>Can't stump the Trump
>He will make America Fabulous!
Based Milo destroys liberal. Concludes with "can't stump the trump" and says he will make America fabulous.
I know this guy isn't an ancap although jokes about it . As an ancap , IDGAF . I love this man and his ability to fuck the media because he is actually gay like trump is with money .
At this point in his homosexual career, he's probably had every STD there's a name for, and been drilled by thousands of fags in his ass. He thinks he's living his dream life, but in reality he's a breath away from falling over dead.
>make America fabulous
holy shit my sides just went to the moon and back
>he's probably had every STD there's a name for
Or.... he might actually be careful... might screen who he sleeps with (have they used drugs, is the partner known to use protection with others, is the partner known to be in long term stable relationships, are they known risk takers, etc.).... and might use sensible protection (condoms, etc.).....
>/pol/ worshiping a gay jew who fucks niggers
this place has really gone downhill
>Or.... he might actually be careful
Homosexuality is characterized by hypersexuality and other risky sexual behaviors. They don't use prophylactics because there's no risk of pregnancy. No matter how many times one depraved homosexual blows his load in another depraved homosexual's hairy asshole, he will never get him ass pregnant, and they will never shit out an ass baby nine months later.
>I don't know how he can stand those mindless cunts talking over him
Simple, he doesn't.
He bulldozes them right over by slamming them with the truth and then making them seem like desperate morons when they angrily interject. Watch each of his videos, he pulls a Trump in every single one.
He says something true but that is considered outrageous to say. Then the other side becomes desperate and so goes into damage control mode either by insults, talking over him, or whatever. Then he just sits back and lets them unload as he lets them destroy themselves.
Milo is unstumpable, just like the Trumpable.
I wouldn't be surprised of most of those faggots think "gay sex is OK but only between 2 white people!"
What's the point in destroying the left if we're left with the same tumblrtards, but they're all white
glad I don't consider myself alt-right if they have faggots like jack donovan and nigger fuckers like milo
>having legitimate criticisms of a man that goes against all your beliefs, like not betraying your race and not fucking niggers = you're a jew
nice joke but I have legitimate grievances with Milo.
Drinking that backwash, warm milk that's left over from your cereal is still worse
>Homosexuality is characterized by hypersexuality and other risky sexual behaviors.
Homosexuals are individuals, not a collective consciousness. Certainly, patterns of behavior and statistical facts can be gleaned from academic studies, but this only speaks to generalities rather than specifics.
The most that you can factually say about Milo is that he might be at increased statistical risk of contracting an STD due to the information gleaned from studies, but that says nothing about him as an individual.
They rest of your post is nothing but one gross over-generalization after another. You are a sad person.
>Le edgy webm xDDDD
>This will surely shit them up, I mean reality isn't nuanced and everyone obviously conforms to my prejudices, stereotypes, and selection biases xDDDD
People like you are actually worse than leftists, desu. You do more to undermine the right and enable the rise of the left than they do. You should be proud.
That's why I'm not a nazi, neo nazis are shit, they just want to wear uniforms and fuck each other
I have nothing against Hitler but when it comes to the people nowadays, yeah they're a disgrace
You can lie about queers all you want, but their depravity is so well documented as to be irrefutable at this point.
What you're missing is that homosexuality is literally a mental illness, characterized by a constellation of symptoms by which a differential diagnosis may be made. It is symptomatic of his brain disease that he engages in those hypersexual behaviors. Not only that, but he admits to many of them in his many public appearances. When he jokes that "he has a thousand abortions every time he farts," what do you interpret that to mean?
There's a reason that the average lifespan of a homosexual is 45. Milo will be lucky to see 40.
Is it a stereotype when he himself admits it?
Remember, the left has popularized homosexuality. The right worked to protect families from that manner of depravity.
>being a dude attracted to another dude is hypersexual
Dude... Were you dropped on your head as a kid?
Nope. If the right actually cared about protecting families it would do something about divorce and promiscuity in the heterosexual community rather than use gays as a diversion. Are you going to tell me now that the rise in divorce rates is due to gays or something? Kek
>Milo is promiscuous as fuck, and proud of it
That insinuation carries within it absolutely zero evidence that he is reckless when he chooses partners or utilizes safety precautions.
The right gave laws that would allow police to literally break into people's homes if there was a rumor you were having sex with someone of the same gender. Guess which group is trying to bring back the obstruction of justice?
