Thank You Elon... Cut To The Chase

Jump to Last Post 1-14 of 14 discussions (140 posts)
  1. Sharlee01 profile image88
    Sharlee01posted 6 weeks ago

    https://hubstatic.com/17019679_f1024.jpg

    "X owner Elon Musk blasted actor Robert De Niro on his social media platform Friday after the "Heat" star compared former President Trump to infamous dictators Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini. Musk replied to a clip of De Niro’s statements from MSNBC’s "11th Hour with Stephanie Ruhle," stating that Trump’s policies "bore no resemblance" to those of both dictators and declared that the actor’s latest anti-Trump tirade "makes no sense." During the segment – which aired on MSNBC Thursday evening – De Niro declared that Trump "can’t be anywhere near the office of the presidency," and called him "sick" and "narcissistic."  https://ground.news/article/elon-musk-c … ter_e8c434

    I'm a die-hard Elon Musk fan, and let me tell you, it's not just about fanfare; it's about admiration for his remarkable qualities. He's got this incredible knack for common sense, fearlessly speaks his mind, and, let's face it, he's one of a kind. There aren't many cut from the same cloth, you know?

    In this incident, he definitely asserted his dominance over Robert De Niro.

    Thoughts

    1. abwilliams profile image68
      abwilliamsposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      Hollywood elites aren't immune to TDS, any more than they are immune to Covid; not sure how DeNiro has fared against Covid, but he has a bad, bad case of TDS!!

      I have a lot of respect for Musk too Sharlee.

      1. Sharlee01 profile image88
        Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        It's like they've been bitten by the Tinseltown bug otherwise known as TDS. Maybe they need some comedic relief to balance out all that drama. Quick, someone send DeNiro a script for a comedy before he starts auditioning for the next season of "Political Debates: The Musical" !!

        1. abwilliams profile image68
          abwilliamsposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          HeHe...
          Gosh, common sense and a sense of humor, hello there my fellow conservative friend!

          1. Sharlee01 profile image88
            Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            I will say I believe we are birds of a feather... LOL

    2. Springboard profile image82
      Springboardposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      Musk is calling out the pure insanity of anyone who would even remotely consider someone like Donald Trump to be anything like these evil dictators on murderous paths.

      Because it IS insane.

      They're unhinged. All of them. That's the bottom line. The one thing, and some may disagree, about MOST liberals is that they are not much unlike children told they could go to the park and then are denied their day in the park. They throw tantrums. They go off the deep end. It's the end of the world to them and anything against their day in the park is evil and dangerous.

      Perhaps even deadly.

      They're not thinking things through. They don't really know what they are saying. Because their day in the park has been denied and they just can't handle it.

      1. Valeant profile image87
        Valeantposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        Or we can just look back at Trump's four years and note that his rhetoric did have violent and deadly outcomes.  El Paso, Buffalo, January 6th, Cesar Sayoc, Cincinnati FBI Office attack, Paul Pelosi attack.  These were all directly linked to Trump's violent rhetoric.  Let alone a rise in hate crimes against Chinese American citizens thanks to his 'China Virus' slur.  Let alone the thousands of domestic terror threats to government officials from the MAGA base that have happened.

        We're thinking through things just fine.  It's the right that ignores the outcomes of his violent rhetoric because they are in a cult now.  And being in a cult means you cannot openly criticize the leader or risk being kicked out of the cult.  It'd be simply sad if not for the dangerous and deadly consequences that have taken place.  That's the truly insane part - what MAGA will seemingly ignore - violence, racist rhetoric like 'Coco Chow' and 'China Virus,' illegally trying to remain in office, organizing and inciting a domestic terror attack on Congress because they didn't get their way in an election.  Talk about throwing tantrums - January 6th was the greatest childish tantrum in the history of our country.  So, save your projection.  It's easy to see.

        1. Springboard profile image82
          Springboardposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          The covid virus came from a lab in Wuhan, China. Why did Trump call it that? Because it was denied it came from China. Because they said it came from someone eating bats when in reality there was known "gain of function" research happening in a Chinese government-controlled lab.

          But I get it, everything is racist nowadays. Especially when it can be applied to Trump.

          As for this notion that Trump often had "violent rhetoric," that's just made up, frankly. Even the J6 event was preceded by "protest peacefully" and "respect law and order."

          Are we to hold Chuck Schumer to account for the attempted murder of Justice Kavanaugh after he told crowds, "There will be hell to pay" and "you won't know what hit you?"

          Oh wait. It's okay if Democrats use inciteful words.

          I get what you are wanting to accomplish. The reality is that Trump was and is none of the things he is accused of. He repeatedly talked about patriotism, American exceptionalism, love of country, honoring the police and honoring veterans, he vowed to keep America out of wars and did, he sought after American interests, respected the flag, respected the Constitution, respected the National Anthem, and the list goes on.

          As for MAGA being a cult, it's just another word you guys like to use in place of having an actual argument. Just like all the other words that replace arguments you guys like to use.

          Racist, homophobe, misogynist—you pick which one applies today.

          You talk about a cult and yet at the same time our side can't agree on ANYTHING. Were you absent from the Speaker debacles? Cults stick together. That certainly didn't happen there.

          Anyway...

          1. Valeant profile image87
            Valeantposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            Actually, it's not been confirmed that Covid came from a lab.  Some say there's a possibility, but that is not a confirmation.  And yes, calling a virus by the name of the country and directing hate towards that country is absolutely racist.  Calling someone Coco Chow is absolutely racist.  Calling out the most basic examples of racism isn't that hard, but these denials by Trump's cult is just another point of evidence that it is a cult.

            Just as the denials of Trump's violent rhetoric having real-world consequences is another point of evidence.  Mass shooters are echoing his language.  January 6th defendants testified to what message they received from his words - peaceful once early in the speech, then fight ten times after it.  Something you couldn't even bring yourself to mention in the usual denialism we see from his supporters.  And the 'respect law and order' post was done by an aide because Trump couldn't bring himself to post something to stop the violence at the moment police were being assaulted.  He was too busy posting that Pence was not going to stop the certification, further inciting the violence that had been going on for an hour when he made that post.

            Trump's words and actions allow many of the words you listed to apply to him - racist, misogynist, xenophobe.  They apply based on the things he does and says.

            As for using the speaker debate to argue the denial of MAGA being a cult, there are still some non-MAGA reps out there.  While there are more in the Senate than in the House, arguing that MAGA hasn't fully taken over Congress as a disproval of the cult existing isn't really the proof you think it is.  Those that support Trump will deny any of his negatives - from his racism, to his illegality, to his immoral behavior.

            1. Springboard profile image82
              Springboardposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

              There are things that are just obvious. A lab in Wuhan, China is doing gain of function research on coronaviruses, and suddenly a virus comes from China that originated somewhere very near or in and around where that lab is.

              Denying the obvious is the art of clutching at straws to try to effectively deny the truth.

              Beyond that, that it was so ADAMANTLY disputed at all, outright calling anyone who even suggested it right out of an asylum—kinda makes you think, yeah. It's PROBABLY right.

              Why conceal the truth? Well, that's another question, isn't it? Because that virus did apparently have a big impact on the election, right? And MAYBE it was more than we thought it was. The reason?

              I know, I know. Tin hatty. But come on. China was pissed about the tariffs. Fauci had some involvement with the gain of function research. Trump and Fauci didn't exactly see eye to eye. The Democrats had tried everything they could to get Trump out. All of it failed. Release a virus and maybe this will be our Katrina moment, folks.

              I don't necessarily believe any of that. But I also don't think believing it would require the same level of suspension of disbelief required in writing certain kinds of fiction.

              As for the racism notion, I'm just going to politely disagree. When your side lost the definition of racism and turned it into simply being someone who disagrees with the left, it mostly lost any value as a word at all, and just like the boy who cried wolf, you overused it, abused it, and it just can't be taken seriously anymore.

