|
|
Post by iamkristinl16 on Aug 10, 2019 20:55:30 GMT
A friend/neighbor just posted a pro Trump meme with False info quoted on it. One of her friends said “fake news” then linked three different credible sources explaining what was false about the claim. She went off, saying “I don’t comment on your trump bashing, democrat loving posts, don’t post on mine” and “get the fuck off my page.”
I don’t know the person she was talking to, but I think it is a relative of hers. No matter who it was, her response was over the top, IMO. I get that people don’t want to be wrong, but then why not look more closely at what you are posting? Especially if you are going to get bent out of shape if someone comments?
This has been a common theme among Republicans/Trump supporters that I am friends with on Facebook. I have a few people that have posted some crazy pro-democrat stuff as well, but when the facts are pointed out, they are respectful and don’t get all defensive about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by SockMonkey on Aug 10, 2019 20:58:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by busy on Aug 10, 2019 21:02:25 GMT
There are a few things going on, I think. One, there is probably some history between the two of them. That's likely not an isolated incident. Two, if her intent was truly to educate and not antagonize, leading with "fake news" isn't the best way to achieve that. Three, you're right that people don't like to be wrong and they especially don't like to be publicly called out on it. A private message may have been more effective if the goal was really to correct the misinformation.
Both sides antagonize each other a lot, IMO. And that includes me. I rarely think correcting misinformation is done in a positive way. But I don't think Rs have cornered the market on sharing misinformation and overreacting to being corrected - I see it plenty with Ds I know.
ETA: I don’t think there is any kind of obligation to handle correcting misinformation with kid gloves. But between people with whom you’d like to maintain some kind of relationship in general, it can be wise.
|
|
|
|
Post by Delta Dawn on Aug 10, 2019 21:06:10 GMT
I hid all my Trump loving fans. I hid my Conservative Canadian Friends too. The Canadian Conservative Friends I squint at, though. None of them are productive people and have more guns, knives and hatchets than brains. I am sure there are smart ones. I just don’t know any in person. They, too, argue facts like when they’re due for welfare cheques and how the gov’t is stealing their money they don’t pay taxes on. Yes. Squint.
|
|
Country Ham
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,313
Jun 25, 2014 19:32:08 GMT
|
Post by Country Ham on Aug 10, 2019 21:09:35 GMT
Also most people I know don’t like to be corrected publicly. I don’t do politics on FB. But other subjects I se d private messages.
|
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Aug 10, 2019 21:27:10 GMT
A friend/neighbor just posted a pro Trump meme with False info quoted on it. One of her friends said “fake news” then linked three different credible sources explaining what was false about the claim. She went off, saying “I don’t comment on your trump bashing, democrat loving posts, don’t post on mine” and “get the fuck off my page.” I don’t know the person she was talking to, but I think it is a relative of hers. No matter who it was, her response was over the top, IMO. I get that people don’t want to be wrong, but then why not look more closely at what you are posting? Especially if you are going to get bent out of shape if someone comments? This has been a common theme among Republicans/Trump supporters that I am friends with on Facebook. I have a few people that have posted some crazy pro-democrat stuff as well, but when the facts are pointed out, they are respectful and don’t get all defensive about it. Oh my god...we have the same siblings!!!! 🤣🤣🤣🤣 |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Aug 10, 2019 21:30:03 GMT
1. If someone on either side is frequently reading and posting political misinformation, they're not interested in truth - and correcting them publicly or privately isn't going to change that.
2. I couldn't care less about hurting the feelings of Trumpers. In any rational situation, people who support a bully are seen as bullies themselves and deserve to be called out. Only here in the upside down do we have to consider the opinions and tender feelings of people who support the racist, xenophobic, misogynist bullying tactics of this administration - while they are never expected to do any introspection of their own. Fuck that noise. Speak truth to Trumpers if you feel like it, but absolutely expect that they will be defensive and whine about "muh feelings" and "muh viewpoint."
|
|
pyccku
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,817 
|
Post by pyccku on Aug 10, 2019 21:43:58 GMT
People aren't interested in facts or debate because they aren't arguing in good faith. There is no chance that you are going to change their minds, and facts won't change anything because they didn't base their opinion on facts in the first place.
