He didn’t. “The only garbage I see is his supporter’s” garbage, i.e, it’s the possessive “'s”. The clue here is ‘is’, singular. If he meant a group of people, he’d have said ‘are’, plural.
Anyway, Trump called the whole country a garbage can, so if you’re so desperately offended by your misunderstanding of Biden’s comments, I guess you’re also pretty torn up about Trump’s actual comments, right?
Nice try. He clearly said all Trump supporters are garbage.
No, he didn’t. Both the context and the grammar make it clear that my interpretation is correct. Even if you interpret it unsumpathetically, the inference that it’s ‘all’ Trump supporters is something you’ve added.
Any Trump supporter pretending to be offended by what Biden didn’t actually say is in any case a massive hypocrite, because Trump built his political career on being offensive. They can’t turn around now and act all offended unless they also repudiate Trump.
None of that changes the fact that Biden called Trump supporters trash.
The fact that he didn’t call them trash is the salient point here.
I mean, apart from anything else, the word he used, whatever it was applied to, was ‘garbage’.
It was applied to Trump supporters.
No, he didn’t, bot.
People, don’t feed the troll bots.
It’s on video. He struggles to get there but he ovibiosly says it.
Nope. He says “His supporters’ [garbage]”, not “his supporters.”
But anyway. The downvotes have spoken. You’re this close to being blocked.
Edit: Lemming for 1 month. You’re part of a disinformation campaign. Good-bye.
Oh noooooooo lol
Probably shouldn’t vote for him, then…
Or kamala. You know she has the same opinion.
You don’t allow women to form their own?
No, I don’t know that…
HARRIS: This is the thing. We know we are actually fighting for our democracy. And unlike Donald Trump I don’t believe people who disagree with me are the enemy.
Trump: “These are horrible people. Oops, we should get along with everybody. They’re horrible people. Some people you just can’t get along with.”
If I’m going to choose candidates based on their own words, then Trump can go fuck himself and Harris seems pretty presidential.
I always gotta laugh when the people who support trump, who are the most famous group of people for pulling the whole “THATS NOT WHAT HE SAID YOU TOOK IT OUT OF CO TEXT AND TWISTED HIS MEANING” then turn around and shit out the exact same turd they’re accusing other people out of their brains. I know conservatives who don’t do this though, and I respect those people. I really, really don’t respect weak removed like you though OP.
What a pitiful attempt at whatever
The tree of liberty is watered by the blood of tyrants.
I’d call wanting to disarm an entire populace and arbitrarily kill babies pretty tyrannical, but that wouldn’t mean we should kill people who advocate such things.
wtf are you on?
Kamala Harris supports an assault weapons ban. First of all, most firearm deaths are done with handguns rather than rifles - 59% vs. 3%. Second, I’ve yet to hear a definition of “assault weapon” that isn’t completely arbitrary. Third, there is very little evidence that the previous assault weapons ban actually reduced firearm deaths.
Also, Kamala Harris wants to “restore the protections of Roe v. Wade,” which would essentially allow abortions up to the point of birth for any/no reason. Abortion is, in the vast majority of cases, the killing of an innocent human being - the fetus/baby. That is, it’s murder of an exceptionally vulnerable person.
disarm
If a man had an assault rifle and a handgun, and he put down the assault rifle, would you describe him as ‘unarmed’? If so, I don’t think you can describe removing assault rifles as ‘disarming’ people.
No, I wouldn’t call that disarmament. If someone else took away his assault rifle by force (or threat of force), that’s disarmament. As is legally preventing someone from acquiring an assault rifle. Felons are disarmed, for example. The Supreme Court affirms that people have the right to keep and bear personal arms, and also that the government cannot legally limit that right without serious historical precedent. Funnily enough, New York State tried justifying their concealed carry legislation by citing bigoted laws from our “Anglo-American tradition.”
My point was that if the man is still ‘armed’, he hasn’t been ‘disarmed’, he just has one less (type of) gun. For example, if I told you that there was a man in my street with two guns, and then added that he’d now been disarmed (forcibly or otherwise), you would assume that he now had zero guns.
If a man had one of his arms cut off but kept the other one, you’d still call him an amputee. Similarly, if your guns are taken away from you by force, you have been disarmed. There are different degrees to this - I would argue that people who live in blue states are generally more disarmed than people living in red states - but that doesn’t change the fact that a disarmament has taken place.
Your analogy would be more like asking if a man who put his arm inside his shirt could be called an amputee.
deleted by creator
I find it interesting that a conservative sub is absolutely riddled with liberals. It’s painfully obvious what is happening here.
Stay mad lol
I tried this place out since I can’t use reddit. I’m sick of being banned for normal thoughts. This place is so much further left but no bans lol. We just need to get more conservatives to come here.
It’s the DNC paid social media machine at work here. They’re swamping several platforms in an attempt to control the narrative.
It isn’t gonna work. And they know it. But I’m sure they are paid well for their wasted efforts.
Its not going to work with an attitude like that lol. I saw stuff about reddit being exposed. I can’t say it surprised me.