              The virus came from China. He called it a China virus. So what? I also dispute that Trump ever displayed hate towards China. He simply disagreed with China's practices and politics. Which, by the way, Americans have mostly always done.

              I am also not going to play with the cult argument because, well...we're not a cult except in your side's eyes. 'Nuff said on that.

              As for the word "fight," it's a massive stretch to suggest it implies other than what it implies. Fight does not mean what you want it to mean. Unions fight for better pay. Pro-Choicers fight for the right to choose. Lobbyists fight for their interests. Hell, the Democrats say they are fighting for democracy—whatever that means since we aren't a democracy. None of it means start throwing punches and storming buildings. It just means stand firm for what you believe in and be firm in your effort to have your interests heard.

      2. Sharlee01 profile image88
        Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        I agree 100%.

  2. Ken Burgess profile image76
    Ken Burgessposted 6 weeks ago

    Robert is an idiot... and a sellout... and hates America.

    That is all you need to know about him. 

    He, as well as Hollywood in general, has lost all credibility... they live in their own bubble... with those who run the MSM... and those in DC... they are by and large Communists trying to destroy America, time to stop beating around the bush, it is clear what they are trying to do, it is the product of allowing our Universities and Colleges to be taken over by Marxist, Socialist, Feminist ideology bent on destroying Western Nations and particularly America and its Constitution.

    When the WEF talks about you will own nothing and be happy about it... that is Communism... you will have no rights, you will own nothing, and you will be happy... or we will send you to a worker camp where you will slave away until you die, or we will put you on a operation table and harvest your organs, while you are alive.

    People need to wake up prior to November 2024 and realize the world can be a very dark place, and we are fast-tracking to very bad times under Biden.

    1. Credence2 profile image78
      Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      "De Niro declared that Trump "can’t be anywhere near the office of the presidency," and called him "sick" and "narcissistic"

      Regardless of what you all may think, I believe Mr. DeNero is right on target and that Musk is just another Trump sycophant. I always suspected that he wasn't any good from very beginning....

      Just my opinion......

      1. Sharlee01 profile image88
        Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        "can’t be anywhere near the office of the presidency,"

        Looks like De Niro's trying to pull a "Men in Black" memory wipe on Trump's presidency! But hey, once you've been president, you can't un-president yourself!

        1. Credence2 profile image78
          Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          I see that you still retain your sense of humor, Sharlee

          1. Sharlee01 profile image88
            Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            I am trying.  I mean if I don't laugh I will cry and have puffy eyes.

      2. Ken Burgess profile image76
        Ken Burgessposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        When people like Elon Musk and a slew of others from Mike Pompeo to Chris Sununu say they now support Trump, no matter what, I think that is very telling.

        People that undermined him, helped tank his 2020 re-election, helped derail his first term, said he was unfit for President are supporting him now.

        Because they know... like every non-Communist or pro-American knows... the alternative is so incredibly worse there is no choice but to support Trump.

        1. Credence2 profile image78
          Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          "Because they know... like every non-Communist or pro-American knows... the alternative is so incredibly worse there is no choice but to support Trump."

          You really believe all of this, don't you, Ken?

        2. Sharlee01 profile image88
          Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          I agree, Ken. I believe the individuals you mentioned share a common characteristic that stands out to me — they all seem to prioritize common sense. Just my perspective.

        3. Valeant profile image87
          Valeantposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          And yet, 40 of 44 members of Trump's cabinet will not support him for a second term.  Because they know...like everyone in 2020, that Trump was totally unfit for office.  No matter how much his base wants to rewrite the history of his failed first term.

      3. GA Anderson profile image89
        GA Andersonposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        So you always suspected Musk was no good? Are you sure your "always" didn't start until just a couple of years ago? Did you think so when he supported Obama in 2012, or Clinton in 2016, or Biden in 2020?

        Or, did it start in 2022 when he broke with the extremism of the liberal's agenda?

        As for being a sycophant . . . if there is any truth to the scuttlebutt that a Trump-initiated March meeting (Musk describes it as Trump stopping by his breakfast table) was about money and he came away empty doesn't sound very sycophantish to me.

        Surely your idea of a sycophant involves more than simply disagreeing with your perspective, right?

        GA

      4. Sharlee01 profile image88
        Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        "Robert De Niro on his social media platform Friday after the "Heat" star compared former President Trump to infamous dictators Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini. Musk replied to a clip of De Niro’s statements from MSNBC’s "11th Hour with Stephanie Ruhle," stating that Trump’s policies "bore no resemblance" to those of both dictators and declared that the actor’s latest anti-Trump tirade "makes no sense." During the segment – which aired on MSNBC Thursday evening – De Niro declared that Trump "can’t be anywhere near the office of the presidency," and called him "sick" and "narcissistic."

        Do you think Trump acted like a dictator during his presidency and should be likened to Hitler? A simple yes or no would suffice.

        Isn't it peculiar that De Niro didn't consider Trump's four years in office when he said Trump "can't be anywhere near the office of the presidency"?

        From my perspective, De Niro seemed to overlook Trump's actual performance and instead made a general statement. If Trump's performance were to be objectively assessed, there's little evidence to support the claim that he resembled a dictator. If he did, I would expect more substantial backing for such assertions.

        1. Credence2 profile image78
          Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          I don't want to ignore your question. No, not somuch during his term, only because he was restrained.  But his muttering as to what he would do if President in 2025 sounds very much dictatorial, so it is no and yes. Trump reminds me more of Benito Mussolini.

          Trump's attitude and anti-democratic leanings concerns many of us which is why both me and Mr. DeNiro just as soon that he not be reelected.

          1. Sharlee01 profile image88
            Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            Thank you for your response. While I don't see evidence of Trump aspiring to be a dictator, I acknowledge his outspokenness and the potential for his statements to be taken out of context. When evaluating his policies and performance, I haven't observed anything that suggests he harbors dictatorial ambitions. I scrutinize his actions and statements carefully and look for and consider the full context rather than selective presentation, to form a balanced assessment of Trump.

      5. Springboard profile image82
        Springboardposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        If you go way back to an old interview with Donald Trump when he was asked if he'd ever consider running for president, who said, "Only if I ever feel the country needs me," those are not the words of a future dictator. Those are the words of a patriot ready to serve his country if he ever determines it may be in peril.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image88
          Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          Absolutely agree, it's evident that Trump has consistently been a lightning rod for criticism and opposition, yet his dedication to America remains steadfast. Reflecting on his old interview where he expressed willingness to run for president only if he felt the country needed him. In my view, it's clear that his motivation stems from a sense of duty rather than mere ambition. Despite facing relentless scrutiny and challenges, Trump has continued to advocate for policies that he believes will benefit the nation. Take his efforts to revitalize the economy through tax cuts and deregulation, which spurred job creation and economic growth. He recognizes America's problems and wants to work on solutions, as he did in his years in the White House.  What we have now is a man that creates problems, and has no idea how to solve them.

          Additionally, I feel Trump's focus on strengthening national security, renegotiating trade deals to prioritize American interests, and confronting geopolitical adversaries have all been driven by a desire to safeguard and advance the well-being of America.  While yes, some may see his methods may be controversial and his approach divisive, Trump's actions demonstrate a true commitment to America's prosperity and security, rooted in a genuine belief in America's potential and resilience.

          1. Willowarbor profile image60
            Willowarborposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            "renegotiating trade deals to prioritize American interests,"

            Do you feel that Trump's Chinese tariffs were a benefit to our economy?

            1. Springboard profile image82
              Springboardposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

              While Trump's Chinese tariffs did not necessarily completely change China's trade policies, at the same time there was no added cost to Americans as a result of them, even though they were anticipated and even Trump knew it might add at least some cost.

