Talk:Nick Fuentes

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon sociology.svg This article contains information about one or more living persons.

Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats.
Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed.
If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

Roy Moore sad time[edit]

5:59 PM: Looks like it's going to be a rough night for the Left. RIP.

6:43 PM: Maybe not actually :/

7:34 PM: Yeah it's a rough night for us actually.

Fuzzy. Cat. Potato! (talk/stalk) 20:25, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Drive-by insult[edit]

Was this article written by an 8-year-old? — Unsigned, by: 2601:19B:C500:270:3CD5:52C9:1CF0:957 / talk

Probably not. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 13:05, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

"Nazi Nick"? Try "Nick the spic"[edit]

We have his nickname listed as "Nazi Nick" but this does not seem to be something anybody has actually referred to him as: real nicknames include "Nick the knife", "Slippery Nick", and "Nick the spic". The latter two at least have some assonance to them, I'm a fan of "Nick the spic". — Unsigned, by: TPUSAfan / talk / contribs

Nein. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 04:05, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Haggard's Law[edit]

Nick Fuentes is NOT gay https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRHxVFhlJFk — Unsigned, by: 207.126.94.8 / talk / contribs

New quotes[edit]

Another video with some pretty disturbing quotes about women etc: https://youtu.be/snkP61hi-Ls— Unsigned, by: Debunky / talk / contribs

There was a large group debate where he laid out his fundamental ideas about epistemology, (22:43) and essentially, vocally, rejected the concept of empiricism or the use of data to prove a point, instead favouring "common sense" and what "everyone already knows", and went on to quite flatly say that if he is ever shown a study that is contrary to an existing belief of his, he would assume that the data is politically motivated. (26:10) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XbT4UojaRw From this you can make some... certain judgements about his character, and his approach to debate.— Unsigned, by: 86.18.122.238 / talk / contribs

Too many cliches[edit]

From what I see is he is rather a "radical centrist" than far right. He opposes right-libertarianism and believes the support for Israel should be cut. Whether we like him or not, he is very smart for his age. BTW, when he took the political compass, he was labelled as "moderate left". 2003:C3:371E:4800:C58C:F680:4091:7905 (talk) 19:56, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

How shall a put this? Nope, not buying it. maybe the fascist guy is a fascist? I dunno, I just know PolSci 101. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 19:58, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
When he took 8values he got fascist. Check it out. — Z 20:50, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
Here is a video of him denying the Holocaust. Not a fascist, right? — Godless Raven SDAPOe logo.svg talkstalkwalkbalk 🌹 Flag of Europe.svg 20:55, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't have enough permissions to edit the page, but everyday in the second quote from the top should be spelled "every day"[edit]

Everyday means ordinary, I'm pretty sure that's not the way Fuentes meant it.--Lowbunny (talk) 00:24, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Nick Fuentes did not enter the capitol building.[edit]

https://twitter.com/NickJFuentes/status/1346978532837056515 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGt4HAw_Qi0 the source used is wrong about Nick Fuentes entering the capitol building on January 6th 2021. — Unsigned, by: Family Man / talk / contribs

I see no reason why the man who lies and shit stirs for a living and then walks his crap back when he gets into to trouble might maybe lie to avoid Federal prosecution. None at all. Also kudos on just taking his word for it with zero third party corroboration. That's totes trustworthy and not at all iffy. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 03:03, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
I find the man himself more trustworthy on this situation than an oversees publication that has no evidence than a blurry photo — Unsigned, by: Family Man / talk / contribs
So... You're a moron? You're going to take a man with a history of lying under similar circumstances, who has every reason to lie, and just take him at his word? That's beyond moronic. It's farcical. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 03:15, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
apparently, yeah. — Unsigned, by: Family Man / talk / contribs
@Family Man For fuck's sake, please, this is not difficult! Sign your posts with (~~~~) or (if that's too fucking hard) by clicking on the fucking sign BUTTON: SigButt.png on the toolbar above the edit panel. (You can indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line.) This keeps the place tidy and stops you looking like a complete arsing tool so please, just fucking do it already.

Kevlarstar and his dog (Woof!) 13:59, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Yh sure man,will do. Also, motivated reasoning much? Stay mad — Unsigned, by: 80.233.61.63 / talk / contribs