Brianna Wu / John Walker Flynt - "Biggest Victim of Gamergate," Failed Game Developer, Failed Congressional Candidate

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Just for fun, does anyone want to compile a list of questions that any potentially lurking journalists should be asking Wu?

Off the top of my head:
  1. Tell me about the campaign events you've held in your district. (When she stammers, ask "what have you done to get to know voters in your district?) Related: You're running in MA. Isn't it dishonest to "campaign" in California and have your funders foot the bill?
  2. What do you think district 8 voters care most about, and what can you bring to the table?
  3. When Wu attacks Lynch for being too old to evolve on positions: Ask her if she's evolved on her negative stances on gay men, overweight people, etc. Related: You have taken strong stances, promising never to support Nintendo, Uber, etc, again because of their sexism. Except, you continue to give them money. How do you defend this?
  4. call Wu out on lies: You've said in interviews that you experienced sexism as a company where you worked in DevOps. When/where was this?
 
Peace and Harmony said:
Aww yeah, get them wetbacks @RepStephenLynch!

View attachment 240642
Click to expand...
Did anyone bother, including John Flynt/Brianna Wu, to read the bill Lynch voted for and that this, bold definitely not illegal, Latinx is complaining about?

It's called Kate's Law and is named after a woman who was shot dead by an illegal alien from Mexico with 7 felony convictions and 5 deportations under his belt. He was in police custody over marijuana possession in San Francisco, following his recent release on a 4 year prison term. The brave liberals in San Francisco decided to release the asshole who then went and stole a gun and shot this poor girl in front of her dad. This was AFTER the Feds had asked SF to keep him in custody. But nah, they love their criminal illegal aliens too much to keep them in prison or turn them over to the Feds including the violent, rapey illegals.

The bill, which will pass the senate finally, increases the penalties for returning to the US after prior deportations. That's it. Doesn't sound unreasonable at all does it? I'm fucking embarrassed to vote democrat with these idiots.

There was also one more bill passed by the house today that Lynch did not vote for. It cuts federal funds for sanctuary cities and makes them vulnerable to liability lawsuits from victims of crimes committed by illegal aliens.

Fuck Briana Wu for not wanting to keep Americans safe.
 
Sissy Galvez said:
Did anyone bother, including John Flynt/Brianna Wu, to read the bill Lynch voted for and that this, bold definitely not illegal, Latinx is complaining about?

It's called Kate's Law and is named after a woman who was shot dead by an illegal alien from Mexico with 7 felony convictions and 5 deportations under his belt. He was in police custody over marijuana possession in San Francisco, following his recent release on a 4 year prison term. The brave liberals in San Francisco decided to release the asshole who then went and stole a gun and shot this poor girl in front of her dad. This was AFTER the Feds had asked SF to keep him in custody. But nah, they love their criminal illegal aliens too much to keep them in prison or turn them over to the Feds including the violent, rapey illegals.

The bill, which will pass the senate finally, increases the penalties for returning to the US after prior deportations. That's it. Doesn't sound unreasonable at all does it? I'm fucking embarrassed to vote democrat with these idiots.

There was also one more bill passed by the house today that Lynch did not vote for. It cuts federal funds for sanctuary cities and makes them vulnerable to liability lawsuits from victims of crimes committed by illegal aliens.

Fuck Briana Wu for not wanting to keep Americans safe.
Click to expand...


Cool, you racist.
 
ZKWNordman said:
Just for fun, does anyone want to compile a list of questions that any potentially lurking journalists should be asking Wu?

Off the top of my head:
  1. Tell me about the campaign events you've held in your district. (When she stammers, ask "what have you done to get to know voters in your district?) Related: You're running in MA. Isn't it dishonest to "campaign" in California and have your funders foot the bill?
  2. What do you think district 8 voters care most about, and what can you bring to the table?
  3. When Wu attacks Lynch for being too old to evolve on positions: Ask her if she's evolved on her negative stances on gay men, overweight people, etc. Related: You have taken strong stances, promising never to support Nintendo, Uber, etc, again because of their sexism. Except, you continue to give them money. How do you defend this?
  4. call Wu out on lies: You've said in interviews that you experienced sexism as a company where you worked in DevOps. When/where was this?
Click to expand...
I'd ask what her Patreon is for if she's not "creating video games" anymore and obviously is the only one with access to her social media. If she brought up Natalie O'Brien, I'd ask for proof that that person exists, as evidence that it's not just obvious simple fraud. I'd ask why the one game she HAS released is a buggy unbeatable mess that she hasn't bothered to fix. Since she claims frequently to be an engineer, I'd ask where she got her engineering degree from. I'd ask for what publication she worked as an "investigative reporter" and why no one can find any piece she's written.

All I can think of off the top of my head but there's obviously more.
 
Sissy Galvez said:
Did anyone bother, including John Flynt/Brianna Wu, to read the bill Lynch voted for and that this, bold definitely not illegal, Latinx is complaining about?
Click to expand...

Ha ha, nice mansplaining dude, but didn't you do that degenerate @RepStephenLynch also voted in favour of legalising sexual assault against women? It's true because John said so!

lynch1.jpg


Just what we need another clueless dumbfuck attempting to regulate the Internet.

encrypt.jpg


Breathtakingly idiotic. Yes Rachel, please angrily let @RepStephenLynch know that you are fiercely advocating for the right of illegal aliens who have committed violent crimes to prowl the streets of District 8.

root.jpg
 
John has no idea how to attack Lynch effectively. This is garbage sniping that is going to carry absolutely no weight with the people who've practically sent him to DC by acclamation for years and years now. It's patently obvious that John doesn't know any means of argument other than being a vicious cunt.
 
