Thank You Elon... Cut To The Chase
"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.
ThoughtsHollywood 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.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" !!
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.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.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...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.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.
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."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......"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!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."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?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.
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.
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"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.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.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.
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.
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."renegotiating trade deals to prioritize American interests,"
Do you feel that Trump's Chinese tariffs were a benefit to our economy?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.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.33.4.187Great. More articles linked to from liberal think tanks to prove the liberals are right. Hmm. lol
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. "Yeah, yeah. Independent. Nonpartisan. By who's assessment? Theirs? lol.
Just like the word, "racist." Just because you say it doesn't make it true.
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.
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.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.
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.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.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?"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.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.
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.'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.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.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.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.
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.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.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."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.Of course it is fair, the article clearly says that most of Trumps lawsuits suits were dismissed for lack of proof, did you miss that?
No, it did not ... I quote your article, do you see anywhere in your article several cases that lacked evidence, which where poorly filed, or filed in the wrong court? It seems you missed context in the Politico article.
"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
Note the word allies, note the word errors in filing, and other procedural issues.
Your comment "Sixty lawsuits where 60 court rulings said that Trump was all wet and his claims had no proof. "
Many cases were not heard due to " Some lawsuits were dismissed due to errors in the filings and other procedural issues." Politico"
You passed over very important context and facts... Could that be a problem when forming a prudent view? Do facts matter or just the facts you want to consider?No, I did not miss that at all, I just looked into several cases as they were filed, and found many were filed poorly, and some to the wrong courts. The cases were not considered yet it seems many are willing to jump on the number 60... Politico did a good job presenting the truth, what I find odd, you appeared to grab onto a number, and yes, some cases were tossed for lack of evidence.
And your comment pretty much has a clear context
"Sixty lawsuits where 60 court RULINGS said that Trump was all wet and his claims had no proof. " NO 60 rulings were not handed down, a majority were never even heard.
I believe this serves as a prime illustration of how facts can become distorted. When you examine the evidence, it does indeed align with some aspects of your perspective. However, it also reveals numerous instances where certain cases were overlooked, yet a particular statistic continues to persist due to widespread acceptance.Yes, but why did the courts decide not to rule, could it be that Trump's claims had no standing?
Does this help?
"Nearly all the suits were dismissed or dropped due to lack of evidence or lack of standing,[3] including 30 lawsuits that were dismissed by the judge after a hearing on the merits.[4] Among the judges who dismissed the lawsuits were some appointed by Trump himself.[5] Judges, lawyers, and other observers described the suits as "frivolous"[6] and "without merit".[7][8] In one instance, the Trump campaign and other groups seeking his reelection collectively lost multiple cases in six states on a single day.[9] Only one ruling was initially in Trump's favor: the timing within which first-time Pennsylvania voters must provide proper identification if they wanted to "cure" their ballots. This ruling affected very few votes,[10] and it was later overturned by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.[11]"I have been unable to share my point regarding fairness and context. You offer once again numbers, so what of the other 30 cases that you have not offered why they were not heard? You offered no source. I would like to see the entire source. Did your source cover the 30 other cases that I see no mention of? The full source would certainly help see the full context of the 60 cases you mentioned in your comment.
Are you splitting hairs down to the micron level again?
There is no context issue. Grabbing for the most implausible possibilities is just another way of skirting the issue.
If Trump could not make any headway with his ludicrous accusations of voter fraud, with filing over 60 Civil lawsuits, with one exception, that is enough context and fairness for me. The big picture makes it quite clear from everyone who matters that Trump assertions were without merit.
So, we are just are going have to agree to disagree on this one.I have not skirted the issue or shared any view about the legal cases, again not sure why you did not see this. My entire point was pretty clearly all about the context of your link, and what you seemed to walk away with. "Sixty lawsuits where 60 court rulings said that Trump was all wet and his claims had no proof. "
Yes, in a sense I split hairs. I'm highlighting how media statements often oversimplify complex issues, reducing them to single issues such as a figure like "60 cases," which can overshadow crucial details about those cases. You seem to feel "Sixty lawsuits where 60 court rulings said that Trump was all wet and his claims had no proof. " Facts show there have not been 60 rulings that claimed Trump had no proof. Your source points that out. Both your sources point that out.
