Literally bent whichever way the wind blows, until authoritarian COVID raises its head.
All aboard the Trump train
Despite significant evidence otherwise, boards the Biden train on Nov 5+
Loses half his subscriber base and then starts to shill onto the Trump train again
Supplementary Arguments:
Shills for literally every CCP social change program to support his low moral fiber
Claims to be agnostic which means he's likely conflicted about genocide
Films himself taking a mental shit consistently.
Has consistent panic porn sessions where he talks about how his tiny brain is going schizo on the world ending.
Sorry, nobody puts out 4+ hours a day and have the content be "decent" by any standard. I don't care about his personality. I don't need someone to read me a news article for 20 minutes that I can read in 3. I especially don't care about a pundit's feelings apart from maybe they were tortured in a prison camp. Sorry, that care is reserved for lovers, friends and fam.
He still has too much faith in the state. (his oxymoronic left libertarianism)
Evidence isn't proof and I doubt he's looked very much into it. He's keeping his channel up.
Of course lefties would leave his channel. That's a consequence of getting red pilled. THATS THE DAMN GOAL.
I don't know if he realizes there's no middle anymore.
He's said he's a theist.
He's stated he's pro-life.
That's what video/media personalities do (now do bannon, tucker, hannity, ingram, doore, crowder, rubin, shapiro, etc.) All these shows are the same format with different takes. It's one you don't like so you have to REEE.
It's probably too much content and a more focused look on stories would be cool but that's not what his channel is even though that's what you want it to be.
Pro-Life personally vs Pro-Life Government control
Does the government have the right to ban this outright no exceptions?
and are there times where it would be a considered action?
The solution doesn't lie within the law of this topic. It lies with prevention. You can't abort a baby if one was never made in the first place. The only reason the government aggravates this issue is the money factor.
The libertarian stance is commonly: I can be pro-life but the government cant legislate on this.
To be fair to him, if he put out a 15 minute summary of his prior day's coverage, it'd be something I'd skim. The "in-depth" coverage got to be damn near 4chan levels of schizoposting.
Yes, Davos is ready to turn us all into milkable consoomers. Yes, globalists shills are horrid. I really didn't need to be told about that every freaking story. The backgrounding on his analysis was repetitive, brief, and shallow.
I think 15 minutes would be about the time that I'd want to hear from him on a daily basis.
u made that up
Nope. Let's revisit the timeline
Supplementary Arguments:
Sorry, nobody puts out 4+ hours a day and have the content be "decent" by any standard. I don't care about his personality. I don't need someone to read me a news article for 20 minutes that I can read in 3. I especially don't care about a pundit's feelings apart from maybe they were tortured in a prison camp. Sorry, that care is reserved for lovers, friends and fam.
Correct. Although Rush did it in 3 hours.
Covid was a lot of ppl wake up call.
He still has too much faith in the state. (his oxymoronic left libertarianism)
Evidence isn't proof and I doubt he's looked very much into it. He's keeping his channel up.
Of course lefties would leave his channel. That's a consequence of getting red pilled. THATS THE DAMN GOAL.
I don't know if he realizes there's no middle anymore.
He's said he's a theist. He's stated he's pro-life. That's what video/media personalities do (now do bannon, tucker, hannity, ingram, doore, crowder, rubin, shapiro, etc.) All these shows are the same format with different takes. It's one you don't like so you have to REEE.
It's probably too much content and a more focused look on stories would be cool but that's not what his channel is even though that's what you want it to be.
Fair points. Also, when I last heard from him, he was a pro-choicer. Must have changed that in the past few months as well.
this is one of those topics the parties massacre.
Pro-Life personally vs Pro-Life Government control
Does the government have the right to ban this outright no exceptions? and are there times where it would be a considered action?
The solution doesn't lie within the law of this topic. It lies with prevention. You can't abort a baby if one was never made in the first place. The only reason the government aggravates this issue is the money factor.
The libertarian stance is commonly: I can be pro-life but the government cant legislate on this.
To be fair to him, if he put out a 15 minute summary of his prior day's coverage, it'd be something I'd skim. The "in-depth" coverage got to be damn near 4chan levels of schizoposting.
Yes, Davos is ready to turn us all into milkable consoomers. Yes, globalists shills are horrid. I really didn't need to be told about that every freaking story. The backgrounding on his analysis was repetitive, brief, and shallow.
I think 15 minutes would be about the time that I'd want to hear from him on a daily basis.
no ones making u watch