|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
United States43505 Posts
On September 11 2025 07:31 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 07:26 WombaT wrote:On September 11 2025 07:12 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 06:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 11 2025 06:26 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 06:18 farvacola wrote:
There isn’t even a suspect in custody and you’ve already got the “the left has this coming” goons already out in force. How predictable. I would have waited for more but the problem is we already have some lefties cheering it. The praise itself deserves opposition. Riddle: What's the difference between sincerely saying "thoughts and prayers" and insincerely saying it? Answer: + Show Spoiler + Whatever you think about that phrase no one cheers school shootings. This isn't hard. On September 11 2025 06:32 KwarK wrote:On September 11 2025 06:26 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 06:18 farvacola wrote:
There isn’t even a suspect in custody and you’ve already got the “the left has this coming” goons already out in force. How predictable. I would have waited for more but the problem is we already have some lefties cheering it. The praise itself deserves opposition. I was against a society where we brand people we politically disagree with enemies and hurt them. I voted against that society at every opportunity. I wasn’t a part of the group that decided to turn this into a game and cheer whenever the enemy got hurt. I was in the group that wanted rule of law and compromise. But here we are. Elections have consequences. You didn’t seem to be too upset when the violence was being used against the people you didn’t like. I didn’t want this game, it was forced upon me by people like you, and now you feign outrage as I play my part. Your previously listed examples of violence leads me to believe you were always going to end up here, because your definition of violence is whacked. Moreover, I'm not so sure what you want is going to result from this. On September 11 2025 06:50 Godwrath wrote:On September 11 2025 06:24 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 05:48 LightSpectra wrote:On September 11 2025 05:41 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 05:06 Gorsameth wrote:On September 11 2025 04:55 Doublemint wrote:On September 11 2025 04:39 LightSpectra wrote:
[quote]
When Nancy Pelosi's husband was attacked, Trump joked about it and speculated it was a scorned lover. When two Minnesota state congressmen were assassinated, Republican Senator Mike Lee made a joke about it on Twitter. There's countless other examples of the far-right normalizing violence, surely they wouldn't hypocritically decide it's a big deal now that the leopards are eating their own faces? Trump is Trump and a piece of shit, absolutely no one expects better. there is a clear line to him entering the political stage and already terrible standards getting worse. but I thought people wanted things to get better. a certain decorum, sincere or not, should be expected. There was a big 'they go low, we go high' energy with Trump 1. Then the Democrats taking the high road let to Trump getting re-elected. Now people no longer give a shit. There is no reason to take the high road when the low road gets rewarded and the high road doesn't. What right-wing violence has been rewarded? Was anyone like, say, Charlie Kirk, cheering the shooting of the MN legislators? Here's Charlie Kirk praising Derek Chauvin, who murdered George Floyd: https://thecharliekirkshow.com/podcasts/the-charlie-kirk-show/the-case-to-pardon-derek-chauvin-ft-ben-shapiro More fast and loose here. The George Floyd murder was not a politically motivated action, and I've seen enough people complaining about Chauvin being railroaded to know it usually doesn't involve praise for him. You'd think the MN murders would be the perfect analogue here but somehow I think its hard to find anyone, anywhere of note who cheered that on. Moreover, what was the "reward"? People are acting like these events have played to someone's benefit and I want to know whose. There is such a thing of right wing violence too of course, but it normally doesn't get a slap on the back and most right-wing public figures are hounded to denounce it and their rhetoric that supposedly caused it. The fuck happened in january 6th? Trump wasn't rewarded for that, it almost ended his political career. Nor did it work to the benefit of those who did it or their poltical cause. I already said there is such a thing as poltical violence on the right, I'm contesting this strange idea that its a benefit, and thus is an excuse for the other side. Maybe though we are replying the 60s with a different tune. Hope they don't start bombing stuff too. Which side of the political ledger argues against giving every Tom, Dick or Harry whatever guns they fancy? If the left got their way it would defang their ability to enact political violence such as we saw tonight But apparently the left is simultaneously wanting one’s guns, but also all about that political violence Trump wasn’t rewarded for Jan 6th, but he wasn’t remotely punished either. He also pardoned people who 100% deserved jail time And the latter is why many of us think the majority of conservatives are completely full of it, with honourable exceptions do of course exist. Trump's approval rating also immediately recovered after January 6. It went all the way back up to 49%, which was higher than the 42% at which his first term started. Then in the second term he started with 47%. There was nothing "career ending" for Trump. If anything, January 6 emboldened the right-wing. The outcry was fake. They supported Trump harder than ever before.
