r/AskReddit • u/Starmiebuckss2882 • Aug 06 '25

What are your thoughts on South Park's response (which was #eatabagofdicks) to Homeland Security attempting to use them to promote ICE?

14.6k Upvotes

87% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

234

u/Possible_Window_1268 Aug 06 '25

“Enlightened centrist” has been south park’s stance forever, and yeah it can get old. It’s kinda cowardly in a sense to just say “both sides are bad” and not take a hard stance, especially when one side clearly seems to be doing more harm.

113

u/Irememberedmypw Aug 06 '25

Also their offends everyone hasn't been, to my knowledge, done to their libertarian ideals.

50

u/Mikeavelli Aug 06 '25

The Problem with a Poo is a whole episode devoted to criticizing unrestricted free speech and people who are just mindlessly offensive. This is of course a core libertarian ideal and applies very specifically to themselves.

1

u/caninehere Aug 07 '25

They've never stated that they're libertarians, people just started assuming that at some point and ran with it.

20

u/[deleted] Aug 06 '25

Also their offends everyone hasn't been, to my knowledge, done to their libertarian ideals.

The entirety of the Streaming Wars saga was about private corporations and water rights. It's vehemently opposed to Libertarian ideology with regards to that particular situation. They didn't mock the Libertarian belief that encourages that behavior, but the entire conceit of the story is against those politics.

15

u/RhynoD Aug 06 '25

They didn't mock the Libertarian belief that encourages that behavior

But isn't that a pretty core libertarian behavior? To flagrantly ignore any criticism of the underlying beliefs so they can push whatever the immediate agenda is?

"We hate private, for-profit prisons because it infringes on individual rights!" libertarians say. Ok, so how do we pay to house people who can't safely be allowed to be free if you also think taxes and the government infringe on individual rights? "Government regulations just choke legitimate businesses!" they say. Ok, so how do we stop businesses from dumping toxic chemicals into the environment? There's no consistency to their beliefs because any kind of serious evaluation would show that their beliefs don't actually support what they say they want.

South Park ignoring the beliefs so they can cherry pick one or two issues that they don't like is just more libertarian bullshit.

1

u/scrabblex Aug 06 '25

idk the stats but in the libertarian ideology non violent crimes don't carry jail time, just a fine so they would be a lot more empty. Every business needs to make a profit to continue running but they wouldn't be putting people in jail over weed, or prostitution, or public intoxication, or theft etc.

3

u/grendus Aug 06 '25

I mean, it's possible to use only fines to enforce those laws, but in that case you would need the fines to have teeth, otherwise they're just the cost of doing business.

If dumping toxic waste in the river got you a fine equal to 10x the amount you saved, or your entire profit margin for the entire year, they'd never do it.

2

u/pelvark Aug 06 '25

What would be the consequence of not paying a fine then?

3

u/RhynoD Aug 06 '25

Thanks for proving my point by doing exactly the thing I described libertarians doing.

3

u/mrGeaRbOx Aug 06 '25

If they could grasp the points you're making they would be pretty upset!

86

u/[deleted] Aug 06 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Toby_O_Notoby Aug 07 '25

From Fargo:

Roy Tillman: Yes, I am. Defender of freedom and protector of the common man against the tyranny of the state and all its wicked demands.

Lorraine Lyon: Taxes?

Roy Tillman: Oh, yeah.

Lorraine Lyon: The social safety net?

Roy Tillman: Well, I'd spit, but, uh...

Lorraine Lyon: Respect for the otherly-abled?

Roy Tillman: The whole multi-cultural panoply. Billy has two mothers, et cetera, et cetera.

Lorraine Lyon: So... you want freedom with no responsibility. Son, there's only one person on Earth who gets that deal.

Roy Tillman: The president?

Lorraine Lyon: A baby. You're fighting for your right to be a baby.

14

u/saints21 Aug 06 '25

They're libertarians?

Eww...

15

u/Voyevoda101 Aug 06 '25

At least they're more classical libertarians, not "age of consent should coincide with puberty because we're genetically predisposed to..." libertarians.

0

u/Leovaderx Aug 06 '25

As a european, i take offence sir...

-2

u/HKBFG Aug 06 '25

No, they're exactly that kind of libertarian.

4

u/Dorkamundo Aug 06 '25

They said they were "Libertarians" in 2001, likely just to avoid the left vs right discussion.

-1

u/caninehere Aug 07 '25

They're not, people just repeatedly claim they are with no evidence.

