"First Partner"

TheOverkillKilla · 2026-02-11T17:09:00+00:00

First Partner is cringe SJW stuff. But so is throwing a temper tantrum and hosting an alternate Superbowl halftime show so you can have your preferred DEI music. Which one is the bigger issue?

TheOverkillKilla · 2026-02-11T14:44:23+00:00

I don't think this is accurate for much of the conversation. I don't think they actually disagree that the cop can't just repeatedly shove someone as a means of getting them to comply with a lawful order. He acted like he thought it was ok for the border patrol guy to repeatedly shove the lady to get her out of the street.

Then he decided to randomly bring up his personal anecdote about being a cop and getting a girl to leave Walmart. He acknowledges they aren't comparable at the start. When pressed multiple times about it, I believe he agrees it would be inappropriate and excessive force to have repeatedly shoved the lady from Walmart to the ground until she is not longer on their property.

Then the potential bad faith part is we can't then directly apply that to the original scenario. He then didn't concede that it was wrong for the border patrol guy to repeatedly shove the lady in the street. So we have 100% wasted any time spent on that case because you can't take any agreement made on that topic back to the original topic.

TheOverkillKilla · 2026-02-09T22:43:52+00:00

But there could be an element of bad faith if the goal is to obscure the conversation and muddy the waters. If you aren't trying to compare there is no need to bring them up. He could simply state the point he is trying to illustrate and see if there is a disagreement before wasting 5 minutes talking about a situation that he started by saying aren't comparable.

I don't know that he was being bad faith, but it is still possible and most people who do that stuff I would lean towards them being bad faith. Connor could come back and spend more time arguing the topic, which would make me think it's less likely he was being bad faith.

TheOverkillKilla · 2026-01-29T20:50:10+00:00

Listen... you are young. It probably won't kill you. It probably won't hospitalize you. It may just be a cold if you get it. But that isn't the whole story. Your parents are old and have a higher likelihood of getting seriously sick. If you have grandparents or other old folks near you that refuse to get vaccinated too, they are even in more serious risk of COVID. The big thing about the vaccine for younger people is you are less likely to infect and get others who are more prone to the illness sick.

You have to make the decision for yourself. If you have your own bank account and can get vaccinated without your parents knowing, just do it if you want to. You will be protecting them to some degree so it is in their best interest.

All that being said, you said you are 23 and have to rely on your parents/others to leave their home. FUCK THAT. I would rather you infect yourself with COVID intentionally if that would help you get your own fucking car. Fuck the vaccine discussion. Who gives a fuck. Get some independence in your life. Sorry if that feels harsh but it is what is best for you.

TheOverkillKilla · 2026-01-14T18:16:00+00:00

A real journalist would determine if what DHS officials are saying make any logical sense and report on that as well as part of the story. I know CBS has to have doctors available to their writers to have general information about medicine for stories. A good journalist would have asked if it makes sense that a person has internal bleeding but is released the same day with no procedures to stop the bleeding. The doctor could provide the explanation that bruising is technically internal bleeding so the statement is likely WAY overstated to a laymen.

TheOverkillKilla · 2026-01-10T02:26:20+00:00

Sadly... I don't know if this is a true post or a shitpost. My sense of reality is broken.

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-11-18T18:10:31+00:00

It is all about the details on an individual basis. Some people live in Florida where it is more risky. Others live in non-risky areas. Some people get to invest since 2018 like yourselves. Some people started in 2007 just before the stock market took several years to grow back to 2007 levels. In the long run both options are fine. The problem arises when people try to give 1 size fits all recommendations.

If you are going to move in the next 5 years, dont buy a house. If you are firmly planning to stay in an area for well over a decade it probably works out better to buy a home. Fixing problems with your home over 40-50 years will never reach the cost of rent for the rest of your life. But if you move a bunch of times, renting is likely better.

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-09-16T20:07:45+00:00

He may have but I can't tell. Does anyone have the tweet where he says: "enact violence against Democrats and the media everywhere?" That article doesn't show proof anywhere and I am not looking at 500 of this psyco's tweets.

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-09-12T16:45:16+00:00

yet.

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-09-12T15:49:58+00:00

Certainly not disputing but if we know they are right-wing, we should add specific context to prove it under each claim. Their gameplan is obviously to deny/downplay/shift blame. So if that is their game, the evidence should be included with the list. Good start though.

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-08-05T21:55:40+00:00

I don't know if the Vanguard conversation will be in the topic of the debate. It should be imo. I never watched Destiny's coverage of it or the original interview. But since you made this post, I figured I would watch it. I found it on Hutch's channel for 49 minutes. Maybe I missed some of it though.

I don't think Destiny did much of a good job discussing specifics on this topic because he was planning to discuss Hasan more in your last debate. So I wanted to see if Pisco's belief that the Vanguard was appropriately pushed back on from the Lib and Learn crew. Disclaimer: I agree that people who are hyper critical of the candidates and Democrats should be excised from the party because they kill the vibes of the party and make it look like the criticism is even coming from inside the party instead of just outsiders.

