.1904[D][DF]

>>1897
>Twitter
Twitter has proven itself to be not trustworthy. Just look at the Hunter Biden stuff, Bitchute links, and Kyle Rittenhouse. All of those events have been censored by Twitter. Trump himself has been censored by Twitter. It is dumb to trust Twiiter knowing that.
>22chan/pol/ low quality
This is worse than usual.
>Only one thread every three or four isn't shit here.
Get /out/ then.
>However somehow you only care when there's a shitty thread carrying an opinion you don't agree with.
Now you are trying to discredit me. Typical leftist tactics.
>Also OP at first replied to initial criticism
That is not enough. You shouldn't leave a active thread just because you don't like what they are saying.
>You are attacking him on no grounds
You called me a nazi on no grounds. You sound so disingenuous.
>So that makes you two people baselessly accusing a third one, great argument.
And your arguments are flawless? Nice reddit spacing too.

 No.1905[D][DF]

>>1897
>Personally I find a lot of posts on 22chan/pol/ low quality, with little thought put into them, and often end up "baited" by them.
Dude why haven't you reqested that they get moved to /trash/ yet?
I did back in the day and like one or two got removed. i think the request thread's still up in /b/ or something.
Either way this thread's gay simpily because it's a discussion on such a short topic, and if he made a thread about shitty political tweets (and dump like several posts that he made and have a discussion why it's retarded) would have been diffrent. the whole "its over" is an overused 4chan /pol/ anti trump thingy any way so..
also where did op go

 No.1906[D][DF]

>>1902
>Yes, because saying "blumpf is literally over" truly is an unbiased statement, which is coming from a competent expert of politics.
>An anti-trump leftist gets called out on being an anti-trump leftist and for whatever reason that somehow is "debatable" and "needs to be proven."
OP wasn't accused of being biased, or a leftist, or anti-trump. Those are all true. He was accused of making "slide threads".
I think there's nothing wrong with being anti-trump or a leftist. Everyone can have their own political opinion, which you can agree/disagree with, and that's fine.
Also I feel like all people here are biased to some extent, me included. If this mistake was made by biden, would this thread have been criticized the same? But it's ok to be a bit biased, as long as we're able to reason logically.
The problem to me is that this guy got accused of being a shill: accused of making threads not to share news, or to discuss things, but as part of a plan of filling up the catalog with intentionally shit content to convince as many people as possible of his point of view via sheer repetition in a similar way to how repetition advertising works.
Being "biased", "leftist" and "anti-trump" doesn't mean that you are a shill and that your threads are slide threads. There is an abysmal difference: the first is a personal opinion, the second is board sabotage. This thread was called a slide thread for no reason at all imo.
With that out the way, the thread is mediocre. It's bait, plus not really a great source for discussion
>>1904
>Twitter has proven itself to be not trustworthy
Are you implying that trump never tweeted that, and that twitter fabricated that tweet? I'm pretty sure trump would say something about it if that was the case.
If not, then twitter's a reliable source for the specific topic discussed. Period.
>Get /out/ then.
I mostly try to ignore this board. But I care about 22chan, and by extension this place, so I can't resist to try to reason with the people here sometimes
>Now you are trying to discredit me
By "you" I didn't mean just you specifically. But I guess I got a little overboard there, sorry. In fact I am wrong. Low effort nazi stuff has actually been called out here before, just checked.
>You called me a nazi on no grounds.
I did not call you a nazi. I said that you'd be more prone to ignore a shitty nazi thread than a shitty leftwing thread. But now I see that that's not necessarily true. My mistake.
So, disregarding unjust accusations, do you agree that there is no reason to believe this is in fact a "slide" thread? I can agree that this thread is mediocre (because of the "blumpf is over" bait part)
>>1905
Fair. I didn't request because I was under the impression that my view of trashness contrasted with how people perceived the threads. But maybe I should

 No.1907[D][DF]