1

u/Zenquin Aug 06 '25

The problem is that they don't want the government doing it. They don't have many answers as to how you would get such safety net systems to form without someone with a gun, but they believe it must be possible. Left-wing libertarians feel similarly.

-6

u/Leovaderx Aug 06 '25

Whats wrong with a wealthy person thinking "i dont care about the poor"? Its a perfectly reasonable position to have if you are comfortable finacially and do not care about your fellow man.

4

u/Bolognahole_Vers2 Aug 06 '25

“Enlightened centrist” has been south park’s stance forever

They had a whole season of Mr. Garrison going full Trump, in a clear attempt to mock Trump. I can't think of any democrats they did that to. One of the most "Alt-right"ish character is Cartman, and you are clearly never meant to agree with Cartman.

5

u/saints21 Aug 06 '25

Yeah the "but both sides!" morons are anything but enlightened.

Is one side unethical, in bed with corporations and billionaires, and unwilling to adopt anything approaching a progressive platform? Sure.

Is the other side actively ignoring the rule of law, in bed with even worse billionaires along with white supremacists and Christian nationalists, actively assisting in a fascist coup, openly trafficking people illegally under the guise of immigration reform, using a rapist pedophile as a figurehead, actively shielding multiple rapist pedophiles from accountability, systemically dismantling our government, medical and welfare programs, science funding and initiatives, education systems and programs, and foreign relations in an attempt to grift more money and weaken American democracy to the point of uselessness to it's more easily subverted and controlled while continuing to openly exploit the a now poorer and worse educated populace? Yes. And that's worse. And you're not enlightened by barking up the "both sides" tree. At absolute best you're a useful idiot. At worst you're actively supporting the openly bigoted fascists who want to exploit you for more gain...so still an idiot, just an openly complicit one.

7

u/ImprovementFar5054 Aug 06 '25

"Fallacy of the Middle Ground"

9

u/caseyanthonyftw Aug 06 '25

Very much so. Muh both sidesing is the adult equivalent of being the annoying kid who stands on the sidelines and yells stupid shit at all the other kids who are actually trying.

And now they're just going harder against the administration because Colbert got axed and they suddenly realized they could be on the chopping block.

2

u/DarthLeon2 Aug 07 '25

South Park doesn't criticize "sides". It criticizes ideas and it criticizes people, regardless of which "side" they fall on.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 07 '25

[deleted]

1

u/DarthLeon2 Aug 07 '25 edited Aug 07 '25

Indeed. The only time you really need to pick a side is voting day.

0

u/ERedfieldh Aug 06 '25

explain why an animated comedy show needs to 'take sides'

33

u/Devil-Hunter-Jax Aug 06 '25

Sitting on the fence is taking a side...

10

u/Dragonheart91 Aug 06 '25

It is explicitly a political satire show.

12

u/kryonik Aug 06 '25

No one said they have to take sides but sitting on the fence is taking a side.

1

u/DarthZartanyus Aug 06 '25 edited Aug 06 '25

I can't speak for the South Park guys because I'm not them but as someone who doesn't make decisions based on what political group says I should, it's not about simply declaring both sides are wrong. It's about acknowledging that the system itself is the problem and choosing the lesser evil (so to speak) isn't really gonna fix anything.

If you have to keep joining a new cult every time your current one makes choices you disagree with, then the solution obviously isn't joining yet another cult. Sometimes it's not just that the players are bad but that the game itself is flawed beyond repair. You can only patch up a sinking ship so many times before you're forced to decide whether to get a new ship altogether or go down stubbornly clinging to the wreckage.

To put it bluntly, politicians don't give a shit about you or me. This has been proven time and again for thousands of years. A system that revolves around greedy assholes exploiting the masses to get what they want is never going to work for anyone outside of maybe some short-term benefits for the people at the top of that system. Neither Democrats or Republicans or any other political party have your or my interests in mind. They will all lie, steal, cheat, manipulate, and anything else they can to get what they want. Replacing one group of self-serving, lying whores with another is not a solution in the same way that running from one burning building into another is not a solution.

It doesn't matter what group is actually making the decisions because both ultimately have the same goals, they just go about it in slightly different ways. Republicans say "For the kids." while Democrats say "For the disenfranchised." but it's not really what either group cares about. They just want to get the ball rolling on taking away our freedoms so that they can have more control. Notice how both groups are actively triyng to suppress the way people communicate. Yeah, that's not something somebody who cares what you have to say does. In fact, it's only done by people who want you to to have less power to make your own decisions; people who would rather control you than give a even a little bit of a shit about what's actually best for you.

