|
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 |
i think the night went well for Republicans and badly for Trump. For Republicans, this was probably the ideal result. JD Vance diagnosed their issues perfectly. It shows he knew all along what the problems were. However, at least he knows and he is willing to let other people know .. he knows. Pretty meta eh?
|
On November 05 2026 20:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2026 14:33 lestye wrote:On November 05 2026 07:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2026 06:58 Geiko wrote:On November 05 2026 02:31 oBlade wrote:On November 05 2026 01:34 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2026 00:29 PoulsenB wrote:
Some excellent, unhinged Jimmy posts today, this is the stuff I come here for. Between JJR's ignorance of Trump's infamous ogling, harassment, and assault of kids and oBlade's insistence that Trump is actually a Democrat in disguise, I really feel like they're trying to one-up each other. Why do you want to misunderstand, every single time, no matter what it is? You were a professor at one point and you can't get the point about Trump being a Democrat? Forget agree or disagree, you can't even get it? Jesus. You psyopped yourself into thinking: -someone with the border and immigration policy of Clinton and Obama (Deporter-in-Chief) -someone with weaker crime policy than the "Superpredators" Clintons (if you remember his bipartisan first term First Step Act) -someone pro gay marriage -someone who is not personally anti-abortion and only ever made it so abortion policy should be set by laws rather than courts -someone with the trade policy of a pre-NAFTA Democrat -someone who's an anti-ground-war anti-neocon anti-interventionist with the military mentality of Obama and Biden of collect all the intel, buy all the expensive MIC toys, and then kill them and/or run away -someone who wants to cut the bloat of federal government and achieved less to do so than Clinton and Gore's initiatives -someone who wants the energy and manufacturing of any pre-"Inconvenient Truth" union Democrat -someone whose best friends are a fucking electric car magnate and an environmental lawyer/ Kennedy-someone who thinks nuclear weapons are the single greatest threat to the world and wants trilateral denuclearization -someone who loves nuclear power which is what normal environmentalism knew was the clean answer before Three Mile Island made people nuts -someone who wants to make kids as healthy as Michelle Obama wanted -someone under whom Congress spent their pants off like Biden -someone whose 2nd term OBBBA restrictions on welfare eligibility pale in comparison to Clinton's "end welfare as we know it" Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act ...into thinking that person was the antichrist Hitler. You fixated 10 years of your life on this misapprehension and let it rewire your whole brain for probably the next 10 at least. If you actually noticed the antichrist you worship against was basically a Democrat, it would make you go oops Democrats from 20-30 years ago were the antichrist Hitler but thank god we've made so much progress since then. Must keep out the cognitive dissonance. Why do you want to misunderstand, every single time, no matter what it is? You were a centrist at one point and you can’t get the point about Biden being a Republican? Forget agree or disagree, you can’t even get it? Jesus. You psyopped yourself into thinking: -someone with the border and immigration policy of Bush and Trump (asylum restrictions by executive order, expanded Title 42, wall construction) -someone with tougher crime policy than the “law and order” Republicans (if you remember his bipartisan 1994 Crime Bill) -someone who is a pro-Israel, pro-NATO Cold War hawk -someone who is personally Catholic, personally opposed to abortion, and who spent decades saying it shouldn’t be imposed -someone with the trade policy of a Trump Republican (he kept the China tariffs and raised them) -someone with the military mentality of Bush: vote for Iraq, buy all the expensive MIC toys, record defense budgets, and then run away from Afghanistan -someone who wants the energy of any pre-“Inconvenient Truth” Republican: Willow, record oil production, LNG export terminals -someone whose best friends are Delaware credit-card bankers and Wall Street donors -someone who thinks Russia is the single greatest threat to the world and wants it contained with armed allies -someone who loves nuclear power and put tax credits behind it -someone under whom Congress spent their pants off like Bush and Trump -someone whose 2005 Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention Act vote pales... no, exceeds anything Republicans ever did to debtors ...into thinking that person was the radical-left Marxist destroyer of America. You fixated years of your life on this misapprehension and let it rewire your whole brain. If you actually noticed the socialist you rail against was basically a Republican, it would make you go oops, Republicans from 20-30 years ago were the radical left, but thank god we’ve made so much progress since then. Must keep out the cognitive dissonance. My favorite part of oBlade's list was how Trump's pro-choice stance is evidence for him being a Democrat. Ya know, that pro-choice stance signified by appointing all conservative Supreme Court Justices, overturning Roe v. Wade, and outlawing abortions in many states. Yeah, that pro-choice stance. Super Democratic, obviously. "someone who is not personally anti-abortion and only ever made it so abortion policy should be set by laws rather than courts" is a really silly position seeing how the mechanism they used to overturn affirmed stare decis.....was the courts. I haven't posted since the election, so forgive me for doing slow. I, like many people in this thread are incredibly delighted by this development. I am so exhausted with current administration, I really just want to live in a post-him world, and this was the first step. I can't believe how well we overperformed. I really hope we have the balls to enact real change. Maybe not federally but with all the states we control now. I thought getting a senate seat in Texas would be huge, but the fact we got EVERYTHING is absolutely astounding! I'm mostly glad we got rid of Susan Collins. Out of all the races 6 years ago, the fact Trump lost Maine but voted Susan Collins absolutely made my blood boil. Lauren Boebert is gone too so thats fantastic ! I really hope Leftish Democrats and their policies make a name for themselves so we have something exciting to run on in the next Presidential election. Something I was thinking about.... is Trump is very very selfish and a prick. I wonder if we could convince him to get us to bring 2 new states into the union. For a man obsessed with grandeur and legacy, being a President to add 2 new stars to the flag would be pretty huge for our lifetimes. He can't put his face on mt.rushmore and i think that would be the next best thing. as destructive as that would be for republicans, maybe trump wont gaf I'm exhausted by this administration too, and I share in your hope that Congressional Democrats try to pass as much progressive and popular legislation as possible. Trump can either accept those bills and share in some credit (he does like to take credit for things, after all), or Trump can veto everything which makes the Democratic 2028 platform clear: a Democratic Congress is willing to solve these problems, and now all we need is a Democratic President. We just need Congressional Democrats to lock in and vote to pass as many helpful ideas as possible. They can't spend the next two years in-fighting.
After Haley Stevens, can we put AIPAC on the list of things establishment/centrist/thirdway/etc Democrats need to stop infighting over and concede to progressives in order to not self-sabotage?
|
How many Democrats are excited about inevitable changes in Republicans that would allow them to cooperate more with Republicans? No need to work anymore with those pesky progressives in the party. Just stall some time to see what Republicans choose to do.
|
On November 05 2026 22:49 KwarK wrote:
Wait, you think it's higher prices or lives?
