Cancel Bud Light! Maga Hissy Fit!

[seafoam1 2,799]

1 minute ago, BuckSwope said:

Do you really not understand what he is saying is hypocritical?

Let me spell it out for you. When Miller Lite comes out with advertisement that promotes transexual and gay lifestyles, I won't buy their product either. Does that work for you?

 

[BuckSwope 654]

7 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

 

Yeah, you don’t know what the Fock you’re taking about. The left was calling for individuals to lose their job for saying the wrong thing. Canceling them. That’s not at all what’s happening here. The boycotters aren’t buying a product. Big difference. 

..and acting like snowflakes wanting an apology (and it better be using the right wording!) - that part is just like the left you hate, which is what I was pointing out.  

Yes, I will give you that they call for the CEO to lose their jobs (they are just cheering about the person who did lose their job).  BUT - largely your side didn't act like the first part a few years ago, so I will give it a few more years to fully catch up with their sh1tty behavior on that last front.  

[seafoam1 2,799]

2 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

..and acting like snowflakes...the left wants this...

 

 

[BuckSwope 654]

14 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

Let me spell it out for you. When Miller Lite comes out with advertisement that promotes transexual and gay lifestyles, I won't buy their product either. Does that work for you?

 

Sure, you do you.   

Hawks' point is about the dozens of other companies and products people use that also promotes, contributes to, and supports transexual and gay lifestyles.  Why aren't people boycotting them or calling them out.   I am guessing like me, he finds the line in the sand of only reacting with a boycott of a product if an ad features a tranny.    What about companies that support a gay pride parade that feature those lovely picks LC shares?  You still buy their product, just not any that use a tranny in an ad?    

Arbitrary and weird, but again - you do you.  

I'll just choose to believe it's largely because it was already a crap product that didn't require that much of a sacrifice to stop using, and was easy to pass around on SM because it was an ad.   

[BuckSwope 654]

8 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

 

 

You are right - it's not normal.  He's a creepy old dude.  

[GutterBoy 2,898]

19 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

Let me spell it out for you. When Miller Lite comes out with advertisement that promotes transexual and gay lifestyles, I won't buy their product either. Does that work for you?

 

 

[League Champion 1,896]

30 minutes ago, MDC said:

Of the big three I’d go Miller Lite, BL then Coors. Amstel Light is better than those 3 tho. And Corona Light is damn good.

I like Miller Light 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,925]

31 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

 

That’s really gay. Gay is ok. I shall continue to drink it. 

[seafoam1 2,799]

36 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

 

Reality...

 

[Hawkeye21 2,381]

5 hours ago, seafoam1 said:

What's the point that's being made? 

And why is it wrong making a point? 

Again, if I choose another color car over an orange car, am I boycotting orange? 

You really think that’s a good analogy don’t you?  It’s not. 

[Hawkeye21 2,381]

2 hours ago, League Champion said:

I like Miller Light 

I think it’s one of the worst light beers there is but I would drink it if it was the only option. I also would drink it if they did what BL did, because wtf cares?

[Gladiators 1,964]

2 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

I think it’s one of the worst light beers there is but I would drink it if it was the only option. I also would drink it if they did what BL did, because wtf cares?

Some people decided not to drink BL after what they did. Who cares?

[Hawkeye21 2,381]

3 minutes ago, Gladiators said:

Some people decided not to drink BL after what they did. Who cares?

I think it makes more sense to not drink a beer because it’s not good, not because of a promotion. Especially a promotion that most of you never would’ve known about if it wasn’t for Kid Rock shooting up cans of it. 

[Gladiators 1,964]

1 minute ago, Hawkeye21 said:

I think it makes more sense to not drink a beer because it’s not good, not because of a promotion. Especially a promotion that most of you never would’ve known about if it wasn’t for Kid Rock shooting up cans of it. 

I’m glad you have your own thoughts on it. I have my own too. People work hard to make money and get to choose which businesses they support. I’m not sure why anyone cares if people decided not to buy BL anymore.