Yep. It just allowed for a purge of the party of all of the Republicans who wouldn’t sign off on a coup. They became RINOs and were forced out. If anything it helped him, a coup was an extremely effective purity test, it forced Republicans to choose between Trump and country.
|
|
|
Northern Ireland26225 Posts
On September 11 2025 07:36 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 07:31 Magic Powers wrote:On September 11 2025 07:26 WombaT wrote:On September 11 2025 07:12 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 06:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 11 2025 06:26 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 06:18 farvacola wrote:
There isn’t even a suspect in custody and you’ve already got the “the left has this coming” goons already out in force. How predictable. I would have waited for more but the problem is we already have some lefties cheering it. The praise itself deserves opposition. Riddle: What's the difference between sincerely saying "thoughts and prayers" and insincerely saying it? Answer: + Show Spoiler + Whatever you think about that phrase no one cheers school shootings. This isn't hard. On September 11 2025 06:32 KwarK wrote:On September 11 2025 06:26 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 06:18 farvacola wrote:
There isn’t even a suspect in custody and you’ve already got the “the left has this coming” goons already out in force. How predictable. I would have waited for more but the problem is we already have some lefties cheering it. The praise itself deserves opposition. I was against a society where we brand people we politically disagree with enemies and hurt them. I voted against that society at every opportunity. I wasn’t a part of the group that decided to turn this into a game and cheer whenever the enemy got hurt. I was in the group that wanted rule of law and compromise. But here we are. Elections have consequences. You didn’t seem to be too upset when the violence was being used against the people you didn’t like. I didn’t want this game, it was forced upon me by people like you, and now you feign outrage as I play my part. Your previously listed examples of violence leads me to believe you were always going to end up here, because your definition of violence is whacked. Moreover, I'm not so sure what you want is going to result from this. On September 11 2025 06:50 Godwrath wrote:On September 11 2025 06:24 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 05:48 LightSpectra wrote:On September 11 2025 05:41 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 05:06 Gorsameth wrote:On September 11 2025 04:55 Doublemint wrote:
[quote]
Trump is Trump and a piece of shit, absolutely no one expects better. there is a clear line to him entering the political stage and already terrible standards getting worse.
but I thought people wanted things to get better. a certain decorum, sincere or not, should be expected.
There was a big 'they go low, we go high' energy with Trump 1. Then the Democrats taking the high road let to Trump getting re-elected. Now people no longer give a shit. There is no reason to take the high road when the low road gets rewarded and the high road doesn't. What right-wing violence has been rewarded? Was anyone like, say, Charlie Kirk, cheering the shooting of the MN legislators? Here's Charlie Kirk praising Derek Chauvin, who murdered George Floyd: https://thecharliekirkshow.com/podcasts/the-charlie-kirk-show/the-case-to-pardon-derek-chauvin-ft-ben-shapiro More fast and loose here. The George Floyd murder was not a politically motivated action, and I've seen enough people complaining about Chauvin being railroaded to know it usually doesn't involve praise for him. You'd think the MN murders would be the perfect analogue here but somehow I think its hard to find anyone, anywhere of note who cheered that on. Moreover, what was the "reward"? People are acting like these events have played to someone's benefit and I want to know whose. There is such a thing of right wing violence too of course, but it normally doesn't get a slap on the back and most right-wing public figures are hounded to denounce it and their rhetoric that supposedly caused it. The fuck happened in january 6th? Trump wasn't rewarded for that, it almost ended his political career. Nor did it work to the benefit of those who did it or their poltical cause. I already said there is such a thing as poltical violence on the right, I'm contesting this strange idea that its a benefit, and thus is an excuse for the other side. Maybe though we are replying the 60s with a different tune. Hope they don't start bombing stuff too. Which side of the political ledger argues against giving every Tom, Dick or Harry whatever guns they fancy? If the left got their way it would defang their ability to enact political violence such as we saw tonight But apparently the left is simultaneously wanting one’s guns, but also all about that political violence Trump wasn’t rewarded for Jan 6th, but he wasn’t remotely punished either. He also pardoned people who 100% deserved jail time And the latter is why many of us think the majority of conservatives are completely full of it, with honourable exceptions do of course exist. Trump's approval rating also immediately recovered after January 6. It went all the way back up to 49%, which was higher than the 42% at which his first term started. Then in the second term he started with 47%. There was nothing "career ending" for Trump. If anything, January 6 emboldened the right-wing. The outcry was fake. They supported Trump harder than ever before. Yep. It just allowed for a purge of the party of all of the Republicans who wouldn’t sign off on a coup. They became RINOs and were forced out. If anything it helped him, a coup was an extremely effective purity test, it forced Republicans to choose between Trump and country.
Preposterous, modern conservatives are proud custodians of the constitution
|
On September 11 2025 07:22 Hat Trick of Today wrote:
No one cheers school shootings but at the same time no one cares about about school shootings to make them stop because it’s politically convenient to have them keep happening. Same deal here.
Is this an indictment of the left? Surely the only people who politically benefit from school shootings are people who want to take guns away? All of you are confusing a null result (or a small result) as a benefit.