That's not what a higher price means. It's not like all the oil suppliers got together and rose the floor price. The higher price is because people who need oil are bidding for it and not all of them are getting oil. Supply is down and in the global south that means being outbid for oil they need. Higher prices mean lives lost.
Lives lost by the world having to invade Iran.
You can quantify your global south deaths and compare and it'll probably be less. Moreover, your global south deaths can be avoided. The global north can just help and save them. Which it should be doing anyway. Like when crude was at $100+ for years under Obama (which is much higher in 2026 dollars) and all those people were dying and at risk of dying. But war deaths and the consequences of that can't be avoided. You can also compare that to the consequences of an inevitable regional war, or the expected losses of a potential regional war in the 30s or 40s, or just the deaths of a nuclear Iran doing something nuclear.
|
Lives were saved because Trump did the thing every other country would have to do if Trump didn't? So... Trump let a bunch of Americans die to save Europeans and Israelis?
|
On November 05 2026 23:05 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
i think the night went well for Republicans
Of course it didn't; they lost their Congressional power.
On November 05 2026 23:09 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2026 20:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2026 14:33 lestye wrote:On November 05 2026 07:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2026 06:58 Geiko wrote:On November 05 2026 02:31 oBlade wrote:On November 05 2026 01:34 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2026 00:29 PoulsenB wrote:
Some excellent, unhinged Jimmy posts today, this is the stuff I come here for. Between JJR's ignorance of Trump's infamous ogling, harassment, and assault of kids and oBlade's insistence that Trump is actually a Democrat in disguise, I really feel like they're trying to one-up each other. Why do you want to misunderstand, every single time, no matter what it is? You were a professor at one point and you can't get the point about Trump being a Democrat? Forget agree or disagree, you can't even get it? Jesus. You psyopped yourself into thinking: -someone with the border and immigration policy of Clinton and Obama (Deporter-in-Chief) -someone with weaker crime policy than the "Superpredators" Clintons (if you remember his bipartisan first term First Step Act) -someone pro gay marriage -someone who is not personally anti-abortion and only ever made it so abortion policy should be set by laws rather than courts -someone with the trade policy of a pre-NAFTA Democrat -someone who's an anti-ground-war anti-neocon anti-interventionist with the military mentality of Obama and Biden of collect all the intel, buy all the expensive MIC toys, and then kill them and/or run away -someone who wants to cut the bloat of federal government and achieved less to do so than Clinton and Gore's initiatives -someone who wants the energy and manufacturing of any pre-"Inconvenient Truth" union Democrat -someone whose best friends are a fucking electric car magnate and an environmental lawyer/ Kennedy-someone who thinks nuclear weapons are the single greatest threat to the world and wants trilateral denuclearization -someone who loves nuclear power which is what normal environmentalism knew was the clean answer before Three Mile Island made people nuts -someone who wants to make kids as healthy as Michelle Obama wanted -someone under whom Congress spent their pants off like Biden -someone whose 2nd term OBBBA restrictions on welfare eligibility pale in comparison to Clinton's "end welfare as we know it" Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act ...into thinking that person was the antichrist Hitler. You fixated 10 years of your life on this misapprehension and let it rewire your whole brain for probably the next 10 at least. If you actually noticed the antichrist you worship against was basically a Democrat, it would make you go oops Democrats from 20-30 years ago were the antichrist Hitler but thank god we've made so much progress since then. Must keep out the cognitive dissonance. Why do you want to misunderstand, every single time, no matter what it is? You were a centrist at one point and you can’t get the point about Biden being a Republican? Forget agree or disagree, you can’t even get it? Jesus. You psyopped yourself into thinking: -someone with the border and immigration policy of Bush and Trump (asylum restrictions by executive order, expanded Title 42, wall construction) -someone with tougher crime policy than the “law and order” Republicans (if you remember his bipartisan 1994 Crime Bill) -someone who is a pro-Israel, pro-NATO Cold War hawk -someone who is personally Catholic, personally opposed to abortion, and who spent decades saying it shouldn’t be imposed -someone with the trade policy of a Trump Republican (he kept the China tariffs and raised them) -someone with the military mentality of Bush: vote for Iraq, buy all the expensive MIC toys, record defense budgets, and then run away from Afghanistan -someone who wants the energy of any pre-“Inconvenient Truth” Republican: Willow, record oil production, LNG export terminals -someone whose best friends are Delaware credit-card bankers and Wall Street donors -someone who thinks Russia is the single greatest threat to the world and wants it contained with armed allies -someone who loves nuclear power and put tax credits behind it -someone under whom Congress spent their pants off like Bush and Trump -someone whose 2005 Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention Act vote pales... no, exceeds anything Republicans ever did to debtors ...into thinking that person was the radical-left Marxist destroyer of America. You fixated years of your life on this misapprehension and let it rewire your whole brain. If you actually noticed the socialist you rail against was basically a Republican, it would make you go oops, Republicans from 20-30 years ago were the radical left, but thank god we’ve made so much progress since then. Must keep out the cognitive dissonance. My favorite part of oBlade's list was how Trump's pro-choice stance is evidence for him being a Democrat. Ya know, that pro-choice stance signified by appointing all conservative Supreme Court Justices, overturning Roe v. Wade, and outlawing abortions in many states. Yeah, that pro-choice stance. Super Democratic, obviously. "someone who is not personally anti-abortion and only ever made it so abortion policy should be set by laws rather than courts" is a really silly position seeing how the mechanism they used to overturn affirmed stare decis.....was the courts. I haven't posted since the election, so forgive me for doing slow. I, like many people in this thread are incredibly delighted by this development. I am so exhausted with current administration, I really just want to live in a post-him world, and this was the first step. I can't believe how well we overperformed. I really hope we have the balls to enact real change. Maybe not federally but with all the states we control now. I thought getting a senate seat in Texas would be huge, but the fact we got EVERYTHING is absolutely astounding! I'm mostly glad we got rid of Susan Collins. Out of all the races 6 years ago, the fact Trump lost Maine but voted Susan Collins absolutely made my blood boil. Lauren Boebert is gone too so thats fantastic ! I really hope Leftish Democrats and their policies make a name for themselves so we have something exciting to run on in the next Presidential election. Something I was thinking about.... is Trump is very very selfish and a prick. I wonder if we could convince him to get us to bring 2 new states into the union. For a man obsessed with grandeur and legacy, being a President to add 2 new stars to the flag would be pretty huge for our lifetimes. He can't put his face on mt.rushmore and i think that would be the next best thing. as destructive as that would be for republicans, maybe trump wont gaf I'm exhausted by this administration too, and I share in your hope that Congressional Democrats try to pass as much progressive and popular legislation as possible. Trump can either accept those bills and share in some credit (he does like to take credit for things, after all), or Trump can veto everything which makes the Democratic 2028 platform clear: a Democratic Congress is willing to solve these problems, and now all we need is a Democratic President. We just need Congressional Democrats to lock in and vote to pass as many helpful ideas as possible. They can't spend the next two years in-fighting. After Haley Stevens, can we put AIPAC on the list of things establishment/centrist/thirdway/etc Democrats need to stop infighting over and concede to progressives in order to not self-sabotage?
