Voter Fraud in Texas

In your case it's a CNN foghorn of Marxist talking points.

A reliable NPC, makes skimming your nonsense posts very easy.

So you admit you have no substance? Bingo!

You might not be an NPC if you are self-aware.

Are you really using the “I know you are, but what am I?” strategy?

Keep thinking you don't have scripted reactions then. It's amusing. You have all the nuance of a rock by the way. Not that this is a bad thing if you are an engineer or a scientist.

Funnily enough the last 5 or 6 responses were essentially:

Me: You need to watch about running out of Republican pretence you use to hide overt racism.

you. CNN tells you to be racist

Me: It’s relatively clear you have no substance to add

you: you have no substancs

Me: your replies could almost be scripted.

you: your replies are scripted.

This isn’t really an issue of nuance, this is an issue of you being a troll. If you had the ability to do that, you could. Almost every other right winger here does so to varying degrees of success. Your strategy isn’t nuanced, or particularly inventive: it’s really just you repeating grotesquely oversimplified and overexhaggerated right wing stereotypes and tropes in order to feel edgy.

Every so often you get dragged kicking and screaming into an actual discussion, and you generally don’t last very long - partly because you don’t seem very capable of actual intelligent discussion, and as we have discovered previously - the majority of your beliefs are based on some relatively visceral emotional position rather than being fact based.

I’ll save you the time: just use my Patented Grey Parrot Troll simulator. Just pick one random number from my each column next time you want to reply, and it will produce a post of equal value and similar sentiment to pretty much any of your posts here, without you having to go to the trouble of thinking of anything:

Column one
1.) Marxist
2.) Anti-white 
3.) Virtue
4.) Racist
5.) CNN
6.) Pelosi
7.) Fascist
8.) NPC
9.) Anti-Fa
10.) Obama

Column 2
1.) Enabling
2.) Empowering
3.) Signalling
4.) Supporting
5.) Normalizing
6.) Embracing
7.) Loving
8.) Tweeting
9.) agrandizing
10.) following

Column 3
1.) Trump
2.) Security
3.) Equality
4.) Harmony
5.) Rainbow
6.) Black
7.) Reality
8.) Minority
9.) Orange man
10.) Immigrant

Column 4
1.) Hater
2.) Shunner
3.) Despiser
4.) Destroyer
5.) Harmer
6.) Assaulter
7.) Doubter
8.) Exterminator
9.) wrecker
10.) Swindler

Lol, using the royal "we"

nuff said.

If by Royal we, you mean not the royal we: and specifically talking about you and I: then sure!

But hey? It wouldn’t be the first time in the last ten minutes you’ve deliberately misrepresented reality in order to deflect from the conversation.

Triggered!

3,7,5,10

lol, too easy

lol

GParrpot aka Franken Trumpanzee https://www.debate.org/Greyparrot/

..'Bingo!, LOL, NPC, Marxist Trigger, Bingo!'.......

1} Lock Away Trumpanzees

..'Bingo!, LOL, NPC, Marxist,Trigger, Bingo!'....

2} Lock Away Trumpanzees!

...'Bingo!, LOL, NPC, Marxist, Trigger, Bingo!'.....

3} Lock Away Trumpanzees!

What is this bullcrap statement that says the American founding fathers were egalitarians? They owned people. Try not taking a phrase out of context before making a completely baseless claim about the founding fathers. 

The founding fathers wanted freedom from King George, and wanted to create a nation that was free from the tyranny of big government.

The entire constitution is a laundry list protecting American citizens from government. That was liberalism back then.

Today's liberalism is a bunch of postmodernist horse crap explaining why we need identity groups to enforce equality over different unequal individuals and enforce equal outcomes using a tyrannical big government to implement those egalitarian ideas.

Equality for the founding fathers meant equality under the law. Period.

Absolutely nothing indicates that the founding fathers were social egalitarians.

The rednecks have heard these words but the chances that they know the meaning of them are as near to zero as you can get.

Hi Greyparrot.  I generally refrain from replying to your posts since it is pretty clear your contribution is less about dialogue then about maximizing discord. Although  I've only been reading these forums for a month,  I've notice a certain tell in your posts- when your writing exhibits complete thoughts, that is because they are  plagiarized.  In this case, you've cut & pasted from Nathaniel Darnell's 2012 article @ American Vision, an end-of-the-worlder Christian hate group that preaches public execution of gays and the forceful submission of the US to the law of Moses.  Here is the article you pasted without attribution:

I guess that's why they call you parrot.

Sort of along the same lines I note your profile pic celebrates SS Gruppenfuhrer Heinz Reinefarth who is best known for the liquidation of  60,000 Jews from the Warsaw Ghetto and then dodging the death penalty by ratting out his fellow Nazi's at the Nurenberg Trials.  A man no American ought to admire- an official enemy of the US, in fact.   I wonder what you see in him?

I guess that's the grey you're parroting.

A brilliant argument. You totally convinced me that the founding fathers were egalitarians with your insightful quips.

This is a casual forum, not a college course. I can cut and paste any damn thing I want if it mirrors my argument. I really don't care about accreditations in a casual forum because arguing through authority is what college kids do. If you want to dodge the arguments, just say so, or better yet, don't reply at all.

Also, SPLC is currently thoroughly debunked as a scam organization that peddles arbitrary hate to the tune of millions of dollars, but you probably already knew that, smart as you appear to be.

Not that you would ever be accused of presenting an argument solely by appealing to fraudulent authority. That would be beneath you.

Why do you use a Nazi officer as your profile picture?