On September 11 2025 07:23 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 07:12 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 06:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 11 2025 06:26 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 06:18 farvacola wrote:
There isn’t even a suspect in custody and you’ve already got the “the left has this coming” goons already out in force. How predictable. I would have waited for more but the problem is we already have some lefties cheering it. The praise itself deserves opposition. Riddle: What's the difference between sincerely saying "thoughts and prayers" and insincerely saying it? Answer: + Show Spoiler + Whatever you think about that phrase no one cheers school shootings. This isn't hard. On September 11 2025 06:32 KwarK wrote:On September 11 2025 06:26 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 06:18 farvacola wrote:
There isn’t even a suspect in custody and you’ve already got the “the left has this coming” goons already out in force. How predictable. I would have waited for more but the problem is we already have some lefties cheering it. The praise itself deserves opposition. I was against a society where we brand people we politically disagree with enemies and hurt them. I voted against that society at every opportunity. I wasn’t a part of the group that decided to turn this into a game and cheer whenever the enemy got hurt. I was in the group that wanted rule of law and compromise. But here we are. Elections have consequences. You didn’t seem to be too upset when the violence was being used against the people you didn’t like. I didn’t want this game, it was forced upon me by people like you, and now you feign outrage as I play my part. Your previously listed examples of violence leads me to believe you were always going to end up here, because your definition of violence is whacked. Moreover, I'm not so sure what you want is going to result from this. On September 11 2025 06:50 Godwrath wrote:On September 11 2025 06:24 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 05:48 LightSpectra wrote:On September 11 2025 05:41 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 05:06 Gorsameth wrote:On September 11 2025 04:55 Doublemint wrote:On September 11 2025 04:39 LightSpectra wrote:On September 11 2025 04:31 Doublemint wrote:
we know absolutely nothing thus far, but people very quickly lose their mind and manners.
When Nancy Pelosi's husband was attacked, Trump joked about it and speculated it was a scorned lover. When two Minnesota state congressmen were assassinated, Republican Senator Mike Lee made a joke about it on Twitter. There's countless other examples of the far-right normalizing violence, surely they wouldn't hypocritically decide it's a big deal now that the leopards are eating their own faces? Trump is Trump and a piece of shit, absolutely no one expects better. there is a clear line to him entering the political stage and already terrible standards getting worse. but I thought people wanted things to get better. a certain decorum, sincere or not, should be expected. There was a big 'they go low, we go high' energy with Trump 1. Then the Democrats taking the high road let to Trump getting re-elected. Now people no longer give a shit. There is no reason to take the high road when the low road gets rewarded and the high road doesn't. What right-wing violence has been rewarded? Was anyone like, say, Charlie Kirk, cheering the shooting of the MN legislators? Here's Charlie Kirk praising Derek Chauvin, who murdered George Floyd: https://thecharliekirkshow.com/podcasts/the-charlie-kirk-show/the-case-to-pardon-derek-chauvin-ft-ben-shapiro More fast and loose here. The George Floyd murder was not a politically motivated action, and I've seen enough people complaining about Chauvin being railroaded to know it usually doesn't involve praise for him. You'd think the MN murders would be the perfect analogue here but somehow I think its hard to find anyone, anywhere of note who cheered that on. Moreover, what was the "reward"? People are acting like these events have played to someone's benefit and I want to know whose. There is such a thing of right wing violence too of course, but it normally doesn't get a slap on the back and most right-wing public figures are hounded to denounce it and their rhetoric that supposedly caused it. The fuck happened in january 6th? Trump wasn't rewarded for that, it almost ended his political career. Nor did it work to the benefit of those who did it or their poltical cause. I already said there is such a thing as poltical violence on the right, I'm contesting this strange idea that its a benefit, and thus is an excuse for the other side. Maybe though we are replying the 60s with a different tune. Hope they don't start bombing stuff too. It almost ended Trump's political career, and yet somehow he became president for a second time. Uh-huh. Look, maybe you're not a big fan of hindsight reasoning, I can get behind that very much. But Trump did become president again. I wanna see what you understand as "almost ended his career", because I saw none of that.
Even today most people disapprove of Jan 6 and Trump's pardons. It seems silly to me to say that he had better odds of winning election again with Jan 6 than if it never happened. Slightly off topic but the biggest contributors to Trump winning again were A) thr silly NY case about the "falsified document" (his primary polling shot way above DeSantis after that) and B) Biden's mismanagement.
There is no world where Trump wants a repeat of that.