Sure, the in-fighting definitely needs to stop. I don't know if this is truly centrist vs. progressive though (e.g., Buttigieg seems to be one of the biggest, most vocal proponents of pushing for a popular vote path, and I'm not sure where you'd place him on the spectrum of centrist Democrats - progressive Democrats).
|
On November 05 2026 23:37 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2026 22:49 KwarK wrote:
Wait, you think it's higher prices or lives?
That's not what a higher price means. It's not like all the oil suppliers got together and rose the floor price. The higher price is because people who need oil are bidding for it and not all of them are getting oil. Supply is down and in the global south that means being outbid for oil they need. Higher prices mean lives lost. Lives lost by the world having to invade Iran. You can quantify your global south deaths and compare and it'll probably be less. Moreover, your global south deaths can be avoided. The global north can just help and save them. Which it should be doing anyway. Like when crude was at $100+ for years under Obama (which is much higher in 2026 dollars) and all those people were dying and at risk of dying. But war deaths and the consequences of that can't be avoided. You can also compare that to the consequences of an inevitable regional war, or the expected losses of a potential regional war in the 30s or 40s, or just the deaths of a nuclear Iran doing something nuclear. But Iran wasn't interested in doing anything nuclear before Trump killed the guy who explicitly forbad Iran from doing anything nuclear. And now after Trumps invasion Iran really wants to do something nuclear because it is te only way to be safe from an insane America.
So Trump cause a hell of a lot of deaths by making a future hypothetical Iran do something nuclear.
|
On November 05 2026 23:50 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2026 23:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 05 2026 20:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2026 14:33 lestye wrote:On November 05 2026 07:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2026 06:58 Geiko wrote:On November 05 2026 02:31 oBlade wrote:On November 05 2026 01:34 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2026 00:29 PoulsenB wrote:
Some excellent, unhinged Jimmy posts today, this is the stuff I come here for. Between JJR's ignorance of Trump's infamous ogling, harassment, and assault of kids and oBlade's insistence that Trump is actually a Democrat in disguise, I really feel like they're trying to one-up each other. Why do you want to misunderstand, every single time, no matter what it is? You were a professor at one point and you can't get the point about Trump being a Democrat? Forget agree or disagree, you can't even get it? Jesus. You psyopped yourself into thinking: -someone with the border and immigration policy of Clinton and Obama (Deporter-in-Chief) -someone with weaker crime policy than the "Superpredators" Clintons (if you remember his bipartisan first term First Step Act) -someone pro gay marriage -someone who is not personally anti-abortion and only ever made it so abortion policy should be set by laws rather than courts -someone with the trade policy of a pre-NAFTA Democrat -someone who's an anti-ground-war anti-neocon anti-interventionist with the military mentality of Obama and Biden of collect all the intel, buy all the expensive MIC toys, and then kill them and/or run away -someone who wants to cut the bloat of federal government and achieved less to do so than Clinton and Gore's initiatives -someone who wants the energy and manufacturing of any pre-"Inconvenient Truth" union Democrat -someone whose best friends are a fucking electric car magnate and an environmental lawyer/ Kennedy-someone who thinks nuclear weapons are the single greatest threat to the world and wants trilateral denuclearization -someone who loves nuclear power which is what normal environmentalism knew was the clean answer before Three Mile Island made people nuts -someone who wants to make kids as healthy as Michelle Obama wanted -someone under whom Congress spent their pants off like Biden -someone whose 2nd term OBBBA restrictions on welfare eligibility pale in comparison to Clinton's "end welfare as we know it" Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act ...into thinking that person was the antichrist Hitler. You fixated 10 years of your life on this misapprehension and let it rewire your whole brain for probably the next 10 at least. If you actually noticed the antichrist you worship against was basically a Democrat, it would make you go oops Democrats from 20-30 years ago were the antichrist Hitler but thank god we've made so much progress since then. Must keep out the cognitive dissonance. Why do you want to misunderstand, every single time, no matter what it is? You were a centrist at one point and you can’t get the point about Biden being a Republican? Forget agree or disagree, you can’t even get it? Jesus. You psyopped yourself into thinking: -someone with the border and immigration policy of Bush and Trump (asylum restrictions by executive order, expanded Title 42, wall construction) -someone with tougher crime policy than the “law and order” Republicans (if you remember his bipartisan 1994 Crime Bill) -someone who is a pro-Israel, pro-NATO Cold War hawk -someone who is personally Catholic, personally opposed to abortion, and who spent decades saying it shouldn’t be imposed -someone with the trade policy of a Trump Republican (he kept the China tariffs and raised them) -someone with the military mentality of Bush: vote for Iraq, buy all the expensive MIC toys, record defense budgets, and then run away from Afghanistan -someone who wants the energy of any pre-“Inconvenient Truth” Republican: Willow, record oil production, LNG export terminals -someone whose best friends are Delaware credit-card bankers and Wall Street donors -someone who thinks Russia is the single greatest threat to the world and wants it contained with armed allies -someone who loves nuclear power and put tax credits behind it -someone under whom Congress spent their pants off like Bush and Trump -someone whose 2005 Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention Act vote pales... no, exceeds anything Republicans ever did to debtors ...into thinking that person was the radical-left Marxist destroyer of America. You fixated years of your life on this misapprehension and let it rewire your whole brain. If you actually noticed the socialist you rail against was basically a Republican, it would make you go oops, Republicans from 20-30 years ago were the radical left, but thank god we’ve made so much progress since then. Must keep out the cognitive dissonance. My favorite part of oBlade's list was how Trump's pro-choice stance is evidence for him being a Democrat. Ya know, that pro-choice stance signified by appointing all conservative Supreme Court Justices, overturning Roe v. Wade, and outlawing abortions in many states. Yeah, that pro-choice stance. Super Democratic, obviously. "someone who is not personally anti-abortion and only ever made it so abortion policy should be set by laws rather than courts" is a really silly position seeing how the mechanism they used to overturn affirmed stare decis.....was the courts. I haven't posted since the election, so forgive me for doing slow. I, like many people in this thread are incredibly delighted by this development. I am so exhausted with current administration, I really just want to live in a post-him world, and this was the first step. I can't believe how well we overperformed. I really hope we have the balls to enact real change. Maybe not federally but with all the states we control now. I thought getting a senate seat in Texas would be huge, but the fact we got EVERYTHING is absolutely astounding! I'm mostly glad we got rid of Susan Collins. Out of all the races 6 years ago, the fact Trump lost Maine but voted Susan Collins absolutely made my blood boil. Lauren Boebert is gone too so thats fantastic ! I really hope Leftish Democrats and their policies make a name for themselves so we have something exciting to run on in the next Presidential election. Something I was thinking about.... is Trump is very very selfish and a prick. I wonder if we could convince him to get us to bring 2 new states into the union. For a man obsessed with grandeur and legacy, being a President to add 2 new stars to the flag would be pretty huge for our lifetimes. He can't put his face on mt.rushmore and i think that would be the next best thing. as destructive as that would be for republicans, maybe trump wont gaf I'm exhausted by this administration too, and I share in your hope that Congressional Democrats try to pass as much progressive and popular legislation as possible. Trump can either accept those bills and share in some credit (he does like to take credit for things, after all), or Trump can veto everything which makes the Democratic 2028 platform clear: a Democratic Congress is willing to solve these problems, and now all we need is a Democratic President. We just need Congressional Democrats to lock in and vote to pass as many helpful ideas as possible. They can't spend the next two years in-fighting. After Haley Stevens, can we put AIPAC on the list of things establishment/centrist/thirdway/etc Democrats need to stop infighting over and concede to progressives in order to not self-sabotage? Sure, the in-fighting definitely needs to stop. I don't know if this is truly centrist vs. progressive though (e.g., Buttigieg seems to be one of the biggest, most vocal proponents of pushing for a popular vote path, and I'm not sure where you'd place him on the spectrum of centrist Democrats - progressive Democrats).
