Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » 05 Jun 2025, 9:11 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2025, 9:11 am

DON'T DOXX THESE ICE AGENTS!

YOU MUST NAME ALL THE SURVEY RESPONDENTS!

So **** g'ddammned stupid

It could just be made up **** instead of regular ****.
 
You love your anonymous sources.  
 

Cedar » 05 Jun 2025, 9:20 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2025, 9:20 am

It could just be made up **** ins stead of regular ****.

From a 3 time Grifty voter.

Blackvegetable » 05 Jun 2025, 9:21 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2025, 9:21 am

From a 3 time Grifty voter.

And?

Who are they?


 

Blackvegetable » 05 Jun 2025, 9:09 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2025, 9:09 am

They're NotPlumbers.

They're not political historians either.
 
 

Why does he wear a ring on his middle finger?

Cedar » 05 Jun 2025, 9:24 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2025, 9:24 am

They're not political historians either.

Post those qualifications. 

Or better yet, stop trying to impugn your betters, Rube.
 

BuckNaked » 05 Jun 2025, 9:14 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2025, 9:14 am

542?  That’s not a large sample of the population

I apologize my numbers were inaccurate.

"525 respondents were invited to participate, and 154 usable responses were received,
yielding a 29.3% response rate."

Did the "unusable" responses **** up their narrative?
 
 

Blackvegetable » 05 Jun 2025, 9:26 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2025, 9:26 am

Post those qualifications. 

Or better yet, stop trying to impugn your betters, Rube.

How do you know your anonymous online survey takers are my betters, they could have asked 154 people in the welfare line, we just don't know.
 
 

Cedar » 05 Jun 2025, 9:40 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2025, 9:40 am

How do you know your anonymous online survey takers are my betters, they could have asked 154 people in the welfare line, we just don't know.

I know you.

And I know PhDs...
 

EDC4ALL! » 02 Jun 2025, 10:48 am » wrote: ↑

02 Jun 2025, 10:48 am

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/vid ... 575722.cms

https://www.newsweek.com/maga-accuses-d ... te-2079436

https://nypost.com/2025/06/01/us-news/n ... onvention/

https://www.foxnews.com/video/6373747792112

I tried, but so far I can't find any reporting on this from the dem controled MSN. Go figure.

 

I think it is hilarious that those moron's went bat **** crazy over Musk doing that but when Spartacus does it they ignore it.  Even funnier is the moron lefties attacking the source or making excuses.

Blackvegetable » 05 Jun 2025, 9:40 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2025, 9:40 am

I know you.

And I know PhDs...

How do you know they're PhDs, they're anonymous.
 

Cedar » 05 Jun 2025, 9:32 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2025, 9:32 am

I apologize my numbers were inaccurate.

"525 respondents were invited to participate, and 154 usable responses were received,
yielding a 29.3% response rate."

Did the "unusable" responses **** up their narrative?

that’s not enough responses to get a decent outcome 

Cedar » 05 Jun 2025, 9:43 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2025, 9:43 am

How do you know they're PhDs, they're anonymous.

Because there are PhDs administering the surveys.

Now stop running from my questions. 
 

Blackvegetable » 05 Jun 2025, 9:48 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2025, 9:48 am

Because there are PhDs administering the surveys.

Now stop running from my questions.

what questions?

BuckNaked » 05 Jun 2025, 9:46 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2025, 9:46 am

that’s not enough responses to get a decent outcome

The whole survey he pulls out of his *** every time he needs to justify his vote for a mentally incompetent president, is a scam.
 

Blackvegetable » 05 Jun 2025, 9:48 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2025, 9:48 am

Because there are PhDs administering the surveys.

Now stop running from my questions.

Can you admit the rifle the ban is about has never been used by the military?

And can you admit that they're only banning accessories that don't affect the rifles function?
 
 

Blackvegetable » 02 Jun 2025, 12:13 pm » wrote: ↑

02 Jun 2025, 12:13 pm

What do you consider Newsweek, **** moron.

And given the relaxed fingers it's clearly a wave.

**** loser.

why does he wear a ring on his middle finger?

Cedar » 05 Jun 2025, 9:51 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2025, 9:51 am

Can you admit the rifle the ban is about has never been used by the military?

And can you admit that they're only banning accessories that don't affect the rifles function?

Can you name it?

And can you admit that they're only banning accessories that don't affect the rifles function?

Entirely irrelevant to the discussion and not an area of my concern.

 

Blackvegetable » 05 Jun 2025, 10:17 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2025, 10:17 am

Can you name it?

Entirely irrelevant to the discussion and not an area of my concern.

Then post the area of your concern.  Your area of concern is on a sliding scale.  Years ago you wanted because of the people it appealed to.  

*Huey » 05 Jun 2025, 10:21 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2025, 10:21 am

Then post the area of your concern.  Your area of concern is on a sliding scale.  Years ago you wanted because of the people it appealed to.

I told you the last time I answered them I would not do it again