Some people actually do enjoy discussion and debate and are willing to change their opinions when presented with new facts or new ways of looking at the issue. Some people aren't interested in that - they just want to cheer for their team. Once you know which camp the person belongs to, you can deal with them sensibly. Team 1: enjoy the discussion, make sure your arguments and facts are sound, and be willing to change your mind if they bring up something you didn't think of before. Team 2: let them cheer their team in their own little bubble, either ignore or unfollow them if they upset you with their posts.
For many in the US, politics isn't really a matter of how we govern our country or how policies will affect us, our families, our neighbors and our communities. It's a sporting event and it doesn't matter how much evidence you have that the Dallas Cowboys are objectively a better team than the Cleveland Browns, you are not going to cause any Browns fans to cheer for the Cowboys.
It's a stupid way to look at politics because the actions of the government really DO affect our lives, but the people who treat it as sports aren't ever going to change their minds. Even if it means never ever going to the Superbowl...or buying insulin, or having clean air, or not having mass shootings on a regular basis.
|
|
|
|
Post by redhead32 on Aug 10, 2019 22:13:36 GMT
Also most people I know don’t like to be corrected publicly. I don’t do politics on FB. But other subjects I se d private messages. Wait. So when someone posts a demonstrably false claim on a public forum, I'm supposed to (a) ignore it, or (b) privately tell them? So that the false info is shared and read and reshared and read without a single voice pointing out the falsity? |
|
pilcas
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,899
Member is Online
|
Post by pilcas on Aug 10, 2019 22:20:35 GMT
Also most people I know don’t like to be corrected publicly. I don’t do politics on FB. But other subjects I se d private messages. Wait. So when someone posts a demonstrably false claim on a public forum, I'm supposed to (a) ignore it, or (b) privately tell them? So that the false info is shared and read and reshared and read without a single voice pointing out the falsity? I would definately call them out on it. I’m past caring what these people think of me, I have lost respect for a lot of people and if they are actively pro Trump I’m ok if they get mad at me and block me or whatever. |
|
|
|
Post by iamkristinl16 on Aug 10, 2019 22:37:51 GMT
Also most people I know don’t like to be corrected publicly. I don’t do politics on FB. But other subjects I se d private messages. Wait. So when someone posts a demonstrably false claim on a public forum, I'm supposed to (a) ignore it, or (b) privately tell them? So that the false info is shared and read and reshared and read without a single voice pointing out the falsity? This is what I'm thinking as well. I get that people don't like to be publicly corrected. But the constant sharing of info that is false is what drives me crazy. Post for whatever "side" you want, if that is what you want to do. But at least post things that are TRUE! And, please--pay attention to where your articles are coming from! Every time something is shared by one person, someone else is going to see it and take it as fact. That goes for all posts, whether they are political or not. For example...if you share an article saying that a certain law is going into effect, please look at where the article came from, the date, and where that law is going into effect. The fact that the article is from a British source should be one clue. Then the fact that the date was 2016 and the language in the article made it clear that this was not a US law should also make it clear that there is no need for someone in MN to share it. Right? |
|
cycworker
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,375
|
Post by cycworker on Aug 10, 2019 22:38:50 GMT
Wait. So when someone posts a demonstrably false claim on a public forum, I'm supposed to (a) ignore it, or (b) privately tell them? So that the false info is shared and read and reshared and read without a single voice pointing out the falsity? I would definately call them out on it. I’m past caring what these people think of me, I have lost respect for a lot of people and if they are actively pro Trump I’m ok if they get mad at me and block me or whatever. I think each case is different. Some people' who I know are just jerks, I correct in public. I'll post a link to Snopes if I can find one. By jerks, I mean the people who I know well enough to know they don't care. They're being purposely controversial. other times, if it is a person I sense just got suckered by fake news, I'll tell them privately so they can save face. I'm thinking of my cousin, and some other young people I know. |
|
|
|
Post by SockMonkey on Aug 10, 2019 22:42:39 GMT