Maybe if I try asking another way.
So you're saying Democrat leaders need to stop collaborating with AIPAC/UDP/etc (especially after their candidate endorsed the Republican in a key race) or that progressives need to concede that issue (as well as everything else they disagree on) to stop the infighting?
EDIT: Buttigieg is widely considered a third way/centrist liberal, I don't have sufficient reason to disagree with that widespread consensus.
|
On November 05 2026 23:53 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2026 23:37 oBlade wrote:On November 05 2026 22:49 KwarK wrote:
Wait, you think it's higher prices or lives?
That's not what a higher price means. It's not like all the oil suppliers got together and rose the floor price. The higher price is because people who need oil are bidding for it and not all of them are getting oil. Supply is down and in the global south that means being outbid for oil they need. Higher prices mean lives lost. Lives lost by the world having to invade Iran. You can quantify your global south deaths and compare and it'll probably be less. Moreover, your global south deaths can be avoided. The global north can just help and save them. Which it should be doing anyway. Like when crude was at $100+ for years under Obama (which is much higher in 2026 dollars) and all those people were dying and at risk of dying. But war deaths and the consequences of that can't be avoided. You can also compare that to the consequences of an inevitable regional war, or the expected losses of a potential regional war in the 30s or 40s, or just the deaths of a nuclear Iran doing something nuclear. But Iran wasn't interested in doing anything nuclear before Trump killed the guy who explicitly forbad Iran from doing anything nuclear. And now after Trumps invasion Iran really wants to do something nuclear because it is te only way to be safe from an insane America. So Trump cause a hell of a lot of deaths by making a future hypothetical Iran do something nuclear.
You will not get him to admit that his pedophile is at fault for anything by applying reason or presenting facts. But I get that is amusing to see him rage due to the election results while he usually tries to act unbothered.
|
On November 06 2026 00:06 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2026 23:50 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2026 23:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 05 2026 20:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2026 14:33 lestye wrote:On November 05 2026 07:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2026 06:58 Geiko wrote:On November 05 2026 02:31 oBlade wrote:On November 05 2026 01:34 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2026 00:29 PoulsenB wrote:
Some excellent, unhinged Jimmy posts today, this is the stuff I come here for. Between JJR's ignorance of Trump's infamous ogling, harassment, and assault of kids and oBlade's insistence that Trump is actually a Democrat in disguise, I really feel like they're trying to one-up each other. Why do you want to misunderstand, every single time, no matter what it is? You were a professor at one point and you can't get the point about Trump being a Democrat? Forget agree or disagree, you can't even get it? Jesus. You psyopped yourself into thinking: -someone with the border and immigration policy of Clinton and Obama (Deporter-in-Chief) -someone with weaker crime policy than the "Superpredators" Clintons (if you remember his bipartisan first term First Step Act) -someone pro gay marriage -someone who is not personally anti-abortion and only ever made it so abortion policy should be set by laws rather than courts -someone with the trade policy of a pre-NAFTA Democrat -someone who's an anti-ground-war anti-neocon anti-interventionist with the military mentality of Obama and Biden of collect all the intel, buy all the expensive MIC toys, and then kill them and/or run away -someone who wants to cut the bloat of federal government and achieved less to do so than Clinton and Gore's initiatives -someone who wants the energy and manufacturing of any pre-"Inconvenient Truth" union Democrat -someone whose best friends are a fucking electric car magnate and an environmental lawyer/ Kennedy-someone who thinks nuclear weapons are the single greatest threat to the world and wants trilateral denuclearization -someone who loves nuclear power which is what normal environmentalism knew was the clean answer before Three Mile Island made people nuts -someone who wants to make kids as healthy as Michelle Obama wanted -someone under whom Congress spent their pants off like Biden -someone whose 2nd term OBBBA restrictions on welfare eligibility pale in comparison to Clinton's "end welfare as we know it" Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act ...into thinking that person was the antichrist Hitler. You fixated 10 years of your life on this misapprehension and let it rewire your whole brain for probably the next 10 at least. If you actually noticed the antichrist you worship against was basically a Democrat, it would make you go oops Democrats from 20-30 years ago were the antichrist Hitler but thank god we've made so much progress since then. Must keep out the cognitive dissonance. Why do you want to misunderstand, every single time, no matter what it is? You were a centrist at one point and you can’t get the point about Biden being a Republican? Forget agree or disagree, you can’t even get it? Jesus. You psyopped yourself into thinking: -someone with the border and immigration policy of Bush and Trump (asylum restrictions by executive order, expanded Title 42, wall construction) -someone with tougher crime policy than the “law and order” Republicans (if you remember his bipartisan 1994 Crime Bill) -someone who is a pro-Israel, pro-NATO Cold War hawk -someone who is personally Catholic, personally opposed to abortion, and who spent