I don't have much of an opinion on Q either way in all honesty. Being pro free speech and with anti-censorship pretty high on my priorities list I don't have a problem with it and from a political strategy standpoint I see its pluses and minuses. It certainly got a lot of people engaged in the election and in Trump's re-election and I would assume they all turned out to vote for him too.
If Trump had literally nothing to do with it and/or didn't know who was behind it I would want to know what he was thinking not distancing himself from it further. Not saying disavow just some clear distancing. So that is really still the question. Then again you wonder if it would've mattered as far as the media is concerned. They obviously have no scruples and tying Trump to Q is questionable in the first place. It's not like he ever really "embraced" it I would say. Just kind of maybe played coy in a few clips I saw.
I mostly don't understand why our side is still trying to play the ridiculous and one-sided "disavow game." Our record is like 0-987. We should have a default mode of just bringing up free speech and ending the conversation at that. Let the Democrats be the moralists they seem to want to be that in every other aspect of governance.
Well I would want to talk to his campaign then. Because unless they were somehow affiliated or at least a known entity the Q strategy is kind of bizarre IMO. Again, not sure it would've made that much difference (distancing) because there is no closeness that actually exists in the first place, of course unless it does and their is some connection/affiliation.
At the end of the day its really not like we know more about "Q" now than we did before. That's why I put quotes around it because you can barely tangibly define it as an actual thing.
Upvote for having a sense of humor.
I don't have much of an opinion on Q either way in all honesty. Being pro free speech and with anti-censorship pretty high on my priorities list I don't have a problem with it and from a political strategy standpoint I see its pluses and minuses. It certainly got a lot of people engaged in the election and in Trump's re-election and I would assume they all turned out to vote for him too.
If Trump had literally nothing to do with it and/or didn't know who was behind it I would want to know what he was thinking not distancing himself from it further. Not saying disavow just some clear distancing. So that is really still the question. Then again you wonder if it would've mattered as far as the media is concerned. They obviously have no scruples and tying Trump to Q is questionable in the first place. It's not like he ever really "embraced" it I would say. Just kind of maybe played coy in a few clips I saw.
I mostly don't understand why our side is still trying to play the ridiculous and one-sided "disavow game." Our record is like 0-987. We should have a default mode of just bringing up free speech and ending the conversation at that. Let the Democrats be the moralists they seem to want to be that in every other aspect of governance.
Well I would want to talk to his campaign then. Because unless they were somehow affiliated or at least a known entity the Q strategy is kind of bizarre IMO. Again, not sure it would've made that much difference (distancing) because there is no closeness that actually exists in the first place, of course unless it does and their is some connection/affiliation.
At the end of the day its really not like we know more about "Q" now than we did before. That's why I put quotes around it because you can barely tangibly define it as an actual thing.