• Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    19 days ago

    Indeed you could and then the onus is on you to show all the examples of Kamala doing things like killing small animals. Does she talk about it? Does she wear things that indicate it? If she was the CEO of a corporate news organization, does she oversee stories promoting it? (Or, more likely, minimizing argument against it?) If you have boatloads of that evidence, you might have a good argument.

    Got nothing? Well, that’s a poor argument. Maybe there are “Jewish space lasers” and MTG has broken the story wide open, but in the absence of literally any other piece of relevant information, it’s a poor argument to make.

    I have metaphorical boatloads of evidence that the corporate news kaisers are supporting trump. So much so that pretty much anyone on here knows a bunch of them already. So much so, it’s hardly worth mentioning because it’s omnipresent. There’s more supporting evidence coming out every day.

    That addresses the “just making up stuff” part, but let me once again, for the third time now, point out that financial donations to a campaign can be made in many ways that are not as rigorously documented as personal donations. So many ways, in fact, that the absence of these CEO’s names on opensecrets.org doesn’t really answer the question.

    But if you’re simply arguing that as far as words on the infographic go, A is not B, then I’ll give it to you. Change “donor” to “supporter” on that infographic and we can have this exact same conversation again with the exact same meaning and relevance.

    Is the CEO that presides over news coverage that doesn’t continually mention trump’s - conviction for hundreds of millions in fraud, the court’s finding of rape, the bizarreness of his speech, and a hundred other things that throw the ludicrousness of his candidacy into high relief - does the CEO that presides over not presenting that information support trump?

    Yes. Yes they do. Did they give the equivalent of two dollars to his campaign fund and make sure their name was recorded? No. Oh! Well! Debunked! These are all egregious lies!

    If you understand the point of the demographic, you can acknowledge its factual inaccuracy and its greater truth. Right?

    • pjwestin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      19 days ago

      Hey, if you’re ever wondering what people mean when they say, “Blue MAGA,” it’s this; 8 rambling paragraphs of conspiracy theories about media companies’ CEOs, with no evidence or sources, to justify a debunked infographic. It’s long-winded, “Fake News.”

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        18 days ago

        Wow you think calling out corporate news owners as trump supporters is a conspiracy theory?

        My apologies for trying to be reasonable with an explanation.

        Evidence is in all the headlines about the race; source is THEIR OWN COMPANIES ffs. You need someone to look at it for you too?

        • pjwestin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          18 days ago

          You think that media moguls are secretly supporting Trump, even though he has spent 8 years attacking their outlets and even recently threatened to revoke CBS’ license, so they would ostensibly be acting against their self interest, while also leaving no evidence or paper trail to prove this support exists. Sounds like a conspiracy theory to me, dude! Anyway, it’s been fun watching how far you’ll go to avoid admitting you fell for a fake meme, but it seems like we’re hitting a wall here, so…bye!