My point, my concern is about context, and how some nowadays just select what they hope to walk away with. Despite the thoroughness of your source (Politico) in presenting the facts about the cases and why some weren't addressed, it seemed you missed some of the context regarding the 60 cases Trump and his allies brought to the courts.
In your recent comment, it appears that over 30 cases have been overlooked in the information you provided. Do you not see this appears like selective reading?
No problem, Yes, time to agree to disagree.
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?No, Jim, he is whining.
I ask you and your people, what do you see in him?
He was a draft dodger and race baiter, a thief, a liar, a coward, with no political experience who could not even spell Constitution. Yet, you see him as this great patriot. He threatened to unravel the entire civil service turning a professional cadre into his flunkies. With the quality men who have held the office in the past, how could someone like this even be in contention, today.
You suck off from him every lie about a "deep state", no other prior president spoke of deep state , that the very executive agencies he is in charge of works against him, yeah sure.
How is a grifter-grafter like Trump who resists Constitutional restraints put upon him as President going to be an advantage to anyone? Every Presidential Historian has rated Trump the worse President in American history, it is only MAGA that says otherwise and based on what? It has to be a cult.
Trump has been a jerk from day 1, yet you all continue to put him on pedestal? I, for the life of me, don't know why.
Such a man shrouded in criminal activity and the constant appearance of impropriety at every turn is not fit for the top job. The President was looked to for setting the highest of standards of citizenship, not the lowest.
Do you desire a more authoritarian America? Are you fearful of the democracy and its foundations? I hear conservatives are fearful and distrust democracy. Is that true?
What is it that you Rightwingers want? I mean really?"I ask you and your people, what do you see in him?"
Many of the users here have answered this for many years now, and it seems you need to hear it over, and over.
It is clear you have some strong feelings about this Trump, and, you are concerned about his character and qualifications to be the president again... However, it's important to remember that political perspectives can vary widely, and what one person sees as a great patriot, another may see differently. We all have that right. I hope you have noted some here who are supporting Trump do not continually need to come out with hyperbolic comments, we are satisfied with our views, and we need no approval from others. And we don't need to ruminate. I suppose this could be a characteristic of conservatism.
Additionally, accusations of draft dodging, race-baiting, theft, lying, and cowardice are serious allegations that would require substantial evidence to support. Without such evidence, it's unfair to make such sweeping judgments about someone's character. As for political experience and competence, those are certainly important qualities to consider in a candidate for any public office. It's up to voters to carefully evaluate candidates based on their qualifications, and track record.
Let's not forget that Trump held the presidency for four years without demonstrating authoritarian tendencies. His focus was on America and improving the lives of its people. Perhaps amidst the political noise, some failed to recognize this. However, it's alarming to witness the erosion of our democracy and the freedoms we cherish. Look around—it's evident. Rather than sticking to a particular narrative, it's essential to be open-minded and acknowledge all perspectives. It's hard to ignore the confusion surrounding Biden's leadership. The current administration has left us grappling with numerous challenges.
What we desire is to preserve the essence of America. We refuse to surrender our unique experiment or conform to a One World Nation. Handouts aren't what we seek; we strive to uphold our shared values and pursue the American dream. We advocate for less intrusive governance because we believe in self-determination.I already know what your excuse is, Sharlee, I wanted to hear from a new voice, what is Jims explanation?
What perspectives? No potential president in history has his record, so there is not point in trying to manufacture parity between Trump and anyone else.
Conservatives just keep their lies and half truths to themselves, so of course, there is no need to ruminate.
From my point of view, I am more afraid of what he proposes for 2025, than his ham handed administration of the past.
This so called "essence" is not well defined. What makes you think that there are "shared values" that we all would adhere to the same message?"Conservatives just keep their lies and half truths to themselves, so of course, there is no need to ruminate."
Back at you... One difference is that I go to great lengths to share why I come to a view. Much of the time you don't. You come out with a soft rant and divert, by calling the name "he was a draft dodger"... Really By the way did Biden serve? No he did not he pretty much had the same deferment as Trump.
"Unlike his son, Mr Biden never served in the US military, having received five student draft deferments and a conditional medical deferment while studying at the University of Delaware and Syracuse University in the 1960s, the latter following a physical exam in April 1968 that led to him being classified as I-Y, which meant he could only be drafted in the case of a national emergency.' https://www.the-independent.com/news/wo … 44210.html
Although he has lied on several occasions that he did serve in the military, fact-checking showed he was lying.
