|
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 |
On February 19 2026 22:18 Jankisa wrote:
Most political analysts agree that the reason why Trump won over Kamala, other then the price of eggs and general anti-establishment and party in power mood was that people perceive him as authentic.
Marco Rubio called Trump every name in the book, Trump did the same to him, Rubio has had a lot of say about Trump even when he wasn't a candidate, he condemned January 6th, he was a strong supporter of Ukraine.
Until he wasn't, when the time came to flip flop, he did it, when he needed to bend over and sell USAID and Ukraine down the drain, he did it, he's a spineless weasel, people like the resident "centrists" are clinging to him because he's basically the only adult left in the room, that's a mirage, he is an empty suit and if the spotlight ever shone on him he'd melt down, AOC would wipe the floor with him, people thinking otherwise are pretty obviously steeped in right wing propaganda.
Right wingers have focused their ire and propaganda machine on AOC because they are threatened by her, she is intelligent, authentic and charismatic, plus, she's a woman, everything they hate, same way they obsessed with Pelosi and Hillary, they switched to her, because they are terrified of competent women.
In other news, it seems like prince nonce got arrested, isn't it nice to have a country not ran by pedophiles?
note he was arrested for passing sensitive information to Epstein while he was a trade envoy, not for any sex stuff.
|
Prince Andrew in jail for 'Epstein' ties.
US: We can't lock up all the billionaire pedo's otherwise the elite would be gone.
|
Oh, I am aware, but I believe we are all also in agreement that Andrew is a pedophile, a pedophile who is a member of one of the most powerful and influential family in the world and UK, and he got arrested.
Why? Well, because in UK the government is not completely corrupt and led by another pedophile.
I agree that American politics are likely too inherently misogynist (just see last word vomit from oBlade) to get behind one in enough numbers to get a woman president, I understand that pragmatism is needed and nominating a woman, again, might be a bad choice.
The part that I strongly reject is this premise that Marco Rubio is some sort of a super popular amazing politician who would dance circles around someone like AOC, he was humiliated in a debate against Trump, sure, it was Trump from 10 years ago, but it was still extremely showing.
Trump has a strange grip on USA, I think even "centrists" around here would agree that he lost the debate to Kamala, the motherfucker was talking about people eating pets, he is a certified moron, and it still didn't matter.
|
United States43588 Posts
The members of the royal family work for the crown, the crown doesn’t work for them. In theory at least. Their job is to protect and serve the institution but the institution has no obligation to them. The average oligarch owns wealth and power and can use it for their own ends, constitutional monarchy is a weird reversal where the wealth and power owns the individual. They belong to the family, it’ll outlive them.
|
On February 19 2026 12:13 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2026 10:13 LightSpectra wrote:On February 19 2026 09:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 19 2026 08:45 LightSpectra wrote:On February 19 2026 07:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 19 2026 06:09 LightSpectra wrote:On February 19 2026 05:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 19 2026 05:31 Jankisa wrote:On February 19 2026 04:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 19 2026 03:53 Jankisa wrote:[quote] Every time you go on one of these, I'll just post this, because, well, they are executing people in the streets, kidnapping them and taking them to concentration camps: + Show Spoiler + "Go on one of these" meaning? Pointing out that the "left wing" (they're centrist capitalist on a real political spectrum) of the capitalist party are not "the same" as the right wing, while also pointing out they are part of the problem, not a solution? I'll also remind you that Democrats helped lay the foundations for them to do that. Including yucking it up with the people doing it before their hubris led to the fascists expanding the longstanding violent persecution of oppressed people (some of the worst of it by Democrat controlled police departments https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/feb/24/chicago-police-detain-americans-black-site ) in the US. + Show Spoiler +EDIT: Republican and Democrat voters/supporters bickering over which people they should let exploit and abuse everyone for the Epstein class just means everyone (but the Epstein class) is losing. Although... There's something I think most people have started to notice in the US, which is that there's also the "lackey class" that the economy is somewhat accommodating. It's the ~top 10% that are basically being bribed with shiny trinkets for their complicity. https://www.marketplace.org/story/2025/09/17/top-10-of-earners-make-up-half-of-us-retail-spending Again, you are preaching to the choir, no one disagrees that Democrats are a corporatist party who has done plenty of bad shit over the years, and will, inevitably do more. They are still much better for me, + Show Spoiler +the world and an average American.
They didn't start any of the relatively recent wars, they didn't start any of the trade wars and states where they govern on average have much, much better outcomes for average people.
It's incredibly obtuse and rude to keep on banging the same drum as if everyone here hasn't heard every intimate thought you have had about the Democratic party.
