WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2026 Poal.co

583

https://twitter.com/CullenHoback/status/1378981135540047872

If this was indeed a marketing campaign, then was it "for" or "against" DJT?

https://twitter.com/CullenHoback/status/1378981135540047872 If this was indeed a marketing campaign, then was it "for" or "against" DJT?

(post is archived)

[–] [deleted] 1 pt (edited )

The simplest answer is usually the correct one. Somebody really really enjoyed Larping gullible people. It wouldn’t be the first time. I actually wish I had thought of it. If you think about it, it’s hilarious and the people who were doing it probably couldn’t believe their luck that no matter what happened, their followers would make excuses after the fact to make the “drop“ fit the conditions on the ground. They probably got giggle boners every day.

I mean he got people to say one thing, then directly and completely contradict it one week later to continue to make everything fit. They were so desperate to cling to their belief in some Internet super fairy superspy fairyfaggot to come and save them that they would literally contradict something they said EARLIER THAT DAY.

The morning that Amy Coney Barrett was nominated, all of the Qtards on one of the boards I go to were talking about how obvious it was that it was a ruse and misdirection that she would never be the nominee.

They analyzed clues, laughable “clues”, to show exactly why.

Then when she was nominated it was the most brilliant thing Trump has ever done and of course all along it was going to be her. They were caught contradicting something that said hours ago. Hours. Not one of them acknowledged it. Not one. Out of hundreds, probably 1000. Not one. Just moved right on.

[–] 0 pt

Well, perhaps. The QProofs and being in and around POTUS's orbit damn near 24 hours a day wasn't no fluke. Can you explain that QAF?