decades saying it shouldn’t be imposed -someone with the trade policy of a Trump Republican (he kept the China tariffs and raised them) -someone with the military mentality of Bush: vote for Iraq, buy all the expensive MIC toys, record defense budgets, and then run away from Afghanistan -someone who wants the energy of any pre-“Inconvenient Truth” Republican: Willow, record oil production, LNG export terminals -someone whose best friends are Delaware credit-card bankers and Wall Street donors -someone who thinks Russia is the single greatest threat to the world and wants it contained with armed allies -someone who loves nuclear power and put tax credits behind it -someone under whom Congress spent their pants off like Bush and Trump -someone whose 2005 Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention Act vote pales... no, exceeds anything Republicans ever did to debtors ...into thinking that person was the radical-left Marxist destroyer of America. You fixated years of your life on this misapprehension and let it rewire your whole brain. If you actually noticed the socialist you rail against was basically a Republican, it would make you go oops, Republicans from 20-30 years ago were the radical left, but thank god we’ve made so much progress since then. Must keep out the cognitive dissonance. My favorite part of oBlade's list was how Trump's pro-choice stance is evidence for him being a Democrat. Ya know, that pro-choice stance signified by appointing all conservative Supreme Court Justices, overturning Roe v. Wade, and outlawing abortions in many states. Yeah, that pro-choice stance. Super Democratic, obviously. "someone who is not personally anti-abortion and only ever made it so abortion policy should be set by laws rather than courts" is a really silly position seeing how the mechanism they used to overturn affirmed stare decis.....was the courts. I haven't posted since the election, so forgive me for doing slow. I, like many people in this thread are incredibly delighted by this development. I am so exhausted with current administration, I really just want to live in a post-him world, and this was the first step. I can't believe how well we overperformed. I really hope we have the balls to enact real change. Maybe not federally but with all the states we control now. I thought getting a senate seat in Texas would be huge, but the fact we got EVERYTHING is absolutely astounding! I'm mostly glad we got rid of Susan Collins. Out of all the races 6 years ago, the fact Trump lost Maine but voted Susan Collins absolutely made my blood boil. Lauren Boebert is gone too so thats fantastic ! I really hope Leftish Democrats and their policies make a name for themselves so we have something exciting to run on in the next Presidential election. Something I was thinking about.... is Trump is very very selfish and a prick. I wonder if we could convince him to get us to bring 2 new states into the union. For a man obsessed with grandeur and legacy, being a President to add 2 new stars to the flag would be pretty huge for our lifetimes. He can't put his face on mt.rushmore and i think that would be the next best thing. as destructive as that would be for republicans, maybe trump wont gaf I'm exhausted by this administration too, and I share in your hope that Congressional Democrats try to pass as much progressive and popular legislation as possible. Trump can either accept those bills and share in some credit (he does like to take credit for things, after all), or Trump can veto everything which makes the Democratic 2028 platform clear: a Democratic Congress is willing to solve these problems, and now all we need is a Democratic President. We just need Congressional Democrats to lock in and vote to pass as many helpful ideas as possible. They can't spend the next two years in-fighting. After Haley Stevens, can we put AIPAC on the list of things establishment/centrist/thirdway/etc Democrats need to stop infighting over and concede to progressives in order to not self-sabotage? Sure, the in-fighting definitely needs to stop. I don't know if this is truly centrist vs. progressive though (e.g., Buttigieg seems to be one of the biggest, most vocal proponents of pushing for a popular vote path, and I'm not sure where you'd place him on the spectrum of centrist Democrats - progressive Democrats). Maybe if I try asking another way. So you're saying Democrat leaders need to stop collaborating with AIPAC/UDP/etc (especially after their candidate endorsed the Republican in a key race) or that progressives need to concede that issue (as well as everything else they disagree on) to stop the infighting?EDIT: Buttigieg is widely considered a third way/centrist liberal, I don't have sufficient reason to disagree with that widespread consensus.
Kind of the opposite, actually. They need to all get on board with AIPAC / popular vote paths. I'm just saying that I don't know if I agree that the issue is between Centrist (No) and Progressive (Yes). Buttigieg is a fine counterexample to your split here, since you characterize him as Centrist even though he's a Yes. Not all Centrists are No (and maybe not all Progressives are Yes).
Instead of forcing the labels of Centrist and Progressive here (which don't fit perfectly), let's just say that anyone who isn't on board needs to get on board.
|
Looks like the Dems are going to pick up the U.S. Senate seat in Mississippi. Scott Colom will be the first black man to occupy the seat that wasn't literally born in (edit: during) slavery.
Shoutout to his banger ad:
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Holy shit that ad is brilliant.
|
Finland966 Posts
On November 05 2026 22:59 LightSpectra wrote:
The night went so bad for Republicans that oBlade is gaslighting himself into believing Trump bombing a girls' school in Iran saved them from certain doom
Gaslighting himself into believing he lives in the US now.