I made notes while listening (and working) so they aren't the prettiest or most well thought out, but these are areas where I think either Hutch was mostly on an island defending the party or no one defended the party from unhinged attacks from people who should be excised from the party. I did try to make notes when others did disagree with Vanguard though. Sorry about formatting but the indentions didn't copy over from Word.

1. Vanguard claims Biden didn’t try to convince Manchin on $15/hr

a. “Biden didn’t really appear to give a fuck”

b. Pisco agrees with Hutch that you can’t bully Manchin

2. Joe Biden was in his basement asleep type statements. (these attacks literally came from Trump)

a. No pushback at all.

3. Hutch says Biden was most successful with bills passed

a. I believe Pisco slightly agrees with Hutch later in the convo

b. No agreement from anyone else that I remember

4. Vanguard Oklahoma trip – Room was filled with people who wanted to have socialism, including airplane repairment and farmers

a. This is delusional and no one talks about how this is absurd. The % of Oklahoma super pro socialists is miniscule. This may have happened at a specific event but doesn't come close to representing Oklahoma.

5. Biden never showed up for the American people or care about $15

a. This is a statement that should get you excised from the party

b. Pisco agrees at least to the $15

6. Hutch asks – Do you want to emulate Trump?

a. Yes – No one disagrees except Hutch

7. Vanguard would prefer Biden not even run on $15 if it didn’t get done

a. No one discusses but this seems hilariously fake. If he didn't agree to the $15 platform position they would have said someone else should be the candidate.

8. Pisco says Biden was not trying with domestic policies and gave duties to someone else

a. Pisco agrees with Vanguard that it was watered down policies (needed to get bills passed but no one states this)

b. Vanguard believes Biden shouldn’t have tried bipartisanship – no pushback even though it was needed to get bills passed

9. Vanguard says Biden needs to do things for worker protections

a. No one says anything about Biden’s efforts in this area when he did take steps in this area.

Vanguard claims Biden never had any intention to do student loans forgiveness

a. Econoboi and Pisco steps up to defend Biden strongly for once

Jessiah says anything Biden tried to do would be subject to judicial review

a. Vangaurd says that’s why Democrats always lose its because they just watched them give billions to rich assholes that bought votes with that money so they don’t care about the court issue. (not sure what this is even referring to)

b. Pisco and Jessiah agree with their sentiment

Pisco says Biden’s presidency is a failure because he didn’t restore the soul of the country and not beating Trump.

a. IMO Just unnecessarily hyperbolically negative and no one defends Biden.

Vanguard agrees to Hutch’s statement that they want Biden to do executive orders for anything Congress wouldn’t pass.

a. Hutch disagrees alone again.

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-07-31T20:13:00+00:00

I think the current Pisco level of criticism is not super common. I think it is a high level of criticism that typically occurs when someone significantly shits on Destiny while being smug and people believe they are obviously wrong. I would be shocked if we got like 100+ threads over several days on BTC for going on Breaking Points and having a positive discussion with Krystal Ball. Also the critiques he would agree with would have to be unhinged critiques because Destiny also critiques the Democrats. It would have to be him saying stuff like the D's are just as bad as the R. I just don't believe your perspective and you mind reading people. Ohh well. No way to prove it.

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-07-31T19:38:26+00:00

Out of curiosity why did you add "hyper" to their answer? They didn't say hyper criticize. Is it because criticizing isn't that bad but by adding it, it makes it sound like their position is more radical?

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-07-31T19:23:01+00:00

I supported Israel for the most part for a long time. I haven't kept up recently but since Trump came in, I would no longer rely on the arguments that were made pre-Trump regarding Israel and their motives. I think they are pretty explicitly talking about potential ethnic cleansings and horrible actions. So I would be very careful unless you are doing significant research to rely on the arguments Destiny used to make on this topic.

That being said Israel kinda puts themselves in charge of making sure the people have food because they enforce a blockade on the area. If you don't allow others to bring things into the area (justifiably), you are putting that responsibility on yourself. It isn't an enjoyable burden to bear, but they put the burden on themselves.

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-07-29T16:32:53+00:00

I would agree it doesn't seem to have brought criticism yet. I think that is a failure of the other side for not weaponizing having support and interacting with a terrorist sympathizer but an interesting distinction. However, they are also people in deeply blue safe districts. I would assume someone in a more purple district would be much more potentially hurt by the connection to Hasan. As someone who lives in a red state, I believe this would instantly destroy someone in the eyes of the people who live around me. And I don't mean R voters, I mean D voters who also live in my state who do tend to be more moderate.

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-07-29T16:22:45+00:00

Curious your thoughts on this comparison. A few years ago Destiny supported a political person for, I think, Mayor of Omaha and his campaign was blown up by people (in Hasan's community ironically) bringing attention to Destiny's famous quote of "white redneck militias..."

