Imgflip Logo Icon

No Crowds Showed Up to Support His Campaign & Americans STILL Reject Him!

No Crowds Showed Up to Support His Campaign & Americans STILL Reject Him! |  Joe Biden White House 

YouTube Channel 
Turns Off Comments; Every Video Receives 
MORE Dislikes Than Likes ! THE PEOPLE REJECT
"AMERICA LAST" 
PUPPET POTUS ! | image tagged in politics,creepy joe biden,youtube,americans,democratic socialism,party of hate | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
share
2,429 views 93 upvotes Made by vBackman 1 week ago in politics
Add Meme
Add Image
Post Comment
Best first
101 Comments
reply
11 ups, 7d
Virtue signalling | image tagged in virtue signalling | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
lol that pic
reply
9 ups, 6d
WHO WANTS TO RUB MY HAIRY LEGS?! | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
9 ups, 7d
made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
6 ups, 6d,
2 replies
Finally something we can agree on. Yes, just as it was illegal for Trump to block people on Twitter; YouTube should not be able to turn off comments on political videos. Turn them back on.
reply
3 ups, 5d
reply
2 ups, 5d,
1 reply
Well, there's a difference between illegal and morally wrong. On top of that blocking someone because you don't want to interact with them is one thing (I'm pretty sure everyone that has Twitter has blocked someone at some point), and removing dislikes and hiding comments on a public video is different, as it is an attempt to spin an untrue narrative.
reply
0 ups, 4d,
1 reply
Not from a government official. In a way, Trump and Biden blocking people or their ability to comments actually IS a violation of the First Amendment.
reply
0 ups, 4d,
1 reply
I disagree. People could still write a letter etc. Would the official see it? No, but they're not going to read some random person's angry tweet either.

It's a feature on a private business's app. Sort of like Youtube turning off comments on political videos. It's kind of a scummy thing to do, but it's completely within their legal right.
reply
0 ups, 4d,
1 reply
Except, that is exactly why Trump was prevented from blocking people on Twitter because his administration designated it an official source. So... the point is moot.
reply
0 ups, 4d,
1 reply
True. I guess it doesn't matter at this point. Think we can both agree Twitter deleting Trump's account was pretty stupid.
reply
0 ups, 3d,
1 reply
Nope! That was well within Twitter’s legal right.

The First Amendment limits government control not businesses.

So it limits Trump from using a business to disenfranchise people but a business can remove any individual that breaches their contract just as Trump did.

If Twitter was an official government source, and not a private business, then there would be merit to your argument. And I understand the lobbying control power of big businesses and such but you don’t limit that control through dictating what a single business can and can’t do. A government can legislate that, sure but then you get into expanding government control rather than cultivating a free market. What should be limited is lobbying power of businesses, not individual businesses themselves.

But conveniently, many are arguing what YouTube and Twitter should’ve done rather than what Trump and Biden should’ve done. If you want government accountability, then focus your ire on individuals in the government and all of them are subject to criticism. No one is exempt! Including Trump.

All politicians, including Trump, profit off of the manipulation of businesses to sell a product; themselves... for whatever office they hold or wish to hold. You can even make this about career politicians versus whatever the opposite of that which honestly, I think, doesn’t really exist.

All politicians see their position as a way to make money. It is vital for them to campaign! I honestly think there is nothing inherently wrong with that. There is no way to stop this process because NO POLITICIAN, even Trump, or people who want to follow his example will do nothing to stop politicians from raising money. They can’t! And why would they want to? Nor will any form “cancel culture” ultimately succeed in the breaking down of a capitalist-democracy.

Businesses will rise and fall eventually until the product they sell is irrelevant. And even if the most influential businesses in social media is ultimately replaced with new businesses; the people and systems that created and limited what they are now will continue to influence the new businesses that rises in their place.

If you want to fix the echo chamber, then you can’t fix the problems of an echo chamber by making a new echo chamber. Until people realize that social media is useless, unlikely due to its addictive nature, then it shall continue to pedal it’s influence unrelenting no matter what political spectrum you fall under.
reply
1 up, 3d,
1 reply
I didn't say it was illegal (it's not), I just said it's stupid. I think censoring people for political ideologies isn't the way to go.
reply
0 ups, 3d,
2 replies
Except that wasn't why they censored him.

