Video: Styx predictions for Bernie and Dems in 2020
- Thread starter NZ Poke
- Start date
What in the world does this guy do for a living?
He's worth a listen.
He's worth a listen.
Majik and Hitler worship. There's quite an audience for that stuff so I hear. I do wish he'd spend some of that YouTube money on shirts though. I just can't watch a creepy third cousin who can't afford a T-shirt version of Joey Ramone talk politics.Alien magic and Trump fan fiction.
My completely random sampling says you've got that backwards,....way backwards.
Shirts my ass, look at the backdrop: sagging plants need water, closet on the right, WTF on the left, and the damned glasses reflection......
Compliments his mom's cooking.
I was wondering why he hasn't been cited more lately, his mom may have cut off his internet access again. Look up his writings on Amazon. Oh, he's the real deal. 666 used to wear a devil symbol and hitler 'stache and now he explains facts to his anciente occulte & majicke booke readers and right wingers.
He's as full o' shit as a Christmas goose.
This video...
Bernie can't beat Trump.
If the Dems fail miserably in 2018, they will probably start thinking about changing their tactics. If they don't, they'll likely continue along the same path they are presently on.
You have to take each election as it comes. We can make some vague predictions on what MAY happen in 2018...whether they will do well or not we'll see...it's probably the latter.
Burden of proof? For an opinion? When you didn't request the opposite opinion to meet the same burden of proof.
Really? Your confirmation bias is showing.
As for context...
You can go find my comments on the random videos I have actually listened to. I've yet to hear a one that gives any particular or unique insight that someone else hasn't already been saying or any actual, you know, factual analysis. In fact, some of them had factually wrong legal analysis and claims....which I pointed out.
Bernie can't beat Trump.
If the Dems fail miserably in 2018, they will probably start thinking about changing their tactics. If they don't, they'll likely continue along the same path they are presently on.
You have to take each election as it comes. We can make some vague predictions on what MAY happen in 2018...whether they will do well or not we'll see...it's probably the latter.
Burden of proof? For an opinion? When you didn't request the opposite opinion to meet the same burden of proof.
Really? Your confirmation bias is showing.
As for context...
You can go find my comments on the random videos I have actually listened to. I've yet to hear a one that gives any particular or unique insight that someone else hasn't already been saying or any actual, you know, factual analysis. In fact, some of them had factually wrong legal analysis and claims....which I pointed out.
Aside from the shirtless weirdness, I don't watch because I'm afraid he'd invite me on a quest to see his sword. Or is it sworde? Regardless, he gives me more creeps than Hillary's creepy as F campaign chairman John Molesta or Molesta John or whatever his name is.
I hope he doesn't have a dog; gawd only knows what he'd do to the beast.
Wow, burden of proof was just a joke because of your profession. Just wanted your actual opinion on some of the details.
Dems should already be rethinking platform. From what I've seen they are doubling down. This makes me agree with "or not."
Honestly, I've never sat through a whole video of his, not even this one. His presentation style just does not catch me and I sit through a bunch of dull shit. I'd rather watch baby seals be clubbed, at least I laugh.
Sorry about that. Tone and joking sometimes don't translate well in text.
My bad.
For me, there just isn't much of anything particularly notable there. It's some guy rambling on about his opinion...and his opinion and claims aren't anything I haven't heard previously here or elsewhere. I just don't get what Mega and (particularly) NZ find so great about his "analysis".
I called NZ out a few times trying to get him to give me something other than he predicted Trump would win...which really isn't an explanation for what supposedly makes a new video "great analysis" (to use NZ's words).
Hell, GunsofFrankEaton accurately predicted Trump would win. Even bet his "board life" here on it. I wouldn't watch a 15 minute video of him rambling on about Trump either.
Maybe my standards for YouTube based political consultants is too high.
Last edited:
JD likes to make fun of Styx being accurate about his election predictions.
For perspective, check out these election predictions from TV's most popular leftist commentator, Ralph Maddow.
How can anyone take this dude seriously after these predictions? What does it say about the corporate media that he didn't get fired?
For perspective, check out these election predictions from TV's most popular leftist commentator, Ralph Maddow.
