America First with Nicholas J. Fuentes / "Nick the Knife" - Basically just Lauren southern with a love for catboys

Is Nick gay?

  • Yes

    Votes: 520 57.6%
  • Yes, but only ironically

    Votes: 382 42.4%

  • Total voters
    902

hot hot leg

leg so hot u fry an eg
kiwifarms.net
So what you're saying is
Thanks, Ms. Newman. Maybe you should try telling me what you're saying, since you seem to have difficulty making your points clear.
If anything, I'd say that just shows how abysmal things are for Stelter and Maddow, being that they have mainstream support and blessing, while it's the opposite for Fuentes. He might actually beat them if not for tech censorship. I hate Fuentes too, but I hate censorship more
I don't think it shows Nick is successful, I think it's just a convenient excuse for his lack of success.
 

Rekkington

Obama chuckled. "You mean the chaos emeralds?"
kiwifarms.net
Thanks, Ms. Newman. Maybe you should try telling me what you're saying, since you seem to have difficulty making your points clear.
Sorry, I didn't know you also struggle with online social subtleties:
I am saying that you are wrong, and you comparing a heavily deplatformed and banned political figure to mainstream and widely-promoted political figures, while still achieving similar viewcounts, makes your example look retarded.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: tantric_depressive

Pointless Pedant

Dancing the electric paegan love song
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Fuentes's view count wasn't great when he was still on YouTube though. He was getting something like 60-80k per episode which while something wasn't really a lot. That's where he'd be without the deplatforming he's suffered this year.
 

Local Fed

RIP snailslime
kiwifarms.net
Fuentes's view count wasn't great when he was still on YouTube though. He was getting something like 60-80k per episode which while something wasn't really a lot.
I'd say that's pretty damn good for a 2-3 hour show that's on five nights a week. Not sure that the average even that high though. I could be wrong, but I think it was more like 40-60k on average (which still seems pretty good to me).
 

Pointless Pedant

Dancing the electric paegan love song
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
I'd say that's pretty damn good for a 2-3 hour show that's on five nights a week. Not sure that the average even that high though. I could be wrong, but I think it was more like 40-60k on average (which still seems pretty good to me).
I think so. It wasn't really getting much higher, though, suggesting that he'd hit a ceiling in popularity. To actually enter the mainstream he'd need millions.
 

Rekkington

Obama chuckled. "You mean the chaos emeralds?"
kiwifarms.net
Fuentes's view count wasn't great when he was still on YouTube though. He was getting something like 60-80k per episode which while something wasn't really a lot. That's where he'd be without the deplatforming he's suffered this year.
I just don't agree with that at all, of all those Dissident Right people he was pretty much the last one standing and the only one with a ballooning viewership. At the time, his viewership was around 80k for a normal one, you had clips getting much higher and certain episodes also getting much higher, and if you watched over time he was growing exponentially quarter over quarter. He was probably the only one anywhere close to that "side" of internet political figures who was growing that quickly. Look at Ethan Ralph and Warski and the rest of them. Point being: he doesn't exist in a vacuum, and based on the stats there's no reason to think he wouldn't be getting more popular. And my argument is, like Stefan Molyneux (a guy who didn't even curse on his show or really dabble in far-right stuff) that's why they got rid of him.
 

Pointless Pedant

Dancing the electric paegan love song
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
I just don't agree with that at all, of all those Dissident Right people he was pretty much the last one standing and the only one with a ballooning viewership. At the time, his viewership was around 80k for a normal one, you had clips getting much higher and certain episodes also getting much higher, and if you watched over time he was growing exponentially quarter over quarter. He was probably the only one anywhere close to that "side" of internet political figures who was growing that quickly. Look at Ethan Ralph and Warski and the rest of them. Point being: he doesn't exist in a vacuum, and based on the stats there's no reason to think he wouldn't be getting more popular. And my argument is, like Stefan Molyneux (a guy who didn't even curse on his show or really dabble in far-right stuff) that's why they got rid of him.
I'm pretty sure the catboy stuff would have dented his popularity a bit but we'll never know. Molyneux had a better chance I think, he even had a Joe Rogan appearance once.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: tantric_depressive