              You have to keep in mind that the yuan depreciated against the dollar and that effectively erased the cost of the tariffs to any buyers using dollars to buy them.

              Generally, I have never been a strong supporter of tariffs as a rule. However, I quickly understood that the reason Trump went for them was to bring negotiations to the table to address the uneven trade, patent theft, and other issues. These are things that affect the American worker, and so even though the expected outcome never happened, there was nothing that wasn't noble about the cause behind them.

              For whatever its worth, if you care to know, the tariffs were one of the only things Biden did not oppose and did not reverse. In fact, Biden kept the tariffs in place AND went HARDER on the Chinese, even threatening to INCREASE the tariffs.

              Probably not something CNN will tell you, so there it is.

              1. Willowarbor profile image60
                Willowarborposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                What does CNN have to do with it??

                "At the same time there was no added cost to Americans as a result of them, even though they were anticipated and even Trump knew it might add at least some cost."

                "Several studies have examined the cost of the  tariffs on the U.S. economy. For example, economists Mary Amiti, Stephen J. Redding, and David Weinstein showed that by the end of the first year that the tariffs were in place, U.S. real income declined by $1.4 billion per month.

                More recently, trade analysts Tori Smith and Tom Lee from the American Action Forum found that U.S. consumers largely bore the brunt of the tariffs, paying a total of $48 billion with half of this figure paid by U.S. firms that rely on intermediate inputs from China. A recent report by the United States International Trade Commission agreed that the cost of the tariffs was passed through to U.S. importers."

                a 2023 study, the US International Trade Commission said that “U.S. importers bore nearly the full cost of these tariffs.” 

                Overall, the US economy lost jobs due to the tit-for-tat tariffs that took effect during the Trump administration, according to..

                https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/ … trade-war/

                A study from St. Louis Federal Reserve economists provides more evidence that tariffs played a role in job losses. It showed states more exposed to US tariffs on imports from China experienced “lower increases or even decreases” in employment and output between 2018 and 2019.

                Tariffs were meant to boost US manufacturers, but they lost jobs too
                Trump’s tariffs were imposed, in part, to boost the US manufacturing sector but that industry suffered a loss of jobs as well, according to at least one study.

                Federal Reserve economists found a net decrease in manufacturing employment due to the tariffs in 2019. That’s mostly because goods became more expensive to US  businesses and consumers.

                https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/ … 086pap.pdf

                https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.33.4.187

                1. Springboard profile image82
                  Springboardposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Great. More articles linked to from liberal think tanks to prove the liberals are right. Hmm. lol

                  1. Willowarbor profile image60
                    Willowarborposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                    Liberal think tanks?

                    Established in 1885, the AEA is a non-profit, non-partisan, scholarly association dedicated to the discussion and publication of economics research. 

                    The Tax Foundation is an "independent tax policy research organization". It is cited in the media as a nonpartisan or bipartisan organization, and is also described as business-friendly, conservative, and center-right.

                    But let me go ahead and throw in this...

                    From 2019...from THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION...

                    "Two separate surveys of the U.S. Purchasing Manager Index, an indicator for manufacturing employment and output, are now seeing a contraction, or close to it, for the first time in more than three years.

                    Businesses cite slowing global demand, a shift in supply chains, and increasing uncertainty in U.S.-China economic relations, as reasons why the U.S. might continue to see slower economic growth in the second half of 2019.

                    Researchers from the Federal Reserve Board estimate that trade uncertainty has already cost the U.S. as much as 0.8 percent of GDP. That’s because tariffs are taxes, and American businesses and consumers are paying higher taxes every day."


                    https://www.heritage.org/trade/commenta … r-easy-win

                    Lol Heritage cites one of the studies (from the Federal reserve economists) I cited... go figure


                    And in case folks aren't familiar with the foundation..

                    "The Heritage Foundation is a conservative think tank that promotes public policy research and analysis based on limited government, individual freedom, free enterprise, traditional American values, and a strong national defense. "

            2. Sharlee01 profile image88
              Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

              Assessing the effectiveness of Trump's trade deal with China depends on various factors and views. The deal, formally known as the "Phase One" trade agreement, was not until signed in January 2020. Its primary objectives were if I understand it correctly to address issues related to intellectual property theft, forced technology transfer, agriculture, financial services, and currency manipulation.

              Some have argued that the deal has had positive impacts.  For instance, China committed to purchasing an additional $200 billion worth of American goods and services over two years, which could benefit sectors like agriculture and manufacturing.  China has not totally kept this part of the deal, most likely due to COVID. But they have improved on what they are purchasing over the past years. See chart.
              However, critics argue that the Tump deal didn't go far enough in addressing structural issues in the U.S.-China trade relationship. Some of these issues persist, such as China's state subsidies for domestic industries and non-tariff barriers that limit market access for foreign companies. Moreover, the trade tensions between the two countries have not dissipated, and there have been instances where both sides have accused each other of not fulfilling their commitments under the agreement.
              Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic and its economic repercussions have complicated the assessment of the deal's effectiveness. The pandemic disrupted global supply chains and dampened economic activity, affecting trade flows between the U.S. and China.  In my view, any trade deal needs more time to evaluate. It was not all bad, and naturally, I feel COVID was a true stumbling block. He is campaigning that he will do further work on trade deals. I think this might cause some short-term problems, but in the end, we need better trade deals.

              https://hubstatic.com/17024530.png

          2. Springboard profile image82
            Springboardposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            A sense of duty is a great way of putting it, because that's exactly what it is and what it is about. Like I have said many times, why would a billionaire subject himself to this other than to right the wrongs and do what he feels is the right thing to do? He could have easily just said screw it, settled into Mar-A-Lago, went back to his businesses and enjoyed his money. He KNEW they'd come after him if he ran. He ran anyway.

            Your comments were all spot on IMO.

            1. Sharlee01 profile image88
              Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

              Today on Truth Trump spoke out and stated above all safeguarding and asserting his constitutional rights remained his top priority.

              He quoted Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death,"

              I fully concur that this individual had the option to walk away and lead a fulfilling life surrounded by loved ones. However, instead, they opted to confront the vile powers in Washington. Despite facing relentless attacks and smear campaigns, he remains resolute in his fight.

              He has revealed to many of us the extent of corruption within our government and the morally bankrupt tendencies that plague those in power.

        2. Ken Burgess profile image76
          Ken Burgessposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          We have two choices.

          The Biden Administration - Democrats
          CRT, DEI, Equity, Transgender protections, Child Mutilation support, etc.
          Spending 1 Trillion dollars more every 3 months than we take in.
          Agitating or involved in 3 different regional conflicts (WWIII).
          Oh yeah, bringing in millions of foreigners and supporting them.

          Or Trump, and hopefully a reversal of ALL of the Above.
          And a de-escalation of the global conflicts Biden has funded.
          And Americans first, ahead of foreigners.

          1. Springboard profile image82
            Springboardposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            Gosh. I need a like button here.

          2. Sharlee01 profile image88
            Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            Trump 2024!

        3. Credence2 profile image78
          Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          Springboard, actions speak louder than words. Despite the fact that conservatives has consistently downplayed  and lied about January 6, 2021 and the period of time surround it, regarding its magnitude and significance, the events of January 6th hardly can be described as Trump not having been involved.

          I focus on the fake electors scheme and Trump's pressuring Mike Pence to disobey the law as set in stone centuries ago. And now Trump is in such a hurry to acquire absolute immunity for crimes he claims he never committed? What was done was the act of a tyrant, unprecedented in American history. Yet, for the conservatives, he is OK?

          No,Springboard, I will not telerate those that steal the value of my vote subverting the entire electoral process. Regardless, of what he says, he has shown to me that he is a tyrant of the lowest order.

          So, I don't want him anywhere near the White House, my house and even your house.