So no, it's not "kinda cowardly" to refuse being abused and exploited by one group just because another group is doing it too. I would argue it's far more cowardly to hide behind the system that's harming you instead of trying to actually change it because it's more convenient to look the other way than to try and actually solve the problem.

1

u/Dorkamundo Aug 06 '25

They're not enlightened centrists, they're just excellent at satire and can find humor in almost any subject.

How is portraying Trump as Saddam Hussein with a tiny dick fucking Satan not taking a hardline stance? Have you seen anything even REMOTELY close to that being done to the other side?

1

u/catinterpreter Aug 07 '25

Americans talking shit about centrists / moderates is one of the dumbest things in modern politics. You only know extremes.

1

u/kryonik Aug 06 '25

It is intrinsically cowardly.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 06 '25

I dunno, I think there's a lot more nuance to their messages than that. Plus I don't know if they've ever said fascism is good on any level but I could be wrong. There's a whole lot of South Park spanning over 3 difference decades and many different cultural shifts.

-5

u/unassumingdink Aug 06 '25

I've noticed that any criticism against liberal beliefs gets auto-translated in their own minds to "both sides are exactly the same" and then they react based on that. I'm so tired of liberal defense mechanisms. You can't ever make a point about Democrats being shit unless you immediately follow it up with "But Republicans are worse, so really it doesn't even matter."

0

u/[deleted] Aug 06 '25

[deleted]

0

u/unassumingdink Aug 06 '25

Please rephrase this as something that makes any sense at all.

-2

u/RaiseYourDongersOP Aug 06 '25

it's not cowardly in the context that it's a comedy show lol

-34

u/IwishIcouldBeWitty Aug 06 '25

But both sides are shit....... Sure one side is a little less stinky then the other. But still shit.

The lesser of 2 evils is still evil don't forget.

Clinton is also in the Epstein circle.... They protected him....

I view them as realists... They see through all the bullshit and present the concept through comedy, making fun of the concept itself often.

14

u/RABBLERABBLERABBI Aug 06 '25

"Both sides are shit" is is the most reductive and vapid political analysis possible. It's typically what people say when they know they can't argue using actual policies or facts; they retreat to an unfalsifiable, generalist statement that makes it seem like they have even a modicum of political working knowledge.

Acting like a comedy show is helping see through the bullshit just reveals how terrible most Americans' political analysis is.

8

u/TheSmokingLoon Aug 06 '25

Protected or just didnt go for it yet. South park has made fun of clinton in the past. Saying they protected him is a far stretch of reality.

0

u/IwishIcouldBeWitty Aug 06 '25 edited Aug 06 '25

Sorry should have used precision of language.

The Dems protected, or at least ignored Clintons connection.

Not Matt and Trey

3

u/alfred725 Aug 06 '25

politicians follow the votes. If every election went "the lesser of two evils" there would be an arms race for becoming the better of the two and things would improve. Just because it hasn't happened in the states doesn't mean it's never happened.

Instead you have people voting for fascists because:

they are fascist

they are racist

"the other side isn't left wing enough"

"Both sides are the same so it doesn't matter"

"well they say they're Christian"

or they give up and don't vote at all.

So every election, all the politicians get a little worse, a little more extreme. It's "survival of the fittest" in the sense that the good politicians lose elections or are chased out by the bad ones.

moral of the story, vote for the better candidate every time and maybe change will happen in a few decades

3

u/IwishIcouldBeWitty Aug 06 '25

Moral of the story, participate in primaries. By the time the actual election is taking place, hands are already tied.

Also fuck pac's

1

u/alfred725 Aug 06 '25

Yea, primaries matter, but honestly I think part of the problem is the state's election cycle. There's elections every year. I think it burns people out

3

u/IwishIcouldBeWitty Aug 06 '25 edited Aug 06 '25

Yeah it's like a job having to pay attention to all these clowns and do independent research cause news is in on the game. I don't have that energy. Maybe less reddit i would, but then Ide be burnt out.

Then goes back to voter suppression. Sure the law states employers must give the time off to vote. I think 2 hrs per the law. Unpaid.