On September 11 2025 07:26 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 07:12 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 06:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 11 2025 06:26 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 06:18 farvacola wrote:
There isn’t even a suspect in custody and you’ve already got the “the left has this coming” goons already out in force. How predictable. I would have waited for more but the problem is we already have some lefties cheering it. The praise itself deserves opposition. Riddle: What's the difference between sincerely saying "thoughts and prayers" and insincerely saying it? Answer: + Show Spoiler + Whatever you think about that phrase no one cheers school shootings. This isn't hard. On September 11 2025 06:32 KwarK wrote:On September 11 2025 06:26 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 06:18 farvacola wrote:
There isn’t even a suspect in custody and you’ve already got the “the left has this coming” goons already out in force. How predictable. I would have waited for more but the problem is we already have some lefties cheering it. The praise itself deserves opposition. I was against a society where we brand people we politically disagree with enemies and hurt them. I voted against that society at every opportunity. I wasn’t a part of the group that decided to turn this into a game and cheer whenever the enemy got hurt. I was in the group that wanted rule of law and compromise. But here we are. Elections have consequences. You didn’t seem to be too upset when the violence was being used against the people you didn’t like. I didn’t want this game, it was forced upon me by people like you, and now you feign outrage as I play my part. Your previously listed examples of violence leads me to believe you were always going to end up here, because your definition of violence is whacked. Moreover, I'm not so sure what you want is going to result from this. On September 11 2025 06:50 Godwrath wrote:On September 11 2025 06:24 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 05:48 LightSpectra wrote:On September 11 2025 05:41 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 05:06 Gorsameth wrote:On September 11 2025 04:55 Doublemint wrote:On September 11 2025 04:39 LightSpectra wrote:On September 11 2025 04:31 Doublemint wrote:
we know absolutely nothing thus far, but people very quickly lose their mind and manners.
When Nancy Pelosi's husband was attacked, Trump joked about it and speculated it was a scorned lover. When two Minnesota state congressmen were assassinated, Republican Senator Mike Lee made a joke about it on Twitter. There's countless other examples of the far-right normalizing violence, surely they wouldn't hypocritically decide it's a big deal now that the leopards are eating their own faces? Trump is Trump and a piece of shit, absolutely no one expects better. there is a clear line to him entering the political stage and already terrible standards getting worse. but I thought people wanted things to get better. a certain decorum, sincere or not, should be expected. There was a big 'they go low, we go high' energy with Trump 1. Then the Democrats taking the high road let to Trump getting re-elected. Now people no longer give a shit. There is no reason to take the high road when the low road gets rewarded and the high road doesn't. What right-wing violence has been rewarded? Was anyone like, say, Charlie Kirk, cheering the shooting of the MN legislators? Here's Charlie Kirk praising Derek Chauvin, who murdered George Floyd: https://thecharliekirkshow.com/podcasts/the-charlie-kirk-show/the-case-to-pardon-derek-chauvin-ft-ben-shapiro More fast and loose here. The George Floyd murder was not a politically motivated action, and I've seen enough people complaining about Chauvin being railroaded to know it usually doesn't involve praise for him. You'd think the MN murders would be the perfect analogue here but somehow I think its hard to find anyone, anywhere of note who cheered that on. Moreover, what was the "reward"? People are acting like these events have played to someone's benefit and I want to know whose. There is such a thing of right wing violence too of course, but it normally doesn't get a slap on the back and most right-wing public figures are hounded to denounce it and their rhetoric that supposedly caused it. The fuck happened in january 6th? Trump wasn't rewarded for that, it almost ended his political career. Nor did it work to the benefit of those who did it or their poltical cause. I already said there is such a thing as poltical violence on the right, I'm contesting this strange idea that its a benefit, and thus is an excuse for the other side. Maybe though we are replying the 60s with a different tune. Hope they don't start bombing stuff too. Which side of the political ledger argues against giving every Tom, Dick or Harry whatever guns they fancy? If the left got their way it would defang their ability to enact political violence such as we saw tonight But apparently the left is simultaneously wanting one’s guns, but also all about that political violence Trump wasn’t rewarded for Jan 6th, but he wasn’t remotely punished either. He also pardoned people who 100% deserved jail time And the latter is why many of us think the majority of conservatives are completely full of it, with honourable exceptions do of course exist.
Like I said, in the 60s lefties were also bombing things. Plenty of ways to carry out an attack. The gun lines are odd because no one on the right is going to change their minds. All you are going to do is prove they mean what they say about the second amendment. It's not a good argument. If anything it should cause perhaps some belief that they are sincere at least some of the time (we can start there).
On September 11 2025 07:27 LightSpectra wrote:
Any conservatives here have a good reason why we should cry and condemn violence when conservatives are killed but it's OK for them to mock liberals/leftists and propagate insane conspiracies when they're killed?
No?