hot hot leg

leg so hot u fry an eg
kiwifarms.net
Sorry, I didn't know you also struggle with online social subtleties:
I am saying that you are wrong, and you comparing a heavily deplatformed and banned political figure to mainstream and widely-promoted political figures, while still achieving similar viewcounts, makes your example look retarded.
Nick isn't trying to make a name for himself in extreme politics, he's trying to make a name for himself in mainstream politics by showing his politics aren't extreme. It needs to be pointed out that the ratings for people like Brian Stelter and Rachel Maddow are abysmal, the vast majority of Americans across all races and demographics more or less agree with what he says about most of the economic and societal talking points, probably a lot of the racial stuff too.
The only ones who get upset about people who say "Jews control the media" are Jews, who then use their control of the media to fuck those people over.
Nobody is actually quoting Contrapoints, he just has a bunch of weird thirsty orbiters and love the idea of a tranny turning a right wing bully into a tranny lover. Fuck I saw a Brian Stelter clip the other day, the whole thing was a roundtable with industry experts about the state of media and they were all flummoxed, describing how their ratings suck and the Right literally doesn't even complain about them, they don't even listen. They are widely tuned out. They're shills speaking exclusively to take-makers on Twitter and various levels of marketers.
The Resistance is largely just a bunch of queer hall monitors, increasingly bitter women, and industry elites calling everyone stupid for not caring about what they have to say. So they need to make examples out of people. Yes, there's definitely Feds who infiltrate Right-Wing groups, there's dozens of confirmed cases and books written entirely about it. Many on the Dissident Right have stories about being approached by the FBI for information and other things. But the Fed accusations are just retarded these days. Everyone is so deflated they think anyone with any modicum of success must be literally funded by the government.
It's not my retarded example. By what measure is Nick successful while Stelter and Maddow are failures?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GranDuke

Rekkington

Obama chuckled. "You mean the chaos emeralds?"
kiwifarms.net
It's not my retarded example. By what measure is Nick successful while Stelter and Maddow are failures?
It's already been explained a few times on this very page, I did it twice, stop gumming up the thread with your faggy "explain it again but harder" posts.
 

hot hot leg

leg so hot u fry an eg
kiwifarms.net
Maddow could retire tomorrow with more money, more views, and more influence than Nick will ever have. Growth doesn't matter if the upper limit of your growth is abject failure. Being oppressed is not a measure of success.
 

Rekkington

Obama chuckled. "You mean the chaos emeralds?"
kiwifarms.net
Maddow could retire tomorrow with more money, more views, and more influence than Nick will ever have. Growth doesn't matter if the upper limit of your growth is abject failure. Being oppressed is not a measure of success.
"Increasing success doesn't matter if the highest you go is being a FAILURE" lol
 

GranDuke

kiwifarms.net
I'm not sure what beating someone like Stelter or Maddow in youtube views is supposed to mean. Someone like Maddow is spreading propaganda on TV and thats what she/he is getting paid for. Youtube is a side gig, while to someone like Fuentes its all there is for him.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: tantric_depressive

Rekkington

Obama chuckled. "You mean the chaos emeralds?"
kiwifarms.net
I'm not sure what beating someone like Stelter or Maddow in youtube views is supposed to mean. Someone like Maddow is spreading propaganda on TV and thats what she/he is getting paid for. Youtube is a side gig, while to someone like Fuentes its all there is for him.
I don't know why this is so weirdly hard to understand for people but here we go
Maddow and Stelter are popular, because they are buoyed by the mainstream, and even considering that, their views are low. CNN in general has very bad numbers compared to Fox. If you want a direct comparison on their level, look at Tucker Carlson who absolutely murders them on every single metric and more or less talks about exactly what Nick is, minus the more overt racial stuff. This is the main point I was making, that Nick's views are not extreme or unpopular, and his popularity would be much higher if they weren't actively trying to take him down. And in the realm of even mainstream media, his ideological opponents are the bottom of the pile.
The secondary point being, even in the realm of YouTube views, Nick achieves very impressive organic numbers with zero promotion, zero commercials, and with the platforms actively working against him. On the high end I've seen clips with 100k views, on the CNN low end I see 100K views, which is to say that there is overlap between this so called political pariah and one of the biggest and scummiest mainstream news organizations in America. That matters, for all the reasons I have (multiple times, very simply) explained.

For some reason this turned into someone saying "well Maddow is richer so Nick will fail forever," and if you end up in a position where you're defending Rachel Maddow's bank account you should probably suck a dick until comatose.
Once again, I am no fan of his show and I do not follow him while I am familiar with him, but again if you're up in here saying Brian Stelter is a winner cause what he does is so cool and popular (while, like I pointed out before, holding televised roundtables about "why aren't they all listening to us?" and publishing an entire book about it) you may be in gaylog territory.
 

Pointless Pedant

Dancing the electric paegan love song
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Tucker Carlson is also really different from Nick personality wise. He's a middle aged married man, while Fuentes sounds like a 4chan incel type. Personality matters as much as political positions in terms of popularity and people tend to find people who ramble on about "e girls" obnoxious in general.
 

Terrorist

Osama bin Ladkin
kiwifarms.net
Nick isn't trying to make a name for himself in extreme politics, he's trying to make a name for himself in mainstream politics by showing his politics aren't extreme.
Fuentes has no idea what he wants - one day he's a full-on white nationalist, the next he's an innocent Christian Trump supporter without a bigoted bone in his body who rejects racism. Nobody on either side of that equation buys his act.