          1. Ken Burgess profile image76
            Ken Burgessposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            As we DON'T know how many 'Mail in Ballots' were fraudulent in those States that allowed ballots to go out to every voter... and also changed other rules to that election... how can one blame anyone for questioning what obviously IS questionable?

            As we DO know that the FBI in some way helped foster and foment what we saw occur on Jan 6th... how are we supposed to know how much of what occurred was intended by NON-FBI Americans?

            How much of it was a frame job to destroy Trump's reputation?

            Is our own NSA/FBI working to manipulate the American public?

            The same FBI that made sure the Hunter Biden laptop story was squelched... despite them having the laptop in their possession and knowing it was real?

            There is LOTS to question and MISTRUST.

            We have come a long way Credence from you saying:
            "No one is talking about picking winners and losers; it is the process of balancing the Capitalist dynamo with its industriousness and innovation and the drive for greater and greater profit against the need to protect the public safety, the rights of labor, the environment."

            The polarization has become extreme... is it by design?

            Is it like the old saying goes "Divided we fall?"

            1. Credence2 profile image78
              Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

              More conspiracy theories, Ken?

              That quote is still accurate and I have not changed my mind about it. So, I am not a Communist or Socialist.

              1. Valeant profile image87
                Valeantposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                Right?  So many conspiracies in there.  Especially being convinced that the FBI 'helped foster and foment January 6th.'  I find that one to be really ridiculous.

                1. Credence2 profile image78
                  Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                  The FBI was under the control of the Trump administration and yet they were working against him, sure.......

          2. Springboard profile image82
            Springboardposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            Credence2, you can call me Jim.

            I think you are wrong about the "questions" conservatives have about J6, and even about the election itself that your side is calling lies. We see irregularities and things that don't make sense.

            I am not one personally in the camp of, "the election was stolen," or "J6 was a staged event." The camp I am in is, "I don't know if the election WAS or WASN'T stolen and I don't know how and WHO coordinated J6," and I am in that camp because we DON'T know, anyone who asked the questions was banned, silenced or ripped to shreds financially or otherwise persecuted in some way or another. There has been no real investigation into anything. Just, "take our word for it."

            Makes you kind of think someone is hiding something, and maybe that's because there's a really good reason to hide it.

            Calling stolen election claims lies is a simple copout. When so many people are asking the question, why NOT look into it? Honestly. Without bias. Why not?

            Hey, your side had questions, right? Isn't that what lead us to that long, drawn out Russia collusion investigation? Nothing was found. Great. But at least we looked into it, right?

            Isn't it important for the American people to know our elections are above board? Isn't it important to know our vote counts and are counted truthfully?

            The thing is, I don't question the election result because Trump lost. I question the election result because it didn't make sense, and because I care about the integrity of elections. If I can go back to previous elections my side lost and fully understand WHY my side lost, why can't I find the reason THIS time?

            I mean, one big question I have is how is it that Trump received 11 million MORE votes in 2020 than he did in 2016 and still lost? Your side said, "he lost support." That doesn't jive with the numbers. And Biden got 81 million votes? The highest number of votes ever in the history of American elections? Campaigning from his basement?

            And then there's those mail in ballots. You know, the ones that once counted completely turned the tables in Biden's favor? Isn't there something suspect about that? Where did the votes come from? Do we know they were actually the people who were named on the ballot or did someone fill the ballot out for them? Where were the checks and balances? Why were the mail in ballots so important to the Democrats at the time? Was it because of covid like they said, or was it some other reason? And why was it that almost all of the mail in ballots were votes for Biden?

            Come on, man.

            Like I said, nothing is absolute. But if you can't see the irregularities, you are either blind, stupid, or you just don't want to know the truth. Which is it?

            You can call me an election denier, a MAGA extremist, a cult member, or whatever other name you want to make up for me. The truth is I am an American who is that first, party supporter second, and Trump supporter third. I care about the Republic. I care about preserving it. I ask the questions BECAUSE I care and because I think it matters.

            I couldn't care less about losing an election fair and square. I care about losing my COUNTRY when people don't play fair, and no one bothers to check.

            1. Valeant profile image87
              Valeantposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

              'Like I said, nothing is absolute. But if you can't see the irregularities, you are either blind, stupid, or you just don't want to know the truth. Which is it?'

              Of course there were irregularities.  The election was held during a once-in-a-lifetime pandemic and 31 states changed election processes to protect their citizens.  Not just battleground states.  So, when there were only challenges in the states Trump lost, that came across as quite disingenuous.  Or that such changes had been done previously during state emergencies, such as when rick Scott changed his in Florida as Governor in 2018, and it was seen as good policy.  Just the latest example of changing norms to accommodate Trumpist-friendly outcomes.

              Let alone the blindness or stupidity to deny the amount of Americans Trump alienated during his four years in office.  His Covid response cost American lives and he lied to the American people about the dangers, costing lives.  When a crisis hit our country, Trump failed.  People lost jobs, businesses closed.  That allowed the higher-than-normal turnout, with many wanting a change in leadership.  Many Americans weren't voting for Biden, they were voting against Trump.  The election makes sense to those not in Trump's cult because it goes back to being allowed to see and then criticize his faults.  Which is just not something allowable for the current version of MAGA and the way they have been programmed since Trump stated he could shoot someone and not lose a vote.

              And if you're going to claim an election was fraudulent, have more than supposition and conspiracies.  Have more than fabricated facts that have gotten multiple attorneys representing the campaign to lose their law licenses.  Don't invent ballots being rolled in when looking at the normal ballot holders on video.  Don't invent a thumb drive when it's a piece of candy.  Have some actual hard evidence to back those claims.

              Irregular?  Absolutely.  There was a pandemic on and officials in 31 states wanted to protect people so they could exercise their Constitutional rights.  Only MAGA sees that as a bad thing, in the latest example of their cruelty towards their fellow citizens.

              1. Springboard profile image82
                Springboardposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                We will probably disagree, but here's the thing about that pandemic and the whole argument that the left continues to try to make about being concerned about the "safety of the American people."

                It wasn't REALLY a pandemic. Not like we would have expected. The Spanish flu, a real pandemic, killed over 10% of the entire world's population. Covid killed 0.08% of the entire world's population.

                I am not saying Covid wasn't bad. I am simply saying it was largely hyped and made out to be deadlier and scarier than the numbers clearly show it ever was.

                So, Covid is an excuse. It WAS an excuse. And NO ONE was EVER honest about the real threat or dangers it posed. We were just told, "It's bad. Trust us."

                How many people attending rallies with tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people, that Trump held, died? You'd think that would be headline capturing news, right? Okay, Herman Caine got sick and died. They blamed the rally. They blamed Trump. But was the rally really at fault? Was Trump really to blame?

                I mean, by your side's argument Trump would have handily lost the election simply because all of his supporters dropped dead from Covid. That didn't happen, of course, so what was the real danger? What was the real threat to go to the polls and vote? Virtually none. No more of a threat than it was for people to go to Walmart to get groceries.

                Beyond that, everyone wants to give the WHO and CDC all sorts of passes for the MILLION things they got wrong about Covid. "This was a new thing," everyone said. "How can we expect them to be right about things that were largely unknown?" Yet, Trump was supposed to have all the answers.

                And by the way, what did Biden do BETTER? Twice as many people died under Biden from Covid than died under Trump. Shall we blame Biden for HIS bungling of Covid which DOUBLED THE DEATH COUNT? Even after he mandated vaccines that didn't obviously work?

                Oh, I guess Biden just did the best he could, right? I mean, they were some REALLY bad decisions that put more people at risk and killed more people, but so long as it wasn't TRUMP making those bad decisions we can wipe the sweat off our brows and assume if Trump would have been elected it may have been much worse.