We can condemn both? We're watching people mock Kirk right now?
|
On September 11 2025 07:28 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 07:12 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 06:32 KwarK wrote:On September 11 2025 06:26 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 06:18 farvacola wrote:
There isn’t even a suspect in custody and you’ve already got the “the left has this coming” goons already out in force. How predictable. I would have waited for more but the problem is we already have some lefties cheering it. The praise itself deserves opposition. I was against a society where we brand people we politically disagree with enemies and hurt them. I voted against that society at every opportunity. I wasn’t a part of the group that decided to turn this into a game and cheer whenever the enemy got hurt. I was in the group that wanted rule of law and compromise. But here we are. Elections have consequences. You didn’t seem to be too upset when the violence was being used against the people you didn’t like. I didn’t want this game, it was forced upon me by people like you, and now you feign outrage as I play my part. Your previously listed examples of violence leads me to believe you were always going to end up here, because your definition of violence is whacked. Moreover, I'm not so sure what you want is going to result from this. I don't want any part of any of this. There's a better than even chance that my team loses. I voted against turning this into a team sport and cheering as people get hurt. When the FBI was used against the civil rights movement was that political violence?
Im not sure it's normally phrased that way. But again, if that's an example you are using then you were always going to end up here because bad stuff is always happening. If we've been struggling literally since the beginnings of the country now is a heck of a time to give up.
|
Trump won the second term because his supporters think his tariffs would be a good idea and that he would kick out duh immigrants. Those were the primary concerns of his base.
But that's not what propelled him to super-stardom. That was just the bread and butter of his campaign, i.e. the foundation. The icing on the cake was his frequent appeals to the far-right, that's what gave him a new edge, something bigger than before. He realized that his base didn't care how much further to the right he was moving. They literally didn't care at all, they kept supporting him anyway. He was able to rally conservatives and the far-right under one umbrella.
But that was of course Biden's fault. Yes, surely. Somehow. The mythical all-incompetent and always present Biden whenever Trump does anything at all.
You and Trump could be literally the same person. Trump and you blame Biden for literally everything.
|
So I despise my gov. Gavin Newsom. But I will give him props for this. I don't know if he's sincere, if it happened while he was in charge if he would change his tone or actions... maybe he feels he must do this because he had Kirk on his podcast. But given what I am reading here i have to least say this is unambiguously good. Also relevant because his silly Twitter trolling (not funny) had got him the eyes of a lot of Dems.
https://x.com/CAgovernor/status/1965899170579202144
|
On September 11 2025 08:00 Magic Powers wrote:
Trump won the second term because his supporters think his tariffs would be a good idea and that he would kick out duh immigrants. Those were the primary concerns of his base.
But that's not what propelled him to super-stardom. That was just the bread and butter of his campaign, i.e. the foundation. The icing on the cake was his frequent appeals to the far-right, that's what gave him a new edge, something bigger than before. He realized that his base didn't care how much further to the right he was moving. They literally didn't care at all, they kept supporting him anyway. He was able to rally conservatives and the far-right under one umbrella.
But that was of course Biden's fault. Yes, surely. Somehow. The mythical all-incompetent and always present Biden whenever Trump does anything at all.
You and Trump could be literally the same person. Trump and you blame Biden for literally everything.
This is basic political science. Trump couldn't win with just his base. He made inroads with almost every demographic possible. Biden's approval rating was in the toilet, which makes it hard for the same party to hold power. You are misreading what I wrote I think
|
On September 11 2025 08:02 Introvert wrote:So I despise my gov. Gavin Newsom. But I will give him props for this. I don't know if he's sincere, if it happened while he was in charge if he would change his tone or actions... maybe he feels he must do this because he had Kirk on his podcast. But given what I am reading here i have to least say this is unambiguously good. Also relevant because his silly Twitter trolling (not funny) had got him the eyes of a lot of Dems. https://x.com/CAgovernor/status/1965899170579202144
You are not giving him the benefit of the doubt for no reason. His trolling was just behaving the way the president does on twitter.
|
United States43505 Posts
On September 11 2025 08:02 Introvert wrote:So I despise my gov. Gavin Newsom. But I will give him props for this. I don't know if he's sincere, if it happened while he was in charge if he would change his tone or actions... maybe he feels he must do this because he had Kirk on his podcast. But given what I am reading here i have to least say this is unambiguously good. Also relevant because his silly Twitter trolling (not funny) had got him the eyes of a lot of Dems. https://x.com/CAgovernor/status/1965899170579202144
He's trying to appeal to the moderates who believe that we can all just go back to how things were before politics became a team sport and the Americans on the other team became the enemy. It's a waste of time. Moderate outraged conservatives are still going to vote for the Trump for a third term when the time comes. Moderate outraged liberals are going to continue to insist that reality is in breach of conventional political norms and therefore shouldn't be allowed.
The game has changed.
Let's say that in a few years Newsom is running against a conservative opponent who cheered publicly when a left wing firebrand was murdered. Newsom's not getting your vote, despite this performance.
|
On September 11 2025 08:08 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 08:02 Introvert wrote:So I despise my gov. Gavin Newsom. But I will give him props for this. I don't know if he's sincere, if it happened while he was in charge if he would change his tone or actions... maybe he feels he must do this because he had Kirk on his podcast. But given what I am reading here i have to least say this is unambiguously good. Also relevant because his silly Twitter trolling (not funny) had got him the eyes of a lot of Dems. https://x.com/CAgovernor/status/1965899170579202144 You are not giving him the benefit of the doubt for no reason. His trolling was just behaving the way the president does on twitter.