[Hawkeye21 2,381]

9 minutes ago, Gladiators said:

I’m glad you have your own thoughts on it. I have my own too. People work hard to make money and get to choose which businesses they support. I’m not sure why anyone cares if people decided not to buy BL anymore.

I’ve said it multiple times already. I think it hypocritical. I think it’s humorous. 

[Gladiators 1,964]

3 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

I’ve said it multiple times already. I think it hypocritical. I think it’s humorous. 

I hope it keeps going so you can continue to laugh about it. I get a good laugh from it too.

[Baker Boy 1,687]

1 hour ago, Hawkeye21 said:

I think it’s one of the worst light beers there is but I would drink it if it was the only option. I also would drink it if they did what BL did, because wtf cares?

Yet you won’t buy Bud Light to support them, in fact, none of Lefties have stepped forward to support them. The left has only boycotted BL, just like the right. 

[seafoam1 2,799]

5 hours ago, Hawkeye21 said:

You really think that’s a good analogy don’t you?  It’s not. 

It's a perfect analogy.

[seafoam1 2,799]

7 hours ago, BuckSwope said:

Sure, you do you.   

Hawks' point is about the dozens of other companies and products people use that also promotes, contributes to, and supports transexual and gay lifestyles.  Why aren't people boycotting them or calling them out.   I am guessing like me, he finds the line in the sand of only reacting with a boycott of a product if an ad features a tranny.    What about companies that support a gay pride parade that feature those lovely picks LC shares?  You still buy their product, just not any that use a tranny in an ad?    

Arbitrary and weird, but again - you do you.  

I'll just choose to believe it's largely because it was already a crap product that didn't require that much of a sacrifice to stop using, and was easy to pass around on SM because it was an ad.   

What companies? Show their ads pushing illogical trannyism on others.

[Hawkeye21 2,381]

9 hours ago, Baker Boy said:

Yet you won’t buy Bud Light to support them, in fact, none of Lefties have stepped forward to support them. The left has only boycotted BL, just like the right. 

I won't buy BL?  I wasn't aware of that.

[Hawkeye21 2,381]

6 hours ago, seafoam1 said:

What companies? Show their ads pushing illogical trannyism on others.

I have yet to see these ads you talk about.

[BuckSwope 654]

6 hours ago, seafoam1 said:

What companies? Show their ads pushing illogical trannyism on others.

I didn't say I had them, I said I (and I am guessing Hawks) find that line of "ads" to be weird and a bit nonsensical.  

Hence my question why that was your line vs a company that, say, contributes to a gay pride parade or contributes to an lgbtq cause.  If I was opposed to trannies as much as you seem to be, I probably wouldn't stop at just whoever shows me an ad and makes it obvious.  That's why I find it weird and a bit hypocritical.  It's also why I largely don't stop using products over b.s. like this because it never ends when you start pulling on that string. 

[TimHauck 2,609]

20 hours ago, seafoam1 said:

What companies? Show their ads pushing illogical trannyism on others.

I assume your girlfriend stopped using Maybelline after they also partnered with Mulvaney, right?

Looks like now they’re taking it another step further and partnering with a bearded person -

 

This is where the hypocrisy comes in.  Mulvaney’s Maybelline ad was the same time as Bud Light’s, but Maybelline got like 1/100th of the calls to boycott it, despite being a product that primarily targets women.  With the number of people that claim trannies are trying to “erase women” or whatever, people should be much more upset over Mulvaney’s Maybelline ad than the Bud Light one.

[Blue Horseshoe 348]

39 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

 

This is where the hypocrisy comes in.  Mulvaney’s Maybelline ad was the same time as Bud Light’s, but Maybelline got like 1/100th of the calls to boycott it, despite being a product that primarily targets women.  With the number of people that claim trannies are trying to “erase women” or whatever, people should be much more upset over Mulvaney’s Maybelline ad than the Bud Light one.