|
On November 06 2026 00:50 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2026 00:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 05 2026 23:50 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2026 23:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 05 2026 20:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2026 14:33 lestye wrote:On November 05 2026 07:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2026 06:58 Geiko wrote:On November 05 2026 02:31 oBlade wrote:On November 05 2026 01:34 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
[quote]
Between JJR's ignorance of Trump's infamous ogling, harassment, and assault of kids and oBlade's insistence that Trump is actually a Democrat in disguise, I really feel like they're trying to one-up each other. Why do you want to misunderstand, every single time, no matter what it is? You were a professor at one point and you can't get the point about Trump being a Democrat? Forget agree or disagree, you can't even get it? Jesus. You psyopped yourself into thinking: -someone with the border and immigration policy of Clinton and Obama (Deporter-in-Chief) -someone with weaker crime policy than the "Superpredators" Clintons (if you remember his bipartisan first term First Step Act) -someone pro gay marriage -someone who is not personally anti-abortion and only ever made it so abortion policy should be set by laws rather than courts -someone with the trade policy of a pre-NAFTA Democrat -someone who's an anti-ground-war anti-neocon anti-interventionist with the military mentality of Obama and Biden of collect all the intel, buy all the expensive MIC toys, and then kill them and/or run away -someone who wants to cut the bloat of federal government and achieved less to do so than Clinton and Gore's initiatives -someone who wants the energy and manufacturing of any pre-"Inconvenient Truth" union Democrat -someone whose best friends are a fucking electric car magnate and an environmental lawyer/ Kennedy-someone who thinks nuclear weapons are the single greatest threat to the world and wants trilateral denuclearization -someone who loves nuclear power which is what normal environmentalism knew was the clean answer before Three Mile Island made people nuts -someone who wants to make kids as healthy as Michelle Obama wanted -someone under whom Congress spent their pants off like Biden -someone whose 2nd term OBBBA restrictions on welfare eligibility pale in comparison to Clinton's "end welfare as we know it" Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act ...into thinking that person was the antichrist Hitler. You fixated 10 years of your life on this misapprehension and let it rewire your whole brain for probably the next 10 at least. If you actually noticed the antichrist you worship against was basically a Democrat, it would make you go oops Democrats from 20-30 years ago were the antichrist Hitler but thank god we've made so much progress since then. Must keep out the cognitive dissonance. Why do you want to misunderstand, every single time, no matter what it is? You were a centrist at one point and you can’t get the point about Biden being a Republican? Forget agree or disagree, you can’t even get it? Jesus. You psyopped yourself into thinking: -someone with the border and immigration policy of Bush and Trump (asylum restrictions by executive order, expanded Title 42, wall construction) -someone with tougher crime policy than the “law and order” Republicans (if you remember his bipartisan 1994 Crime Bill) -someone who is a pro-Israel, pro-NATO Cold War hawk -someone who is personally Catholic, personally opposed to abortion, and who spent decades saying it shouldn’t be imposed -someone with the trade policy of a Trump Republican (he kept the China tariffs and raised them) -someone with the military mentality of Bush: vote for Iraq, buy all the expensive MIC toys, record defense budgets, and then run away from Afghanistan -someone who wants the energy of any pre-“Inconvenient Truth” Republican: Willow, record oil production, LNG export terminals -someone whose best friends are Delaware credit-card bankers and Wall Street donors -someone who thinks Russia is the single greatest threat to the world and wants it contained with armed allies -someone who loves nuclear power and put tax credits behind it -someone under whom Congress spent their pants off like Bush and Trump -someone whose 2005 Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention Act vote pales... no, exceeds anything Republicans ever did to debtors ...into thinking that person was the radical-left Marxist destroyer of America. You fixated years of your life on this misapprehension and let it rewire your whole brain. If you actually noticed the socialist you rail against was basically a Republican, it would make you go oops, Republicans from 20-30 years ago were the radical left, but thank god we’ve made so much progress since then. Must keep out the cognitive dissonance. My favorite part of oBlade's list was how Trump's pro-choice stance is evidence for him being a Democrat. Ya know, that pro-choice stance signified by appointing all conservative Supreme Court Justices, overturning Roe v. Wade, and outlawing abortions in many states. Yeah, that pro-choice stance. Super Democratic, obviously. "someone who is not personally anti-abortion and only ever made it so abortion policy should be set by laws rather than courts" is a really silly position seeing how the mechanism they used to overturn affirmed stare decis.....was the courts. I haven't posted since the election, so forgive me for doing slow. I, like many people in this thread are incredibly delighted by this development. I am so exhausted with current administration, I really just want to live in a post-him world, and this was the first step. I can't believe how well we overperformed. I really hope we have the balls to enact real change. Maybe not federally but with all the states we control now. I thought getting a senate seat in Texas would be huge, but the fact we got EVERYTHING is absolutely astounding! I'm mostly glad we got rid of Susan Collins. Out of all the races 6 years ago, the fact Trump lost Maine but voted Susan Collins absolutely made my blood boil. Lauren Boebert is gone too so thats fantastic ! I really hope Leftish Democrats and their policies make a name for themselves so we have something exciting to run on in the next Presidential election. Something I was thinking about.... is Trump is very very selfish and a prick. I wonder if we could convince him to get us to bring 2 new states into the union. For a man obsessed with grandeur and legacy, being a President to add 2 new stars to the flag would be pretty huge for our lifetimes. He can't put his face on mt.rushmore and i think that would be the next best thing. as destructive as that would be for republicans, maybe trump wont gaf I'm exhausted by this administration too, and I share in your hope that Congressional Democrats try to pass as much progressive and popular legislation as possible. Trump can either accept those bills and share in some credit (he does like to take credit for things, after all), or Trump can veto everything which makes the Democratic 2028 platform clear: a Democratic Congress is willing to solve these problems, and now all we need is a Democratic President. We just need Congressional Democrats to lock in and vote to pass as many helpful ideas as possible. They can't spend the next two years in-fighting. After Haley Stevens, can we put AIPAC on the list of things establishment/centrist/thirdway/etc Democrats need to stop infighting over and concede to progressives in order to not self-sabotage? Sure, the in-fighting definitely needs to stop. I don't know if this is truly centrist vs. progressive though (e.g., Buttigieg seems to be one of the biggest, most vocal proponents of pushing for a popular vote path, and I'm not sure where you'd place him on the spectrum of centrist Democrats - progressive Democrats). Maybe if I try asking another way. So you're saying Democrat leaders need to stop collaborating with AIPAC/UDP/etc (especially after their candidate endorsed the Republican in a key race) or that progressives need to concede that issue (as well as everything else they disagree on) to stop the infighting?EDIT: Buttigieg is widely considered a third way/centrist liberal, I don't have sufficient reason to disagree with that widespread consensus. Kind of the opposite, actually. They need to all get on board with AIPAC / popular vote paths. I'm just saying that I don't know if I agree that the issue is between Centrist (No) and Progressive (Yes). Buttigieg is a fine counterexample to your split here, since you characterize him as Centrist even though he's a Yes. Not all Centrists are No (and maybe not all Progressives are Yes).
This is actually nonsensical to me.
I don't know what "They need to all get on board with AIPAC / popular vote paths" even means?
Why you're mentioning "popular vote" regarding whether or not establishment/centrist/third way Democrats (especially their leaders in the House and Senate) need to stop infighting with progressives on continuing to collaborate with AIPAC/UDP after Haley Stevens (and plenty of other stuff)?
Are you trying to say Buttigieg agrees with progressives on Democrat leadership stopping their collaboration with AIPAC/UDP or what?
Instead of forcing the labels of Centrist and Progressive here (which don't fit perfectly), let's just say that anyone who isn't on board needs to get on board.
Who are you saying needs to concede what to stop the infighting on AIPAC? (or literally ANYTHING you think the establishment/centrists/thirdway Democrats need to concede to their progressive left to stop the infighting to avoid self-sabotaging)
|
On November 06 2026 00:50 LightSpectra wrote:Looks like the Dems are going to pick up the U.S. Senate seat in Mississippi. Scott Colom will be the first black man to occupy the seat that wasn't literally born in (edit: during) slavery. Shoutout to his banger ad: + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nga2Q207-58
first black Senator since the reconstruction period.
|
On November 06 2026 01:03 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2026 00:50 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 06 2026 00:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 05 2026 23:50 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2026 23:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 05 2026 20:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2026 14:33 lestye wrote:On November 05 2026 07:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 05 2026 06:58 Geiko wrote:On November 05 2026 02:31 oBlade wrote:
[quote]
Why do you want to misunderstand, every single time, no matter what it is? You were a professor at one point and you can't get the point about Trump being a Democrat? Forget agree or disagree, you can't even get it? Jesus.
