Pass? Well maybe that’s the problem. Let’s start with student loan forgiveness which was done by executive fiat.
But you’re missing the point Tom. Perception is reality.
Last edited:
Jan 6, 2025, 4 years after the Trump led insurrection on the Capitol
- Thread starter Chishawk1425
- Start date
But you’re missing the point Tom. Perception is reality.
I have little doubt that trump has/will run in ways that are far from moderate and from time to time will be a shitshow - it's especially the nature of new administrations, though i suspect a little less so on the second go round when they tend to have at least a little more discipline (eg as 'might' be reflected in the johnson speakership election). The funny thing about whataboutism like this is...IT'S USUALLY TRUE!!!! (So I honestly try hard not to play that game, though I'm sure I don't always succeed, because there's never really an online winner.)
But...more relevant to the discussion here, all of those whataboutism cards were, in fact, played - over and over again, in fact -- in the election. And the part of the electorate that prevailed chose the other guy's whataboutism. Call me cynical if you will. I will grant you that choice may seem mystifying, but only an ostrich buries its head in the sand rather than figuring out why.
That's the other thing that boggles my mind. I can't quite get my head around how many on the left take every crazy word out of that guy's mouth (or twitter feed, which may not be his own mouth) as if it's a gospel promise that will definitively come true. (Canada? Greenland? Seriously?)
I tend to think people can recognize straw men when they see them, and the D's would be better off focusing on stuff that's not fantasyland trolling.
Holy shit. The left? He promised to lower prices. Economy number one on exit polls. I knew then he couldn’t deliver. What about all idiots who voted for him who ate that shit up.?
1. Has he taken office yet? (checks phone calendar)
2. But seriously, what the idiots heard was I'll lower prices (and eventually, they'll judge him on that). What they heard but never took seriously was "on day one" (because no one can do anything consequential on day one and they actually understand that). And what they didn't hear was "by implementing price controls".
now of course, D's made many cogent arguments along the lines of (i) they're already low/coming down, and (ii) his economic platform (eg, tariffs) won't lower prices. but I think you've just done precisely what i was bemoaning by zooming in on 'day one' when we're at like day negative 14.
He shouldn't have been allowed to be on the ballot, we are a failed Democracy. The SCOTUS is an absolute corrupt disgrace.
1. No but he is back pedaling already because he knows people are going to expect him to deliver and he won’t.
2. So the only part that counts is the “on day one”?…got it.
And Mexico will pay for a wall…
Chis, i'm not being judgmental here. I am trying to be explanatory.
I'm actually pretty confident that 51% of our population are not, in fact, full on MAGA, and that when it comes to elections, there are a very substantial number of non-crazy people that determine outcomes based on their broad perceptions of their world and the direction it's moving. And they're capable of evaluating that question without the "benefit" of twitter/bluesky memes.
But you just keep calling them all stupid, evil, or whatever other adjective you want to use, because surely that is the right answer (not to mention the right political strategy).
Last edited:
That's not at all what i said - they will be evaluating him and R's on the economy, and 2026 will be the first reflection of their thinking. but they won't say, "hot damn, on january 26, 2025, my eggs still cost x"
Don't get me started on the Mexico wall, as it reflects yet another bizarro world thing. Set aside the discussion we've just had. Why on earth would you attack someone as a promise breaker with respect to a promise that you would not in a thousand years actually want them to keep?
But again, QED. If middle right (or even right lunatics) had actually believed that and it mattered that much to them, rather than people being able to evaluate political rhetoric for what it is, explain to me why on earth they'd vote to bring him back as president?
(A: Because, per my broader point, they have a gut feeling, validated to a degree by biden himself, that the border got out of control on his watch.)
Last edited:
My problem is with the people who voted for this bullshit. He promises shit that sounds good to stupid people but if you are smart enough to know he won’t deliver do you vote for him anyway?
Again, because I think what more people than most seem to want to admit do is to evaluate the themes, rather than to evaluate the fine print. Fine print is electoral rhetoric. (BTW re: the wall, the better message would have been simply "we kept him from building it")
Indeed, the only non fine print thing i can remember that 'might' have been a material part of rejecting a president was 'read my lips no new taxes'. (Though i tend to think bush was rejected because people were just tired with r's and clinton connected with them since "it's the economy stupid").
Exactly, the choice is indeed ours and it's really pretty simple. And that choice, like many Americans, is that we prefer that our president not be a convicted felon.
If you paid attention, you'd realize that many of our allies have turned right and have the same concerns as what we have in the U.S.:
The lefties have failed to protect our borders.
The lefties screwed up with Covid.
The lefties overspent and caused inflation.
The world is a more dangerous place than it was 4 years ago.
Why can't it be both? Don't act like Democrats put forth a viable candidate and more importantly, a solid strategy steeped in policy to sincerely make America great again. "Not Trump" backfired.
I disagree.
Or there’s this: we need secure borders, reasonable inflation, and I want a president that knows boys don’t have periods or get pregnant.
If those terms are unacceptable, well you can just cry like a libtard bitch for the next 4 years.
It’s really simple
Harris was a helluva a lot more viable than Trump. How can you even post that with a straight face?
The Trump DOJ failed to convict them. The federal prosecutor he appointed moved to drop the charges.
if only i had a nickel for every wapo headline that i would have liked to edit...
WTF? The thing Trump lacks as much as anything else is fine print. There is no substance to what he says. Those falling for it have no interest in the details, all they look for are the headlines that say what they want to hear.
You continue to be very verbose while saying very little of consequence. It's no wonder you're defending Trump.
It's easy. People are dumb and easily swayed. Participation was low. It is easier to scare people than inspire people. WOC.
Are you okay? You don't seem okay. You seem very angry. Did you kick your dog when Iowa beat Nebraska?
This has always irritated me to no end. The media, left, and DOJ thought nothing of it.
Really? What could the democrats do to change abby and northern's minds? They already vote against their best interests. Viable candidate? I don't think people even know what that is. History is going to look fondly at Biden and all I read here is how godawful he is. I don't trust Americans to have the first clue what's viable, or in their best interests.
How is someone ^ this delusional allowed to be near small children?