Fact can bite you can they not?
These two men carry some of the same negative issues... One thing they don't share is Job performance. But it appears you don't see this or you truely feel Biden has done a better job. What is your view? I feel Trump did a superior job. Just due to very visible effects. It shocks me that you don't recognize that this man is confused and too fragile to serve.Sharlee, I have told you that I will answer any question that you ask of me as honestly as possible. But, you may not always accept my answers and I can't be responsible for that.
Let me be more accurate, Trump is a Chicken Hawk, as there have been many former Presidents without military service. But the phony Trump image of hyper masculinity is a total sham, so let's wage war on Mexico attitude. He always talks tough, but he has been recorded by numerous sources as making disparaging comments regarding our men and women in uniform.
Chickenhawk definition:
a person who speaks out in support of war yet has avoided active military service.
"rich chicken hawks stay well away from any real fighting"
No, I don't see Biden as a problem, at least not relative to Donald Trump. I am satisfied with Biden's performance having dug out from under the pandemic economy left to us by the Trump administration. I think that Trump's so called "great economy" was actually the product of the heavy lifting by Barack Obama cleaning up another mess created on the GOP watch in 2008. So, Trump changed the economy around in the two years of his term prior to the pandemic, sure....Leave it to Trump to take credit for the effort of others but refuse to be held responsible for anything. I am sorry, but such a man can never be taken seriously by me. Yes, Biden has done a better job and I abhor Trump as not fit for any serious government office. So, don't be shocked we come from totally different realities.We see things differently... Put aside the mess Biden has made of our Country. I struggle to understand how anyone could cast their vote for a man who appears increasingly confused and frail with each public appearance. Supporting someone who seems unfit for any job, let alone the presidency is beyond my comprehension.
It is simple . . .
A vote against Biden is a vote for Trump
It doesn't matter one bit if you care about the policies, the character, or anything about Trump. It only matters if you are against Biden.
A vote against Trump is a vote for Biden
It doesn't matter one bit if you care about the policies, the character, or anything about Biden. It only matters if you are against Trump.More simple...
A vote for or against Trump. Biden is irrelevant in this race. Do you trust MAGA to be in charge of the country when they cannot even acknowledge actual reality?I guess that it does appear to look that way, doesn't it?
But Biden does not anywhere near the sordid record or character deficits of Donald Trump, but that, too, is debatable.I appreciate your perspective, and I acknowledge that for some, voting can be driven by negative sentiments towards a candidate. However, I personally base my voting decisions on a thorough evaluation of each candidate's strengths and weaknesses. While both candidates have their faults, I believe that one has demonstrated a lack of effectiveness in governance, while the other has not. Additionally, I prioritize clarity and competence in leadership, qualities that I find lacking in one of the candidates. My approach to voting is serious and conscientious, devoid of any bias or animosity. Ultimately, I hold myself to a high standard and prioritize my own judgment over external opinions. In summary, I cannot in good conscience support a candidate whom I perceive as having failed in their duties, especially one who appears ill-equipped to make important decisions.
My allegiance lies with my country above all else, transcending any personal emotions. Through experience, I've come to understand that allowing emotions to dictate decisions can lead to unintended consequences. It's akin to letting one's nose lead the way only to find it severed, ultimately harming oneself. Therefore, I prioritize rationality and foresight in my actions, safeguarding against any potential self-defeating outcomes.
Trump 2024
"From my point of view, I am more afraid of what he proposes for 2025, than his ham handed administration of the past."
To gain insight into Trump's intentions, it's essential to delve into transcripts, listen to his interviews, or watch his rallies on platforms like YouTube. As for "Project 2025," I've never come across any indication of his endorsement or mention of it. From my perspective, Trump appears to prioritize adherence to the Constitution. He seems focused on addressing significant issues that plague the country. Trump demonstrates independence in decision-making; he's not controlled by others, including members of his party.
Project 2025 has been around for a couple of years, why are liberals all of a sudden becoming interested in this collection of policy proposals? Note the word proposals. Trump has nothing to do with this project nor has he endorsed it or campaigned on it. Do the Demacrats rest from stirring the pot, or come down to earth?
Starting with your last sentence... not true.
John F Kennedy in one of his last speeches (before they killed him) warned of just that.
