Official Election 2020 Doomsday Thread

Who wins on November 3rd? (Zeitgeist, not who you're voting for)

  • Expecting a Trump win.

    Votes: 978 45.7%

  • Expecting a Biden win.

    Votes: 277 12.9%

  • Expecting no clear winner on November 3rd.

    Votes: 885 41.4%
  • Total voters
    2,140
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Screenshot_1.png
 
  • Informative
  • Lunacy
  • Optimistic
Reactions: WonderWino, Allakazam223, ColtWalker1847 and 1 other person
  • Lunacy
  • Like
Reactions: mai minakami and Non-Threatening Niall
Our timeline is all fucked up, holy shit.

In 2016, they told all of us on Reddit that Grimplf is a fucking raycist who will exterminate all Blacks and Hispanics but... the votes on these elections show the total opposite, and what's more ironic is that 4chan users are the ones who are being very, very tolerable and supporting for Hispanics and Blacks on /pol/ while Reddit is literally an inch away to say the n-word on r/all.
Like, Reddit is literally racist now, and 4chan for some fucking reason is all for diversity? Like, it's ABSURDLY different from what we heard online 5-6 years ago. What the fuck is happening?
Christians shooting up mosques in the Middle East? Women raping men? Mass immigration of Europeans to Africa?

All we have left is a Second Cold War.
 
  • Like
  • Dumb
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Ira the Weatherman, Carnavoyeur, Borrisokeane and 14 others
Meruem said:
Which candidate is more likely to get rid of Section 230?
Click to expand...
100% serious:
Neither. Null's doomposting is retarded. The Internet flat out cannot function without 230. Websites being sued for random shitposts or online shopping fraud would destroy every online business that operates in America, and nobody wants that.
However, Joe Biden and the Democrats want to add a caveat to 230 where websites will lose their protections if they don't "protect minorities and vulnerable groups". In other words, if you're allowed to say "nigger" then no 230 protection.
Meanwhile, Trump wants to actually enforce 230 and punish websites that editorialize non-illegal content. There is absolutely no reason for Youtube to put a warning label on every video that mentions the Moon Landing, as if we're all just incapable of reasoning for ourselves. If someone wants to rant about fake moon landings, they're legally allowed to and any website that prevents them from doing so should be treated as a publisher and not as a neutral entity.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Donny Cheese, Marvin, JohnnyG and 62 others
  • Agree
Reactions: The Littlest Shitlord, Antique Rice, Carnavoyeur and 3 others
  • Mad at the Internet
  • Like
  • Feels
Reactions: The Littlest Shitlord, Big Jake, Borrisokeane and 14 others
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back