You psyopped yourself into thinking:
-someone with the border and immigration policy of Clinton and Obama (Deporter-in-Chief)
-someone with weaker crime policy than the "Superpredators" Clintons (if you remember his bipartisan first term First Step Act)
-someone pro gay marriage
-someone who is not personally anti-abortion and only ever made it so abortion policy should be set by laws rather than courts
-someone with the trade policy of a pre-NAFTA Democrat
-someone who's an anti-ground-war anti-neocon anti-interventionist with the military mentality of Obama and Biden of collect all the intel, buy all the expensive MIC toys, and then kill them and/or run away
-someone who wants to cut the bloat of federal government and achieved less to do so than Clinton and Gore's initiatives
-someone who wants the energy and manufacturing of any pre-"Inconvenient Truth" union Democrat
-someone whose best friends are a fucking electric car magnate and an environmental lawyer/Kennedy
-someone who thinks nuclear weapons are the single greatest threat to the world and wants trilateral denuclearization
-someone who loves nuclear power which is what normal environmentalism knew was the clean answer before Three Mile Island made people nuts
-someone who wants to make kids as healthy as Michelle Obama wanted
-someone under whom Congress spent their pants off like Biden
-someone whose 2nd term OBBBA restrictions on welfare eligibility pale in comparison to Clinton's "end welfare as we know it" Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act
...into thinking that person was the antichrist Hitler. You fixated 10 years of your life on this misapprehension and let it rewire your whole brain for probably the next 10 at least. If you actually noticed the antichrist you worship against was basically a Democrat, it would make you go oops Democrats from 20-30 years ago were the antichrist Hitler but thank god we've made so much progress since then. Must keep out the cognitive dissonance. Why do you want to misunderstand, every single time, no matter what it is? You were a centrist at one point and you can’t get the point about Biden being a Republican? Forget agree or disagree, you can’t even get it? Jesus. You psyopped yourself into thinking: -someone with the border and immigration policy of Bush and Trump (asylum restrictions by executive order, expanded Title 42, wall construction) -someone with tougher crime policy than the “law and order” Republicans (if you remember his bipartisan 1994 Crime Bill) -someone who is a pro-Israel, pro-NATO Cold War hawk -someone who is personally Catholic, personally opposed to abortion, and who spent decades saying it shouldn’t be imposed -someone with the trade policy of a Trump Republican (he kept the China tariffs and raised them) -someone with the military mentality of Bush: vote for Iraq, buy all the expensive MIC toys, record defense budgets, and then run away from Afghanistan -someone who wants the energy of any pre-“Inconvenient Truth” Republican: Willow, record oil production, LNG export terminals -someone whose best friends are Delaware credit-card bankers and Wall Street donors -someone who thinks Russia is the single greatest threat to the world and wants it contained with armed allies -someone who loves nuclear power and put tax credits behind it -someone under whom Congress spent their pants off like Bush and Trump -someone whose 2005 Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention Act vote pales... no, exceeds anything Republicans ever did to debtors ...into thinking that person was the radical-left Marxist destroyer of America. You fixated years of your life on this misapprehension and let it rewire your whole brain. If you actually noticed the socialist you rail against was basically a Republican, it would make you go oops, Republicans from 20-30 years ago were the radical left, but thank god we’ve made so much progress since then. Must keep out the cognitive dissonance. My favorite part of oBlade's list was how Trump's pro-choice stance is evidence for him being a Democrat. Ya know, that pro-choice stance signified by appointing all conservative Supreme Court Justices, overturning Roe v. Wade, and outlawing abortions in many states. Yeah, that pro-choice stance. Super Democratic, obviously. "someone who is not personally anti-abortion and only ever made it so abortion policy should be set by laws rather than courts" is a really silly position seeing how the mechanism they used to overturn affirmed stare decis.....was the courts. I haven't posted since the election, so forgive me for doing slow. I, like many people in this thread are incredibly delighted by this development. I am so exhausted with current administration, I really just want to live in a post-him world, and this was the first step. I can't believe how well we overperformed. I really hope we have the balls to enact real change. Maybe not federally but with all the states we control now. I thought getting a senate seat in Texas would be huge, but the fact we got EVERYTHING is absolutely astounding! I'm mostly glad we got rid of Susan Collins. Out of all the races 6 years ago, the fact Trump lost Maine but voted Susan Collins absolutely made my blood boil. Lauren Boebert is gone too so thats fantastic ! I really hope Leftish Democrats and their policies make a name for themselves so we have something exciting to run on in the next Presidential election. Something I was thinking about.... is Trump is very very selfish and a prick. I wonder if we could convince him to get us to bring 2 new states into the union. For a man obsessed with grandeur and legacy, being a President to add 2 new stars to the flag would be pretty huge for our lifetimes. He can't put his face on mt.rushmore and i think that would be the next best thing. as destructive as that would be for republicans, maybe trump wont gaf I'm exhausted by this administration too, and I share in your hope that Congressional Democrats try to pass as much progressive and popular legislation as possible. Trump can either accept those bills and share in some credit (he does like to take credit for things, after all), or Trump can veto everything which makes the Democratic 2028 platform clear: a Democratic Congress is willing to solve these problems, and now all we need is a Democratic President. We just need Congressional Democrats to lock in and vote to pass as many helpful ideas as possible. They can't spend the next two years in-fighting. After Haley Stevens, can we put AIPAC on the list of things establishment/centrist/thirdway/etc Democrats need to stop infighting over and concede to progressives in order to not self-sabotage? Sure, the in-fighting definitely needs to stop. I don't know if this is truly centrist vs. progressive though (e.g., Buttigieg seems to be one of the biggest, most vocal proponents of pushing for a popular vote path, and I'm not sure where you'd place him on the spectrum of centrist Democrats - progressive Democrats). Maybe if I try asking another way. So you're saying Democrat leaders need to stop collaborating with AIPAC/UDP/etc (especially after their candidate endorsed the Republican in a key race) or that progressives need to concede that issue (as well as everything else they disagree on) to stop the infighting?EDIT: Buttigieg is widely considered a third way/centrist liberal, I don't have sufficient reason to disagree with that widespread consensus. Kind of the opposite, actually. They need to all get on board with AIPAC / popular vote paths. I'm just saying that I don't know if I agree that the issue is between Centrist (No) and Progressive (Yes). Buttigieg is a fine counterexample to your split here, since you characterize him as Centrist even though he's a Yes. Not all Centrists are No (and maybe not all Progressives are Yes). This is actually nonsensical to me. I don't know what "They need to all get on board with AIPAC / popular vote paths" even means? Why you're mentioning "popular vote" regarding whether or not establishment/centrist/third way Democrats (especially their leaders in the House and Senate) need to stop infighting with progressives on continuing to collaborate with AIPAC/UDP after Haley Stevens (and plenty of other stuff)? Are you trying to say Buttigieg agrees with progressives on Democrat leadership stopping their collaboration with AIPAC/UDP or what? Show nested quote +Instead of forcing the labels of Centrist and Progressive here (which don't fit perfectly), let's just say that anyone who isn't on board needs to get on board. Who are you saying needs to concede what to stop the infighting on AIPAC? (or literally ANYTHING you think the establishment/centrists/thirdway Democrats need to concede to their progressive left to stop the infighting to avoid self-sabotaging)
Oh this is my mistake; I got my acronyms mixed up. I was talking about the NPVIC / using the popular vote earlier, and I didn't realize that your question was about a different topic / Israel. Mea culpa!