President Kennedy did not trust the CIA, and he reportedly intended to dismantle it after the Bay of Pigs failure. Kennedy said he wanted to "splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it into the winds."
Legacy of Ashes: The History of the Central Intelligence
Agency (New York: Double-day), pp. 105-106.
If interested in chasing down 'conspiracy theories' that will open an eye, try looking into Operation 40. And no, I will not link to it or explain further.
Now, lets consider your first sentence.
I consider back to 2016, what few knew, was that we had amassed more tanks, artillery, etc. in countries like Romania, Germany, and Poland in the weeks leading up to the election than we had amassed for Desert Shield - Desert Storm.
The plan was for Clinton to escalate the conflict with Russia in Ukraine soon after her election.
That fiasco was diverted for 4 years because of Trump being elected.
As bad as Biden's efforts have been to turn Ukraine into WWIII, things could have been worse under Clinton, who I believe is psychotic and was willing to take things further, faster, than Biden has.
Partly because 4 years and Trump's Administration later, the preparations for that war had been diffused, that assemblage of armor and armaments dispersed and we were in the midst of a Pandemic... in addition our relationship with China shifted immensely, China sided with Russia in 2021... I am not sure they would have done so in 2016, when things were considerably different in our relationship and in China's readiness.
As Springboard has said... you don't have to be MAGA... the Biden Administration has done plenty to make this election about getting rid of them, not about seeing anything great in Trump.
I don't know if you recall back to 2019... when I earnestly hoped that the Democrat Party would move in the direction of new ideas and younger minds not twisted by decades of power and corruption in DC.
The DNC (Bigtime donors and power brokers) didn't go in that direction they wanted a stooge they could control, someone as corrupt and twisted as they could find in DC... part of the 'old school' politics... so they forced Biden down our throats, and instead of getting change, we got a return to all the worst elements of DC...
Only now they really don't care about hiding how corrupt and uncaring they are... they are all about power, control, and are willing to destroy the country in the process to maintain it. In fact... I believe some of them want just that.Ken, you got me on that one. I missed it, JFK was the victim of black ops or the equivalent of a "deep state" working against Kennedy's agenda and it got him killed. So, under these circumstances I have to acknowledge the possibility of a "deep state" due to that example. As for how much Trump is a victim and how much of this is contrived is open to debate.
If you have nothing better than Trump to offer over Biden, that leaves most of us no choice. Because, regardless of your opinion, Trump is the worse choice between the two, for million of Americans and November will tell the tale.I wish I could believe that, I really do.
At the end of the day, I support America, the idea of America, the USA.
As I understand it, the Biden Administration is doing everything it can to undermine America, to move into a NWO... an Agenda 2030... a Great Reset... and is willing to sacrifice the sovereignty of America to do so.
It is willing to strip from Americans their rights... to Personal Property, to Free Speech, basically the changes we see today which typically deconstruct and divide a society to foster the opportunity to bring in something much worse.
Plenty of examples throughout history of what happens when a nation's society derails itself, throws its beliefs and mores aside and allows for its economy to falter.
EDIT/ADD:
You may find this video interesting, part of it is a nice clip of one of our favorites, Nancy Pelosi, spelling it out in 1992:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JE0Zlx14PU8
This of course has evolved considerably, to what is now Agenda 2030, but more significant was the marriage of the WEF to the UN in 2019... this was a shift to corporate control and power, and the new agenda to create a global communism where people have no rights to own anything, nor the liberty to pursue their own agendas.Well, Ken, I support America, the idea of America, etc. but we are still in two different worlds as to what America is and should become. Trump, according to his Agenda 2025 is not my idea of promoting America.
I have not reviewed Agenda 2025, but will do so this weekend so I can comment on it.
I will compare it to Biden's Equity Agenda and Biden's Open Border policy which he promised on the Debate Stage in 2019, he did join the Global Compact on Migration on day 1 in office, so the fact that he has helped bring in over 10 million migrants on your tax-dollar expense should not surprise anyone.
Biden's escalation of conflict with Russia in Ukraine, Biden's funding of Iran so they in turn could fund Hamas, the Houthis, Hezbollah, etc.
I will consider it, and what we saw from Trump between 2016-2019... and if I feel it is more detrimental to the nation and the world than what the Biden Administration has wrought in less than 4 years I will make damned sure I am warning about it... ...just like I warned about how bad a Biden Administration would be back in 2019 before he was ever the nominee.Here is a link to it. It was created by the Heritage Foundation pretty much.