                As for the 2020 election question, what I have said all along is we never investigated it. The people who told us the fraudulent election claims were false and ridiculous were the same people who told us there was nothing to see.

                Why not ask the foxes how the hens are doing? There may be nothing left in the coop but bones and feathers, and perhaps a few sly foxes can climb into the coop and learn how to cluck, but it doesn't mean we can be assured the hens are fine unless someone actually goes into the coop to make sure.

              2. Ken Burgess profile image76
                Ken Burgessposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                OK, fine.

                But that was for the Pandemic.

                There is NO reason to keep those changes on the books for 2024... unless you want the same results... Mail In Ballots that can never be verified... Millions of Mail in Ballots that can never be tracked as to who they reached.  Mail in Ballots going out to people incapacitated or deceased.

                People selling their ballots (hard to do that when you have to show an ID and present yourself in person at the voting station), ballot harvesting... these are 3rd world issues for Nations that don't really have representation, just a simulation of choice. 

                The Pandemic is over... time to ensure those ballots are being cast by real voters... not fraudulently fabricated by those counting the votes.

                1. Springboard profile image82
                  Springboardposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                  They don't want the change. How best to have dead people, illegal immigrants, senile grandmas in nursing homes, poor people whose votes can be bought vote your way? If votes can be verified, or have to be, that means they have to be legitimate and then you have to actually do the work of the American people and earn votes.

            2. Credence2 profile image78
              Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

              Ok, Jim, it is.

              https://edition.cnn.com/2022/06/16/poli … index.html

              https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 … awsuits-l/

              None of Trump's allegations of voter fraud were considered valid by virtually every responsible source.  Even those in Trumps cabinet and entourage that would know told him the truth. So what is left is Trump's inane mutterings and conspiracy theories that upon close examination don't hold water. If you can't prove and substantiate  "irregularities" as fact, they mean nothing.

              No responsible leader, in my mind, would keep the country on edge over information and assertions that he could not prove, whining for almost 4 years.  Imagine if either Gore or Bush had done that in 2000, when the election was even closer? So are elections are not above board because Trump, the losing candidate, says so?

              Valeant has made many cogent points in this regard that I need not repeat. The points you make regarding the ballots and such are mere conjecture on your part without the weight of evidence and proof. All this stuff about his campaigning from his basement, is just more of that. Trump lost in the Electoral college in 5 crucial states, the votes of urban areas did him in. I take my hat off to the residents of Phoenix, Philadelphia, Milwaukee, Atlanta and Detroit. Voters that Trump and his entourage just as soon not have access to the ballot. But they did and my side won. At this point, I say, too bad, get over it.

              So, Jim, I already know the truth.

              One has to be blind ANDstupid not to connect the dots regarding the illegal fiasco that involved so many states on J6. It is like Trump holds the smoking gun, but someone else pulled the trigger. I am appalled as to how far you MAGA people will go to provide cover for this excuse for a human being.

              The sooner he is removed from the political scene, one way or the other, the better.

              Welcome, Jim, to the forum. Just another conservative voice, I see.

              1. Springboard profile image82
                Springboardposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                What is a "responsible" source? I have to question it since your side often redefines words or throws in certain verbiage to make it sound legitimate. Like how "illegal immigrants" has been changed to, "migrants" to sort of negate from the fact that they are people coming here illegally. But I digress.

                I'll just go with, "a responsible source is defined as one that agrees with your narrative."

                As I have said time and time again whenever the left tries to point to, "Well, this Trump supporter said this, that, or the other thing," you can't take that as proof of anything.

                Look at what the bureaucracy has DONE to anyone who asks questions? Ban them. Bankrupt them. Make fools of them. Even arrest them and launch them into bogus investigations just to tear them down.

                Some people aren't up for that. They'll shut up or tell whatever story they are told to tell just to save their own asses. It's that deep state we keep warning your side about that you seem to want to ignore. Probably because you THINK they're on your side.

                One day they won't be. Trust me. So, the time to question them is now before it's too late for even you.

                As for conjecture, your claim the election was NOT stolen is as much conjecture as someone claiming it was because again, NO ONE HAS INVESTIGATED IT.

                It's their word and we're supposed to just sit back and accept it as truth.

                1. Credence2 profile image78
                  Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Look at the links, Jim.

                  Sixty lawsuits where 60 court rulings said that Trump was all wet and his claims had no proof. You don't consider the judiciary as a "responsible source" ? Well, I do, and that is good enough for me. Do you really believe that all these courts and their rulings were partisan?

                  You buy in to all that Deep State stuff, I see. I don't like Republicans or their agenda and I am reminded every day by folks like you and others.

                  We have had 44 presidential administrations prior to Trump, but now we, after over 230 years, want to give absolute immunity to the President to commit what ever crimes he wants while in office. Trump is "so different and unique" that none of the rules previous office holders complied with is applicable to Him? Utter nonsense.

                  Trump, tyranny and fascism certainly isn't on my side, and I abhor it all.

                  1. Sharlee01 profile image88
                    Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                    "Sixty lawsuits where 60 court rulings said that Trump was all wet and his claims had no proof. "

                    In regard your Politco link ---

                    "Biden’s figure is correct. Trump wasn't an official plaintiff in all of them; some were his allies or supporters echoing Trump’s claims.

                    The lawsuits failed for VARIOUS reasons. Some had errors in the filings, others lacked standing. Mainly, the allegations lacked proof."

                    "Is that accurate? Yes. More than 60 lawsuits brought by Trump and his allies failed because they were unable to prove their allegations. Some lawsuits were dismissed due to errors in the filings and other procedural issues."   Politico article End Quote

                    Each case was different, many were filed in the wrong courts, and some had errors in filing. It is fair to look at the full picture, not just blurbs from OP articles. In my view, this is what some do, and then they run with it. Not really fair.

                  2. Springboard profile image82
                    Springboardposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                    Why Trump? Why now? Suddenly law and order matters? Because he's winning. That's the only reason. And because the real threat he poses is not to the country. The threat he poses is to the power hungry, the deep state, and the exposition of what MIGHT have really happened in 2020.

                    You can't dismiss at all, the tenacity and vigor that has been efforted here not only now, but throughout Trump's entire term in office, to remove him. We have been alive long enough to have lived through many presidencies and elections and I have never seen anything as wicked as what has been done to Trump.

                    And it begs the question why. Something just really smells about all of this. The suspicions were not stoked because we lost in 2020. Suspicions were stoked because we saw what we saw happen over the past 7+ years and it makes us wonder.

                    What's really going on here?

                2. Sharlee01 profile image88
                  Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                  well said

                3. Valeant profile image87
                  Valeantposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                  This claim that no one has investigated it is patently false.  Even when put in capital letters.  The Department of Homeland investigated it.  States investigated it.  Shoot, even Trump's own campaign hired people to investigate it - and when they found nothing, they buried the report.

                  https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-c … den-2023-2

                  https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-voter- … 24996.html

                  https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing … all-false/

                  https://www.rawstory.com/trump-2020-ele … -research/

                  Just like in 2016.  Trump claimed that he lost the popular vote because of fraud, appointed Kris Kobach to investigate, and then Kobach....found no fraud.  And still the MAGA folks did not understand that Trump simply lied about there being fraud.

                  https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/r … oter-fraud

                  Trump ran the same playbook and his supporters still fail to grasp that his claims of fraud are all BS to protect his fragile ego.  And the claims that no one investigated voter fraud is simply a fabrication to hide the obvious - that there was no fraud and Trump is a pathetic liar.

                  1. Springboard profile image82
                    Springboardposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                    The fact remains that the people who are telling us there was no fraud are exactly the same people who wish to hide it if it exists. Again, it's the fox telling us the hens are fine. I am not sure why that is so hard to understand. What REAL investigations did we have? Hell, where was the special counsel such as in the case of the Russia Collusion thing?