I don't know enough about AIPAC to comment.
|
On November 05 2026 23:53 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2026 23:37 oBlade wrote:On November 05 2026 22:49 KwarK wrote:
Wait, you think it's higher prices or lives?
That's not what a higher price means. It's not like all the oil suppliers got together and rose the floor price. The higher price is because people who need oil are bidding for it and not all of them are getting oil. Supply is down and in the global south that means being outbid for oil they need. Higher prices mean lives lost. Lives lost by the world having to invade Iran. You can quantify your global south deaths and compare and it'll probably be less. Moreover, your global south deaths can be avoided. The global north can just help and save them. Which it should be doing anyway. Like when crude was at $100+ for years under Obama (which is much higher in 2026 dollars) and all those people were dying and at risk of dying. But war deaths and the consequences of that can't be avoided. You can also compare that to the consequences of an inevitable regional war, or the expected losses of a potential regional war in the 30s or 40s, or just the deaths of a nuclear Iran doing something nuclear. But Iran wasn't interested in doing anything nuclear before Trump killed the guy who explicitly forbad Iran from doing anything nuclear. And now after Trumps invasion Iran really wants to do something nuclear because it is te only way to be safe from an insane America. So Trump cause a hell of a lot of deaths by making a future hypothetical Iran do something nuclear.
Sure they just had hundreds of kilograms of 60% HEU from centrifuges hundreds of meters under mountains for traditional Persian jewelry.
The IAEA said since the early 2000s that they couldn't verify that Iran's nuclear programs are just nice happy rainbow civilian activities.
If they had no interest in nuclear weapons there wouldn't be multiple administrations kicking the can down the road trying to negotiate stopgap deals about something they had no interest in to begin with. Don't waste my time.
|
On November 06 2026 02:24 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2026 23:53 Gorsameth wrote:On November 05 2026 23:37 oBlade wrote:On November 05 2026 22:49 KwarK wrote:
Wait, you think it's higher prices or lives?
That's not what a higher price means. It's not like all the oil suppliers got together and rose the floor price. The higher price is because people who need oil are bidding for it and not all of them are getting oil. Supply is down and in the global south that means being outbid for oil they need. Higher prices mean lives lost. Lives lost by the world having to invade Iran. You can quantify your global south deaths and compare and it'll probably be less. Moreover, your global south deaths can be avoided. The global north can just help and save them. Which it should be doing anyway. Like when crude was at $100+ for years under Obama (which is much higher in 2026 dollars) and all those people were dying and at risk of dying. But war deaths and the consequences of that can't be avoided. You can also compare that to the consequences of an inevitable regional war, or the expected losses of a potential regional war in the 30s or 40s, or just the deaths of a nuclear Iran doing something nuclear. But Iran wasn't interested in doing anything nuclear before Trump killed the guy who explicitly forbad Iran from doing anything nuclear. And now after Trumps invasion Iran really wants to do something nuclear because it is te only way to be safe from an insane America. So Trump cause a hell of a lot of deaths by making a future hypothetical Iran do something nuclear. Sure they just had hundreds of kilograms of 60% HEU from centrifuges hundreds of meters under mountains for traditional Persian jewelry. The IAEA said since the early 2000s that they couldn't verify that Iran's nuclear programs are just nice happy rainbow civilian activities. If they had no interest in nuclear weapons there wouldn't be multiple administrations kicking the can down the road trying to negotiate stopgap deals about something they had no interest in to begin with. Don't waste my time. Why not? you waste all of yours every single day.
|
On November 06 2026 02:33 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2026 02:24 oBlade wrote:On November 05 2026 23:53 Gorsameth wrote:On November 05 2026 23:37 oBlade wrote:On November 05 2026 22:49 KwarK wrote:
Wait, you think it's higher prices or lives?
That's not what a higher price means. It's not like all the oil suppliers got together and rose the floor price. The higher price is because people who need oil are bidding for it and not all of them are getting oil. Supply is down and in the global south that means being outbid for oil they need. Higher prices mean lives lost. Lives lost by the world having to invade Iran. You can quantify your global south deaths and compare and it'll probably be less. Moreover, your global south deaths can be avoided. The global north can just help and save them. Which it should be doing anyway. Like when crude was at $100+ for years under Obama (which is much higher in 2026 dollars) and all those people were dying and at risk of dying. But war deaths and the consequences of that can't be avoided. You can also compare that to the consequences of an inevitable regional war, or the expected losses of a potential regional war in the 30s or 40s, or just the deaths of a nuclear Iran doing something nuclear. But Iran wasn't interested in doing anything nuclear before Trump killed the guy who explicitly forbad Iran from doing anything nuclear. And now after Trumps invasion Iran really wants to do something nuclear because it is te only way to be safe from an insane America. So Trump cause a hell of a lot of deaths by making a future hypothetical Iran do something nuclear. Sure they just had hundreds of kilograms of 60% HEU from centrifuges hundreds of meters under mountains for traditional Persian jewelry. The IAEA said since the early 2000s that they couldn't verify that Iran's nuclear programs are just nice happy rainbow civilian activities. If they had no interest in nuclear weapons there wouldn't be multiple administrations kicking the can down the road trying to negotiate stopgap deals about something they had no interest in to begin with. Don't waste my time. Why not? you waste all of yours every single day.
That is a sick burn, just like the burns that would result if you stuck your hand in the uranium hexafluoride in one of the centrifuges that Iran used to enrich hundreds of kilograms of 60% HEU over the years, that you have no answer for, and basically have the mind of an Iranian agent astroturfer to be able to ignore so brazenly.
|
Hi oBlade, if Trump didn't send Americans to die to stop Iran's nuclear program, would Europe/Israel/whomever else you're imagining have done so? If so, how is it "America First" for Americans to die doing the work other countries can be doing for us?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