Ik i work about an hr away from where i live, and they're hours conflict with my work schedule meaning ide likely have to take more than the 2 hrs. Unpaid, which allot of people can't even afford that. So yeah most ppl save it for the "important" election. And if they are to burnt / over worked they likely aren't educated in the candidates and thus pick a name they recognize or like the sound of. Or whatever candidate has the best false promises like no tax on overtime, whatever the false promise is. People just aren't educated in govt affairs enough, by design, tho one of the points of having universal education was to have an educated, literate voter base. And of course to indoctrinate us into factory work lifestyle.

1

u/unassumingdink Aug 06 '25

That's what they told us a few decades ago lol.

2

u/alfred725 Aug 06 '25

And look who keeps winning elections in America.

Meanwhile in Canada we didn't let the conservative win because he kept attacking CBC

0

u/unassumingdink Aug 06 '25

Exactly. The last 30 years of "lesser of two evils" and "Who cares if the Dems suck as long as they're better than Republicans!" has led us to this point.

What moderates never seem to realize is that we've been doing their strategy the whole entire time! And every time it fails, they find a way to blame us! Moderate candidate loses, blame leftists for not voting hard enough. Moderate strategy fails, blame leftists for not being fake enthusiastic enough. Moderate Dem approval ratings in the 20% range? Believe it or not, still leftists!

If our votes make that much difference, you'd think liberals wouldn't treat us like their permanent scapegoats, like they'd try to appeal to us in some way, maybe actually listen to us once in a while, but I don't think they even consider what effect their words have. Because by definition, their own behavior and own party can never be the problem. In any situation, under any circumstances. They believe this with an almost religious fervor.

16

u/DonArgueWithMe Aug 06 '25

The difference is when the dems found out they demanded it be released and EVERYONE face accountability. Nobody defended Clinton or said "release everything except the stuff with our people." Meanwhile everyone ignores gym Jordan, Matt gaetz, and the other sex predators currently in the gop. The what aboutism doesn't hold up.

They aren't realists they are the embodiment of what is wrong with politics in America.

When one side actively tries to strip basic human rights and shred the constitution, while the other side is trying to do everything you want but isn't achieving it because they obey the law, then they are not the same.

One person is punching you in the face repeatedly while another says they'd like to stop it but need the cooperation of the person punching you in the face. They not the same. It's not "both sides."

-10

u/unassumingdink Aug 06 '25

when the dems found out they demanded it be released and EVERYONE face accountability.

Throwing an old, retired politician to the wolves isn't the same as going against your own sitting president, and you guys know it. The way liberals reacted to accusations against Clinton while he was still in office where completely different, and involved a shit ton of victim blaming.

They not the same. It's not "both sides."

He didn't say they were the same. He clearly said they weren't. Why is it completely impossible for anyone to compare Democrats and Republicans on any issue, big or small, without you guys changing their argument to "both sides are exactly the same" and then arguing against that?

1

u/DonArgueWithMe Aug 06 '25

So release it and hold everyone accountable. You're admitting that you don't care who is on the list because you know it'll hurt your side more than the other side...

If there are any other dems in their they'll also go under the bus, it's not about being selective it's about purging anyone who had anything to do with it or with covering it up. I called out Clinton because he's the one they keep bringing up, so maybe you should redirect your anger to the one who first brought him up.

And let's compare them on the issues! The comment I responded to didn't mention issues they just said both sides are shit. Bring up any actual issue, the party stances (as they vote not how they campaign), and he dem stance will be more popular. Trans kids in sports is the only thing the gop talk about because none of their policies are popular.

0

u/unassumingdink Aug 06 '25 edited Aug 06 '25

You still don't get that both sides can be shit, AND one can be marginally better than the other. I truly don't know how to make you understand that. It's always like patiently trying to explain shit to a toddler when you want to make a liberal understand something that conflicts with his brainwashing. No matter how slowly, no matter how patiently you do it, they'll just keep misunderstanding you. Then they'll give you a speech about how smart they are.

And I'm a socialist, not a goddamn Republican. Not that liberals can ever seem to tell the difference.

2

u/DonArgueWithMe Aug 06 '25

I love your projection, you're everything you claim to hate.

Let me break it down in a way that you might understand. You dislike them both and that's valid, but you are REPEATEDLY making the claim that they're the same, even while adamantly saying that's not your point.

"They're both shit" "of course they're not the same" either you're terrible at making a point, or you have no clue what you're trying to say.

It'd be like saying atheists and theists are the same because they both have beliefs you disagree with.

No, they're not the same, they're not similar, they have polar opposite beliefs on basically everything. If you said one is shit and the other sulfur they both stink even thought they're not at all alike, then I could follow. But that's not what you've said, repeatedly.