                    It seemed VERY apparent Democrats were concerned about potential fraud. It seemed VERY apparent Democrats were suggesting Trump may not have been duly elected. Hillary Clinton denied the election for MONTHS after Trump won. The MEDIA called Trump an illegitimate president.

                    All that was taken seriously by your side. Some still believe in Russia collusion even though it was all a fraud itself.

                    Like I have repeated multiple times, I am not in the camp of it WAS stolen. I am in the camp of WE DON'T KNOW. The question of 2020 has never been taken seriously.

                    You can say all day you're sure all the claims have been debunked. But they haven't been. We've only been told that they were. You only accept it and believe it because you are happy with the outcome. The reason I want answers has NOTHING to do with the outcome but has everything to do with my deeply felt conviction that elections are vitally important in this country, and with so many irregularities to consider, it begs questions that require real answers.

                    As I mentioned in another comment, I have never questioned elections in the past. I have disagreed with the choice made by the American people. But I trusted that at least the voice of the American people was heard. I know exactly why my side lost in the past. It made sense. There was nothing to question and no reason to question it.

                    That is not the case with regard to 2020. The questions regarding that election are many fold. If we do investigate and we find Trump really lost, I don't give two hoots about that. What I care about is that we KNOW for SURE he LOST.

                    The last thing I want America to become is a place like North Korea. "Trust us, Kim Jong Un got 99% of the vote." The 1% he didn't get were probably killed.

            3. Ken Burgess profile image76
              Ken Burgessposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

              Exactly.

              Those who push the "accept that it was legit, or else" are far more "cult like" than anything I see coming from those who question what went down, or bring up facts that don't align with the 'official' version of things.

              Like I said before the 2020 election ever occurred, the worst thing for the country would be if Biden was selected as the Democrat's nominee, and that has proven itself out IMO.

              Biden is nothing if not a stooge for the very worst elements in DC.

              The worst of the corrupt politicians and most compromised individuals are in control of the country today... one has to have blinders on not to see it.

    2. Sharlee01 profile image88
      Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      "He, as well as Hollywood in general, has lost all credibility... they live in their own bubble... "

      This bubble is provided O2 by the Jews that own Hollywood... I think that's why we have not been hearing too much from actors.  We have seen celebritards taking the vow of of silence. 

      Yes, people do need to wake up, and we need to keep reminding them of what we will be giving up.  Time to turn pop the bubble.

  3. abwilliams profile image68
    abwilliamsposted 6 weeks ago

    "De Niro declared that Trump "can’t be anywhere near the office of the presidency."

    Sorry DeNiro, he has and shall be again, live with it or.....
    buh-bye!

  4. Credence2 profile image78
    Credence2posted 6 weeks ago

    I address this to both Sharlee and GA.

    Here is my answer, and boy, do I love The Guardian. You ask why I don't trust Musk? It is the same reasons I don't trust conservatives generally, brilliantly laid out in this article. They certainly said it better than I could have said it personally.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr … benevolent

    1. Sharlee01 profile image88
      Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      What's not to like?

      And why do you feel Elon Musk is "no good"?  In my view, on many occasions, he was helpful to humanity.

      Musk has proven to be a significant figure in times of global crises, showcasing a need for innovative solutions and philanthropic gestures. His endeavors extend beyond the realms of business, as evidenced by his proactive responses to various challenges. During moments of adversity, Musk has notably contributed by leveraging his resources and expertise. For instance, amidst the COVID pandemic, Musk directed efforts toward manufacturing ventilators and distributing them to areas in need. Additionally, he facilitated the delivery of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) to healthcare facilities, aiding frontline workers in their battle against the virus.  Musk's ventures in renewable energy and space exploration offer promising prospects for addressing pressing environmental concerns and advancing human civilization. Through initiatives like SpaceX and Tesla, he promotes sustainable practices and inspires technological innovation. He initiated to have Starlink terminals sent quickly to Ukraine to allow Ukrainians access to the Starlink network when they lost service.

      Overall, Musk's multifaceted contributions during times of crisis underscore his commitment to making a positive impact on society, transcending the boundaries of conventional business endeavors.  Not sure why in our view, he is no good.

      1. Credence2 profile image78
        Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        It's the underlying current behind him that is expressed in the article.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image88
          Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          Underlying current. Is it because he offered less censoring of all on X? Or perhaps that he took an abrupt turn from the most left views that were being born out as of the past few years? He definitely would have been considered a liberal some years back. In my view he is his animal, not many are brave enough to be so direct, and open about views, and not many nowadays change views mid-stream.

          1. Credence2 profile image78
            Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            He has a right to change as we all do, but I reserve the right not to approve of the change.

            1. Sharlee01 profile image88
              Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

              So far you have that right. Makes one wonder how long.

              1. Credence2 profile image78
                Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                The way you phrased that gives me pause " so far I have that right", when do I stop having it?

                As for how long? As long as Musk clings to a right wing agenda from where I stand, indefinitely.....

                1. Sharlee01 profile image88
                  Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                  "He has a right to change as we all do, but I reserve the right not to approve of the change."

                  Simply acknowledging that rights are not guaranteed can be uncomfortable. Expressing oneself openly might lead to alienation from groups with more dominant perspectives, a reality that may already be evident. I admire individuals who boldly express their thoughts without being swayed by group consensus.

                  I hold in high regard those who possess the ability to think beyond the confines of the group, delving deeper into complex issues.

                  1. Credence2 profile image78
                    Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                    When I lose the Right to speak freely, America ceases to exist.
                    I don't care about alienation from my adversaries regardless of the influence of their perspective.

                    Am I not expressing a boldly held opinion, contrary to anyone else on this thread?

        2. Ken Burgess profile image76
          Ken Burgessposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          Someone writes an article that has the biases you agree with... but that doesn't make it anything more than an opinion.

          I consider Musk's accomplishments monumentally more impressive, and positively impactful for humanity, than some no-name writer who wants to trash him.

          The twisted ideology and detrimental decisions of the Biden Administration must be stopped.  As so many have said, that don't love Trump, it is a binary choice... one or the other... which means for sane, hardworking Americans, there is only one choice that is viable.

          1. Credence2 profile image78
            Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            I don't think that they are biases, as I explained to GA. The man simply does not have my favor.

            Musk is a visionary, yes. But that does not mean he remains beyond criticism in all aspects.

            Like I said, it is just my opinion. And I don't expect conservatives to agree with it, as I don't agree with them.

            1. Ken Burgess profile image76
              Ken Burgessposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

              Musk was very much a Lefty not so long ago...

              But he is highly intelligent and has common sense...

              Being as successful as he has been, requires a personality that does not bury one's head in the sand, or put blinders on, but must deal with reality and facts constantly and fully.

              In addition he has had the benefit of seeing the world for what it really is, meeting with world leaders regularly, spending considerable time in China, Germany and elsewhere.

              So Musk's perspectives on the dangers he sees and the warnings he makes carry much more weight than a biased not-nearly-so-experienced and learned writer for a hack-rag. Or a politician that has to play the game or get labeled and shunned from the DC establishment.

              That Musk spent 50 Billion dollars to give people one platform to use to speak truth and facts is his sin... that he exposed the lies and corruption fostered by the FBI on behalf of the Biden campaign and Democrat Party will not be forgotten... that is why there are hit pieces out against him, and that is why you don't like him... you have been given your marching orders comrade and Musk is enemy #2, right behind Trump, to the cause.