He continued to deliberately post information that had been proven by official sources to be incorrect or misleading.

His opinion that the 2020 election was fraudulent was an opinion based on a political election; but not strictly political in nature.

And if it was, I'd argue that politicizing election fraud is far more stupid than censoring people for political ideologies. And one of the reasons I think Republicans MIGHT lose for the next two years. If enough Republican voters have lost faith in our election system, they may be less inclined to participate again over the next four years. That is a very serious concern of mine. I think it's a mistake for Republicans to dangle the possibility of a third Trump run in 2024 just to satisfy the mob that wants Trump and doesn't understand how completely ineffective he is despite the successful and overwhelmingly conservatives-backed propaganda that claims any other source of legitimate negative criticism of Trump to be completely false.

These partisan fanatics, if they really are the majority in their party, shouldn't be catered to any further.
reply
0 ups, 2d
True.
reply
0 ups, 2d,
1 reply
I believe Trump did a lot of good.

"He continued to deliberately post information that had been proven by official sources to be incorrect or misleading."
That's not necessarily true. Nothing was proved.
0 ups, 2d
None of the claims Trump made were proved.
reply
5 ups, 6d
reply
7 ups, 6d
reply
1 up, 5d
reply
1 up, 6d,
1 reply
You can all keep rolling with laughter but its not true, look at it on YouTube. Tip for conspiracy theorists, try to avoid theories that can be easily checked. Also, the thumbs up/down arrows are fake if you look closer.
reply
3 ups, 5d,
1 reply
Google it, leftist troll. You have been on Imgflip two minutes & anointed yourself as King thinking that just because you say something, it makes it 'true'. I am sure your ONE follower takes it as gospel but anyone with half a brain sees right through you...
reply
0 ups, 4d
Ah, but did you actually look? Like, on Youtube?
reply
1 up, 6d
"the people reject "america last" puppet potus!"

eyyy trump promised "america first" but put the wants of the israeli government before the needs of the american people. hypocrite
reply
7 ups, 7d,
3 replies
The president isn't decided by YouTube video upvotes
reply
20 ups, 7d,
2 replies
Did anyone say it was decided by anything other than Dominion machines, 2 a.m. poll workers, cheaters, and those pesky Democrat dead voters?
reply
4 ups, 7d,
1 reply
Everything except Cheaters are true in this sentence.
And Biden won.
reply
6 ups, 6d,
1 reply
And nothing can be proven. Dead voters? Lol ok.
reply
1 up, 6d,
1 reply
Oh, that's what you meant.
Where is proof they existed in the election.
reply
4 ups, 6d,
2 replies
You mean all the voters that were kicked off the rolls shortly after Biden won the election? Go look it up.
reply
2 ups, 6d,
1 reply
These investigations have been proved false by Authorities. Check other sources.
reply
6 ups, 6d,
2 replies
The courts refused to even look at the evidence, so how could they have been proven false?
reply
3 ups, 6d,
1 reply
Nah, they looked at the Evidence.
And they concluded false.
reply
2 ups, 6d,
1 reply
Nope. Please try again. The legislatures looked at the evidence and found it to be true. Stop watching CNN.
2 ups, 6d
I tried again.
False.
reply
0 ups, 6d
Fake news.
reply
3 ups, 6d,
1 reply
no- show me the evidence.
reply
2 ups, 6d,
2 replies
Its out there, just gotta look for it. It's been linked hundreds of times in here.
reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 4d
She’s too stupid.
reply
0 ups, 6d,
1 reply
No it’s not or you’d have proof. Make a claim, prove it. That’s how it works.
reply
2 ups, 5d,
2 replies
Here's one of the senate hearings where they reviewed the evidence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=16708&v=u5ZP_HpBKos&feature=youtu.be
1 up, 5d
Also- don't you think GEORGIA....of any state....would find actual proof if there was any?