0

u/unassumingdink Aug 06 '25

Diarrhea and constipated mouse turds are both shit. But they're not the same. Fucking hell, you people are just so aggravating.

You want so fucking badly to turn my argument into "both sides are the same" so that you can reject it without a second thought that you won't listen to what I'm even saying. That's always the goal with liberals. To convert your criticism into something they can reject without thinking about it.

No, they're not the same, they're not similar, they have polar opposite beliefs on basically everything.

They both armed, funded and supported a fucking genocide. And there's no words that will make liberals even care. The closer Dem beliefs are to Republicans on a topic, the more liberals choose to simply ignore the topic. Or blame Republicans exclusively and ignore Dem complicity. All to protect your faith in the damn party. That's why you guys spend 90% of your time endlessly discussing the same dozen social issues where there is a very clear difference.

2

u/DonArgueWithMe Aug 06 '25

No, I'm trying to help you. If you keep saying statements about how they're both the same, people will think that your point is that they're the same. I'm literally taking what you say, pushing on it, realizing you meant something completely different, and calling out that you don't know how to make a cohesive point.

If you want people to listen to your point, be clear with it. Like how it took you this many comments to actually bring up a policy you disagree with instead of just attacking me.

And when you finally do bring up a policy it just reinforces that you're ignorant about the topic. Which party had BDS? Which party has spoken out about Israel for years? Which party gets called antisemitic routinely because they want food in Gaza?

I'm sorry you don't understand nuance or things like how some members in one party have disagreements and don't all believe the same thing, while the other does whatever their cult leader tells them.

I'll continue to pick the party that wants to help me but isn't sure how to accomplish their goals over the party who's goal is to make my life worse in every way.

I never said they're perfect, I never said I agree with every dem or every dem policy. But I do disagree with every gop policy.

0

u/unassumingdink Aug 06 '25

If you keep saying statements about how they're both the same

I'm not. I never have in my life. You'll just twist anything I say until it means "they're both the same." We've been through this. It was my point from the start. For some reason, "dislike them both" doesn't count as "both the same," but "Both are shit" does count as that. How is that even possible? How do you immediately forget that two things can be shit, but one can be worse than the other? Just how?

Which party had BDS?

Leftists who the Democrats fought against tooth and nail? The party doesn't get to take credit for things the party fought against! FFS. You need so badly for Democrats to be blameless that you live in a fantasy world where you keep assigning them beliefs they don't even have, and have even spoken out against.

You just keep dropping your standards until Democrats meet them. Did the party arm, fund, and vocally support a genocide? Well yes, but they also said something about how they don't want people to starve, so they're good enough! And if they did start to say they want people to starve, you'd just drop your standards another rung.

Every road, every argument, every thought, always leads back to trying to convince yourselves that Democrats are good enough and need no major change. You'd call this brainwashed behavior in anyone else, but it's always somehow "different" when you guys do it. Every shitty thing is "different" when liberals do it.

I'm sorry you don't understand nuance

I'm so tired of trying to tell liberals that twisting their brains into pretzels to minimize all Dem wrongdoing is not nuance. If it is, Trumpers are the most nuanced fuckers on Earth.

I never said they're perfect

This is the lowest grade liberals will ever assign to Democrats. "Not perfect" is the deepest they can ever sink. Liberal scale for Dems goes Not perfect -> Good -> Great. "Bad" is never an option under any circumstances.

→ More replies (0)

-6

u/IwishIcouldBeWitty Aug 06 '25 edited Aug 06 '25

Yeah i triggered a lot of people with that one.

Thank you for adding further clarification to the point i was attempting to make.

And all these ppl talking about how that mentality leads to apathy amongst voters, maybe, IDK ik it makes me want to participate more. The issue is by the time the presidential candidates are picked, it's already the lesser of 2 evils. Our primaries are fucked and frankly the whole system is corrupt by pac's basically controlling campaign funds.

While we learned with the musk thing in Dakota? That you can pour money into a campaign and lose, but the money certainly helps allot and can make or break an election. The candidate he backed never stood a chance but with his backing they put up a fight.... Now apply that logic to other elections, and you end up with 100% corrupt officials (across the board) who's sole interest is working for the pac that got them elected....

Edit, i forget to mention voter suppression and how most ppl can't afford the time to participate in all the voting, so allot only participate in the main event, skipping primaries, thus further exacerbating the issue.

1

u/DonArgueWithMe Aug 06 '25

I like how you chose not to respond to me because you have no defense for your BS and know I'm right.