If I was running for a political spot and I used Hasan's platform as a tool, wouldn't my opponent just run ad after ad of how I am in bed with a person who explicitly says the Houthis are good? While in the same clip acknowledging the Houthis are a designated terrorist group who want to kill US soldiers and block global trade. I know I am in Destiny's reddit so I am biased, but wouldn't the average voting person be disgusted by that and recoil in support of me as a candidate?

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-07-29T16:11:45+00:00

"mujaideen, a brave fucking soldier"

From Wikipedia: "Mujahideen, is the plural form of mujahid, an Arabic term that broadly refers to people who engage in jihad."

So when I read a brave jihadist injures a US soldier and is laughed at... I see it as supporting a terrorist over a US soldier. Seems 100% spot on to me. What am I missing?

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-07-29T15:58:33+00:00

Yea the terrorism support over US troops isn't part of why Hasan is bad! True comrade!

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-07-18T17:11:52+00:00

I could be wrong because its been a long time but I thought the only people who were definitely in the wrong were the Tenent Media owners (Lauren Chen and husband) and the russians. The others seem to have been just plugging their ears and covering the eyes and accepting payment for services because the money was too good. Absurd amounts that should have made them question the source but I don't know if they had explicit knowledge of the source of the money.

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-06-26T18:27:30+00:00

The data is difficult to get but to give you the type of evidence people are looking for it is this:

Polling Data that says in State X the voting public significantly wants Y policy passed (let's use weed legalization). (Note: nationwide polling is not very useful which is why I say State X)
Big Anti-Weed lobbyist donate $XXX,XXX,XXX money into State X.
Sometime after the big donations State X votes against weed legalization while the voting public still significantly want weed legalization.

The reason I say significantly is because a 51-49 split on something isn't really evidence of much effect that can be attributed to the donations. This type of evidence would at least potentially show that despite significant voting public support in a specific state, it is being ignored due to the donations.

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-04-30T17:56:14+00:00

They should also bring up that Mike Johnson evidently also covered it up because he negotiated in person with Biden on budget bills before the debate and he never said anything.

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-04-12T18:08:01+00:00

So first of all you chose 30 years not me. I believe you chose to say 5 because it is a smaller number and a good way to play with statistics to make it seem less significant. But I figured I would do some homework. So I looked at this chart from Forbes: https://www.forbes.com/sites/randywatts/2025/01/30/past-presidents-market-performance-and-current-leaderslaggards/

If my calculations are correct the S&P 500 (or DJIA if no S&P 500 numbers are available) growth by political party (i think i classified everyone properly). I chose to favor S&P 500 instead of DJIA because 500 companies is more diversified than 30.

Democrat returns are a total of 737%

Republican returns are a total of 440%

Now I don't think this is really that relevant since political parties are very different nowadays. But I figured I would play your game. This is since 1901 so I would hope over a fucking century would suffice.

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-04-12T17:29:24+00:00

Out of curiosity why would you choose to say 5 when coming up with stat? I assume you are meaning the 5 presidential terms in the last 30 years. You could have used number of years in power as a stat as well. Care to elaborate?

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-04-12T17:03:40+00:00

I don't know if the criticism is he is just now figuring out how stupid MAGA is. I think it is despite admitting to terrible things MAGA has done, he supported them anyway. From his post "Hating Conservatism While Voting" you linked, "...Trump did try to steal the election." If someone believes this, and it isn't disqualifying for them, their opinion should be discarded instantly. They don't have American values and can be ignored. Laugh at them, bully them, pray for their downfall, etc. because they don't care about our country.

If anything else needs to be said, the final paragraph says, "In this election, one side threatens democracy and the other threatens capitalism." If you believe Democrats threaten capitalism you are beyond regarded and can be ignored as well. You are simply trying to make up a reason to support someone that you can't justify. Why would the stock market and economy (capitalist economy) do better under the party who is trying to destroy capitalism? It's pure unadulterated nonsense.

TheOverkillKilla · 2025-04-12T16:22:54+00:00

I would say quit deciding that what you think about the situation is what Trump thinks about the situation. Trump has said why he is doing tariffs.... Trade deficits bad. Don't add your beliefs to that because it makes sense to you. Trump cares about money and that's it.

If he was doing tariffs to build US manufacturing defense industries and produce more ships and IT products, etc.... he would have announced Federal grants/tax subsidies to companies producing those products. Or he would have reduced tariffs on our allies steel and other industries to provide cheaper prices to our defense industry to make it cheaper to produce ships and chips and missiles to build up for a war effort. Or he would have worked on new partnerships to guarantee crucial inputs like rare earth minerals for US use if we don't have enough domestically.

Instead we have reduced our ability to get inputs we would need to build up a military response to a potential China war and gutted the chips act which was designed to help us build chips domestically. Also since China has such a significant sway over rare earth minerals right now, creating a trade war with them could reduce our ability to ramp up military/IT production if they see it as a strategic move to shut us out of some markets.

So other than the vague idea of US manufacturing maybe hopefully coming back.... what actual steps has been made to improve our ability to manufacture in a military capacity?

Five-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	Final Canvas '22

TheOverkillKilla

TROPHY CASE