He is a dissident and wants to transgress norms, but at the same time isn't cut out for the hardships of life as an open dissident and craves mainstream respect (which leads to another question - how much longer can he keep this up? how long until he buckles). Impossible to have this cake and eat it too.
 

KiwiJoe

Anime Jacinda Ardern
kiwifarms.net
When I first heard of Nick and read through this thread, I thought he was just some politics streamer/closeted homosexual. And whilst Nick is nowhere near as smart as he pretends to be "ironically", he definitely runs circles around most personalities in his sphere of politics. Which is an insult to the sphere, and only a partial compliment towards Nick.

At the very least, he's had the most success in breaking into the more mainstream side of politics. Richard Spencer has more of a following, but that following hasn't warranted a serious rebuttal from people on the fringes of the mainstream. Richard Spencer and his following is who they roll out to demonise the far-right, and he's only dealt with in that capacity. Nick actually got Charlie Kirk and TPUSA to actually try and reply to his points on immigration, and booed him off of campus.

This is all pretty minor league stuff, but considering the Marxist/left wing shit we see today was once just a fringe on Tumblr and other online forums, I don't think it's fair to write Nick off as going nowhere.
>At the very least, he's had the most success in breaking into the more mainstream side of politics. Richard Spencer has more of a following, but that following hasn't warranted a serious rebuttal from people on the fringes of the mainstream. Richard Spencer and his following is who they roll out to demonise the far-right, and he's only dealt with in that capacity. Nick actually got Charlie Kirk and TPUSA to actually try and reply to his points on immigration, and booed him off of campus.

Uh, what? Under what circumstances today does Spencer have a larger following than Nick? He may have had a larger following than Nick, back in 2017, maybe 2018. But 2019 and from now-on he essentially cucked most of Spencer's viewer base into his little TradCat mafia, and he's essentially irrelevant. Last I remember was when Soleimani got bombed all that Spencer did was paste an Iranian flag emoji and was like "GRRR! TRUMP! WHY YOU KILLED MY NIGGA SOLEIMANI!"
 

Kenobi

kiwifarms.net
is this true? I know that Chinese and Chinese influenced companies have the tendency to inflate viewership, but what evidence is there for this dlive and why would dlive inflate his viewership. The staff at dlive has been very hostile to nick
Nothing concrete.
PPP and godwinson who usally get around 200-300 viewers a stream on youtube go on dlive and they get from 1-1.5k viewers. They would consitantly get 3-5 times the viewers that they got on youtube troughout several streams.
As dlive is a much smaller plattform with a lot smaller viewerbase this is completly unlogical they were also talking about topics unrelated to the usual content on dlive.
Ralphs chat is about as fast as a 60 viewers channel on youtube. Even tough he has around 750 "viewers" on dlive.
For a while you could inflate your live viewer count by opening more tabs in your browser.
The current theory for the inflation of viewers is to seem more popular to potential investors and to attract bigger content creators to the plattform by showing that you can get an audience on the plattform.
 

Rekkington

Obama chuckled. "You mean the chaos emeralds?"
kiwifarms.net
Nothing concrete.
PPP and godwinson who usally get around 200-300 viewers a stream on youtube go on dlive and they get from 1-1.5k viewers. They would consitantly get 3-5 times the viewers that they got on youtube troughout several streams.
As dlive is a much smaller plattform with a lot smaller viewerbase this is completly unlogical they were also talking about topics unrelated to the usual content on dlive.
I think the size of the platform has everything to do with it, and how new videos are promoted/listed. This is the rule for every new video platform, while viewers overall may be lower, if you're just launching a stream or publishing a video you can get more valuable real estate for people who just browse the home page. I think Ryan Dawson has some exclusive deal with BrandNewTube where his show has permanent placement in the header of the page.
Also, everyone's known for years that even people who subscribe to certain YouTube channels won't be alerted that someone has gone live, or they don't turn up in searches, etc. This is why people were waiting so long for BitChute to figure out their streaming and advertising shit, because a lot of their core audience has probably abandoned YouTube (or been banned) and just hang out on these smaller platforms.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: tantric_depressive

Pointless Pedant

Dancing the electric paegan love song
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Fuentes has no idea what he wants - one day he's a full-on white nationalist, the next he's an innocent Christian Trump supporter without a bigoted bone in his body who rejects racism. Nobody on either side of that equation buys his act.

He is a dissident and wants to transgress norms, but at the same time isn't cut out for the hardships of life as an open dissident and craves mainstream respect (which leads to another question - how much longer can he keep this up? how long until he buckles). Impossible to have this cake and eat it too.
By "buckles" do you mean go visibly mad on camera? Because the catboy date thing was already that honestly.
 
Tags
None