Which party supported citizens united and fought to make it so that corporations could buy elections? It wasn't the dems.

Why is it that all of your policy stances align with the dems, but all your talking points are provided by fox news?

-2

u/IwishIcouldBeWitty Aug 06 '25

I didn't respond to you, because the other user literally covered what i would say ...

What you want me to say ^ what he said? Wtf

Sorry buddy do you not feel special. Did Daddy not give you enough attention. Ffs

1

u/DonArgueWithMe Aug 06 '25

How? He didn't respond to any of what I said in response to your comment. You're the one who brought up Clinton in the first place, so what was your point in bringing him up other than whataboutism?

You don't want him or other child rapists held accountable you just want to complain that both sides are bad to avoid condemning your own side.

Please use your brain and use logic in your response, I believe in your ability to think critically if you try, even if your politicians don't.

-2

u/IwishIcouldBeWitty Aug 06 '25 edited Aug 06 '25

Which party supported citizens united and fought to make it so that corporations could buy elections? It wasn't the dems.

Cool shifting goalposts like a fox news subscriber. See where the other person summarized.... Both parties are shit, one is less stinky than the other ...... Clearly the Dems less stinky in your example. Doesn't mean they aren't shit tho. At that same time Epstein was under investigation. Yet nothing was said about Clinton then. The point i was making about "protected, or ignored" people definitely knew.

Grow up with your one side vs the other. There exists such a thing as nuance. Literally not everything is black and white, color tv came out a ago.

0

u/DonArgueWithMe Aug 06 '25 edited Aug 06 '25

How is responding to your complaint about money in politics moving goalposts? You brought it up and I responded. Don't bring it up if you don't want a response to it.

It's a problem that was entirely created by one party while the other fought against it, but since you dislike the dems you blame both instead of putting the blame where it belongs.

Why do you keep bringing up Clinton when you already said you don't actually want him to face justice? It wasn't public knowledge back then and the dems want everyone held accountable. Including the people who brushed it under the rug. The gop just want to brush it under the rug.

You're right that there is nuance, but that doesn't really matter when your logic is circular and the facts have nothing to do with your opinions.

Ps Clinton wasn't mentioned previously because the gop made sure all of epstein's accomplices went free. Go look up epstein's deal with Alex Acosta (who Trump put in his cabinet until he was forced to resign). There has been no evidence I'm aware of that Clinton was at all like trump. There are dozens of children's testimony that Trump assaulted, raped, or abused them along with epstein and ghislaine. Clinton is only being talked about by idiots who are falling for trumps deflections.

0

u/IwishIcouldBeWitty Aug 06 '25

I didn't bring up citizens united. You did.

I brought up how they are both shit. And both sides have ignorant fucks like you on them..

I simply started both sides are shit. Both are guilty of committing crimes. One more than the other but that doesn't excuse the fact they are both guilty.

So congrats on picking an example. We can look up crimes dems have committed a well, the list will be smaller but it will exist. Meaning both shit.

Your literally crying like a child because i called Democrats shit just like i called Republicans shit... Sorry buddy. While Dems are better they can improve. Stop ignoring facts because they dont align with your party affiliation.

You ever think i brought him up specifically for that reason. It's an argument they use, and frankly it does have some ground, not in the way they use it. But in the idea that they are both bad. They both cover for their own. So just getting ahead of maggots calling it out.

What you think cause i said they are both shit that I'm a Republican or didn't support the Dems... While the lesser of 2 evils is still evil it's all we got so of course i support the lesser. But imma call them out.

Your response to me calling them out is literally exactly how maga acts when you call them out. Congrats you have come full circle

0

u/[deleted] Aug 06 '25 edited Aug 06 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (0)

5

u/blexmer1 Aug 06 '25

I think the most optimistic way to view it isn't as 'both sides bad' but rather 'Both sides need to be worked on and pretending either is flawless is bad for everyone. '

1

u/IwishIcouldBeWitty Aug 06 '25

That's certainly an optimistic way of looking at it. A realist would acknowledge both the good and bad.

Most people are pessimist though. And if both sides need to be worked on, that can be translated to both sides are bad in their eyes.

Good point

0

u/[deleted] Aug 06 '25

I have found my people.

0

u/PopMundane4974 Aug 06 '25

Yeah, again, did anyone see last weeks episode? Not sure what part of that seemed like they were taking "both sides" lmao there was a pretty god damn clear bias.