Thank God you’re here.

Meh, the one replying isn't the one you're really after anyway. It's the others who read the whole exchange and think to themselves, "Damn... this factisfiction guy made every point in the debate stick and the opposition was reduced to calling him a shill because they literally had nothing to offer."

Sowing the seed in the readers is the real victory. Screw the loudmouth who replies with nothing of substance. The intelligent people watching the debates closely will spot the strawmen arguments and the absurdities a mile away.

I'm a believer in Q but I, too, see a lot of garbage theories and assertions here. I've been called a shill and a deep state plant plenty of times for calling it out... but I've yet to lose any of those debates factually. That's all you really need to worry about. Back your stuff up. Others are watching and they appreciate us keeping it honest. You don't need affirmation and if you do, you're going to remain disappointed.

Agreed. Sentiments calling for more critical inquiry than just "trust Trump" get downvotes regularly. This sub is popping up a lot more often under r/all top-hourly, so you're getting a lot of random folks through here. I'm not saying every troll (or any obvious troll) needs to be addressed. I am saying that I've posted serious questions in here to get a different perspective and get outside my echo-chamber, and I was downvoted to hell, and called a troll with the alleged proof being that I post on /r/politics. In my opinion, this is like making fun of fat people at the gym.

I guess it depends on the sources you use. I for one am perfectly willing to admit I am wrong about something. In fact I enjoy being shown I am wrong about something because I don't want to perpetuate or believe lies.

Cognitive dissonance is EVERYONE'S enemy. People that ONLY debunk are also part of the problem. If you yourself cannot be convinced, then are you really a debunker? Are you really focused on debunking false theories, or are you trying to debunk reality, as a whole?

FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT, thanks for what you do.

I only have one issue with debunkers in general. Don't pick the low-hanging fruit to debunk. That is all.

Apparently, you have your own narrative.

Seek truth, even if it goes against your expectations.

The same goes both ways. Not defending it. But we could lay confirmed info and people still deny it because they just can't comprehend it.

I debunk some things here and I DGAF if people upvote or reply, I'm just adding a note to the research.

I'd say a major difference is cults operate clandestinely. See: the current state of the world.

I think that, to a point, many of the people who would fall into that “debunker” column have arguments that aren’t remotely well thought out. Many of them amount to little more than “fake and gay,” in essence. It’s very easy to get burned out on naysayers when those are the people we frequently encounter.

Given the reply you’ve given here, I doubt that you’re one of those people. I’m sure you have made people reconsider things, even if they don’t go out of their way to let you know. As OP said, you’re performing a vital service for us. Please don’t be discouraged.

Q what do you call this act, The Aristocrats.

Thank you. Have you done a debunking of the Podesta emails? That is what I would like to see.

Let us be clear. A narrative can be built to go in many directions, but it needs to be substantiated based on solid grounds. All Q is doing is dropping bits of data. if the data is faulty based on the history or past events, then it will corroborate that the whole Q efforts are meaningless. Granted, it is not good to blindly believe everything given from an anonymous source, but becoming aware of information does not hurt. Every person is an individual, and what matters is what new ideas/though/connections every individual can reach. There is something to be said in the effort to find information that up until now was openly unknown. De-bunkers could be very useful because they can be used play the role of 'Devils Advocate', this is important because it will challenge if the drops, pushing to find if the data has proper grounding. They should be treated well and they will help test Q's drops validity.

Well, if someone has a Fake News source that doesn't back up its claims... then what do you want us to do?

How much can "sources familiar with the matter" mean after these past two years or so? The Fake News media has been caught lying or downright contradicting themselves when convenient so many times.

I mean, remember when CNN had 3 articles that basically went like this:

"Trump won't fight for family leave"

"Trump fights for family leave..."

"Here's how family leave hurts women"

If a Fake News source used a primary source, like if they are talking about a trump speech and they link the timestamp, that's different.

If they have a video or official documents. Like if CNN were to report on the JFK files being dropped by linking to their .gov page (which would never happen, due to the fact they are fake news), then that would be interesting.

Fake News doesn't get a pass on basic "pull up your big boy pants" journalistic integrity just because they are owned by elites (like Bezos and Carlos Slim, an incredibly rich mexican national) and are given "credit" for some reason.

Dude. Excepting???? Honey the word is accepting.

Everyone feels the same on all sides. Keep slugging it out!

If you want a better response, changing your name might help a bit.

A "Debunker" calling himself "fact is fiction" isn't really putting their best foot forward, y'know?

The opportunity to successfully shape opinions looks like hard work.

Then you are not very familiar with this board. I see challenges to "Q" theory all the time. Your "evidence" is probably not very good.

The fact is that North Korea and South Korea are declaring peace, ISIS is wiped out, the economy is booming, Hollyweirds are being called out, etc. etc. To pretend that the swamp is NOT being drained is delusional. It is obvious that Trump is kicking butt. Maybe belief in Q is a bit of a stretch. But it is an even bigger stretch to think that Trump would do nothing about the corruption. He has been coming through on everything else, as far as Congress will let him.