It's insane, the level of denial you people are living in.
1 up, 5d
Again- repeating nonsense (even by a Senate member) is NOT proof. What's next? Trumps tweets are proof? The movie by the pillow man?
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 4d,
1 reply
You’re not American
reply
0 ups, 4d,
1 reply
No I'm not.
reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 4d,
1 reply
Then you have no say-so here.
reply
0 ups, 4d,
1 reply
A weak excuse for the fact that you're in the wrong.
reply
2 ups, 4d,
1 reply
You've been debunked. Try again.
reply
0 ups, 4d,
1 reply
What part of my comments has been debunked.
reply
2 ups, 4d,
1 reply
Everything. It's all completely debunked.
0 ups, 4d
No examples, I see. Bye!
reply
6 ups, 6d,
1 reply
she didn't say it did you moron
reply
5 ups, 6d,
1 reply
This moron only has moronic arguments to put forward. Nothing else.
reply
3 ups, 6d
ikr I see them in literally every Pro-Trump comments section spewing their liberal bullshit
reply
5 ups, 6d,
3 replies
It’s kind of odd, though, that the president* who supposedly got the most votes ever is so clearly disliked. I guess it’s just a mystery. (Or maybe his “election” was a fraud. That’s another possibility.)
reply
3 ups, 6d,
2 replies
reply
1 up, 6d
It's because they were worried that a trump supporting mob might attempt an assassination/massacre and Covid
reply
0 ups, 6d
They greatly limited attendance at Biden's inauguration.
reply
1 up, 6d,
1 reply
No, that is not a possibility.
reply
1 up, 6d,
1 reply
Yes, it is. That is not just a possibility. That is the reality. Joe Biden is a fraud. The election was stolen, and his supporters are traitors to the nation.
reply
2 ups, 6d,
3 replies
Debunked, and dangerous.
reply
1 up, 5d,
3 replies
Was it dangerous when the left shouted Russian collusion for 4 years?
reply
2 ups, 5d,
1 reply
"Collusion" was always the ex-President's line. It's not even what the Mueller probe was addressing, as Mueller himself pointed out. He dug up plenty of evidence of obstruction, which in his legal opinion would be actionable after the presidential immunity had lapsed, which in fact it has.

https://www.politico.eu/article/mueller-refutes-trumps-no-collusion-no-obstruction-line/
reply
0 ups, 4d,
1 reply
So in one situation there was collusion, but the other it's impossible to rig the elections?
reply
0 ups, 4d,
3 replies
The only person who talked about collusion was the former president, who bleated about it so much exactly because it wasn't what he'd been accused of -- like me saying "you haven't proved I'm a Satanist, haha! ALL your arguments against me are meaningless!" Non sequitur.
reply
1 up, 4d,
1 reply
If it makes you happy, keep telling yourself whatever you want to think.
1 up, 4d
HAHAHA The only person to talk about collusion was Trump HAHAHAHAHA
reply
0 ups, 4d,
1 reply
I don't think my reading is the problem, I think it's your subpar sentence structure and punctuation usage. I don't hold it against anyone though. It is the internet after all.

I guess you dont remember the Russian collusion that the left went on about for years?
0 ups, 4d
Written at a middle school reading level isn't "subpar". I'm going to guess you find the Gray Lady too hard to read too. I made the point twice. Just reread carefully, circle the big words, work it out one piece at a time.
reply
0 ups, 4d,
1 reply
So... Instead of accepting your inconsistency you rattle off a confusingly worded empty statement...
I've seen it all before.
0 ups, 4d
Sorry, I forget the reading level here is so low.

My point is, only supporters of the impeached liar talk about "collusion". Legally, it's a meaningless category. "The left" didn't shout it, your guy did -- and he did it BECAUSE it was meaningless.
reply
4 ups, 5d,
1 reply
reply
3 ups, 5d,
1 reply
Of course not. Silly me. :P
reply
3 ups, 5d
I swear in 6 months, they are going to say that after Trump won, Trump supporters chased down Hillary supporters in blue hats, pulling them out of cars 'He a Hillary voter!' and beating them and that Republican politicians said to 'harass them where you find them and push back and tell them they're not welcome'