 

 

 

Relative Privation (also known as: it could be worse, it could be better)

Description: Trying to make a scenario appear better or worse by comparing it to the best or worst case scenario. The fallacy of relative privation rejects an argument by stating the existence of a more important problem. The existence of such a worse issue, the fallacy insists, thereby makes the initial argument irrelevant. This fallacy is also known as the appeal to worse problems or “not as bad as”.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Relative-Privation

[Hardcore troubadour 14,925]

45 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

I assume your girlfriend stopped using Maybelline after they also partnered with Mulvaney, right?

Looks like now they’re taking it another step further and partnering with a bearded person -

 

This is where the hypocrisy comes in.  Mulvaney’s Maybelline ad was the same time as Bud Light’s, but Maybelline got like 1/100th of the calls to boycott it, despite being a product that primarily targets women.  With the number of people that claim trannies are trying to “erase women” or whatever, people should be much more upset over Mulvaney’s Maybelline ad than the Bud Light one.

I’m amazed you can tie your own shoes. You should hit  your knees tonight and thank the Lord that you were born in the United States and live in these times. The fact that you have a roof over your head and food in your fridge is a testament to the great country our forefathers left for us. They have defeated Darwinism. 

[League Champion 1,896]

 

[gas 128]

4 minutes ago, League Champion said:

 

Attention MAGAts: the best thing about a Republican woman is that there are so few of them.

[League Champion 1,896]

1 minute ago, gas said:

Attention MAGAts: the best thing about a Republican woman is that there are so few of them.

Enjoy your fat, pale, purple haired, hairy, smelly, tree hugging Wife. 

[seafoam1 2,799]

1 hour ago, League Champion said:

 

...they are actually women.

[listen2me 23 1,825]

6 hours ago, TimHauck said:

I assume your girlfriend stopped using Maybelline after they also partnered with Mulvaney, right?

Looks like now they’re taking it another step further and partnering with a bearded person -

 

This is where the hypocrisy comes in.  Mulvaney’s Maybelline ad was the same time as Bud Light’s, but Maybelline got like 1/100th of the calls to boycott it, despite being a product that primarily targets women.  With the number of people that claim trannies are trying to “erase women” or whatever, people should be much more upset over Mulvaney’s Maybelline ad than the Bud Light one.

You are so silly.  Clueless.  Lol.  

You all are still so twitchy over the fact BL boycott worked.  

[TimHauck 2,609]

6 hours ago, Blue Horseshoe said:

 

 

 

Relative Privation (also known as: it could be worse, it could be better)

Description: Trying to make a scenario appear better or worse by comparing it to the best or worst case scenario. The fallacy of relative privation rejects an argument by stating the existence of a more important problem. The existence of such a worse issue, the fallacy insists, thereby makes the initial argument irrelevant. This fallacy is also known as the appeal to worse problems or “not as bad as”.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Relative-Privation

I’m not comparing it to a “different scenario;” it’s literally the same exact scenario - both companies used Mulvaney for an ad at the same time, with wildly different results.  

I don’t really care about whether or not people buy Bud Light, but when others have brought up in here about Miller and Coors also supporting pride month, the response was essentially, “supporting gays is fine, supporting trannies is not,” which I get.  But there are companies that do support trannies including partnering with the same person Bud Light did, that didn’t receive near the same backlash.  Yes, that is hypocritical, especially because Mulvaney has also advertised for actual women’s products and I thought a major argument against trannies is that they’re trying to “erase women.”

[seafoam1 2,799]

3 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

I’m not comparing it to a “different scenario;” it’s literally the same exact scenario - both companies used Mulvaney for an ad at the same time, with wildly different results.  

I don’t really care about whether or not people buy Bud Light, but when others have brought up in here about Miller and Coors also supporting pride month, the response was essentially, “supporting gays is fine, supporting trannies is not,” which I get.  But there are companies that do support trannies including partnering with the same person Bud Light did, that didn’t receive near the same backlash.  Yes, that is hypocritical, especially because Mulvaney has also advertised for actual women’s products and I thought a major argument against trannies is that they’re trying to “erase women.”

What's your obsession? Who are you mad at?

[GutterBoy 2,898]

22 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

I’m not comparing it to a “different scenario;” it’s literally the same exact scenario - both companies used Mulvaney for an ad at the same time, with wildly different results.  