You know, one reason for taking on an entrenched and popular incumbent is to show the local and state party organizations how professional a candidate you can be. If the party sees you as a serious, dedicated student of politics and/or a good professional organizer of a campaign, good things can come from even the most lopsided of defeats. You may be tapped for a role in internal party activities, you may even attract enough favorable attention that they will groom you for another run.

John? After this, he'll be lucky if the local party allows him to be a poll-watcher. They certainly won't put him up front to talk to either voters or send him out to rain-make with contributors. He's poison to a professional organization and they can see this just as clearly as we can.
 
Karl_der_Grosse said:
John? After this, he'll be lucky if the local party allows him to be a poll-watcher.
Click to expand...
He didn't even talk to his local party before starting his run, he's on record as saying he specifically went around them. He pretty much declared war on them from day one by primarying their guy.
 
Karl_der_Grosse said:
You know, one reason for taking on an entrenched and popular incumbent is to show the local and state party organizations how professional a candidate you can be. If the party sees you as a serious, dedicated student of politics and/or a good professional organizer of a campaign, good things can come from even the most lopsided of defeats. You may be tapped for a role in internal party activities, you may even attract enough favorable attention that they will groom you for another run.

John? After this, he'll be lucky if the local party allows him to be a poll-watcher. They certainly won't put him up front to talk to either voters or send him out to rain-make with contributors. He's poison to a professional organization and they can see this just as clearly as we can.
Click to expand...

Hell, the way this campaign is going, they'll ban John from even being a voter.
 
Kosher Dill said:
He didn't even talk to his local party before starting his run, he's on record as saying he specifically went around them. He pretty much declared war on them from day one by primarying their guy.
Click to expand...

Primarying an incumbent should never be done lightly. It's supposed to be reserved for incumbents who have fucked up in some spectacular way, or bucked the party's base so egregiously that they can't tolerate it any longer. Any incumbent, no matter how bad the fuckup, is going to have connections and be owed favors by various levels of the party organization, and is not going to take a challenge to their position with good cheer. It's not just the threat of being unseated by the challenger; a rough primary can wound an incumbent for the general election. Jimmy Carter was probably doomed from 1978 or so, but Teddy Kennedy trying to take him down did him no favors. The mere possibility that John might damage a fairly popular Dem rep who can be relied on to go with the party -- what, 80, 90% of the time? -- puts a big target on the stupid fuck's head. (Assuming, of course, anyone ever takes him seriously, which is a big assumption.) Like Omar said, you come at the king, you best not miss.

But of course this isn't about impressing the Democrats or even really trying to win. It's just a scam for Potbelly sangwidges and stupid video game toys. Maybe John expects to get a talk show out of it. Could he be featured on Talking Dead, perhaps?
 
Somewhere in Tyson's Corner, Gannet's CEO comes to the sudden realization that, no, profits and return on shareholder investment is not his first priority - paying 20 year olds more and saving democracy is, just as the freakish abomination foretold in his twitter dream.
 
Peace and Harmony said:
At some point, what you should realise first is what kind of effect the saturation of dogshit-tier journalism is having on the country.

View attachment 240862
Click to expand...
For the better part of two decades, people in Brianna's particular flavor of limousine liberalism have been engaged in a heel-digging war against the fall of print media, all while happily contributing to the very thing that's killing it.
Look, is the loss of traditional sourcing and rigorous fact checking a bad thing? Fuck yes, of course it is. That is the fucking foundation on which we've built political discourse in this country, which kind of explains why it's gotten progressively worse.

But we did this. The very things Brianna holds dear is the reason this shit is dying. It's because people are more interested in thinkpieces and hot takes than they are in data. It's because we value something agreeing with us over something that tells us a difficult truth. We like succinct, punchy, fluffy little ideas with a lot of bold stances and exciting words.
And the internet has that shit in fucking spades, at an eighth of the cost and with a sixteenth of the staff. Simple economics sorta took over from there.

The New York Times isn't making staff cuts because it doesn't value fact checking. It's making staff cuts because it's fucking hemorrhaging money, and they're trying to slow the bleeding. They literally do not have a choice. Shitty pseudojournalism rags like Buzzfeed, (formerly) Gawker, Mary Sue, and Breitbart are fucking slaughtering them, and that's because they can give the people what they want with a staff of ten and don't give a fuck about sources or fact checks. They just need to say that (literally anything you can think of) is racist, or in the case of Breitbart, that secret moon Jews are coming in government funded rape wagons to make your children gay.
And that doesn't require a staff of people who organize your evidence.

Print media is bleeding to death because people today get their news from listening to hackneyed thinkpiece garbage and spicy takes on twitter, Brianna.
 
Heh... so Wu apparently read someone who used the phrase "churn and burn" and thought it sounded cool, so now she's gonna try and salt his tweets with it for the next couple of weeks.

She didn't even really research what it means. Wu seems to have latched onto the idea that it merely means a maintaining low wages along with a high turnover rate, and she never bothered to find out that it specifically referred to employment practices employed by businesses that were trying to damage unions. It seems that particular phrase has been given the same treatment as other words these days such as "rape", "violence", "harassment", and "Nazi" in which their definition is watered down so much that they can imply meaning everything while actually representing nothing anymore, however.

Hell, she can't even get the words of the phrase in the correct order.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom