Liberal Forum

"But...but...it's the BLUE STATES and BLUE CITIES that have homeless! It's their FAILED, LIBRUL SOSHALIZTzztzttttt POLICIES!!!"

             

https://x.com/Onecrazyndn/status/2052575464129216589

Response:

https://x.com/MJSinOKC/status/2052591925878833577

MAGATs = sh*t for brains...

 

Also let us consider these counterfactuals...which MAGATs are too retarded to consider (because their brains can't operate beyond a high school level of logic)

1) That the "LibrUL DemoCraP" scumbags like Newsom are corrupt and stole / laundered the money supposed to be allocated for homeless shelters, which says nothing about the feasibility of the policy itself


2) That homelessness is correlated with high COL (which happen to be strong libRuL / DemoCraP) strongholds due to their insistence on strict zoning laws - which, by the way, are some of the lowest priority targets of criticism of MAGATs


3) In the event the homeless were relocated from Oregon to...say, West Virginia, they would still be drug addicted dopes living in shanty shacks built 80 years ago...you've reduced the "homelessness" statistic but done nothing regarding the actual quality or standard of living which is presumably the purpose of the debate and not merely scoring brownie points  

----------------------------

In some strange parallel universe, a MAGAT gets into office in SF, declares "Anyone who sleeps in a 5x5 ft or greater size tent is no longer considered 'homeless' " and hands out "free" tents to homeless...suddenly MAGATs would be stupefied!        
 
 

LowIQTrash » 08 May 2026, 12:27 am » wrote: ↑

08 May 2026, 12:27 am

Also let us consider these counterfactuals...which MAGATs are too retarded to consider (because their brains can't operate beyond a high school level of logic)

1) That the "LibrUL DemoCraP" scumbags like Newsom are corrupt and stole / laundered the money supposed to be allocated for homeless shelters, which says nothing about the feasibility of the policy itself

2) That homelessness is correlated with high COL (which happen to be strong libRuL / DemoCraP) strongholds due to their insistence on strict zoning laws - which, by the way, are some of the lowest priority targets of criticism of MAGATs

3) In the event the homeless were relocated from Oregon to...say, West Virginia, they would still be drug addicted dopes living in shanty shacks built 80 years ago...you've reduced the "homelessness" statistic but done nothing regarding the actual quality or standard of living which is presumably the purpose of the debate and not merely scoring brownie points  

----------------------------

In some strange parallel universe, a MAGAT gets into office in SF, declares "Anyone who sleeps in a 5x5 ft or greater size tent is no longer considered 'homeless' " and hands out "free" tents to homeless...suddenly MAGATs would be stupefied!      

Tax payers are fleeing the oppressive government's of blue cities and states....you think the homeless is a problem now?
 
 

RebelGator » 08 May 2026, 3:42 am » wrote: ↑

08 May 2026, 3:42 am

Tax payers are fleeing the oppressive government's of blue cities and states....you think the homeless is a problem now?

Post your **** sources, Ruby.

Blackvegetable » 08 May 2026, 4:48 am » wrote: ↑

08 May 2026, 4:48 am

Post your **** sources, Ruby.

Bitch, ****.  Make a case that people are no fleeing places like CA and NY.  Get with reality, bitch.

Huey » 08 May 2026, 5:10 am » wrote: ↑

08 May 2026, 5:10 am

Bitch, ****.  Make a case that 

Melty!

 

Blackvegetable » 08 May 2026, 5:13 am » wrote: ↑

08 May 2026, 5:13 am

Melty!

 

there is no context where. A puss like you can make that happen.  Your argument is tht people are not leaving blue cities/states like CA & Ny.

Make your case.

Huey » 08 May 2026, 5:15 am » wrote: ↑

08 May 2026, 5:15 am

 

there is no context where. A 

It is EVERY context, Girrrrrrl

Blackvegetable » 08 May 2026, 5:16 am » wrote: ↑

08 May 2026, 5:16 am

It is EVERY context, Girrrrrrl

  

there is no context where a puss like you can make that happen.  Your argument is tht people are not leaving blue cities/states like CA & Ny.

Make your case.