Project 2025
https://www.project2025.org/policy/You were undecided last month, what are your thoughts on it?
Undecided on what . . . my vote? Keeping it succinct. I wrote a reply that turned into an article and canceled.
I am not voting for Trump.
I am undecided about Biden.
I always have the option I took the previous two elections by voting for Teddy Roosevelt.
As far as Project 2025 there is some I like and much, much more I dislike. Overall I see it as a playbook for authoritarianism. That goes against my grain.
Of course, I am always open to reconsidering my position except on Trump.I think it is brave that you have finally stepped up and shared a bit about your decision on who you won't be voting for. Fence sitting can get uncomfortable. I give you credit, ultimately who one vote for is private if they wish it to be.
Thanks! As said, I wrote a dissertation to justify my position. Alas, I canceled it. Like the election itself it is the bottom line that counts, right?
Ultimately, what matters most is the final outcome. It's crucial for each of us to stay true to our own beliefs, especially when it comes to voting. Selecting a president is a weighty task, and I personally feel a strong sense of responsibility in making the right decision. We need someone who can propel us forward, not drag us backward, someone who can mend what's broken and avoid further chaos. This election feels distinctly different from any other. The current state of affairs is palpable, and the contrast with the past is stark. Many will find it challenging to choose between the candidates. Right now, it seems like there's an invisible divide fueled by negativity on both sides.
And you know what, I have come to the conclusion we have come to the point where many do vote on emotion --- Maybe this is the problem?I am disappointed that we weren't able to make the case for Trump. We are seriously slacking if the jury is still out on Biden, but had no problem convicting Trump!
I wasn't really asking which way you were voting, but just noting you were still weighing things out. Was more wondering how as an undecided voter, how you viewed Project 2025. Pretty much in the same light I do, an authoritarian playbook.
What is authoritarianism in your view?
Is that mandating that people take a vaccination or lose their job?
Is that using the 'proper pronoun' or lose your job?
Is that accept the 'official narrative' or lose your job?
I think the authoritarian playbook is already being enacted by the current Administration to the best of their ability, give them four more years and you will really see what authoritarianism is all about.Thanks for the reply and the challenge, however I will not take it up. I am quite satisfied with my position as it stands at this time.
As far as what authoritarianism is I will stick with Google University for now:
noun: authoritarianism
the enforcement or advocacy of strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom.
"he warned against the intrusion of authoritarianism in various countries"
lack of concern for the wishes or opinions of others.
"in his authoritarianism he has displayed disrespect for the culture he works in"
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.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.
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.
"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.
"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!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 … benevolentWhat'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.It's the underlying current behind him that is expressed in the article.
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.
He has a right to change as we all do, but I reserve the right not to approve of the change.
So far you have that right. Makes one wonder how long.
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....."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.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?To be honest and share my perspective, while your stance on this thread is assertive, it's worth noting how few have actively participated in the discussion. Overall, your viewpoint doesn't diverge significantly from what many millions of staunch Democrats express across social media, conversations, articles, or news media. It appears that both your perspective and mine can be categorized within a specific viewpoint, suggesting we can be neatly put in the appropriate box.
Overall, your viewpoint doesn't diverge significantly from what many millions of staunch Democrats express across social media, conversations, articles, or news media.
It wouldn't, the position of the Democratic Party speaks for much of my views. It is not group think, it a reasoned out process as to how I prefer to see the country run. It just happens that there are millions of others who come to the same conclusion.
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.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.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.
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.
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
GAHere 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.....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
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.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.
GAI 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....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"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...."I would like to see conservatives understand this woke issue goes beyond the ridiculous and the periphery."
. . . and we agree again.
I bet we could even agree if "the public" was substituted for "conservatives":
'I would like the public to understand this woke issue goes beyond the ridiculous and the periphery.'
Surely, it would be better if the conservative image of 'woke' did include more than that pregnant 'man' on the Glamor cover, or the physical dominance of that transwoman swimmer, or the 'we/they' Tiktoker(?) with purple hair throwing a tantrum for being misgendered, or . . .
Wouldn't you also see a benefit if the liberal public understood that all conservatives resisting aspects or extrapolations of 'woke' aren't rednecks with pickups, guns, and beer?
