2
duckduck 2 points ago +2 / -0

Fun fact: handedness is the only trait identified that has inverse correlation with identical twins, meaning it is almost certainly not genetic. It is now believed to be due to the position of the baby in the womb; twins have different positions in the womb and are thus much more likely to have different dominant hands than the general population average.

2
duckduck 2 points ago +2 / -0

I doubt it, but the liberals are naturally selecting against themselves with gay/trans shit, chopping off their kids genitals, having mass amounts of abortions, and having super ugly dyke women who no dude wants to sleep with.

13
duckduck 13 points ago +13 / -0

"Facts show" and "very likely" generally don't go in the same sentence. Either it is fact, or it is probable, not both.

2
duckduck 2 points ago +2 / -0

Why though? Unless the Republicans gain 17 senate seats in the midterms, removal won't be possible, it would be just a meaningless gesture like the 2 against Trump. Plus even if removal occurred, then we'd have Harris, and be very careful what you wish for.

3
duckduck 3 points ago +3 / -0

Piers is kind of a fag, but I do like him in this argument. And every time he brings up something that short-haired chick doesn't want to acknowledge, then she says "that's irrelevant." I would have played the same game and said "that's irrelevant" to everything she said.

1
duckduck 1 point ago +1 / -0

I've been around universities, and all these smart people, they all know men can't get pregnant, but they refuse to say so, they are too scared of the social ramifications. Revolting behavior from scientists, their entire job is to find the truth no matter how disappointing to certain agendas it may be. But the pregnant men thing will only take a couple big-name people to admit it and it will create a tidal wave, because no one actually believes it, they just need permission to say so.

In terms of convincing Democrat-voters, it is basically just as good to get a would-be Democrat voter to refuse to vote. They don't have to actually vote Republican, they can just be disgusted enough to not vote Democrat (or not vote at all). It's a net-gain. So the line of "Democrats are too crazy to vote for" is a very effective strategy.

4
duckduck 4 points ago +4 / -0

They are immune specifically in regards to the covid "vaccine" gene-therapy, given blanket immunity by our wonderful government.

1
duckduck 1 point ago +1 / -0

The "dick saw" line is funny, but it's even more funny hearing the crowd "laughing," it sounds like only the paid crew of "laugh leaders" are laughing and the rest of the crowd is silent. Democrats have this circuit in their brain where something can only be funny if it is actively promoting their agenda, only once that criteria is met will the laugh circuit be activated. Also, I kind of hope that Dems like Mahr continue to stay silent about the trans-kid thing, because there has never been an easier reason for parents to vote Republican in my lifetime than to keep teacher's hands and minds off their kid's genitals.

by Tevhbro
3
duckduck 3 points ago +3 / -0

Corporations ultimately are going to like capitalism over communism. They can get fooled for a while, after long periods of success, but when that cash flow starts closing up significantly, all of the sudden they are pro-market again.

1
duckduck 1 point ago +1 / -0

Fingerprints could help, but the problem is the people who are supposed to verify the fingerprints could just say..."yup, it's a match, because it voted Democrat."

18
duckduck 18 points ago +18 / -0

That is horrible. Doctors and vax manufacturers are immune from liability, but at least one state has recently ruled that employers who mandated the vax could be held liable for vax injuries if the employees felt forced to take it.

1
duckduck 1 point ago +1 / -0

Each state would have to pass it through the legislature themselves, but it might be a way that the swing/cheating states could limit the cheating without having to admit that they cheated, or that the method they used previously was rife with potential for fraud. I know they should have to admit that, but they'll want to save face. They can move to district electoral votes as saying candidates would need to appeal to more parts of a state to win, or whatever, without explicitly mentioning fraud.

1
duckduck 1 point ago +1 / -0

Not sure whether I agree with this point of view, but that is something the enemy would say to keep their opponent passive from doing anything...

1
duckduck 1 point ago +1 / -0

No, actually that was the one thing Fauci said was okay, at the very height of the covid panic, when not much information was known, and everyone was wearing masks, someone asked Fauci in a press conference type thing if it was still okay to "hook up with strangers." Despite being the # 1 activity for spreading disease, Fauci said that behavior, and only that behavior, was up to the individual person to make that choice. So shut society all the way down...but we still have to be bale to have sex with strangers, let's not go crazy there people!

2
duckduck 2 points ago +2 / -0

Or, more likely, everything single thing she does gets excused because she is a black woman, and anyone who criticizes her for anything is a racist and sexist.

1
duckduck 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes it is. It is listed in the DSM-V, which is used by every psychiatrist and psychologist to diagnose virtually all mental disorders.

1
duckduck 1 point ago +1 / -0

Impeachment is a waste of money, time, energy, and brain cells. Sure, Biden could get impeached...but for actual removal they would need at least 17 Democrat senators to vote for removal. That will never happen in a million years. It has never happened before, it likely never will, and I actually doubt Nixon would have got voted for removal if he hadn't resigned. Plus...why would we want Biden removed, we all know Kamala is worse!

view more: Next ›