Blackvegetable » 08 May 2026, 5:16 am » wrote: ↑

08 May 2026, 5:16 am

It is EVERY context, Girrrrrrl

 

AI OverviewNew York City’s population shrank by approximately 12,000 residents in 2025, reversing two years of post-pandemic growth, according to a report from the Citizens Budget Commission. This decline was driven by a 70% drop in international migration and high domestic out-migration, as high living costs continued to drive residents away, notes a report from The City. [1, 2, 3]
2025 Population Decline Key Details:

• Net Loss: The total population dropped by roughly 12,000, following significant gains of 70,000 in 2023 and 163,000 in 2024, as reported by Realtor.com and Fox Business.
• Domestic Exodus: NYC lost 114,000 more residents to other U.S. cities than it gained, an increase in domestic out-migration from 2024, say The New York Post and PIX11.

Blackvegetable » 08 May 2026, 5:16 am » wrote: ↑

08 May 2026, 5:16 am

It is EVERY context, Girrrrrrl

 

AI OverviewCalifornia experienced a net population decline in 2025, with estimates suggesting a loss of approximately 54,000 to over 89,000 residents, driven by high net domestic outmigration. This dip marks a return to negative growth after brief post-pandemic gains, with roughly 216,000-229,000 more people leaving for other states than moving in. 

Key Population Drivers (2024-2025):

• Net Domestic Migration: Over 216,000 more residents moved to other states than moved into California.

Huey » 08 May 2026, 6:22 am » wrote: ↑

08 May 2026, 6:22 am

  

there is no context where a puss like you can make that happen.  Your argument is tht people are not leaving blue cities/states like CA & Ny.

Make your case.

Your argument is tht people are not leaving blue cities/states like CA & Ny.

Make your case.

Against what?

Rebel's assertions?

Huey » 08 May 2026, 6:29 am » wrote: ↑

08 May 2026, 6:29 am

AI OverviewCalifornia experienced a net population decline in 2025, with estimates suggesting a loss of approximately 54,000 to over 89,000 residents, driven by high net domestic outmigration. This dip marks a return to negative growth after brief post-pandemic gains, with roughly 216,000-229,000 more people leaving for other states than moving in. 

Key Population Drivers (2024-2025):

• Net Domestic Migration: Over 216,000 more residents moved to other states than moved into California.

What part of the state's population does this represent?

Huey » 08 May 2026, 6:22 am » wrote: ↑

08 May 2026, 6:22 am

  

there is no context where a puss like you can make that happen.  Your argument is tht people are not leaving blue cities/states like CA & Ny.

Make your case.

every single context, Braintree 

Blackvegetable » 08 May 2026, 4:48 am » wrote: ↑

08 May 2026, 4:48 am

Post your **** sources, Ruby.

Why, you won't be able to comprehend. 

Blackvegetable » 08 May 2026, 6:31 am » wrote: ↑

08 May 2026, 6:31 am

What part of the state's population does this represent?

You tell me.  I backed up my comments.  You?  Not so much.

Huey » 08 May 2026, 6:36 am » wrote: ↑

08 May 2026, 6:36 am

You tell me.  I backed up my comments.  You?  Not so much.

It's your "case"...

Any idiot would understand that, on a nominal basis, the state with the largest population would have the highest number of emigrants..

And, because the NYPost understands that its readers are morons, it relies on you to never ask yourself the relevant questions. 


 

Blackvegetable » 08 May 2026, 6:41 am » wrote: ↑

08 May 2026, 6:41 am

It's your "case"...

Any idiot would understand that, on a nominal basis, the state with the largest population would have the highest number of emigrants..

And, because the NYPost understands that its readers are morons, it relies on you to never ask yourself the relevant questions.

PIX11 is not the NY Post.  Instead of yapping you can make your case.

Huey » 08 May 2026, 6:54 am » wrote: ↑

08 May 2026, 6:54 am

PIX11 is not the NY Post.  Instead of yapping you can make your case.

I just did.


And with every response lacking a number, you bang another nail into your temple...
 

Blackvegetable » 08 May 2026, 7:00 am » wrote: ↑

08 May 2026, 7:00 am

I just did.

And with every response lacking a number, you bang another nail into your temple...

No facts, no citations.  Just yammering.