I had to hit downvote when she attacked Chrissie Mayr, an actually brave and bold comedian who said the same jokes when it made you a pariah, for saying the truth about Whitney.
What is the objective here? To get them to yield, or to destroy them? It may not be practical to destroy Bud Light entirely. It will also make it more difficult to get companies to yield, if they know they've burned their bridges and nothing they can do is ever enough.
Now, I'm not sure Bud Light has done enough, and connecting this to 'right-wing cancel culture' is stupid.
The objective is to leave a crater where the company once stood, so that all other companies see what will happen to them if they even think about pushing degeneracy on the public.
The right needs to get over their obsession with forgiveness already. It's what got us into this mess to begin with. We should leave no quarter for our enemies. Anything less is just waiting for them to eventually slit our throats.
I'm very cool with forgiving people/companies, but in order for it to be a genuine apology you have to be able to admit what you did wrong, why it was wrong and explain how you came to understand that.
No objective except don't support people who hate you. Budweiser is a huge company, and there's no reason to ever go back to Bud Light because it's a shitty product. No they haven't done enough either but it doesn't matter. Nobody wants their slop. A lot of people were already laid off or transferred, but they won't be destroyed because they have sponsorships with a lot of sporting events.
All perfectly valid reasons. My point is that it should be a calculated choice to continue or stop a given boycott. It is not always beneficial to continue after you got what you want, simply to spite them.
We can't destroy something as big as BL but we've shown we can cause significant damage.
I'm actually in general big on the idea of giving people a 2nd chance and supporting the idea that people can change. But they need to show signs it's genuine, key to that is taking accountability and expressing exactly what you did wrong so we know you get it. Brett even admits Bud's "apology" was wishy washy, so why should we accept.
She also tries to bring in RFK an and Tulsi, but those 2 didn't really change anything- the Democrats are the ones that changed. They seem to hold the same beliefs they have publicly held for years.
I'm actually in general big on the idea of giving people a 2nd chance and supporting the idea that people can change.
Corporations aren't people, dont have feelings, and will outlive us all to repeat the same strategies later. They'll probably do it in our lifetimes because they don't care about perceptions beyond how they affect their bottom lines. Unless a corporation literally apologizes or admits its marketing team was hijacked by DEI and its since cleaned house, I say a boycott should basically be forever.
We can't destroy something as big as BL but we've shown we can cause significant damage.
And the message got through to many other companies. Like the old Chinese proverb: kill one to warn 100 others. Clearly, it was a good idea to start the crusade. But given these facts, what is the marginal cost & benefit to continuing? What more can be extracted from BL?
I'm not saying we should stop, just that it should not be a given that it's beneficial to continue at this point.
But they need to show signs it's genuine
I think it's never genuine. These companies flip on a dime based on the amount of pressure they receive. It makes sense, because they're out to make profit.
Brett even admits Bud's "apology" was wishy washy, so why should we accept.
I'd be fine with no apology as long as they did a 180. But they haven't done that.
She also tries to bring in RFK an and Tulsi, but those 2 didn't really change anything- the Democrats are the ones that changed. They seem to hold the same beliefs they have publicly held for years.
Republicans also changed a lot. They used to be even bigger warmongers than the Democrats.
I'm actually surprised she's this massive a shill. I didn't actively watch her shit but that's wild. For once the daily wire was making someone be more conservative 😂
The show looks the same, the format is the same, the sponsors are the same. Already has 1m subscribers.
I won't be watching, but she'll be fine. She's already got a net worth around $10m. Meaning she could be making $400k/year @ 4% on that money. That's true "fuck you" money. I'd find a new hobby if I were her, but I think she's on a mission to prove she doesn't need The Daily Zionist.
I was excited to know that she was going solo and glad to hear she wasn't screaming at the intro. But I got lost shortly after the meat advert because it was just a slow preamble and I didn't think it was going anywhere and a new GTA 6 trailer just dropped and so I had better things to look at.
There's nothing wrong with using chemical weapons should an enemy use them on you. Cancel culture is just that - we're turning their devastating weapons against them, when they were all but silent when it was used on us.
So she's going to be an image rehab option for out of favor brands and elites? Don't worry if the mob got you from the right, Brett will do your PR and get you back in their good graces. If the mob got you from the left, just say you're trans.
Nothing really- some people just called her out for being a hypocrite and a coward. If we were actually trying to cancel her we'd be calling venues she's performing at and trying to get her shows cancelled. "Cancel culture" requires...get this...actually trying to get something cancelled.
We're just saying she seems like a grifter and not supporting her.
Last specific event I can recall was her calling out CNN(?) Around new years when it was the safest time in history to publicly call out fake news. People were just wondering what took the "edgy comedianne" so long
I had to hit downvote when she attacked Chrissie Mayr, an actually brave and bold comedian who said the same jokes when it made you a pariah, for saying the truth about Whitney.
Jeremy Boring is still a faggot, however.
Aaand at the 12 min mark she comes to the defense of BUD LIGHT, claiming they spent the last 2 yrs "putting in the work".
Is this bitch fucking retarded?
EDIT at 18 mins she defends ZUCK...what is she thinking, honestly?
My brother in Christ, Islam is right about women. Yes.