Also most people I know don’t like to be corrected publicly. I don’t do politics on FB. But other subjects I se d private messages. Wait. So when someone posts a demonstrably false claim on a public forum, I'm supposed to (a) ignore it, or (b) privately tell them? So that the false info is shared and read and reshared and read without a single voice pointing out the falsity? We're not specifically talking about race here, so it's not directly related, but I think of Robin DiAngelo's White Fragility rules of engagement. Fragility abounds (white and otherwise) when it comes to feedback on problematic stances, whether racism, sexism, or just ignorantly spouting lies. (Emphases below mine) www.uua.org/sites/live-new.uua.org/files/diangelo-white_fragility_and_the_rules_of_engagement.pdf1. Do not give me feedback on my racism under any circumstances. If you break the cardinal rule: 2. Proper tone is crucial – feedback must be given calmly. If there is any emotion in the feedback, the feedback is invalid and does not have to be considered.3. There must be trust between us. You must trust that I am in no way racist before you can give me feedback on my racism. 4. Our relationship must be issue-free – If there are issues between us, you cannot give me feedback on racism. 5. Feedback must be given immediately, otherwise it will be discounted because it was not given sooner. 6. You must give feedback privately, regardless of whether the incident occurred in front of other people. To give feedback in front of anyone else—even those involved in the situation—is to commit a serious social transgression. The feedback is thus invalid. 7. You must be as indirect as possible. To be direct is to be insensitive and will invalidate the feedback and require repair. 8. As a white person I must feel completely safe during any discussion of race. Giving me any feedback on my racism will cause me to feel unsafe, so you will need to rebuild my trust by never giving me feedback again. Point of clarification: when I say “safe” what I really mean is “comfortable.” 9. Giving me feedback on my racial privilege invalidates the form of oppression that I experience (i.e. classism, sexism, heterosexism). We will then need to focus on how you oppressed me. 10. You must focus on my intentions, which cancel out the impact of my behavior. 11. To suggest my behavior had a racist impact is to have misunderstood me. You will need to allow me to explain until you can acknowledge that it was your misunderstanding. |
|
|
|
Post by birdgate on Aug 10, 2019 23:59:05 GMT
Today on FB there was a post where some trumpers called the thumbs up photo with baby in the hospital "fake news!" Someone had to post the image from Melania's account for them and they still disbelieved. They ride or die for their devil. I stay friends with some of them so I can trace their disinformation/white supremacist/Russian bot memes and links.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 19, 2024 2:25:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2019 0:48:13 GMT
There are a few things going on, I think. One, there is probably some history between the two of them. That's likely not an isolated incident. Two, if her intent was truly to educate and not antagonize, leading with "fake news" isn't the best way to achieve that. Three, you're right that people don't like to be wrong and they especially don't like to be publicly called out on it. A private message may have been more effective if the goal was really to correct the misinformation. Both sides antagonize each other a lot, IMO. And that includes me. I rarely think correcting misinformation is done in a positive way. But I don't think Rs have cornered the market on sharing misinformation and overreacting to being corrected - I see it plenty with Ds I know. ETA: I don’t think there is any kind of obligation to handle correcting misinformation with kid gloves. But between people with whom you’d like to maintain some kind of relationship in general, it can be wise.  The gist of this thread seems to be that it only comes from one side. I've seen it with my own eyes where facts were presented with video and transcripts making the facts undeniable and yet those who didn't want to hear it lost their shit on the person presenting the facts. Right here. And they're still, to this day, presenting the wrong information in the last 24 hours with everyone on the "facts only" side still agreeing with them. It most definitely happens on all sides. |
|
|
|
Post by SockMonkey on Aug 11, 2019 0:51:49 GMT
There are a few things going on, I think. One, there is probably some history between the two of them. That's likely not an isolated incident. Two, if her intent was truly to educate and not antagonize, leading with "fake news" isn't the best way to achieve that. Three, you're right that people don't like to be wrong and they especially don't like to be publicly called out on it. A private message may have been more effective if the goal was really to correct the misinformation. Both sides antagonize each other a lot, IMO. And that includes me. I rarely think correcting misinformation is done in a positive way. But I don't think Rs have cornered the market on sharing misinformation and overreacting to being corrected - I see it plenty with Ds I know. ETA: I don’t think there is any kind of obligation to handle correcting misinformation with kid gloves. But between people with whom you’d like to maintain some kind of relationship in general, it can be wise. The gist of this thread seems to be that it only comes from one side. I've seen it with my own eyes where facts were presented with video and transcripts making the facts undeniable and yet those who didn't want to hear it lost their shit on the person presenting the facts. Right here. And they're still, to this day, presenting the wrong information in the last 24 hours with everyone on the "facts only" side still agreeing with them. It most definitely happens on all sides. Yeah, it happens on both sides. But... www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-supporters-share-more-fake-news-junk-news-oxford-study-a8199056.html?ampWhat’s your alter, by the way? |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 19, 2024 2:25:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2019 1:01:57 GMT