I don’t really care about whether or not people buy Bud Light, but when others have brought up in here about Miller and Coors also supporting pride month, the response was essentially, “supporting gays is fine, supporting trannies is not,” which I get.  But there are companies that do support trannies including partnering with the same person Bud Light did, that didn’t receive near the same backlash.  Yes, that is hypocritical, especially because Mulvaney has also advertised for actual women’s products and I thought a major argument against trannies is that they’re trying to “erase women.”

They can't boycott everyone that supports LGBTQ, so of course they're hypocrites, but it hurts them to admit it so they won't.  If they were honest with themselves they wouldn't be engaged in their ridiculous behavior.

[Engorgeous George 2,126]

34 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

They can't boycott everyone that supports LGBTQ, so of course they're hypocrites, but it hurts them to admit it so they won't.  If they were honest with themselves they wouldn't be engaged in their ridiculous behavior.

So if a person cannot accomplish everything they should accomplish nothing or be judged a hypocrite? 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,925]

57 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

They can't boycott everyone that supports LGBTQ, so of course they're hypocrites, but it hurts them to admit it so they won't.  If they were honest with themselves they wouldn't be engaged in their ridiculous behavior.

Yeah, Gutterboy always admits when he’s wrong. It’s just that he’s never wrong, so we don’t see it. 

[BuckSwope 654]

11 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

So if a person cannot accomplish everything they should accomplish nothing or be judged a hypocrite? 

No, that's not quite what people are saying, at least I am not.      IMO if you do things like say you won't support a company that runs an ad like that, or a company that supports trannies and other things you are against promoting, and only do that for one thing and not dozens of others, you are being hypocritical.   Especially when it's something as easy as not buying something you rarely use or there is an easy brand replacement for.   Like the above examples - it's important enough to ban Bud Light from your house but not Maybelline?  

It's a bit a of a no-win situation when you spend so much time hyping it up.   A bit of a hypocrite for doing one over the other since both are very easy boycotts, or admitting they largely didn't know about the Maybelline ad which then goes down the road of just caring about the trendy one on right SM/not being important enough to you to do some mild research (despite coming on message boards near daily and ranting about trannies and people that support them).   Some portion of this is largely performative as people are suggesting.   

[Hardcore troubadour 14,925]

Someone needs to call the team at boycott HQ and let them know they are being hypocrites and give up on the most successful boycott of all time. 

[RLLD 4,143]

1 hour ago, GutterBoy said:

They can't boycott everyone that supports LGBTQ, so of course they're hypocrites, but it hurts them to admit it so they won't.  If they were honest with themselves they wouldn't be engaged in their ridiculous behavior.

You do not need to boycott everything.  This is a principle that liberals are more than familiar with, its part and parcel of their tactics.  

By way of example, you do not need a police officer for every speeder, just enough around to influence behaviors.  When the FBI was communicating with social media companies and "warning" them about stuff, it was not to warn them about anything other than they were being watched.

In this instance the warning here is to watch how far you take it.....go ahead and do the pandering to the mentaly ill, but be aware that people with money might decide enough is enough.....

This is likely an aberration.  No one cares much about mentally ill trannies, but all people have a line. And if you as a vendor decide to pander to these folks, by all means do it, its likely a safe bet.  But it might not be.....

[MDC 7,124]

1 minute ago, RLLD said:

No one cares much about mentally ill trannies

You’d never know it from Tranny Central aka the Geek Club.

[RLLD 4,143]

7 minutes ago, MDC said:

You’d never know it from Tranny Central aka the Geek Club.

I think you have a wealth of mentally ill people, and we rarely hear from them or about them.  But if it is true that folks put their sh!t out there, then people will have an opinion, and particularly in this case where its is "acknowledge me or else".  So I get it.  But the average tranny is just trying to live their life, we dont know it and we dont care.

If it becomes true that the people who think they are cats starts making it a major social movement, putting it in our face, creating an "or else" scenario, we might point out how stupid they are as well.