>>1906
>Are you implying that trump never tweeted that, and that twitter fabricated that tweet?
No, it is not fabricated. I was just trying to say twitter is not a worthwhile platform what so ever. I cannot take the site seriously when it is prone to censorship. I can't take the site seriously as a source because of all the censorship it is involved in.
>So, disregarding unjust accusations, do you agree that there is no reason to believe this is in fact a "slide" thread?
It is very suspicious to me because of how close the election is. Early voting is occurring now. A lot of the crappy threads here are crossposted on other sites and should probably go. It is impossible to know the OP's intentions. This thread does overlap with things mentioned in this link explaining what slide threads.
https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/179136455/

 No.1913[D][DF]

>>1907
>No, it is not fabricated. I was just trying to say twitter is not a worthwhile platform what so ever. I cannot take the site seriously when it is prone to censorship. I can't take the site seriously as a source because of all the censorship it is involved in.
I agree with that. When I was saying it is a valid source, I meant it was so for this specific thing, not in general in any way.
>It is impossible to know the OP's intentions.
That's my point. Until we actually find this same thread on another chan or we see any concrete evidence that it's shilling I think it's wrong to call it that.
Regarding the link, the description is a bit generic imo.
Suspicion is fair, but you can't straight out accuse people because of suspicion

 No.1914[D][DF]

>>1913
>I meant it was so for this specific thing
Fair enough with this specific topic. Broadly Twitter is full of mouthbreathers so out of hand I dismiss Twitter as a serious springboard into discussion. I just get a visceral reaction seeing twitter used as a source with all the idiocy on that site. My negative reaction was probably relating to my general feelings more than this situation.
>Regarding the link, the description is a bit generic imo.
I think it was suppose to be generic. Did you mean vague?
>Suspicion is fair, but you can't straight out accuse people because of suspicion
I did engage with him before I made any assessments of OP. I just stated my opinion with the evidence I've seen. Am I biased? Probably.

 No.1915[D][DF]

>>1906
>Fair. I didn't request because I was under the impression that my view of trashness contrasted with how people perceived the threads. But maybe I should

Honestly you'd be suprised how at least some regulars feel about these threads. either we get invaded by rude faggots or it's just cross board spam 24/7, back in the day people complained on /sg/ that /pol/ was too civil. all what /pol/ needs is new, better threads, more posters, and removal of absolute shit threads and it'll be spick and span. Being vigil about board quality also helps.

 No.1916[D][DF]

>>1914
>Did you mean vague?
Yeah
>I did engage with him before I made any assessments of OP. I just stated my opinion with the evidence I've seen. Am I biased? Probably.
I see. Well, I guess all I did was voice my opinion too (even if I probably could've worded it better)
>>1915
makes sense

 No.1917[D][DF]

>>1916
>Yeah
It probably is to someone who isn't as familiar to what slide threads are.
>I see. Well, I guess all I did was voice my opinion too
This conversation has kinda transformed this thread lole.
>>1915
>>1916
>back in the day people complained on /sg/
Maybe this needs to be done for the current state of /pol/. Be sure to report the threads that are low quality and explain in detail why they are bad.

 No.1918[D][DF]

https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/kayleigh-mcenany-locked-out-of-twitter-for-sharing-posts-hunter-biden-story/
uhhh so it turns out recently twitter has started blocking and banning people who have been sharing the hunter biden story for "fake news" and "hacked media"

 No.1919[D][DF]

>>1918
Yeah, Trump is sort of running against the media and big tech in a sense. (((They))) are pulling all the stops to stop Trump.

 No.1920[D][DF]

what the fuck does hacked media even mean? like it wasnt even hacked, and the media on the laptop was actual real stuff.

 No.1921[D][DF]

>>1920
The mainstream media like MSNBC, CNN, FOX, etc. I am referring to approved sources of news.

 No.1922[D][DF]

>>1921
no, i was referring to the article/ twitters actions, their excuse is that the news related to the laptop is a bannable offence because it was leaked information. although there isnt any proof yet i'm thinking they've been payed off.

 No.1923[D][DF]

unless their just retarded but i highly doubt that. kinda ironic considering how the babylon bee article became real.

 No.1930[D][DF]

>>1922
Trump is more likely to do something about social media censorship than Biden so it is obvious who Twitter would support.

 No.1932[D][DF]

>>1930
i wonder if biden payed them off or it's just a socialist thing



[Reply to this Thread]

[Return] [Go to top] [Catalog]
[Post a Reply]