Wait. So when someone posts a demonstrably false claim on a public forum, I'm supposed to (a) ignore it, or (b) privately tell them? So that the false info is shared and read and reshared and read without a single voice pointing out the falsity? This is what I'm thinking as well. I get that people don't like to be publicly corrected. But the constant sharing of info that is false is what drives me crazy. Post for whatever "side" you want, if that is what you want to do. But at least post things that are TRUE! And, please--pay attention to where your articles are coming from! Every time something is shared by one person, someone else is going to see it and take it as fact. That goes for all posts, whether they are political or not. For example...if you share an article saying that a certain law is going into effect, please look at where the article came from, the date, and where that law is going into effect. The fact that the article is from a British source should be one clue. Then the fact that the date was 2016 and the language in the article made it clear that this was not a US law should also make it clear that there is no need for someone in MN to share it. Right? I totally agree with you. I'm convinced that some have their fingers stuck on the share button. We get it the other way. A missing cat in Kansas was shared by someone on my fb feed a while ago.....Kansas for gods sake. How did it get to the UK.That isn't the only one though. We have food recalls, laws that have changed ...I could go on. It annoys me and I do post and tell them. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 19, 2024 2:25:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2019 1:24:48 GMT
The gist of this thread seems to be that it only comes from one side. I've seen it with my own eyes where facts were presented with video and transcripts making the facts undeniable and yet those who didn't want to hear it lost their shit on the person presenting the facts. Right here. And they're still, to this day, presenting the wrong information in the last 24 hours with everyone on the "facts only" side still agreeing with them. It most definitely happens on all sides. Yeah, it happens on both sides. But... www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-supporters-share-more-fake-news-junk-news-oxford-study-a8199056.html?ampWhat’s your alter, by the way? I stand by what I said. This thread is leaning to the majority pushing the narrative that it only comes from one side. People here on the "facts only" side still lost their shit over being presented with facts they don't like. Those same people still presenting those false narratives as facts. |
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Aug 11, 2019 1:35:15 GMT
A friend/neighbor just posted a pro Trump meme with False info quoted on it. One of her friends said “fake news” then linked three different credible sources explaining what was false about the claim. She went off, saying “I don’t comment on your trump bashing, democrat loving posts, don’t post on mine” and “get the fuck off my page.” I don’t know the person she was talking to, but I think it is a relative of hers. No matter who it was, her response was over the top, IMO. I get that people don’t want to be wrong, but then why not look more closely at what you are posting? Especially if you are going to get bent out of shape if someone comments? This has been a common theme among Republicans/Trump supporters that I am friends with on Facebook. I have a few people that have posted some crazy pro-democrat stuff as well, but when the facts are pointed out, they are respectful and don’t get all defensive about it. Oh my god...we have the same siblings!!!! 🤣🤣🤣🤣 DH's aunt is the same way. I don't know why you wouldn't want facts |
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Aug 11, 2019 3:16:15 GMT
There are a few things going on, I think. One, there is probably some history between the two of them. That's likely not an isolated incident. Two, if her intent was truly to educate and not antagonize, leading with "fake news" isn't the best way to achieve that. Three, you're right that people don't like to be wrong and they especially don't like to be publicly called out on it. A private message may have been more effective if the goal was really to correct the misinformation. Both sides antagonize each other a lot, IMO. And that includes me. I rarely think correcting misinformation is done in a positive way. But I don't think Rs have cornered the market on sharing misinformation and overreacting to being corrected - I see it plenty with Ds I know. ETA: I don’t think there is any kind of obligation to handle correcting misinformation with kid gloves. But between people with whom you’d like to maintain some kind of relationship in general, it can be wise. The gist of this thread seems to be that it only comes from one side. I've seen it with my own eyes where facts were presented with video and transcripts making the facts undeniable and yet those who didn't want to hear it lost their shit on the person presenting the facts. Right here. And they're still, to this day, presenting the wrong information in the last 24 hours with everyone on the "facts only" side still agreeing with them. It most definitely happens on all sides. Could you be a little more direct, please, in regards to “right here”? What thread, what topic? |
|
smginaz Suzy
Pearl Clutcher
Je suis desole.
