Redditor

*Bot

Let’s see. Leftist hate oil so in the last 16 years they, with the help of Democrats they have pushed to shut down 30 oil refineries in the USA. Pushed for higher gas prices to save the planet, and now cry gas is too expensive.

Leftist hate Nuclear power, using 3 mile island disaster to halt buildings new safer power plants, with the help of Democrats.
Now they are crying Data Centers are going to suck up all the energy.

Leftist pushed for No Gun Zones leaving children defenseless against leftist shooters. Only to cry for more gun control.

Violent protest causing governments to add more security, like cctv, body cameras, and flock cameras, turning our country into a security state. Then cry about Authoritarian regimes.

These are more then This and That. Leftist retards are to blame for most of it.

And now they want communism. Stupid is as stupid does. Leftist own this.

My man speaking my language!

Let's see here:

Republicans have opted for rascism and sexism since Day 1, they elected a pedophile president who'd been charged with multiple crimes, that president then went on to put idiots in charge of important branches of the government, he's declared that all black/hispanic/(anyone of color) to be purged from the country, he's butted into conflicts that we shouldn't be part of, he's said repeatedly that he doesn't care about the american public.

Now do you have an actual complaint or just more hate speech?

It’s only hate speech when leftist hate the truth.

There are several well-documented examples in American politics where Republican politicians rejected, disputed, or continued promoting claims despite substantial evidence against them. To be precise, we can document when a politician rejected evidence; proving that they personally “hated the truth” or knowingly lied requires evidence about what they knew and intended.

Here are some prominent examples, including the evidence that contradicted their claims.
1. Donald Trump and the 2020 election

The claim: Trump repeatedly claimed that widespread fraud stole the 2020 presidential election from him.

The evidence: His own attorney general, William Barr, said in December 2020 that the Justice Department had not found fraud on a scale that could have changed the outcome. Courts and state officials also rejected efforts to overturn the results.

Why it matters: Trump continued promoting the stolen-election narrative after these findings. Reuters also documented Republican lawmakers' votes to reject electoral results despite the lack of evidence supporting widespread fraud.

2. Ted Cruz and climate science

The claim: In 2016, Cruz argued that satellite measurements showed no significant global warming over the preceding 18 years.

The evidence: Scientists familiar with the satellite data explained that his interpretation was misleading. His chosen starting point coincided with a strong El Niño, which temporarily raised temperatures and distorted the comparison.

Why it matters: The example illustrates how selectively choosing a time period can create a misleading impression about a scientific trend.

3. Marjorie Taylor Greene and COVID-19 vaccines

The claim: In August 2021, Greene said COVID-19 vaccines were failing because vaccinated people could still become infected and spread the virus.

The evidence: Breakthrough infections were known to occur, but they did not establish that vaccines were ineffective. Evidence showed that COVID-19 vaccines reduced the risk of severe illness, and vaccination also offered protection against infection, although protection against infection varied over time and with variants.

Why it matters: Greene treated the existence of breakthrough infections as proof of overall vaccine failure, a conclusion that did not follow from the evidence.

4. Mo Brooks and rising sea levels


The claim: In 2018, Brooks argued that sediment from rivers and rocks falling into the ocean were major causes of sea-level rise.

The evidence: Scientific research identifies two major drivers of global mean sea-level rise: the expansion of seawater as it warms and the addition of water from melting land ice.

Why it matters: His explanation conflicted with established scientific evidence about the principal causes of rising seas.

5. Rick Santorum and the scientific consensus on climate change


The claim: In 2015, Santorum disputed the widely reported finding that approximately 97% of actively publishing climate scientists agreed that human activity was driving global warming.

The evidence: FactCheck.org reviewed his interpretation and found it misleading. Multiple studies involving thousands of researchers supported a strong scientific consensus that human activities were the primary cause of recent global warming.

Why it matters: This is an example of challenging a scientific conclusion by misrepresenting the research used to establish it.

What do these examples actually show?

There is an important distinction between three behaviors:

Being wrong: A politician makes an inaccurate statement, possibly through misunderstanding.

Rejecting evidence: A politician continues to dispute well-supported findings after credible evidence contradicts their position.

Knowingly misleading people: A politician makes claims they know are false. Establishing this requires stronger evidence, such as private communications, admissions, or documented warnings they received.

Not paying attention

No matter what side you on, there is always going to be some bullshit

Yep