yes, but effective for calling out the left-tards and their fake support of blacks. You use opposing views in arguing points at times when it is effective. The left won't argue for taking muh guns from dem slaves due to bad optics, they are all about optics.
yes, but effective for calling out the left-tards and their fake support of blacks. You use opposing views in arguing points at times when it is effective. The left won't argue for taking muh guns from dem slaves due to bad optics, they are all about optics.
The left won't argue for taking muh guns from dem slaves due to bad optics, they are all about optics.
I would say the left doesn't give a shit about attaining positive optics for themselves. That's cuckservatives, who try to get to look positive to the left, which never works.
>The left won't argue for taking muh guns from dem slaves due to bad optics, they are all about optics.
I would say the left doesn't give a shit about attaining positive optics for themselves. That's cuckservatives, who try to get to look positive to the left, which never works.
you underestimate the fact that there are more left-central people than hard core leftists. they polarize everything, this guy is showing them not the hard core leftists. this shows how strong his argument is.
you underestimate the fact that there are more left-central people than hard core leftists. they polarize everything, this guy is showing them not the hard core leftists. this shows how strong his argument is.
(post is archived)