It's not interesting, original and it doesn't relate to the current situation and crisis that the world is dealing with. No one fucking cares about how fucking stupid Hilary's team and Democrats were in 2016, in case you didn't check lately, it's 2026 and all the bad shit that is happening is enacted by Republican president, congress and senate. If Democrats get some semblance of power back in the midterms and start fucking up, which they will, please come here and shit on them all you like, in the meantime, stop, you are showing incredible lack of humanity, the people in their concentration camps that are being denied meals or contact with their families, who are being beaten up, raped, killed don't give a flying fuck about what Hillary did in 2016 or if her, Bill and Trump were buddies before that. + Show Spoiler +For fuck sake man, honestly, your brain is just as broken and fucked up as oBlade's.
I'm glad you stopped posting your tankie takes in the Russia / Ukraine thread, maybe it's time for you to do the same here until the midterms, because you are just making a fool out of yourself and annoying everyone else for no fucking reason. The bold is really a lot of the crux of it. People refuse to see how we couldn't have gotten Trump/Republicans (or the Dynasty Trusts) without the Clintons and Biden/Democrats (and Delaware). "No one fucking cares about how fucking stupid Hilary's team and Democrats were in 2016" or have been for decades, or how Biden's/Democrats hubris got us Trump 2.0 (among countless other issues) or the people that have suffered/died as a consequence, because for all the problems, it's working well enough for you/them. One funny thing is, we all know no one advocating incremental reformism through Democrat electoralism will accept that when their family ends up on the chopping block. Democrats don't win election -> people suffer -> "why didn't Democrats stop this?" -> refuse to vote for Democrats because they can't do anything while they don't have power -> Democrats don't win election ad infinitum Except in reality... Black people suffer from a racial wealth gap-> Black people ensure Democrats win elections -> Democrats don't improve that wealth gap-> Black people continue voting for them their whole lives at rates unparalleled by any other groups -> Democrats lose to fascists because of their hubris -> The transition from mass disruptive politics to electoral incorporation helped stabilize a racial wealth order that remains largely intact. Movements fought for change, flooded the streets, and demanded justice, and the system pulled them in, calmed the unrest, and left who owns what largely the same. People won legal rights and political seats, but real economic power stayed concentrated at the top. Meanwhile, the rules of capitalism shifted to protect wealth. Investments are taxed less than work. Finance operates with fewer limits. Housing became a vehicle for family wealth. Unions weakened. Dynasty trusts let the rich pass assets across generations with minimal interference. These are not isolated policies. Together, they reinforce class power. Bringing movements into electoral politics stabilized the system without redistributing wealth. This has happened under both Democratic and Republican administrations, showing that representation alone rarely changes the underlying distribution of wealth or addresses structural inequality. Inequality, including racial wealth gaps, continues to reproduce itself. The result is a bipartisan system where wealth persists across generations, while labor and social movements remain episodic and are absorbed by the system to preserve existing power. In reality, Democrats have had power for less than half of the past 50 years, and in terms of years where they had the House, Senate, and White House, it's been less than Republicans. + Show Spoiler +
You're blaming a world largely created by Republicans on "the uniparty" and kneecapping the only people preventing them from making racial wealth gap even worse.
Except when Democrats held large majorities in the house and senate, while holding the presidency, they finally passed their greatest achievement in the last 50 years. A more right-wing version of Nixoncare...Few people today would dare call President Richard Nixon a radical liberal. But 44 years ago, he proposed a health plan that went far beyond what today’s Affordable Care Act includes. At this rate, if Democrats win big enough majorities frequently enough, we'd be lucky to look forward to Democrats and their supporters celebrating finally building Trump's wall and implementing his immigration policy in 50 years. EDIT: Data question: from worst to best, how is the racial wealth gap looking in solid blue, purple, and solid red states? It's a more complicated question than it seems, but basically: Blue states provide higher potential income but have the worst wealth gaps due to high barriers to entry (housing/cost of living). Red states provide lower potential income but have the best wealth equality because they offer an easier path to middle-class stability (homeownership/PPP). The country's moved overwhelmingly to the economic right since Nixon. + Show Spoiler +Voters rewarded Reagan and Clinton with huge mandates because they liked what they saw. Obama was called a radical socialist despite being rather moderate, but by winning on a moderate platform he was able to expand Medicaid to 25 million people that didn't have it before, as well as prevent people with pre-existing conditions from being summarily killed by society.
If you want people to vote for more left-wing candidates, you need to convince people that left wing policies are preferable. What you're actually doing is encouraging detached apathy, which benefits the conservative status quo. You are right to point out that Democrats (in their primaries) chose to help move the country to the right since Nixon
lol. Every time I try to take you seriously for more than a paragraph you insist on driving your clown car back into the circus tent. I guess you just can't help yourself.