Posts: 2,606
Jun 26, 2014 17:27:30 GMT
|
Post by smginaz Suzy on Aug 11, 2019 5:23:18 GMT
The gist of this thread seems to be that it only comes from one side. I've seen it with my own eyes where facts were presented with video and transcripts making the facts undeniable and yet those who didn't want to hear it lost their shit on the person presenting the facts. Right here. And they're still, to this day, presenting the wrong information in the last 24 hours with everyone on the "facts only" side still agreeing with them. It most definitely happens on all sides. Could you be a little more direct, please, in regards to “right here”? What thread, what topic? Well, that would mean using facts, and facts are hard. |
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Aug 11, 2019 7:38:52 GMT
I stand by what I said. This thread is leaning to the majority pushing the narrative that it only comes from one side. People here on the "facts only" side still lost their shit over being presented with facts they don't like. Those same people still presenting those false narratives as facts. Well...it just so happens that the current administration has a propensity to lie about pretty much darn everything, every day, and the rhetoric is easily proven to be false. I don’t think anyone here thinks that it has only come from one side, however, with this current administration it’s like a rapidly progressing disease. Lying all the time. No one can trust the current potus because he lies every day. For example, trump would have his base believe that Mueller’s report “totally exonerated him” “no collusion, no obstruction” as he is fond of repeating. However, it’s a bald faced lie. Mueller’s report does not state that, and even Mueller testified to that FACT. CLEARLY. But here is where trump and his base just refuse to accept those facts. They ARE facts. And trump & co. loses their shit over the FACT that he just doesn’t like that truth. Just yesterday trump’s screaming on Twitter that his posing with the baby ofthe dead parents in El Paso was “fake news”. Well, it wasn’t! Reporters took the photo directly from Melania’s twitter. It WAS them. They DID pose for that photo. Trump was grinning and giving the thumbs up sign. FACTS. The reason that this thread is “leaning towards the majority that it comes from one side” is well...because right now, it happens to be true and a fact. Right now, this administration/republicans are lying, gaslighting, pressing “alternative facts” and denying the actual truth like no other ever has done. Enforce them. (And that too is a fact). And it’s really bizarre that there are people who will go on to defend all the lies and gaslighting that trump and co. engage in—like they’ve lost all common sense, decency, and morals. No other potus in history has lied and gaslighted like the current one. (Fact) |
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Aug 11, 2019 7:43:49 GMT
The gist of this thread seems to be that it only comes from one side. I've seen it with my own eyes where facts were presented with video and transcripts making the facts undeniable and yet those who didn't want to hear it lost their shit on the person presenting the facts. Right here. And they're still, to this day, presenting the wrong information in the last 24 hours with everyone on the "facts only" side still agreeing with them. It most definitely happens on all sides. Could you be a little more direct, please, in regards to “right here”? What thread, what topic? Ooohhh be careful...sounds like a “rhymes with a Mia” vibe or circular semantics trap!!!! My guess is that it’s regarding the Google/Dr. Epstein thread that mizindependent posted. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 19, 2024 2:25:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2019 12:56:52 GMT
The gist of this thread seems to be that it only comes from one side. I've seen it with my own eyes where facts were presented with video and transcripts making the facts undeniable and yet those who didn't want to hear it lost their shit on the person presenting the facts. Right here. And they're still, to this day, presenting the wrong information in the last 24 hours with everyone on the "facts only" side still agreeing with them. It most definitely happens on all sides. Could you be a little more direct, please, in regards to “right here”? What thread, what topic? Because you think it doesn't happen? You really think only one side is opposed to facts and you need proof? |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Aug 11, 2019 13:08:26 GMT