A reason we don't have that benefit is because the ridiculous and the periphery is all that's presented to the public. The zealots of each party's ideology see to that. Nuance and pertinent details don't make good soundbites.
That's why it's harder to pry old understandings out of you. You see a threat so severe (you've said so) that you've gone to the wall—girded for battle with evil conservatives. No quarter, no compromise.
But, I gotcha back bud. I put a call out to Socrates for some quips about zeal being an emotion and the danger of basing decisions on emotion. Locke says he'll send you a note about the structural importance of reason in any 'whole society' decision (a mitigation of degrees of 'state of war'), and Dickens' estate is sending some of his selected reasonings from during his writing of that ' Two Cities' book.
GA ;-)The public would include moderates and the Left and they are not making that mistake. So, "public" means conservative. Many that seem to understand are our allies.
There are the conservatives in the Brooks Brothers suits, although well dressed are no better than the "r*necks. It is funny that here in Florida, they are the only ones with the big Trump Flags saying "Trump Won" when everyone knows he lost. Liberals and progressives simply are not as obviously garish in their style.
"A reason we don't have that benefit is because the ridiculous and the periphery is all that's presented to the public. The zealots of each party's ideology see to that. Nuance and pertinent details don't make good soundbites."
That would require that we take the time with the issue and dig a little deeper and not just take something at face value. If we want to really understand, nuances and pertinent details are essential. From my perspective, I cannot afford to listen to conservatives definition of"woke" and take it as gospel. I will look for what is behind it as I don't trust what they say.
In the world of Trump Republicanism, how can I comprise, with racism (see racism thread), the threat of tyranny and authoritarianism? And whether you admit it or not those that accomodate Trumpism by inaction and whataboutism are just as guilty as those who promote it. You can have your conservative principles and such, but the current direction of the "conservative" party leaves little room for compromise.
Tyrannical government is not reason, John Locke or otherwise, this idea that liberals operate on emotion is just more right wing bias in my opinion. You all get emotional enough about the stuff that you want to promote. You just need to open your eyes to see what is happening, and the direction things are moving in.So I'm the blind one? Well, okay, sure.
GA
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.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?
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.
Wait, Willow...no links from CNN to make your arguments? Isn't that where you get all your information from?
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.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.'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.'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.Cred, isn't it interesting that Agenda 2025 is not known to the people of this forum? Unreal.
I don't think that you can really have an understanding of what Trump is up to without reviewing Agenda 2025.
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.
Related Discussions
- 46
Shout Out To Elon Musk
by Sharlee 18 months ago
First, so many need to be thanked for helping with the current disaster that Hurricane Ian has caused. So, many heroes, and so wonderful to see so many come together to help with this tragedy. All need to be recognized as heroes. Elon Musk has stepped up quickly to help the people of Florida --...
- 201
Elon Musk Makes Offer To Buy Twitter And Take It Private
by ga anderson 24 months ago
Elon Musk Offers to buy Twitter for $43 Billion dollarsThe link is a Google search quey. Pick your source for details. The short story is that we are about to see a battle of titans. America's richest man vs. the capital interests involved with Twitter. Musk has offered $43 Billion, and `they' say...
- 54
Elon Musk smoking weed during a TV interview...
by Jack Lee 5 years ago
How does the CEO of a major company think this is acceptable behavior? Why is he still in charge of Tesla? Where is the sane people in his company? If I was an employee of this company, I would take as message it is ok to smoke weed as well... The question for all Tesla owners is this - do you want...
- 34
Why Many Might Not Vote for Trump
by J Conn 2 days ago
1.) Corruption a.) Trump just offered to sell policy to the oil industry for $1 billion b.) Tried to blackmail a foreign country to get a fake investigation c.) Tried to steal a presidential election with blatant lies d.) ...
- 8
Who is the best actor and why, Robert De niro or Al Pacino?
by ALFRED FOX 13 years ago
Who is the best actor and why, Robert De niro or Al Pacino?
- 44
Tracking Biden's Polls --- How Low Can He Go
by Sharlee 22 months ago
May 31, 2022 -- Disapproval 54.0Aproval - 40.0https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/bi … al-rating/Reuters Ipsos -- 59% of Americans disapprove of the president -- 36% approveUPDATED MAY 24, 2022https://graphics.reuters.com/USA-BIDEN/ … opagnqapa/Thoughts