On February 19 2026 22:52 oBlade wrote:
AOC would be a great choice if she can get past the juggernaut of Kamala in the primaries. Just the thought of her being president is enough to get people out to vote. But she and Kamala are so equal and comparable in their level of competence that it's hard to even decide who should be at the top of the ticket between them. They'd have to flip a coin maybe. Kamala bringing the executive experience and an actual law degree, AOC bringing legislative experience. Either way the prospect of an all-female ticket would be the most terrifying and threatening thing to Republicans that Democrats should definitely do if they want to win.
Maybe AOC could still win some Republican votes if she starts trafficking children right now? Probably a futile strategy though, whoever the 2028 Republican candidate's going to be has probably been fucking kids since before AOC was born.
|
The last time the brother of the ruling king was arrested was in 1478. Charged with treason and (by his own chosing) drowned in a keg of wine. This is a big deal.
Misconduct in office (aka treason in his case) is just the charge on the warrant that was made public, you know how this goes there will be more.
|
On February 19 2026 23:50 Jankisa wrote:
The part that I strongly reject is this premise that Marco Rubio is some sort of a super popular amazing politician who would dance circles around someone like AOC, he was humiliated in a debate against Trump, sure, it was Trump from 10 years ago, but it was still extremely showing.
He was humiliated by Chris Christie for being a robot, and before that by late night comedy for drinking from a water bottle before responding to Obama's State of the Union, which persisted as a criticism into the 2016 campaign. After Christie et al. had dropped out and there were only ~4 left, Rubio strongly outfoxed/trounced Trump at one of the last debates (there were like ten).
That was not enough to outdo Trump's 30 years of planning and planting seeds to be president but it'll make short work of any Democrat in the House now.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On February 20 2026 00:24 oBlade wrote:
That was not enough to outdo Trump's 30 years of planning and planting seeds to be president but it'll make short work of any Democrat in the House now.
Do you think he'll get a standing applause from Republican voters when he takes credit for rapist and sex trafficker Andrew Tate not going to prison in Romania or the UK?
|
Modern r-voters will love that. They like insecure people that use violence or inherited money to get what they want, because in the end that's people like them.
They don't "like" Tate or Trump for the raping.. but they applaud them for having enough money and influence to get away with it.
That must be god's way of letting your know those people are better than Obama, who you'd never get away with joking about having sex with his daugther, and how attractive she is to him.
|
oBlade was saying the Trump family is one of the most upstanding moral examples in modern politics a few pages back. Possibly the only person to ever pay someone to stay silent about sex they didn't have--no House Democrat has the courage to do that.
|
You guys must be very, very desperate when little Marco is your best hope and champion you are clinging to, jeez.
The guy has negative charisma, he has no stances of his own outside of his lifetime goal of toppling as many south American governments as possible.
Trump really did a number on your brains, to think that Marco Rubio is some sort of a political mastermind, great speaker and august figure takes some serious brain damage.
I guess when the other choices are JD Vance and the walking corpse of Trump it makes sense.
|
Jankisa is already whitewashing Trump in preparation for Rubio's ascendancy the same way Romney and Bush were rehabilitated in hindsight after Trump won. I mean Trump may have been a Nazi... but at least he had more charisma and was a better debater than Rubio, who Jankisa believes he humiliated. Trump is one thing but Rubio? That would just be beyond the pale. Fascinating.
I am far more likely to support a politician whose congenital ambition is dismantling communist and enemy regimes than one whose adopted hobby is opposing Western civilization. When push comes to shove most Americans still agree especially when "Not Trump" won't be on the ballot anymore to motivate those who otherwise wouldn't participate in politics (i.e., people like Jankisa who actually have US suffrage). The Democrats have ingeniously made their own bed and before they have a chance to lie in it, it's going to retire, taking them with it.
|
United States43588 Posts
Ah yes, anyone who identifies areas that need improvement hates western civilization. Whereas anyone who refuses to acknowledge problems and doubles down on them loves America. It’s not a cult though.
|
On February 20 2026 01:28 oBlade wrote:
Jankisa is already whitewashing Trump in preparation for Rubio's ascendancy the same way Romney and Bush were rehabilitated in hindsight after Trump won. I mean Trump may have been a Nazi... but at least he had more charisma and was a better debater than Rubio, who Jankisa believes he humiliated. Trump is one thing but Rubio? That would just be beyond the pale. Fascinating.
I am far more likely to support a politician whose congenital ambition is dismantling communist and enemy regimes than one whose adopted hobby is opposing Western civilization. When push comes to shove most Americans still agree especially when "Not Trump" won't be on the ballot anymore to motivate those who otherwise wouldn't participate in politics (i.e., people like Jankisa who actually have US suffrage). The Democrats have ingeniously made their own bed and before they have a chance to lie in it, it's going to retire, taking them with it.