4y4w38.jpg (click to show)
reply
1 up, 5d,
1 reply
There's a bit of a difference between believing that a politician has foreign ties, and believing that anyone who votes for a candidate you don't like is a tRaItOr.
reply
0 ups, 4d,
1 reply
So in the one year it was collusion but the other tampering with the elections is impossible? Because pretty much nobody thinks like the second part of your statement. Although I have seen some celebrities compare people who voted for Trump to Nazis, so maybe you have something there.
reply
1 up, 4d,
3 replies
Zaklog literally called Biden's voters "traitors to the nation".
reply
0 ups, 4d,
1 reply
According to that logic, since a liberal thinks Trump supporters are all murderous Nazis, all or most liberals think that.
0 ups, 4d
I didn't say most Trump supporters think that, I criticised zaklog for saying that.
reply
0 ups, 4d,
1 reply
I was saying if you weren't trying to implicate the notion that there is a large group espousing the ideals of which you spoke, there was no point in bringing up this Zaklog guy in the first place.
0 ups, 4d
I was replying to him when you replied to me getting iffy about my use of the word "dangerous".
reply
0 ups, 4d,
1 reply
Then what was the point of bringing it up? It's certainly not disproving the idea that it's a vast minority that thinks that way.
0 ups, 4d
YOU responded to my criticism of zaklog. YOU "brought it up".
reply
2 ups, 6d,
1 reply
Really? Who debunked it? And where? Where was it disproven that massive numbers of illegitimate votes came in late at night in several battleground states? Be specific please.
reply
1 up, 6d,
1 reply
Where was it proven that massive numbers of illegitimate votes came in late at night?
reply
2 ups, 5d,
2 replies
If you watched it live you saw it happen. All the key states in dispute stopped counting around 10 pm. with Trump leading by hundreds of thousands. When the morning crew came in, one by one stations started reporting almost immediately numbers that were overwhelmingly Biden(98%) until he took the lead then the surge died off. A lot of anchors were scratching their heads over this, having never seen anything like it. Then, they all just glossed over it like it happens all the time. It has never happened like that, and that is why people are so incensed over it. Many people saw it happen live and offered to testify, and were summarily dismissed. That's a cover-up. And you just can't do that on a scale this large without expecting some kind of pushback.
reply
1 up, 5d,
1 reply
I watched the count live from Australia - your "all night" is our "all day" - and that NEVER happened. You're just repeating what some right wing site told you, and they are LYING.
reply
1 up, 5d,
2 replies
No. I watched it across three networks. I'm repeating what I saw and have been saying from the beginning.
0 ups, 5d
I looked it up just in case I was misremembering, and I wasn't. You are either misremembering, or lying.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN27Q2NI
0 ups, 5d
Bullshit.
reply
0 ups, 3d
What happened was many mail in votes could not be counted/shown before midnight so after midnight the states that opted for this kind of count (like PA for instance) looked like a flood of votes came in after midnight. In actuality they were able to REPORT the votes after midnight. In-person voting numbers were being tallied as usual, and most of Trump's votes came in this way. So before midnight, Trumps numbers may have looked higher than Bidens in those states that couldn't report mail-in ballot numbers before midnight.
reply
2 ups, 5d,
1 reply
This is more of the "Blacks are murderous" sewage you've spewed on other threads.
reply
1 up, 5d,
1 reply
13% of the U.S. population is responsible for over 50% of the murders. These are simple facts. This has been true for years. You can look it up for yourself on the FBI Uniform Crime Report. Screw you.
reply
2 ups, 5d,
1 reply
I've responded to these same distorted statistics at least twice before, without yet sinking to your level of rudeness. Grow up.
reply
1 up, 5d
No, you haven't. You've just blown smoke and obfuscated and pretended you've proved something. You're a liar and a fraud. Screw you.
reply
2 ups, 5d,
1 reply
The KKK and other assorted right wing militia as well as various attendees and partipants in lynchings in the South?
reply
0 ups, 5d,
1 reply
Nah, bro. The KKK functionally doesn't exist today and everyone who's not out of their mind with propaganda knows it.
reply
2 ups, 5d
Key word, "functionally," huh?
But your invisible sky god that no one has heard from since Mohammad does.

Save it for the next Biden KKK meme.
reply
1 up, 6d,
1 reply
By 10 year olds?
reply
2 ups, 6d
Yes, your average 10 year old loves Trump and dislikes Biden videos for absolutely no reason. Dumbass, hear what you're saying.
Flip Settings
memes
gifs
other
Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator
EXTRA IMAGES ADDED: 2
  • image.png
  • paste:image.png
  • image.png
  • IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
    Joe Biden White House YouTube Channel Turns Off Comments; Every Video Receives MORE Dislikes Than Likes ! THE PEOPLE REJECT "AMERICA LAST" PUPPET POTUS !
    hotkeys: D = random, W = upvote, S = downvote, A = back
    Feedback