I am giving him the benefit of the doubt though? Alos saying it almost doesn't matter.
On September 11 2025 08:08 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 08:02 Introvert wrote:So I despise my gov. Gavin Newsom. But I will give him props for this. I don't know if he's sincere, if it happened while he was in charge if he would change his tone or actions... maybe he feels he must do this because he had Kirk on his podcast. But given what I am reading here i have to least say this is unambiguously good. Also relevant because his silly Twitter trolling (not funny) had got him the eyes of a lot of Dems. https://x.com/CAgovernor/status/1965899170579202144 He's trying to appeal to the moderates who believe that we can all just go back to how things were before politics became a team sport and the Americans on the other team became the enemy. It's a waste of time. Moderate outraged conservatives are still going to vote for the Trump for a third term when the time comes. Moderate outraged liberals are going to continue to insist that reality is in breach of conventional political norms and therefore shouldn't be allowed. The game has changed. Let's say that in a few years Newsom is running against a conservative opponent who cheered publicly when a left wing firebrand was murdered. Newsom's not getting your vote, despite this performance.
If the nomination is won by right-wing Kwark who said "about time" then i won't be voting for that person either.
|
On September 11 2025 08:05 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 08:00 Magic Powers wrote:
Trump won the second term because his supporters think his tariffs would be a good idea and that he would kick out duh immigrants. Those were the primary concerns of his base.
But that's not what propelled him to super-stardom. That was just the bread and butter of his campaign, i.e. the foundation. The icing on the cake was his frequent appeals to the far-right, that's what gave him a new edge, something bigger than before. He realized that his base didn't care how much further to the right he was moving. They literally didn't care at all, they kept supporting him anyway. He was able to rally conservatives and the far-right under one umbrella.
But that was of course Biden's fault. Yes, surely. Somehow. The mythical all-incompetent and always present Biden whenever Trump does anything at all.
You and Trump could be literally the same person. Trump and you blame Biden for literally everything. This is basic political science. Trump couldn't win with just his base. He made inroads with almost every demographic possible. Biden's approval rating was in the toilet, which makes it hard for the same party to hold power. You are misreading what I wrote I think
Well, I know he gained with just about every demographic. But why did that happen? It wasn't because of Biden, and it wasn't because of something temporary. It was about fundamental fears that Trump stoked. He was all about the economy, because people are afraid of the economy. He was all about immigration, because people are afraid of immigrants. That's how he won. I mean, there was more. He also rallied against LGBT harder than before.
So the difference between first and second term is that he ramped up the rhetoric as much as he could. And that worked.
I ask you: why would that work with the American people? No, it wasn't Biden's fault. Find a different answer, I'm asking you to find an answer outside of Biden.
|
On September 11 2025 08:12 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 08:05 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 08:00 Magic Powers wrote:
Trump won the second term because his supporters think his tariffs would be a good idea and that he would kick out duh immigrants. Those were the primary concerns of his base.
But that's not what propelled him to super-stardom. That was just the bread and butter of his campaign, i.e. the foundation. The icing on the cake was his frequent appeals to the far-right, that's what gave him a new edge, something bigger than before. He realized that his base didn't care how much further to the right he was moving. They literally didn't care at all, they kept supporting him anyway. He was able to rally conservatives and the far-right under one umbrella.
But that was of course Biden's fault. Yes, surely. Somehow. The mythical all-incompetent and always present Biden whenever Trump does anything at all.
You and Trump could be literally the same person. Trump and you blame Biden for literally everything. This is basic political science. Trump couldn't win with just his base. He made inroads with almost every demographic possible. Biden's approval rating was in the toilet, which makes it hard for the same party to hold power. You are misreading what I wrote I think Well, I know he gained with just about every demographic. But why did that happen? It wasn't because of Biden, and it wasn't because of something temporary. It was about fundamental fears that Trump stoked. He was all about the economy, because people are afraid of the economy. He was all about immigration, because people are afraid of immigrants. That's how he won. I mean, there was more. He also rallied against LGBT harder than before. So the difference between first and second term is that he ramped up the rhetoric as much as he could. And that worked. I ask you: why would that work with the American people? No, it wasn't Biden's fault. Find a different answer, I'm asking you to find an answer outside of Biden.