This is just word salad. Like you are not saying anything here. This has nothing to do with what Jankisa said earlier. Are you ok man?
|
On February 20 2026 01:28 oBlade wrote:
I am far more likely to support a politician whose congenital ambition is dismantling communist and enemy regimes than one whose adopted hobby is opposing Western civilization.
oBlade enters their neoconservative era. I guess "America First" was a lie afterall.
|
On February 20 2026 01:07 Jankisa wrote:
You guys must be very, very desperate when little Marco is your best hope and champion you are clinging to, jeez.
The guy has negative charisma, he has no stances of his own outside of his lifetime goal of toppling as many south American governments as possible.
Trump really did a number on your brains, to think that Marco Rubio is some sort of a political mastermind, great speaker and august figure takes some serious brain damage.
I guess when the other choices are JD Vance and the walking corpse of Trump it makes sense.
Yeah, I really don't see Rubio winning the next Republican presidential primary anyway. He lacks charisma, doesn't come off quite as alpha/unhinged/rapey/fascisty/bigoted as what resonates with the current MAGA/Republican base, and he's a person of color. Remember, not only did he lose to Trump in 2016, but he even lost to Ted Cruz too!
|
Prince Andrew arrested for an investigation into public misconduct, and some news articles suggest its for disclosing confidential information to Epstein while a UK trade envoy.
The pedophilia accusation is apparently just synonymous with statutory rape and sexual abuse of a minor in contemporary parlance, since I'm having trouble finding anything real regarding that. I guess that people are into the rhetorical punch of a pedo ring. The rest of the trafficking shit is more about the rich and powerful being in the company of obviously minor teen girls, and how that impugns their moral character, since it obviously does that. The truth is plenty incriminating, which makes me wonder why there's all these lies and distortions.
|
On February 20 2026 01:28 oBlade wrote:
Jankisa is already whitewashing Trump in preparation for Rubio's ascendancy the same way Romney and Bush were rehabilitated in hindsight after Trump won. I mean Trump may have been a Nazi... but at least he had more charisma and was a better debater than Rubio, who Jankisa believes he humiliated. Trump is one thing but Rubio? That would just be beyond the pale. Fascinating.
I am far more likely to support a politician whose congenital ambition is dismantling communist and enemy regimes than one whose adopted hobby is opposing Western civilization. When push comes to shove most Americans still agree especially when "Not Trump" won't be on the ballot anymore to motivate those who otherwise wouldn't participate in politics (i.e., people like Jankisa who actually have US suffrage). The Democrats have ingeniously made their own bed and before they have a chance to lie in it, it's going to retire, taking them with it.
You are still in the process of supporting Trum, in fact you have been unable to make yourself say a bad thing about him up until now, despite being asked direct questions for the last 100 pages, and you broke your taboo to stan for Marco Rubio.
Rubio humiliated himself by going to work for a person who insulted him and a person who he called a con artist, dangerous lunatic and a fraud.
I kind of get why you want to support the guy, it seems like both of you share passion for licking boots.
Also, as others pointed out, I guess wanting people to have healthcare and people to be paid decent wages is what qualifies for "opposing Western civilization".
|
On February 20 2026 03:15 dyhb wrote:
Prince Andrew arrested for an investigation into public misconduct, and some news articles suggest its for disclosing confidential information to Epstein while a UK trade envoy.
The pedophilia accusation is apparently just synonymous with statutory rape and sexual abuse of a minor in contemporary parlance, since I'm having trouble finding anything real regarding that. I guess that people are into the rhetorical punch of a pedo ring. The rest of the trafficking shit is more about the rich and powerful being in the company of obviously minor teen girls, and how that impugns their moral character, since it obviously does that. The truth is plenty incriminating, which makes me wonder why there's all these lies and distortions.
The lies and distortions are pretty standard in either deflecting or smear campaigns as long as there‘s a ring of powerful people involved, imo.
It‘s a pretty annoying contemporary feature of social media driven news reporting.
As annoying as it is that the media machine places pedophilia, which is the disorder and not illegal in itself, semantically as the same as child abuse or similar.
|
Rubio isnt a great candidate. He already lost a primary.
But who else , He is the strongest candidate the republicans have.
Vance seems unlikely to me. Bondi or Noam maybe.
Non of the other males in the administration comes even close.
That would be one way to get a female president , it has to happen one day.
Noam or Bondi vs Aoc or Harris. It would not even be a bad idea but i doubt either party would he willing to commit to this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/003/208/785/977.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://static01.nyt.com/images/2015/12/30/us/politics/TRUMPBILL/TRUMPBILL-superJumbo.jpg?quality=75&auto=webp)