Hypersexuality is symptomatic of homosexuality. The average heterosexual has 8 sexual partners in a life time. The average homosexual has over 100, with one survey reporting half of all homosexuals admitting to having had over 500 sexual partners.
Relative privation. I mean, I knew that fags were mentally ill and stupid, but I didn't realize that they were this bad at arguing, too.
>Kate hates Trump calls him a racist for not supporting feminist values.
Who is this kate? we need to dox her and destroy her for this kind of slander. If she can go on the air and spew hatred towards one of Americas most beloved leaders lets see if she can take the heat.
I've made no claims on this matter one way or the other.
>When he jokes that "he has a thousand abortions every time he farts," what do you interpret that to mean?
I interpret it to mean that he is using hyperbole for shock value in an effort to declare that he is sexually active and not ashamed of it.
It seems that at least at some unconscious level you recognize this also, because it was you that said:
>When he jokes.....
I've never heard of such a law and doubt they exist. But considering what fags do in public, it's probably a good idea.
You really are functionally retarded. So me pointing out that conservatives, in particular the insane religious right, not doing anything about divorce is a fallacy? Is divorce not at fault for the death of the family? Explain to me how two dudes fucking can possibly cause a family to split and marriages in general to become a joke. I'll tell you, the family was dead way before gays were widely accepted. I know this must be hard for someone as retarded as you to understand so you try to deflect it.
Obviously it's a joke, but it's also likely true. It's okay, though. You don't have to be convinced by me. When he dies suddenly, though, and all the fag enablers come to the internet to signal mourning at one another, you remember this conversation. Maybe then you'll realize that queermos actually are predictable because they fall into known patterns of behavior.
>his dream life
Milo openly admits that he wishes he was straight and would be a better person if he was.
Sometimes i get the feeling hes not gay and just pretending to be for his career
You forgot to mention homosexual MALES as part of your statistic. Men have a higher sex drive then women and both parties would pursue sexual intercourse at the rate of the slowest partner. Since men have higher sex drives that means that there's very little need for foreplay or courting and they go right at it.
But honestly, a ton of sex is alright as long as you're using protection and being safe. When you find the one then settle down but who are you to say there should be a limit on how much someone has sex?
Google Sodomy and Lawrence v. Texas sometime to learn more about it. While you're at it you could look up the gay bar raids and the Stonewall riots to see more of why lgbt people started pushing the lifestyle in the streets. The gay pride movement wasn't an initial attack, it was a counter punch to the bullshit that heteros put them through in the past.
No, you're deflecting. That's the point of relative privation. We're discussing faggotry, and you come along and say, "but WAIT! You're not allowed to talk about that! There are starving children in Africa!"
Well, it may well be that divorce is bad for the family. It may even be that divorce is worse for the family than faggotry. It may be that divorce is the single worst problem in all of human existence. But so what? We focus on one problem at a time, and right now, we're talking about queers.
This must be the first time you've ever had to discuss the matter. Do try to keep up, maybe you'll learn something.
>insane religious right
Insane is a subjective term. For instance, I could claim that Bernie's economic policies are "totally insane" because he wants to spend money that isn't there. However, that is fucking nothing.
>not doing anything about divorce
I demand citations from you to back up your claim that the right is "not doing anything." Please provide links from reputable sources. Since you are making these claims, you must understand the logic and evidence behind them. And if you understand the logic and evidence, then you must remember the sources from which you gathered this information.
Reminder that you idiots were the ones who caused the gay pride movement in the first place
>but it's also likely true.
>You don't have to be convinced by me
No, but I do have a reasonable right to request that you put forward rational arguments that are based in fact and evidence as opposed to speculation and generalizations.
I've made no arguments for or against homosexual activity. All of my points have addressed risk factors, statistics, and the tearing down of gross over-speculation.
For instance, I could mention details about the Apollo missions to the moon, but this does not mean that I am advocating resurrecting the program.
>You forgot to mention homosexual MALES as part of your statistic
I didn't forget. Fag enablers attempt to conflate different mental illnesses in an attempt to seize political power (i.e. the gay blt). Carpet munching dykes are evil in their own right, but are so vanishingly rare as to be beneath notice.
>Men have a higher sex drive then women
Unfounded. Women have libidos just like men.
>would pursue sexual intercourse at the rate of the slowest partner.