Biden was president and his decisions and the promises he made are directly relevant? "Please explain how Trump won the presidency without talking about who is president." That sounds kind of silly, doesn't it? People don't make choices in a vacuum. I could say things that Biden had a hand in without using his name...Trump won because of inflation and immigration/border control.
|
United States43505 Posts
On September 11 2025 08:12 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 08:08 KwarK wrote:On September 11 2025 08:02 Introvert wrote:So I despise my gov. Gavin Newsom. But I will give him props for this. I don't know if he's sincere, if it happened while he was in charge if he would change his tone or actions... maybe he feels he must do this because he had Kirk on his podcast. But given what I am reading here i have to least say this is unambiguously good. Also relevant because his silly Twitter trolling (not funny) had got him the eyes of a lot of Dems. https://x.com/CAgovernor/status/1965899170579202144 He's trying to appeal to the moderates who believe that we can all just go back to how things were before politics became a team sport and the Americans on the other team became the enemy. It's a waste of time. Moderate outraged conservatives are still going to vote for the Trump for a third term when the time comes. Moderate outraged liberals are going to continue to insist that reality is in breach of conventional political norms and therefore shouldn't be allowed. The game has changed. Let's say that in a few years Newsom is running against a conservative opponent who cheered publicly when a left wing firebrand was murdered. Newsom's not getting your vote, despite this performance. If the nomination is won by right-wing Kwark who said "about time" then i won't be voting for that person either.
I don't believe you.
|
On September 11 2025 08:19 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 08:12 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 08:08 KwarK wrote:On September 11 2025 08:02 Introvert wrote:So I despise my gov. Gavin Newsom. But I will give him props for this. I don't know if he's sincere, if it happened while he was in charge if he would change his tone or actions... maybe he feels he must do this because he had Kirk on his podcast. But given what I am reading here i have to least say this is unambiguously good. Also relevant because his silly Twitter trolling (not funny) had got him the eyes of a lot of Dems. https://x.com/CAgovernor/status/1965899170579202144 He's trying to appeal to the moderates who believe that we can all just go back to how things were before politics became a team sport and the Americans on the other team became the enemy. It's a waste of time. Moderate outraged conservatives are still going to vote for the Trump for a third term when the time comes. Moderate outraged liberals are going to continue to insist that reality is in breach of conventional political norms and therefore shouldn't be allowed. The game has changed. Let's say that in a few years Newsom is running against a conservative opponent who cheered publicly when a left wing firebrand was murdered. Newsom's not getting your vote, despite this performance. If the nomination is won by right-wing Kwark who said "about time" then i won't be voting for that person either. I don't believe you.
Then let's pray we don't have to find out and it never gets there.
|
On September 11 2025 08:16 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 08:12 Magic Powers wrote:On September 11 2025 08:05 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 08:00 Magic Powers wrote:
Trump won the second term because his supporters think his tariffs would be a good idea and that he would kick out duh immigrants. Those were the primary concerns of his base.
But that's not what propelled him to super-stardom. That was just the bread and butter of his campaign, i.e. the foundation. The icing on the cake was his frequent appeals to the far-right, that's what gave him a new edge, something bigger than before. He realized that his base didn't care how much further to the right he was moving. They literally didn't care at all, they kept supporting him anyway. He was able to rally conservatives and the far-right under one umbrella.
But that was of course Biden's fault. Yes, surely. Somehow. The mythical all-incompetent and always present Biden whenever Trump does anything at all.
You and Trump could be literally the same person. Trump and you blame Biden for literally everything. This is basic political science. Trump couldn't win with just his base. He made inroads with almost every demographic possible. Biden's approval rating was in the toilet, which makes it hard for the same party to hold power. You are misreading what I wrote I think Well, I know he gained with just about every demographic. But why did that happen? It wasn't because of Biden, and it wasn't because of something temporary. It was about fundamental fears that Trump stoked. He was all about the economy, because people are afraid of the economy. He was all about immigration, because people are afraid of immigrants. That's how he won. I mean, there was more. He also rallied against LGBT harder than before. So the difference between first and second term is that he ramped up the rhetoric as much as he could. And that worked. I ask you: why would that work with the American people? No, it wasn't Biden's fault. Find a different answer, I'm asking you to find an answer outside of Biden. Biden was president and his decisions and the promises he made are directly relevant? "Please explain how Trump won the presidency without talking about who is president." That sounds kind of silly, doesn't it? People don't make choices in a vacuum. I could say things that Biden had a hand in without using his name...Trump won because of inflation and immigration/border control.
If people cared about inflation, they would've voted for Harris. She promised a tax reduction for poor people and an increase for the top earners. Trump did the exact opposite, promising to raise taxes specifically for poor people and lowering taxes for the superwealthy. If inflation was a concern for people, Harris was the obvious pick.
Immigration was one of the reasons indeed, as I already acknowledged. But it was fear of immigrants, not a mishandling of immigration. Under Biden, immigrants didn't wreak havoc. That's fiction written by conservatives. And that's precisely what I'm trying to get you to understand. Trump stoked fears, he wasn't looking at reality and pointing out how bad things are. He was making shit up and making people afraid of the made up shit.
|
On September 11 2025 08:25 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 08:16 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 08:12 Magic Powers wrote:On September 11 2025 08:05 Introvert wrote:On September 11 2025 08:00 Magic Powers wrote:
Trump won the second term because his supporters think his tariffs would be a good idea and that he would kick out duh immigrants. Those were the primary concerns of his base.
