WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

257

What are we doing here? Trying to convince each other Kamala’s running mate is bad news? Are we worried people on this site need to be educated about this?

It must be that because the memes obviously aren’t intended to be funny. I’m not even saying that as part of my running bit where I complain about Poal’s precipitous decline in quality, it’s just obvious from looking at these memes that they are

Are you guys worried about voting? Like if Trump doesn’t get the W we’re not gonna be in Iran fast enough or something?

What are we doing here? Trying to convince each other Kamala’s running mate is bad news? Are we worried people on this site need to be educated about this? It must be that because the memes obviously aren’t intended to be funny. I’m not even saying that as part of my running bit where I complain about Poal’s precipitous decline in quality, it’s just obvious from looking at these memes that they are [“teaching” type memes.](https://poal.co/s/TellPoal/712580) Are you guys worried about voting? Like if Trump doesn’t get the W we’re not gonna be in Iran fast enough or something?

(post is archived)

[–] 1 pt

In 2016 some of us still harbored the delusion that we could persuade people. In the intervening 8 years we've realized that we contest principalities and powers leading communists who want to rape kids.

Witty memes wont persuade pedo commies to change anymore than snark deters a mugger.

[–] 0 pt

claiming every person who can’t be persuaded is a commie, kid-raping pedo is a bromide. It’s a belief that makes things simpler, but is that the reality or just what you want to believe to make yourself more comfortable?

[–] 0 pt

The purpose of a thing is what it does. If a given political party holding power consistently results in more communism and a swarm of immigrants and alphabets raping kids, that is the purpose of that political party. It doesn't matter what it claims or what excuses it makes, its purpose is objectively observable. Anyone who supports it either wants that as a primary goal, or is indifferent to it as an acceptable side effect.

If that party raises sugar tariffs by 1%, I can see why someone opposed to tariffs in general might argue it's a tolerable compromise of little consequence. If the party is enslaving people through communism and raping kids all over the place...the "tolerable compromise" argument becomes completely implausible. They're not choosing a lesser evil or unaware of some obscure bad thing that happened once. They want communism and groomer gangs.

[–] 0 pt

It’s best to defend a weak position with fewer words