itsoktocry

You asked for a source. I gave you one. It had multiple lies in it. You didn't even open the link.

Now you are pretending that someone can't go on YouTube and find more lies about the vaccines from the likes of people like Rachel Maddow. People have assembled long clips, it's a meme.

"Nuggets of truth", my lord, pure delusion.

"But but but what about some hypothetical scenario where the president didn't lie?"

We will never know, will we?

Yeah, ignore the 3 lies in the quote I posted, then ignore the other lies in the article. That's your convention, I get it.

Exactly. For those following along, take note about how this interaction with JumpCrisscross went.

These people will lie. Deny. Gaslight. Move goalposts. Ask for sources they have no intention of looking at. Then lie some more.

Imagine claiming, "No one lied about the vaccines" in 2025 and asking for proof when challenged. It's absurd.

An yet, he has a long posting history here; we know he's not oblivious. So what are the incentives to pretend it never happened?

What a pathetic reply.

You made the claim: >Nobody lied about vaccines.

I posted a link from a left-leaning source, fact-checking the PRESIDENT literally lying about vaccine efficacy. Then you move on to something else.

Well, that's in there too, but you didn't read, did you?

"You’re not going to get Covid if you have these vaccinations.”"

I posted one resource, I'm not doing your research for you. The fact that you deny this indicates you are completely brain-rotted. Enjoy.

>You’re making the claim. Show me.

The fact that you are unaware of it means you've got your head-in-the-sand.

"Calling on Americans to get vaccinated against Covid-19, Biden said, “If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, you’re not going to be in the ICU unit and you’re not going to die.”"

Are those facts?

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/22/politics/fact-check-biden-cnn...

>Nobody lied about vaccines.

Sure they did. Go back and listen to what the media and politicians were saying about the vaccines when they were first released: you won't get COVID, you won't spread COVID. We ended up at "you'll still get COVID and spread COVID, but your symptoms will be lessened".

I'm not anti-vaccine by any means, but the story around COVID vaccines changed...a lot.

Yes.

Critiques, discourse, discussion..these are all things that make the internet "real".

You're right, no one is getting benefits without paperwork, because that's what the rules say, and no one would break rules.

From the article:

>"Specifically, the Sky News team ran a study where they created nine new Twitter/X accounts, three left-wing, three right-wing, and three politically neutral, and then tracked what content got dumped into their “For You” tabs on the Elon Musk-owned social media service during a one-month period in 2025"

They created 9 accounts for the study, and had "experts" qualify content as left or right wing. They could have at least tried before publishing this story for the 100th time.

In many instances, no. And that's where a lot of the anger and blow back stems from.

And Nvidia is going to own the whole thing, forever?

How short-term of a thinker do you have to be to consider Nvidia's run a long time? I blame TikTok.

What is a "productive mindset"? Why do we so easily dismiss some things as due to genetics, while for others it's strictly taboo?

You literally have people crying that their garbage content isn't getting enough views (and hence payout).

It's embarrassing, but that's what the entire site is.

I tried out Bluesky during the great migration about a year ago.

It was incredibly toxic, but of course the "left-wing sphere" thinks they are the purveyors of universal "good", thus their toxicity is fine.

I've been a long-time Twitter user. I don't hate Elon, so when he bought it I was cautiously optimistic.

I deactivated last week. The platform is bad and getting worse. It's scammy and spammy. Everything is designed around garbage engagement, so that the X team can brag about how good the product is doing.

I have zero faith that a sociology paper will hold up to scrutiny, nor demonstrate causality. Bonus points for Harvard.

>But whatever the intention, the results were almost always the same: aquatic colonisers destroyed indigenous environments.

Why was everything always good, peaceful and stable in "indigenous environments" until "the colonizers " show up? I find it hard to believe.

I'm Canadian. I don't know what 10kg feels like until I convert it to pounds.

Why are you going on about "balancing a check book?"

I'm in my 40s. Never did it, never going to.

What's the difference between 18 elephants stacked versus a building with 20 stories? They are just different analogies.

Well, either Trump never listens to experts and still managed to become an extremely successful business man and became President, twice, by sheer skill. Or he actually listens to experts.

I bet you don't like either answer.

Air filters are easy, but so what? They are even easier for the mechanic when my car is in the shop for semiannual maintenance.

I can also bake my own bread, make my own clothes and build my own furniture. But I choose to spend my time elsewhere.

What is so noble about changing your oil?

>Companies would start to min/max this process and would use it as a way to meet targets (perhaps unrealistic ones) at the expense of take-home pay for employees, even in situations where they don't actually need to make cuts.

And the reverse? We literally just went through a phase where tech companies over hired like crazy, at ridiculous salaries. We had people remote working 3 or more jobs at a time. And yet, people still act like companies have all the power?

This stuff ebbs and flows. The reality is the value of your labour fluctuates, despite the inconvenience of that to you.

>Passive vs. active voice. "Job losses" is chickenshit language.

"Job losses" isn't passive voice. "Jobs were lost" would be passive voice.

Why are people so hung up on "job losses", as if we don't hear this every day? Who cares?

Where's the data?

>The obvious solution to this is to change everything structurally needed to ensure the other side never again takes control, which is clearly also in progress.

- Signed, the side that tried to throw a candidate in prison.

>1) driving their campaign contributions to zero or 2) threatening to sic his mob on them.

What's so crazy about comments like this is they have an air of, "we are actually the good guys in the right, but the system works against us!"

You got out-voted.