What is the objective here? To get them to yield, or to destroy them? It may not be practical to destroy Bud Light entirely. It will also make it more difficult to get companies to yield, if they know they've burned their bridges and nothing they can do is ever enough.
Now, I'm not sure Bud Light has done enough, and connecting this to 'right-wing cancel culture' is stupid.
The objective is to leave a crater where the company once stood, so that all other companies see what will happen to them if they even think about pushing degeneracy on the public.
The right needs to get over their obsession with forgiveness already. It's what got us into this mess to begin with. We should leave no quarter for our enemies. Anything less is just waiting for them to eventually slit our throats.
You literally took the words right out from under my fingers. I was all ready to respond saying the EXACT same thing.
Thank you for this.
I'm very cool with forgiving people/companies, but in order for it to be a genuine apology you have to be able to admit what you did wrong, why it was wrong and explain how you came to understand that.
No objective except don't support people who hate you. Budweiser is a huge company, and there's no reason to ever go back to Bud Light because it's a shitty product. No they haven't done enough either but it doesn't matter. Nobody wants their slop. A lot of people were already laid off or transferred, but they won't be destroyed because they have sponsorships with a lot of sporting events.
All perfectly valid reasons. My point is that it should be a calculated choice to continue or stop a given boycott. It is not always beneficial to continue after you got what you want, simply to spite them.
We didn't get what we want. That's the point.
We can't destroy something as big as BL but we've shown we can cause significant damage.
I'm actually in general big on the idea of giving people a 2nd chance and supporting the idea that people can change. But they need to show signs it's genuine, key to that is taking accountability and expressing exactly what you did wrong so we know you get it. Brett even admits Bud's "apology" was wishy washy, so why should we accept.
She also tries to bring in RFK an and Tulsi, but those 2 didn't really change anything- the Democrats are the ones that changed. They seem to hold the same beliefs they have publicly held for years.
Corporations aren't people, dont have feelings, and will outlive us all to repeat the same strategies later. They'll probably do it in our lifetimes because they don't care about perceptions beyond how they affect their bottom lines. Unless a corporation literally apologizes or admits its marketing team was hijacked by DEI and its since cleaned house, I say a boycott should basically be forever.
And the message got through to many other companies. Like the old Chinese proverb: kill one to warn 100 others. Clearly, it was a good idea to start the crusade. But given these facts, what is the marginal cost & benefit to continuing? What more can be extracted from BL?
I'm not saying we should stop, just that it should not be a given that it's beneficial to continue at this point.
I think it's never genuine. These companies flip on a dime based on the amount of pressure they receive. It makes sense, because they're out to make profit.
I'd be fine with no apology as long as they did a 180. But they haven't done that.
Republicans also changed a lot. They used to be even bigger warmongers than the Democrats.
You have to make an example of them and destroy them utterly
Destroy
I'm actually surprised she's this massive a shill. I didn't actively watch her shit but that's wild. For once the daily wire was making someone be more conservative 😂
Woman gonna woman
Controlled opposition.
The show looks the same, the format is the same, the sponsors are the same. Already has 1m subscribers.
I won't be watching, but she'll be fine. She's already got a net worth around $10m. Meaning she could be making $400k/year @ 4% on that money. That's true "fuck you" money. I'd find a new hobby if I were her, but I think she's on a mission to prove she doesn't need The Daily Zionist.
I very highly doubt that. Those internet "net worth" things are pretty bullshit.
We know from the fallout with The Daily Zionist. They got to arguing numbers.
This is just as expected as Sydney Watson coming out as a feminist liberal and everyone is going to continue to fall for a pretty grifter
So she’s coming out the gate as another flavor of controlled opposition. Figures.
Why does a girl have a mans name?
Why does a girl look like Ben Shapiro?
I was excited to know that she was going solo and glad to hear she wasn't screaming at the intro. But I got lost shortly after the meat advert because it was just a slow preamble and I didn't think it was going anywhere and a new GTA 6 trailer just dropped and so I had better things to look at.
Yes, the trailer was a fake one.
For some reason this was in the first spot for video recomendation on my YT page.
Astroturfed.
What's weird is that it wasn't for me. Although I came when it had only been out for an hour, didn't pay attention to viewcount- she's at 275k now.
Don't come.
Know what? I'm going to come again and I'm going to come even harder!
There's nothing wrong with using chemical weapons should an enemy use them on you. Cancel culture is just that - we're turning their devastating weapons against them, when they were all but silent when it was used on us.
There is no room for fair play in war.
So she's going to be an image rehab option for out of favor brands and elites? Don't worry if the mob got you from the right, Brett will do your PR and get you back in their good graces. If the mob got you from the left, just say you're trans.
I'm getting a lot of "useful idiot" vibes lately.
What did Whitney Cummings do that needed defense?
Nothing really- some people just called her out for being a hypocrite and a coward. If we were actually trying to cancel her we'd be calling venues she's performing at and trying to get her shows cancelled. "Cancel culture" requires...get this...actually trying to get something cancelled.
We're just saying she seems like a grifter and not supporting her.
Last specific event I can recall was her calling out CNN(?) Around new years when it was the safest time in history to publicly call out fake news. People were just wondering what took the "edgy comedianne" so long