Conjecture, and broadly speaking, untrue.
>a ton of sex is alright
Normative, and without regard for social or individual consequences. You're just stating your opinion as fact.
>as long as you're using protection and being safe
Restrictions with no basis in law or ethics, and as demonstrated, mostly not followed.
>When you find the one then settle down
Impossible for homosexuals. Their hypersexuality makes them incapable of forming mutually monogamous long term committed relationships. Their brain disease literally precludes them forming normal male-female pair bonds.
>but who are you to say there should be a limit on how much someone has sex?
Red herring. What I did was point out differences in sexual behaviors between the depraved and normal decent people. If you want to understand why homosexuals are such reservoirs and transmission vectors of the worst STDs that exist, you need to understand what's different about them. Or you can just insist that their vile sodomy is good. Then when they continue to die off young, and lead miserable lives, you can break your arm patting yourself on the back over how tolerant you are. It's ironic that I seem to actually care about them more than you do.
No, we were talking about the family. If you remember I was replying to this statement you made:
>The right worked to protect families from that manner of depravity.
In other words, you're implying that the right is doing everything in its power to protect families from all kinds of depravity, which divorce is a part of. You can't make a statement like that and assume no one is going to call you out. Plus, it actually was relevant to the discussion since I said that Christcucks are using fags as a scapegoat for the destruction of the family, something you refused to address even though it deals with faggotry. Plus, you're not arguing logically either. All you're doing is making broad generalizations and treating gays as a collective with flimsy evidence at best. You also don't provide justifications for why you should care about what gays do. Anecdotes and biased sources (yes, I've looked up the sources on your shitty info graphs) aren't proper evidence for debate.
I know you have trouble reading, but hopefully you'll see your retardation now. I mean, what else can I expect from the byproduct of incestuous relations, right Cletus?
My evidence is milo himself. How often does he have to tell you what a flaming promiscuous queer he is before you decide, "you know what, maybe he means what he says?"
If you want to discuss rational arguments based in fact and evidence, then I would recommend you look up homosexual suicide rates and average life spans as compared to normal people. What you'll find is that it's not even close. They are literally dying of how gay they are.
>In other words, you're implying that the right is doing everything in its power to protect families from all kinds of depravity
Incorrect. I was talking about one specific issue, and you made a relative privation argument in a facile attempt to deflect. I am not obliged to talk about Christians, divorce, or any other thing when I am specifically discussing one narrow issue. You can't refute it, so you want to bog it down with extraneous arguments.
Oh, and what we're discussing more broadly is faggotry. You say that I'm making generalizations, but we're talking about the gays. It is reasonable to generalize that all homosexuals share certain characteristics: that's why we call them gays. Furthermore, as previously mentioned, there are well understood and documented symptoms of homosexuality, some of which I have already discussed. Your denying that fags are gay not only makes you wrong, it makes your arguments ludicrous on their face.
>Insane is a subjective term
So what? People generally know what you mean when you call them insane. I'm sure you know what I mean by the insane religious right, too. It's more used for effect.
I was talking about them not doing anything about the divorce rates, and give that this is something that would be on political platforms, debates, etc. then in this case the lack of evidence of them trying is enough. Or have you heard of serious attempts to ban no-fault divorce? How about the banning of fornication? No? Neither have I.
Okay then please provide proof that a lot of consensual sex is harmful to someone.
>Unfounded. Women have libidos just like men.
>Impossible for homosexuals.
I literally got back from a christmas dinner with a few gay friends who have been together since the early 80's and they got married when it became legal in Washington. Do you not know of a single married lgbt couple who has been in a relationship for a long time or should we just take your generalizations in good faith?
>Conjecture, and broadly speaking, untrue.
Same as your statement but I guess we should just take your word on good faith.
>Restrictions with no basis in law or ethics, and as demonstrated, mostly not followed.
How the fuck is using a condom against the law?
>depraved and normal decent people
What makes lgbt people depraved? Sex is not deprivation if it's consensual between two adults.
The worst STDs that exist and the highest rates are in Africa. I dare you try and prove me wrong on that. Hell, treatment for HIV has come so far that the quality and longevity of life is equal to HIV negatives as long as they're medicated. If you want to talk about gonorrhea, chlamydia, or syphilis then those are all treatable with antibiotics. None of them die off young anymore except for suicide and that's normally due to social issues amongst family or peers.