How can anyone take this dude seriously after these predictions? What does it say about the corporate media that he didn't get fired?
Yeah, but you haven't addressed his hocus pocus, nazi sympathizing and satan worship. Don't forget those.
You are being obtuse and deceptive as usual.
I don't make fun of him for accurately predicting the election.
Good on him for that.
I make fun of YOU for believing everything else that comes out of his mouth for all of eternity is the spoken gospel because he got that one thing right yet bailing on your boy when anybody asks you to defend or explain what you think is "great analysis" is in subsequent videos.
I don't take Maddow seriously. It doesn't intellectually and logically follow that because I don't take Maddow seriously, I just unquestioningly and uncritically take Styxie seriously instead.
Last edited:
I like to make fun of Styx. He's a moron.
When you go months hearing nothing but inferences you should be ashamed to vote for Trump, it's common sense that people are going to lie when they get called by pollsters. It's nothing to hang your hat on that you picked Trump to win.
Has someone ever even posted Rachel Maddow's musings on the board? There are a very few libs on here, but none even post editorials. If they have it's rare.
I submit for your consideration the near perfect symmetry of the constant right wing tweets and videos and certain posters' political views. Some people think for themselves, and some don't. It's weird, how a certain ideology revolves around other opinion makers' narratives. You can see it on these boards, it's constant. I can't think of any demographic more influenced by professional opinion makers than the right wing of the republican party.
Hell no wonder Russia targeted conservatives, they're used to reading something and taking it hook, line and sinker. The propaganda simply wouldn't work against independent thinkers that don't parrot everything they hear from an "approved" source.
Logic would dictate that any Russian involvement would be targeted towards switching people inclined to initially vote for Hillary to change their vote. Conservatives would be voting for Trump anyways.
But hey, if it makes your feel better about yourself, go ahead and think what you want.
I disagree that they will "probably start thinking about changing their tactics" if they "fail miserably" in 2018 which I think is likely. They have been "failing miserably" since 2010 (other than the 2012 election) and have not changed their tactics. If anything they keep doubling-down on their cultural Marxism-inspired platform and the people of the US have been clear that they could care less about such a bizarre and anti-American platform.
In only 10 to 15 years, the Democrats literally transformed from being anti-religion to pro-Sharia (and pro-FGM).
This was last week from the top Democratic feminist activist. WTF happened to them?!
Flashbacks:
Jihad is defined by how fanatical the person implementing it is. It doesn't mean what you think it does either.
"Jihad" should not be in the vernacular in America. The joys of "multiculturalism."
More conservative deception. She plainly did not call for violence.
In her speech, Sarsour told a story from Islamic scripture about a man who once asked Muhammad, the founder of Islam, “What is the best form of jihad, or struggle?
“And our beloved prophet … said to him, ‘A word of truth in front of a tyrant ruler or leader, that is the best form of jihad,'” Sarsour said.
“I hope that … when we stand up to those who oppress our communities, that Allah accepts from us that as a form of jihad, that we are struggling against tyrants and rulers not only abroad in the Middle East or on the other side of the world, but here in these United States of America, where you have fascists and white supremacists and Islamophobes reigning in the White House.”
www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/07/07/muslim-activist-linda-sarsours-reference-to-jihad-draws-conservative-wrath/?utm_term=.6b6f002d4749
In her speech, Sarsour told a story from Islamic scripture about a man who once asked Muhammad, the founder of Islam, “What is the best form of jihad, or struggle?
“And our beloved prophet … said to him, ‘A word of truth in front of a tyrant ruler or leader, that is the best form of jihad,'” Sarsour said.
“I hope that … when we stand up to those who oppress our communities, that Allah accepts from us that as a form of jihad, that we are struggling against tyrants and rulers not only abroad in the Middle East or on the other side of the world, but here in these United States of America, where you have fascists and white supremacists and Islamophobes reigning in the White House.”
www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/07/07/muslim-activist-linda-sarsours-reference-to-jihad-draws-conservative-wrath/?utm_term=.6b6f002d4749
i don't get what point this is trying to make. Is it some kind of in for a penny, in for a pound metaphor?
If you can't stop homegrown terrorism, the answer is to import it from abroad as well?
