Utterly fucking incredible. No one said anything, posted any memes. He just posted this out of the blue. Just fucking incredible. They will march in to hell screaming at everyone around them for not voting hard enough. Like just what the fuck is this? Who is this for, now, in 2024, after this debate? What do they think posting this bullshit will accomplish? Biden just spent 90 minutes shitting himself on stage and failing to finish sentences and their immediate move is to scold people before they even start saying the emperor has no clothes?
"the chicken is stuffed with butter and then braised in the blood of a hundred thousand conscripts maimed and slaughtered to ensure europe is forever dependent on american natural gas supplies," the flight attendant says. "it's chicken kyiv. it comes with your choice of geno-side."
the chicken is also covered in shit and stuffed with broken glass, but the liberals keep insisting that it's the better choice because there's still some chicken in there. somewhere
"Would you rather eat the dish that is 100% platter of shit with broken glass in it or the dish that is 99% platter of shit with broken glass in it and 1% chicken?"
"Um, no thank you."
"See? This is exactly what's wrong with this country!! 😡😡"
No one seems to care about the crime bill or think that reflects on his character, goals, and core personality and I don't understand why they don't care and don't seem to have ever care.
The way no one seems to care at all about the genocide in Yemen continues to just be this fucking thorn stuck in my mind that never stops hurting. Something went terribly wrong at some point for all these supposed defenders of human rights to be completely indifferent to the brutal murder of somewehre between two and four hundred thousand people, many of them children, killed with starvation and dehydration. And countless more, especially children, permanently harmed and crippled by malnutrition. It's wrong. People should care.
Then you ask did any of the glass get in the chicken as well and they tell you yes and so you choose to obviously not eat anything on the plane because they're serving shit with glass in it
Also the chicken is rotten and not actually a chicken, but a less stinky platter of shit that the attendant insists on calling a "chicken" and if you point out its shit she'll call you ableist or a transphobe. If you skip the meal she'll decapitate you. If you decide on a third dish she calls you unrealistic and say you can't have it
Every election cycle liberals pull out the obnoxious food analogies.
"Hillary is like a hamburger and Trump is like a big stinky poo turd. I know some of you wanted pizza but they don't serve pizza so it's either the hamburger or the smelly poo big poopy turd of shit poop!!!!"
Imagine being on an airplane that's boarding. It's an unusual airliner. It only has one pilot. The pilot's name is Biden. Before you got on board - you happened to sit next to him for an hour in the airport. And you watched him and he was just like he was on the debate stage. It would be cause for worry and you'd want off that plane. The meal would be the least of your worries.
The big airlines are apparently lobbying to only have to put one pilot on the plane so they can weasel out of paying pilots enough money to cover years of expensive training plus a very expensive job. Lol. Lmao. I hate this fucking country.l
Biden wouldn't be able to climb the stairs to get into the cockpit in the first place so your terrible analogy is completely deboonked. I am very smart and very liberal.
Deboonked deboonked deboonked! Libs have gotten to 2024 and still don't get that what matters is what people want to be true, not whatever their "fact checkers" shit out.
This is my favourite counter to the dumb metaphor.
Libs really are just ordering the chicken instead of immediately realising none of the food could possible by trustworthy, and the whole airline is fundamentally flawed for getting to this point.
The desperate need to always make analogies just to defend Biden is something else. Analogies should only be used if they add something to make understanding the subject easier. But it also assumes the other side is not intelligent enough to understand the subject in the first place.
You wouldn't use analogies to explain the newest Quantum mechanics to Einstein. You could use them to introduce them to a person with a poor math/physics background maybe. But at the end you wouldn't assume the person who "kind of gets it" through an analogy to actualy come out knowing about said topic. You teach an analogy to a kid to help, you don't make the analogy the entire subject and replace the actual topic.
So yeah, all these dipshits using analogies are just saying "hey you pathetic manchild that doesn't understand how democracy is supposed to work, here let me dumb it down for you all why you need to vote for my candidate. So imagine a restaurant menu..."
What do they expect? A bow and a thank you mr democrat asshole I understand democracy now and will proceed to vote for the person you just told me to.
The only response should rather be a punch in their face.
Yeah I've been around the block a few times and seeing any sort of analogy in an argument makes me just kinda disregard it. Just talk about the real thing. It isn't that hard.
Secondarily I would say it is not a good argumentative tactic to play in the analogy's world to show why it's a dumb analogy. Just reject analogies on their face.
Then you take a closer look at the chicken and turns out the thing is rotten, also full of glass and completely unsafe for consumption, so not any better than the other option, you'd be just as sick either way. And so, you logically decide to not take either of these option and after looking the rest of the cart up and down you settle on a bag of peanuts sitting in a compartment bellow the main 2 options, not the best but at least it's actually comestible.