But that's not what propelled him to super-stardom. That was just the bread and butter of his campaign, i.e. the foundation. The icing on the cake was his frequent appeals to the far-right, that's what gave him a new edge, something bigger than before. He realized that his base didn't care how much further to the right he was moving. They literally didn't care at all, they kept supporting him anyway. He was able to rally conservatives and the far-right under one umbrella.
But that was of course Biden's fault. Yes, surely. Somehow. The mythical all-incompetent and always present Biden whenever Trump does anything at all.
You and Trump could be literally the same person. Trump and you blame Biden for literally everything. This is basic political science. Trump couldn't win with just his base. He made inroads with almost every demographic possible. Biden's approval rating was in the toilet, which makes it hard for the same party to hold power. You are misreading what I wrote I think Well, I know he gained with just about every demographic. But why did that happen? It wasn't because of Biden, and it wasn't because of something temporary. It was about fundamental fears that Trump stoked. He was all about the economy, because people are afraid of the economy. He was all about immigration, because people are afraid of immigrants. That's how he won. I mean, there was more. He also rallied against LGBT harder than before. So the difference between first and second term is that he ramped up the rhetoric as much as he could. And that worked. I ask you: why would that work with the American people? No, it wasn't Biden's fault. Find a different answer, I'm asking you to find an answer outside of Biden. Biden was president and his decisions and the promises he made are directly relevant? "Please explain how Trump won the presidency without talking about who is president." That sounds kind of silly, doesn't it? People don't make choices in a vacuum. I could say things that Biden had a hand in without using his name...Trump won because of inflation and immigration/border control. If people cared about inflation, they would've voted for Harris. She promised a tax reduction for poor people and an increase for the top earners. Trump did the exact opposite, promising to raise taxes specifically for poor people and lowering taxes for the superwealthy. If inflation was a concern for people, Harris was the obvious pick. Immigration was one of the reasons indeed, as I already acknowledged. But it was fear of immigrants, not a mishandling of immigration. Under Biden, immigrants didn't wreak havoc. That's fiction written by conservatives. And that's precisely what I'm trying to get you to understand. Trump stoked fears, he wasn't looking at reality and pointing out how bad things are. He was making shit up and making people afraid of the made up shit.
I am going to gently suggest that what you consider obvious is not actually obvious. Also excusing politicians you like for their political missteps is probably counter productive
|
On September 11 2025 08:12 Magic Powers wrote: He was all about immigration, because people are afraid of immigrants. That's how he won. I mean, there was more. He also rallied against LGBT harder than before.
So the difference between first and second term is that he ramped up the rhetoric as much as he could. And that worked.
I ask you: why would that work with the American people? No, it wasn't Biden's fault. Find a different answer, I'm asking you to find an answer outside of Biden.
Nobody is afraid of immigrants, right wingers saw them as getting a free ride and stressing social services which they don't believe should exist in the first place, or should be the dominion of charities or religious organizations. You should confront the possibility that most americans are shown content by algorithms following a bimodal distribution, and that tends to favor the far right because the far left is de facto banned. Generations of anticommunist and antisocialist propaganda has limited the left's only difference in flavor to be social issues. Every place you get your information or content is controlled by corporations who would NEVER allow serious threat to their power through discussing regulation or nationalization.
|
United States43505 Posts
On September 11 2025 08:51 Phyanketto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2025 08:12 Magic Powers wrote: He was all about immigration, because people are afraid of immigrants. That's how he won. I mean, there was more. He also rallied against LGBT harder than before.
So the difference between first and second term is that he ramped up the rhetoric as much as he could. And that worked.
I ask you: why would that work with the American people? No, it wasn't Biden's fault. Find a different answer, I'm asking you to find an answer outside of Biden. Nobody is afraid of immigrants, right wingers saw them as getting a free ride and stressing social services which they don't believe should exist in the first place, or should be the dominion of charities or religious organizations. You should confront the possibility that most americans are shown content by algorithms following a bimodal distribution, and that tends to favor the far right because the far left is de facto banned. Generations of anticommunist and antisocialist propaganda has limited the left's only difference in flavor to be social issues. Every place you get your information or content is controlled by corporations who would NEVER allow serious threat to their power through discussing regulation or nationalization.
This reductive analysis fails on a very cursory comparison to the objective reality we see before us.
If the corporations were really in charge then we wouldn't see Trump routinely fucking them.
We wouldn't see Trump extorting them.
We wouldn't see them having to make payments to him in order to have their products exempted from tariffs.
If you want to argue that the corporations brought Trump to power then it'll have to be a Hindenburg bringing Hitler to power style comparison where they immediately learned that they had zero control over him. But you didn't opt for that.
Big corporations are very clearly junior partners vying for Trump's blessings and seeking to avoid his judgment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
