I support Trump, but I was called a Trump cultist even though I wanted Larry Elder to win. Similarly, I don't think JD Vance was carried by Mike DeWine. I said that DeSantis did some good things, but was being terribly mislead by Bushites who were probably going to try and tank both DeSantis' and Trump's political careers. That is why I was called a cultist.
That's not a cultist, and I don't call anyone who is a die-hard DeSantis supporter a Cultist. Dave Rubin is not a cultist. He genuinely supports DeSantis, but he's also a shill for Ron. Meghan Kelly falls in that same boat.
Yes, you are a shill if you are refusing to acknowledge basic issues with people you like. If I were to say, "Larry Elder has no major flaws", that would be a bullshit lie because he lost to Gavin Newsom. That's not only shilling for Larry Elder, but bad shilling at that. I can be an adult about this and not stake my identity on being a propagandist for someone. Even if you are going to be a propagandist, you need to have a counter-argument, not an insult.
Well, he was wrong about that if he called you a cultist for that. But whatever it was, it's water under the bridge now. Words are air.
Yes, you are a shill if you are refusing to acknowledge basic issues with people you like
This guy was critical of DeSantis regarding his Ukraine comments.
If I were to say, "Larry Elder has no major flaws", that would be a bullshit lie because he lost to Gavin Newsom.
While your point is correct, your example does not actually follow. Losing to Gavin Newsom does not demonstrate that you have major flaws (though no doubt he has). Jesus could lose to Newom, and the fact of losing is not what indicates flaws.
I disagree. Losing to Gavin Newsom, who is now facing a second recall, suggests some kind of major organizational or activism deficiency. He might not have many policy deficiencies, but logistical deficiencies still count.
Contrast that with Lee Zeldin who preformed much better than Larry Elder, and had (and has) a strong political logistical system in the state that is making major efforts to flip it.
I support Trump, but I was called a Trump cultist even though I wanted Larry Elder to win. Similarly, I don't think JD Vance was carried by Mike DeWine. I said that DeSantis did some good things, but was being terribly mislead by Bushites who were probably going to try and tank both DeSantis' and Trump's political careers. That is why I was called a cultist.
That's not a cultist, and I don't call anyone who is a die-hard DeSantis supporter a Cultist. Dave Rubin is not a cultist. He genuinely supports DeSantis, but he's also a shill for Ron. Meghan Kelly falls in that same boat.
Yes, you are a shill if you are refusing to acknowledge basic issues with people you like. If I were to say, "Larry Elder has no major flaws", that would be a bullshit lie because he lost to Gavin Newsom. That's not only shilling for Larry Elder, but bad shilling at that. I can be an adult about this and not stake my identity on being a propagandist for someone. Even if you are going to be a propagandist, you need to have a counter-argument, not an insult.
Well, he was wrong about that if he called you a cultist for that. But whatever it was, it's water under the bridge now. Words are air.
This guy was critical of DeSantis regarding his Ukraine comments.
While your point is correct, your example does not actually follow. Losing to Gavin Newsom does not demonstrate that you have major flaws (though no doubt he has). Jesus could lose to Newom, and the fact of losing is not what indicates flaws.
I disagree. Losing to Gavin Newsom, who is now facing a second recall, suggests some kind of major organizational or activism deficiency. He might not have many policy deficiencies, but logistical deficiencies still count.
It's California...
I always said that Larry Elder was too good for Oklahoma, let alone California.
Contrast that with Lee Zeldin who preformed much better than Larry Elder, and had (and has) a strong political logistical system in the state that is making major efforts to flip it.