Look kid, you're young. You haven't experienced the world much and you were probably homeschooled, locked in your basement, and forced to read the bible 6 hours a day. /pol/'s memes are great and true about many things but they're just straight up wrong when it comes to lgbt issues. How a forum could go into such detail about laws, effects, and statistics for guns and then turn full retard for lgbt stuff is beyond me.
>My evidence is milo himself.
That is a baseless statement. You make it... and then... just jump into even more baseless speculation without evidence. Again, the use of hyperbole doesn't tell us much about anything, and it certainly does NOT tell us about what safety precautions he might take to lessen his risk of exposure to STD's.
>How often does he have to tell you what a flaming promiscuous queer he is before you decide, "you know what, maybe he means what he says?"
Hyperbole. We have been over this. The hyperbole doesn't tell us anything more than he is sexually active and not ashamed of being such. Without actual data on how often he engages in sexual activity or regarding what precautions he uses, any speculation is useless and will generally only be driven on into exaggeration by the claimant's biases and presuppositions.
>If you want to discuss rational arguments based in fact and evidence, then I would recommend you look up
Again, while these figures from studies around the world do give us valid statistical evidence regarding the overall prevalence of a particular behavior or risk, they do not tell us anything about Milo himself. All you can surmise from these statistics is that Milo has an increased risk of falling prey to such things as he is part of that particular demographic.
Saying that he has an increased risk of something tells us nothing about Milo himself. The fact that there is a certain percentage of his demographic that does NOT get STD's, does not kill themselves, and who do have average or beyond average lifespans means that Milo could also just as well be amongst the group that escaped the possible risk factors.
Milo is an individual, not a collective of persons.
So what? If they do share characteristics, who cares? It may be appropriate to talk about averages but using these same averages to paint all homosexuals as being representative of it is being disingenuous and it really is a childish argument. You're really making no sense. Answer me this, why do you care so much what gays do? What do you plan to do about it? All you're doing now is bitching and venting about how much you dislike them because reasons. Don't you see how stupid this is? Probably not, I'm dealing with a mong.
averages aren't always a great correlation. For example, amongst Heterosexuals there is a larger number of christians who believe in sex after marriage, thereby skewing their average.
Homosexuals, more likely to not give a shit, would obviously not have that problem.
It's also used as a way for Milo to point out that gay people don't have a homogeneous way of thinking. He's hinting that he can be a massive degenerate faggot and still not agree with the regressive left. As >>61143471 points out, it's done colourfully in hyperbole.
Can I lay out an opinion I have formulated that no one seems to acknowledge...
the president is not the Pope. All these motherfuckers talking about decorum and personality have their head so far up their ass. there is no rule in the constitution that the president has to be a nice guy, or warm and friendly. All these fuckers worrying about Trump not being serious enough has never worked a real day in their lives, what the fuck man. There's a reason trump is respected by the middle class and it's because he's a real person, not this bullshit fake personality.
>People generally know what you mean when you call them insane.
Being that it is a subjective term whose intended intensity can never be directly transmitted to the hearer... no... you cannot know what the speaker means. Generally the term is only applied as a means of character assassination, as a strawman, to bring down or ostracize someone. It's use, outside of describing those with an loss of competency due to an authentic mental illness, is only ever intended to deride.
>I'm sure you know what I mean by the insane religious right, too.
Even if only understood in a general sense, it still does not clearly explain what you mean or to what group you are referring to.
>It's more used for effect.
Exactly, and that effect is character assassination. It is a strawman attack, a fallacy.
>I was talking about them not doing anything about the divorce rates
Right, I understood your point very clearly, and I am asking you for direct citations to articles or studies that can clearly back up this claim.
You said they are not doing anything about the divorce rates. Give me a citation.
>Or have you heard of
I am not the one making claims about the right and divorce rates. If you are presenting an argument and are making truth claims, it is then incumbent upon you to have evidence on hand to validate your position.
Whatever is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
>Neither have I.
Claiming you have not heard of something yourself is evidence of nothing.
For instance, I have not heard anything about Obama taking action to combat mosquito-transmitted malaria in Africa.... ever. However, this is not evidence that he has taken little or no action.
Hello Milo again. Thanks for coming back to post on 4chan.
1) Don't be a closet heterosexual. Come out already
2) You'll never be American, just like I will never be one. We have live with our cucked British empires ran by women.