Could you be a little more direct, please, in regards to “right here”? What thread, what topic? Because you think it doesn't happen? You really think only one side is opposed to facts and you need proof? In this case, yes. The liberals on this board are pretty careful about misinformation and even call each other out when things are not correct. If the post above is correct that you're referring to the thread about Google fixing elections - well, perhaps you see a video of testimony from a Prager U conspiracy theorist as proof, but I don't. Perhaps the larger problem is that we have a different idea of what constitutes credible information and, thus, evidence of truth. |
|
|
|
Post by jeremysgirl on Aug 11, 2019 13:19:38 GMT
Merge said: The liberals on this board are pretty careful about misinformation and even call each other out when things are not correct. It hasn't always been this way in my 15 year history on this board but I would say that this statement is pretty damn accurate at this point in time. I can't imagine @fred letting anyone get away with misinformation. And you can see this in action on the epstein thread. A wild claim was made and right away a source was requested. At this point, I feel the truth is so ugly liberals don't need to make shit up.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 19, 2024 2:25:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2019 14:43:28 GMT
Because you think it doesn't happen? You really think only one side is opposed to facts and you need proof? In this case, yes. The liberals on this board are pretty careful about misinformation and even call each other out when things are not correct. Not when it feeds a narrative they can't let go of, they aren't careful about misinformation. And when that happens they do not call each other out, they attack the messenger. The above post you speak of is not correct and yet we still have a different idea of what constitutes credible information. |
|
|
|
Post by iamkristinl16 on Aug 11, 2019 14:57:50 GMT
There are a few things going on, I think. One, there is probably some history between the two of them. That's likely not an isolated incident. Two, if her intent was truly to educate and not antagonize, leading with "fake news" isn't the best way to achieve that. Three, you're right that people don't like to be wrong and they especially don't like to be publicly called out on it. A private message may have been more effective if the goal was really to correct the misinformation. Both sides antagonize each other a lot, IMO. And that includes me. I rarely think correcting misinformation is done in a positive way. But I don't think Rs have cornered the market on sharing misinformation and overreacting to being corrected - I see it plenty with Ds I know. ETA: I don’t think there is any kind of obligation to handle correcting misinformation with kid gloves. But between people with whom you’d like to maintain some kind of relationship in general, it can be wise. The gist of this thread seems to be that it only comes from one side. I've seen it with my own eyes where facts were presented with video and transcripts making the facts undeniable and yet those who didn't want to hear it lost their shit on the person presenting the facts. Right here. And they're still, to this day, presenting the wrong information in the last 24 hours with everyone on the "facts only" side still agreeing with them. It most definitely happens on all sides. In my OP I said that what I seen on MY Facebook feed is primarily Republicans posting things that are not true and getting upset about it when they are shown actual facts (topics can include abortion, guns, Democrats in general, platforms of Democratic candidates, immigration, and so on). I also said that I have seen a few people post similar style of anti-Trump articles or memes, but when it is pointed out to them, they don't get upset and say things like "I'm not reading that" or "I just go by what the White House says" or "Get the Fuck off my page." I understand that others may experience different things with their group of friends and family, but from what I have read here and seen on my page, it does seem to be ore of a Republican phenomenon. Even their opinions on things like checks and balances, Russia, who our allies are, whether or not you can believe our intelligence agencies, climate change, and so on, is being warped because of Trump and actual misleading/fake news (not the ones "lamestream or fake news that Trump complains about). |
|
|
|
Post by sasha on Aug 11, 2019 15:23:10 GMT
On my FB feed, I find that the ones who spread misinformation the most are those that are extremes on both sides of the political aisle; however it seems to me that the Trumpsters are the worst offenders.
|
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Aug 11, 2019 17:13:07 GMT
Could you be a little more direct, please, in regards to “right here”? What thread, what topic? Because you think it doesn't happen? You really think only one side is opposed to facts and you need proof? Because I wanted to know what you consider to be non-credible information that the liberal peas are accepting without question. That seems reasonable enough to me. YMMV |
|