    2. Sharlee01 profile image88
      Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      In my perspective, the article you provided seemed heavily biased, akin to a targeted attack rather than an impartial analysis, especially considering its outdated information from 2022. Perhaps it would be beneficial to explore more recent sources, such as X in 2024, to obtain a comprehensive view of the situation. X has notably made strides, particularly with its revamped format, evident in the increasing user engagement and consequently, a noticeable uptick in revenue. It's essential to afford Elon Musk some time to navigate challenges and implement improvements. From my standpoint, the new forum presents a platform that fosters greater freedom of expression and relevance compared to its predecessor. Hey, in 2022 he was just forming his new company, maybe give him a bit more time.

      1. Credence2 profile image78
        Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        2 years can be an eternity, maybe I need to give time for his platform and his image by me and those on the left to moderate. I am not qualified to speak on his platform, but I am familiar with arrogance of wealthy white men and how they lean toward the very attitudes featured in the article.  They become conservative and therefore are diametrically opposed to my points of view.

        Again, just my opinion.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image88
          Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          I appreciate your views and recognize that they stem from your unique life experiences. I firmly believe in the importance of considering individual backgrounds and viewpoints rather than making assumptions based on factors such as wealth, race, or ideologies. It's essential to approach discussions with an open mind and a willingness to understand where others are coming from.

          1. Credence2 profile image78
            Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            What defines us today are differences in ideologies, wealth and unfortunately race. It remains the foundation around the current struggles today and is hardly incidental.

            1. Sharlee01 profile image88
              Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

              I've listened to those arguments before. From where I stand, it seems that this dynamic has likely existed since time immemorial. It's evident to me that certain individuals will consistently thrive, some will perpetually struggle, and others will have to exert significant effort to succeed. It underscores the importance of individual initiative and circumstances.

    3. GA Anderson profile image89
      GA Andersonposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      I can see why you loved that opinion, it sounds just like you.

      ". . . he has encouraged far-right conspiracy theories . . ."

      ". . . consistently articulated rightwing extremist ideas and coddled extremists . . ."

      ". . . allowed hate speech and far-right abuse to flourish . . ."

      "Musk’s actions are fully consistent with the worldview that dominates among far-right reactionary extremists."


      etc. etc.

      And the buzzwords and phrases. . . I think your author hit them all:

      "rightwing extremists, coddled extremists, allowed hate speech, far-right abuse, banning critical voices, far-right reactionary extremists, male tech oligarchs, elite white males, etc. etc."

      Then he says, ['i]" It is not very useful to obsess over what Musk “really” believes."[/i]

      And continues to tell us what Musk really believes because he knows how bad elite white male tech oligarchs are . . .

      There's a ton more but it isn't worth the effort to continue, the ideological tone was enough for you. An unsubstantiated (author noted that the NYT couldn't pin down Musk's politics, but he can?) page of hyperbole and ideological confirmation is where you stand.

      Details? Reason? Support? Yep, just your kinda article, when it says what you think you don't need no stinkin' details.

      GA

      1. Credence2 profile image78
        Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        Here is a "detail" for you, GA

        "In May 2022, Musk said that he could "no longer support" the Democrats, saying that "they have become the party of division & hate" and would be voting Republican due to Biden's support for unions and his inability to "get a lot done".[14][148] In June 2022, Musk voted for Mayra Flores in a special election, stating it was the first time he ever voted Republican.[149] In November 2022, Musk tweeted that he would support Ron DeSantis in the 2024 United States presidential election if he chose to run.[150]"

        Anyone speaking of supporting  DeSantis, a standin for Trump, is no friend of mine. I support Biden supporting unions and despite rightwing lies, Biden has accomplished a Great deal.

        So what is Musk's anti-woke  stance? Many  on the left believe, myself included, that anti-woke is anti truth, where unpleasant aspects of our society both now and the past are to be shrouded and denied. He says that if we do not eliminate it, we will be unfit to colonize Mars, uh-huh. I just have to look at DeSantis' actions in Florida to confirm how the idea fleshes out in policy initiatives from the Governor's office.

        Leftwing extremism? yeah, sure.....

        1. GA Anderson profile image89
          GA Andersonposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          So 2022 was when your "always" started. When he changed from voting Democrat to voting Republican, he became "no good." All of his accomplishments that are directing benefiting the society he is a part of don't count anymore because he voted Republican?"

          "Anti-woke is anti-truth?" That seems backward to me. Did you see that British Issue of Glamor with the front cover being a transman in a business suit with the shirt unbuttoned to show a very pregnant belly 'proving' that men can be pregnant? Is that a "woke" truth you agree with, or is it an anti-truth?

          How about the sex/gender issue? Is they/them a truth? Those examples are legitimately understood to be part of Woke, aren't they?


          GA



          https://hubstatic.com/17020702_f1024.jpg

          1. Credence2 profile image78
            Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            I always naturally distrust those with large amounts of wealth, to not use their wealth to their advantage and to the disadvantage of everyone else. That goes for the Carnegies, Rockerfellers, Astors, Trumps and Musks. That would explain prior to 2022.

            Being associated with the Republican Party is already an automatic demerit. The party's current agenda, ideology, candidates and policies are unacceptable in my view.

            Supporting DeSantis is supporting Trump without all his baggage, why would anyone think that I wasn't aware of that? Musk cannot be in bed with DeSantis and still have my support.

            I am not discrediting his accomplishments, but the deficit I find in his politics would make him some what less than a God in my opinion. .

            While you conservative take the woke thing to levels of comedy on the edge of the ridiculous and improbable, I have to explain why DeSantis silences black voices in education, burns and censor books that does not support  the conservative view of a flawless and guilt free America. Just one aspect among many that is not so funny.

            1. GA Anderson profile image89
              GA Andersonposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

              Yep, my examples were the extremes of the issues (not quite to the level of comedic, maybe just the 'grin and shrug' level), but reasonable examples are too nuanced for how far you have traveled.

              I would bet you know the issues that are generally inferred when "woke" is used. So there is no argument on what the issues are.

              That same bet says the same thing about the general public understanding of the 'two or seventy-two sexes/genders issue. You know what Middle America thinks. You even think it.

              Equating anti-woke to anti-truth is ideological zealotry. On these two issues alone you defend them as truth yet don't believe them yourself.

              GA

              1. Credence2 profile image78
                Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                I will let you play on the ludicrous boundaries of this issue as conservatives don't take it seriously. Well, we do and that reflects in our consistent support of Democrats who take the threat of this rightwing antiwoke movement seriously. And support of DeSantis and his anti woke Agenda by Musk gets a thumb down by me and progressives.

                At least in Florida, Anti woke is anti black, anti-inllectualist, but we all know that is what conservatives are all about, don't we?

                We are not going to agree on this, but this is where I stand, firmly....

                1. GA Anderson profile image89
                  GA Andersonposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                  But we have agreed on these issues in the past.

                  A reasonable agreement that for trans men and women, their truth is a real truth to them and it only takes a little conservative tolerance to accept that they can live their life however they want. And, a little tolerance from liberals in understanding that their truth isn't the truth of reality—they can live as they want but they can't become what they want. So it's unreasonable to demand that everyone accept their truths.

                  You got me on anti-black and anti-intellectual part, I've never thought of the term "anti-black," I just thought it was racism. Either way, I wouldn't have thought of them as "woke" issues.

                  Look back to where I started; Musk, and 'anti-woke=anti-truth.'

                  Your support for claiming you always suspected he was no good started being tied to his Republican preferences. Then, your 'always' was tied to Musk being a rich white guy elite . . . before he turned bad for sure by voting Republican.

                  Your direction was to bring in everything from 'baggageless' Trump supporter, to DeSantis booster, any Republican ideal, and now, you toss in anti-black and anti-intellectual.

                  What about those two basics? Is Anti-woke equal to anti-truth — relative to the woke issues offered, still a mantra? Musk should have been easy. You could have simply said you don't like his politics so you don't trust him. But your pen was already held high and your zeal couldn't resist an ideological down-slash: 'I always suspected he was no good." Harrumph, damn conservative take that!

