NY Times explains the Dem loss: "We din' have no social media to match the Trumpies!"

Twelve days ago--and 12 days after the election--the NY Times ran a laughable piece wailing that the Dems (the Left) lost because...wait for it...they didn't have any friendly social-media outlets they could use to counter conservative voices on social media!

Seriously, that's exactly what the Times piece absurdly claimed.  Take a look:

No similar spaces existed for the left. Meta’s Instagram, Threads and Facebook *had publicly de-emphasized politics leading up to the election.*  Musk had transformed Twitter into X and shifted it to the right. And no other tech platform had gained momentum as a public square for liberals.

In case you were tempted to call bullshit on this astonishing lie, the Times lackey quoted a "political consultant based in New York" (we are SO impressed!) saying the same thing:

“It has become starkly evident that the left, the Democrats, do not have the same social media platforms to push their agenda.  That has left Democrats in a huge deficit.”

SEE, citizen??  Dis guy beez a "political consultant,"  And not just some clueless consultant, but one who was quoted by the New York Times!   So yew gots t' believe what he bleats! 

Ohhh, you bet, sparky!  So let's take the Times bullshit propaganda apart a line at a time, so you can see how the propaganda is made:  First, 

"Meta’s Instagram, Threads and Facebook had publicly de-emphasized politics leading up to the election."

Utter horseshit!  Both leftist platforms had slobbered over Democrat-fellating talking heads on CNN and MSNBC calling Trump "Hitler" and a fascist and a dictator every single day for months--including right up to and beyond election day.  Yet the Times claims those sacred platforms--and surely MSNBC and CNN--had "de-emphasized politics leading up to the election"?  On what fucking planet?

Next is this laughable lie:  "Musk had transformed Twitter...and shifted it to the right."

Okay, Sheera (the propagandist), how did Musk "shift X to the right"?  He didn't, of course.  What he DID was to fire 75% of Twatter's leftist employees, whose job was to censor posts critical of the FBI, the Deep State and the biden/garland/mayorkas regime. 

What that meant was that Twatter (now X) stopped censoring conservative posts.  

So at last Americans and voters were allowed to post what they liked.  Musk merely allowed people who used those platforms to see posts by you leftists had previously censored.  Those who were censored were now free to say what they believed.

Because you incredibly arrogant, moronic, anti-free-speech sons of bitches--and the arrogant, lawless, Deep-State-fellating Fibbies--had urged Twatter to delete posts they didn't like, you Democrats never knew how many Americans hated your leftist/Dem policies.  So your only remaining option is to claim Musk somehow "shifted X to the right," when the truth was that Americans hated your shitty policies.  You assholes had just used your power to prevent posts from people you hated from being seen! 

The online disparity was evident on Nov. 5, when Harris and Trump both posted messages on social media urging people to vote. Mr. Trump’s posts were more widely shared and liked than those by Ms. Harris. Trump’s most popular Election Day post asking voters to stay in line to vote was liked nearly 160,000 times and shared by more than 15,000 people. Ms. Harris’s most popular post was liked 18,000 times and shared by 1,500 people.

The Times propaganda piece is possibly the best study of how absolute power corrupts everything--including debate and reasoning.  One more quote: They claim the internet is being used to...wait for it..."disrupt democracy."  Seriously:

Joan Donovan, founder of the Critical Internet Studies Institute, which studies how the internet is used to disrupt democracy, said Ms. Harris and her campaign operated in a hostile environment on many of the platforms, including X.

Apparently to the author of the Times shit-post, a "hostile environment" is when lots of comments criticized Cackles for being fake, dumb, constantly dodging questions, endlessly repeating cliches like "I was raised in a middle-class home" and "Unburdened by what has been."  If your team thinks that's hostile, how do you think you'll do against actually foreign adversaries? 

No matter how much you hate the Mainstream Media and the Deep State, it's not nearly enough.  And if you think their ravenous desire to control everything has abated even a tiny bit after their loss, you're too naive to breathe.

Your virtue-signaling siblings--who sweetly, piously, virtuously demand that we allow an unlimited number of illegals into our country--are a crucial part of the Dem regime, and always will be.  I had three siblings like that.  Sweet and totally smug about their virtue.  Called illegals "asylum seekers."  Claimed muggers and rapists were "the real victims of ouah cruel, oppressive society."

Does the Leftist claim "systemic racism" ring any bells?  Did we have a black prezzy for eight years or did I just imagine that?

These are people who demand that African "migrants" with an IQ of 80 be hired as air traffic controllers, commercial airline pilots, doctors.  Cuz who needs competence if that results in "disparate outcomes," eh?

For Americans under 30:  Over fifty years ago the U.S. Supreme Court RULED that "disparate outcomes" are prima facie evidence of discrimination, and thus are illegal.  Seriously.

53 years ago the Supreme Court RULED that "disparate outcomes" (results) were evidence of discrimination.  Under this ruling (which Wiki and Google call a "landmark case"), plaintiffs no longer had to prove a policy was intended to discriminate.  Instead now all that was needed was to show that a policy produced resulted in different percentages of blacks vs. whites being hired or promoted or whatever.

(For those who're curious, the "landmark case" was Griggs v. Duke Power Company.)

This was a dumbshit ruling--like the Dred Scott ruling.  What percentage of NBA and NFL players are black, eh?  Think the U.S. legal system will call that "illegal discrimination" due to disparate impact?  Of course not.

The SC needs to reverse Griggs.  But of course they won't.  So get ready for commercial pilots from Africa.  It's already happened: A brand-new Boeing 767 was flown into the ocean by an unqualified diversity hire.  Fortunately only the crew was killed, so you never heard about it.  And of course you don't keep up with NTSB accident findings, cuz why should ya, eh?

Eh, I don't care.  I don't have any kids, and my nieces and nephews are good Dems just like their parents, so will eagerly parrot the Democrat line even if they were being lined up against the wall and executed.

Of course there is a solution.  Trump gets it, but the Dems will block ALL his cabinet nominees and major policies.  Then they'll crow that he didn't accomplish the things he promised!  Mission accomplished for the Left!

I know, I know: you think this is just crazy talk.  So tell ya what: make a folder named "the future," and save this post in it.  Be sure to transfer it to new laptops.  Then in 20 years, read it and see if I was right.

For years I was in a profession in which if you wanted to live, you had to know everything going on around you, none of which you could see.  (Imagine playing chess with no chessboard.)  Many of my friends died because they believed the so-called "experts" instead of using their damn heads.

For those who have a hard time with reading comprehension: I'm NOT claiming the "experts" are always wrong.  Indeed, they're a useful input just like everything else.  But if you believe "experts" and ignore what your own senses are telling you, you deserve to be removed from the gene pool.

I do NOT hate stupid people.  It's understandable that they believe whatever the Media and government tell em because they don't have the ability to recognize truth from lies.  The people I hate are the ones who DO have the IQ to figure it out, but willingly don't even try.  Instead they choose to "join the cool kidz"--because it helps their careers and makes 'em feel good.

Hey, who doesn't wanna be a member of the cool kidz club, eh?

Source: NY Times
 
https://archive.is/Xyg9s#selection-4727.0-4735.233