But before you can grab the bag of peanuts the passenger just in front grab your arm to stop you. The man has a costume vest, shirt and necktie on top, a baggy pant maintained by strings of bad quality fabric and white socks in flip-flops, your eyes briefly settle on the pins on his fedora, you notice the oh too familiar one displaying a smiling chicken with a shit eating grin full of human teethes and growl mentally in annoyance as the man stare you down with a smug look off superiority and disdain and begin telling you the same thing these types all says every single time:
"You can't take the peanuts you fool! You need to take the chicken!"
You roll your eyes not even bothering to hide your annoyance this time.
"It's rotten and full of glass shards, I can't eat that"
"Yeah but at least it is actual food unlike the platter of shit with broken glass. Or would you rather have more airline companies serve crap with shards of glass? Because that's what you're encouraging by buying peanuts!"
"How the heck does taking peanuts encour-"
"THAT'S JUST HOW 2 DISHES TRAYS WORKS, DON'T QUESTION IT AND CHOOSE STRATEGICALLY IF YOU DON'T WANT EVERY SINGLE DISH TO BE REPLACED WITH LITERAL SHIT!!"
"Even if that was somehow true, rotten chicken isn't any better."
"HOW DARE YOU SAY IT'S NOT BETTER?! HAVE YOU NOT SEEN THESE SCARY SHARDS OF GLASS? AND BESIDE I'M SURE THAT THE GLASS SHARDS IN THAT SHIT ARE MORE SHARP THAN THOSE IN THE CHICKEN AND YOU TOTALLY CAN DIGEST ROTTEN CHICKEN UNLIKE SHIT I'VE READ IT SOMEWHERE WHICH MEANS -"
Here you go, another fool to berate you all flight for daring not wanting to experience food poisoning. This flight is gonna be a long one.
A meal that killed somebody vs a meal that might kill me. Yeah, I'll abstain.
The analogy really is on point though considering how carnists will always try to gotcha with "but the chicken is already dead, letting it go to waste is a privileged position", same as blue MAGA with Bidet
I look down at my "chicken" and find that it is a platter of shit with rusty nails in it
Once you notice how these lib columnist assholes only ever articulate their terrible ideas as castle-in-the-sky hypotheticals because reality is too dicey, you never unsee it. The Freidman Special.
The peak of liberal political analysis is just analogy.
Trump is Voldemort and Hillary is Hermione Granger.
Trump is Jojo Siwa and Biden is Billie Eilish.
Fucken, whatever it is all it amounts to is this aesthetic "I don't like the bad thing because the bad thing is tacky and lowbrow/threatens to destroy the world but I like the good thing because it's nice and refined and clever/is the thing that's going to save the world".
That's all they can ever do.
"Biden is like liquid medicine: not something that is your preference to drink, it's bitter and uncomfortable but ultimately you know that what is more important is your own health–the health of the nation and of the world–than drinking coke instead.
Meanwhile Trump is like ipecac. People drink it because they think it will get rid of the problem and it might just do that but you're going to make yourself very sick in the process, you're going to create a huge mess, and you will feel weakened and full of regret for your choice by the end of it. Then you are going to need someone to come along and start cleaning up the mess that your poor decision-making has wrought."
It's so incredibly smug and self-congratulatory. Usually it's really wordy and the analogy becomes more tortured as the whole thing progresses.
If half the plane does not vote they still get the meal the others chose and they will get that meal for years to come. And unless they can finance their own "meals" they will have to eat the shit.
I think IATA has a rule that for flights over a certain time/distance you need to have at least one on board meal. I know that when I take 12 hour flights I get 2 big meals and one snack.
What's so hard to understand about the fact that by not eating the rancid chicken fried in stale piss you're implicitly endorsing the platter of shit with bits of broken glass in it?
Libs really need to understand what messages only serve to virtue signal to their in group versus convince a neutral bystander. This type of smug self-congratulatory horseshit is less convincing to the average normie scrolling by than posting that Tom Hanks is going to harvest their kid's andrenochrome. And this stuff makes the chuds gleeful because it reads like you are coping by unraveling.
Well, it's David Sedaris in the New Yorker. No undecided average bystander will ever see this essay. It could not possibly be more in group and smug than this
Screenshotting this of all things and posting it to your feed probably adds more to people's annoyance with liberals than it engenders favorability towards Biden. And I can't believe people are still sharing David Sedaris to make themselves look cultured, he's old and played out too!
not shown in this metaphor: everyone around you who got the chicken is shitting their pants waiting for the bathroom, which is coincidentally where they're getting the shit for the other meal from
Therefore you should eat nothing, idiot. And before you start your propagandized bleating, the idea that eating nothing is actually eating a platter of shit is fundamentally nonsensical and was pounded into your head by the people who keep threatening you with a platter of shit unless you eat their shit-covered chicken.
Actually, the other way around. We keep on compartmentalizing, Trump can lie all he wants and nothing happens, but Joe stutters and it’s a national disgrace… How can you compare one without including the only alternative?
Haaaaaaaaa
The people complaining about moderation are funny. The dnc and rnc set all the rules for these debates and, afaik, choose all the questions. The moderators are just props.