                  GA

                  1. Credence2 profile image78
                    Credence2posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                    "But we have agreed on these issues in the past."

                    True, but we have not agreed on much lately.

                    I would like to see conservatives understand this woke issue goes beyond the ridiculous and the periphery.

                    "You got me on anti-black and anti-intellectual part, I've never thought of the term "anti-black," I just thought it was racism. Either way, I wouldn't have thought of them as "woke" issues"

                    Removing African American curriculum or watering it down to teach that slaves benifitted from slavery is an affront and a lie making a certain political cabal comfortable to teach "patriotic history" rather the the accurate truth. The focus in Florida is anti-black, which is a sub set of racism.

                    In a capitalism economy like this one, anyone piling up huge amounts of wealth has earned  my suspicions automatically concerning the arrogance of wealth and how it will reveal itself.

                    His association with the Republican Party was just another nail in his coffin as far as I was concerned.

                    He was always suspect before, turning Republican just confirmed what I suspected.

                    DeSantis has been promoting an anti-black or anti-intellectual position with his censorship and water-down of books and educational curriculum, so he is directly tied in to all of this.

                    "You could have simply said you don't like his politics so you don't trust him."

                    Yes, I say this in addition to everything else that I have said....

  5. IslandBites profile image90
    IslandBitesposted 6 weeks ago

    To those who would hold their noses and vote for Trump despite obvious failings, the actor said, “I don’t think they understand how dangerous it will be if he ever, God forbid, becomes president [again]. I don’t think they really understand. And, historically, from what I see, in Nazi Germany they had it with Hitler. They don’t take him seriously. Looks like a clown. Acts like a clown. Mussolini, same thing. These guys, I don’t know why, they look like clowns. Somehow people, that element of society, identifies with them.”

    Its not so much about Trump but people around him and his MAGA cult. Agree.

    1. Sharlee01 profile image88
      Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      I assume this comment is your view, due to no source of who may have made the posted statement.

      While everyone is entitled to their opinions, it's important to address hyperbolic statements with a dose of reality. Comparing Donald Trump to Hitler or Mussolini is not only historically inaccurate but also greatly exaggerates the situation. Trump has already served as president, and while his leadership may have been controversial, it did not exhibit the extreme authoritarianism associated with dictators like Hitler or Mussolini. Drawing parallels between Trump and these historical figures overlooks the complexities of their regimes and the atrocities they committed. Such comparisons can trivialize the suffering of those who endured under oppressive regimes and distract from meaningful discussions about contemporary politics. It's crucial to engage in civil discourse grounded in facts and reasoned analysis rather than resorting to sensationalist rhetoric.

      Do you have facts that have led you to your opinions?

  6. Valeant profile image87
    Valeantposted 6 weeks ago

    Funny how everyone on the right thinks that CNN is the only source of information the left has.  Or that we were unaware that Biden left the tariffs on China in place.

  7. Valeant profile image87
    Valeantposted 6 weeks ago

    Wait, Willow...no links from CNN to make your arguments?  Isn't that where you get all your information from?

  8. Valeant profile image87
    Valeantposted 6 weeks ago

    Yeah, your Fauci conspiracy is pretty tin-hatty in my opinion, but standard for MAGA, so not surprising.  There is the possibility that Covid came from a lab, but it's not confirmed was simply my point.

    When one can no longer identify what is clearly racism, that's pretty troubling.  Or when the obvious becomes excusable, that might be even more so.  Calling an Asian American Coco Chow is pretty obvious.  Using ugly rhetoric that increases hate crimes against Americans is not something we should tolerate in our leaders.

    As for the 'fight' argument, it's not me wanting it to mean something you don't see.  It's the many MAGA folks who stood trial.  They testified that that was how they interpreted it when Trump used it multiple times to a crowd that had been primed by multiple speakers to believe something that just wasn't true.  A crowd who had been incited and then sent to the Capitol.  Context matters on when and where the word fight is used.  Trump supporters took it to mean physically fight on January 6th when Trump used it, as many testified to.  Just the latest example of Trump using reckless rhetoric that endangered American citizens.

  9. Valeant profile image87
    Valeantposted 6 weeks ago

    What's been going on?  Trump has been breaking laws since before his election in 2016.  His campaign was proven beyond a doubt to have colluded with members of Russian Intelligence when his campaign manager met with the Russians multiple times to pass campaign strategy and internal polling data to them.  He has committed business fraud, campaign finance violations, blackmail, inciting an insurrection, pressuring elections officials to overturn an election, pressuring his Vice President to overturn an election and void legitimate votes, obstructing justice in the retrieval of the nation's nuclear secrets.  He was found to have committed defamation, sexual abuse of a woman, and criminal contempt of court.  Let alone the violations of the Emoluments Clause and Nepotism statutes to enrich himself and his family.

    And yet, this is who the right admires and thinks should be president.  Just ridiculous.

  10. Valeant profile image87
    Valeantposted 6 weeks ago

    'The fact remains that the people who are telling us there was no fraud are exactly the same people who wish to hide it if it exists.'

    Actually, I just posted four links for you to read that was from a company Trump hired.  Why would they want to hide fraud if it existed?  So, no, what you say is a fact is not an actual fact at all.  Even the people Trump hired did not find any fraud - meaning that Trump lied.  And his supporters accept it.  And they will never accept any election as legitimate because Trump has convinced them of the idea that fraud might exist.  While the proof of that kind of widespread fraud just isn't there.  2020 doesn't make sense because you cannot grasp how many Americans find Trump unfit for office after a disastrous Covid response and two impeachments.  Let alone the brainwashing he subjected his supporters to where he kept telling them the only way he could lose was if there was fraud.  Again, that just was not true.  His narcissism, his bad policies, his embarrassing daily tantrums, his deficits, his net-negative job gains could have convinced Americans that a change in leadership was necessary.

    'All that was taken seriously by your side. Some still believe in Russia collusion even though it was all a fraud itself.'

    You're joking, right?  So, when the chair of a campaign is meeting with Russian intelligence and passing strategy and internal polling data, your claim is that it is not collusion?  This is why we think MAGA folks are in a cult.  Actions that are so obviously collusion are still called 'fraud.'  And while Hillary conceded, she noted the Russian assistance Trump's Campaign had gotten to win.  I questioned Trump's win as well when it was done with the assistance of one of our nation's enemies.  That's just smart national security.

  11. Valeant profile image87
    Valeantposted 6 weeks ago

    'Let's not forget that Trump held the presidency for four years without demonstrating authoritarian tendencies.'

    Wow.  Just wow.  The amount of things we could list to prove this statement false would be immense.  His indictment in DC is just the easiest.

  12. Valeant profile image87
    Valeantposted 5 weeks ago

    Cred, isn't it interesting that Agenda 2025 is not known to the people of this forum?  Unreal.

    1. Credence2 profile image78
      Credence2posted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

      I don't think that you can really have an understanding of what Trump is up to without reviewing Agenda 2025.

      1. Valeant profile image87
        Valeantposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

        I fully expect most of those supporting Trump to cheer for the Agenda, to be honest.

        1. Credence2 profile image78
          Credence2posted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

          Now, that's scary.......

  13. Valeant profile image87
    Valeantposted 5 weeks ago

    Thanks for that, I haven't laughed that hard in a while.

  14. Valeant profile image87
    Valeantposted 5 weeks ago

    As if vaccines haven't been mandated prior to Joe Biden took office...
    https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads … -covid-19/

    Does anyone remember a certain individual complaining about vaccines before Donald Trump came along?

    Or that the Supreme Court didn't rule back in 1964 in Bostock v. Clayton County that sex discrimination falls under Section VII of the Civil Right Act and protects gay and trans citizens.

    Add it to the number of times that there have been complaints about the trans community from a certain individual.  There's a xxxx-phobic that truly fits here.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)