Donald J. Trump: President of the USA Part III Covfefe

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gingerbeardman

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
4,043
The alternative to top down orders is actually teaching people that they need to support their local economy.
Sure, but how do you circumvent the globalist propaganda in the process? Cuz your efforts will be in vain if you can't outcompete it.
 

rietrot

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
14,765
Sure, but how do you circumvent the globalist propaganda in the process? Cuz your efforts will be in vain if you can't outcompete it.
Ja, don't know. I like to believe(probably incorrectly) that the average person is smart enough to do what's in their community's and in their own best interest without the need for top down orders.
 

buka001

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
3,945
I had Andy Ngo association with Patriot Prayer confused with Proud Boys.

A thread detailing clear implicit links.

He is a provocateur masquerading as a journalist.

Note how he happily stands with guys holding bricks, which were later thrown at the premises, but somehow melts when he sees a milkshake.

A case of accuse the other side of that, which you are guilty of, perhaps?

 

Gingerbeardman

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
4,043
I had Andy Ngo association with Patriot Prayer confused with Proud Boys.

A thread detailing clear implicit links.

He is a provocateur masquerading as a journalist.

Note how he happily stands with guys holding bricks, which were later thrown at the premises, but somehow melts when he sees a milkshake.

A case of accuse the other side of that, which you are guilty of, perhaps?

So then just like all the other activists posing as journalists in the MSM then. :sleep:

What's the problem Buka, you said you only care about violence... Andy isn't being violent, is he? :sneaky:
 

Gingerbeardman

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
4,043
Yikes! Fewer People Today Consider Themselves Democrat than When Trump was Elected

by Jim Hoft August 24, 2019 493 Comments


Democrat party leaders


The last two years have been hard on America-hating Democrats.
Open borders, lawlessness and socialism are not big selling points for the liberal party.
There are less Democrats today than when Donald Trump was elected US President on November 8, 2016.

According to Gallup.
On November 9-14 2016 30% of Americans considered themselves Democrat.


Today, August 24, 2019 only 27% of Americans consider themselves a Democrat.

All of that craziness and violence is not expanding their party.

Gee, I can't imagine why.... :sneaky:
 

BBSA

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
12,134
Joe Walsh, a former Illinois congressman, says he’ll challenge President Donald Trump for the Republican nomination in 2020. The tea party favorite argues that Trump is unfit for the White House.

Walsh announced his candidacy during an interview on ABC’s “This Week’” on Sunday. Also in the race is Bill Weld, a former Massachusetts governor.

Walsh won a House seat from suburban Chicago in the 2010 tea party wave, but lost reelection in 2012 and has since hosted a radio talk show.

He has a history of inflammatory statements regarding Muslims and others, and said just before the 2016 election that if Trump lost, “I’m grabbing my musket.” Walsh has since soured on Trump.

 

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
41,287
You know, just as the Repubs of yesteryear are not the Repubs of today, the same is true of the Dems. You might wanna take that into account.
Sure. But it shows what a farce conservatism as a movement is, and has been for a very long time.

Gingerbeardman said:
You mean like Tulsi Gabbard? Pretty sure I even said somewhere that atm I'd vote for her over Trump. I expect my views to remain that way for so long as Tulsi doesn't pussify and become a DNC toady as Bernie Sanders did.

Indeed, a search for me talking about Gabbard isn't hard to do:
Gabbard's fine, as is Yang. But they're not going anywhere in this race.

Why don't you spend any time discussing actual policy issues and ways of moving them forward, though? Including the things that Gabbard are putting forward as part of her campaign? It's really weird that as someone who claims to be a 'lefty' and supports someone like Gabbard, you spend so little time discussing the ways that the Trump admin are harming the things you supposedly view as goals?

Gingerbeardman said:
I'd call myself a lefty, not a leftist. I certainly don't actively try to be on the left rather than the right, and I'm not deranged enough to think that authority can be abolished entirely and that any acknowledgement of this turns one into an incoherent authoritarian.
So you're tilting at windmills and fighting right wing culture wars in pursuit of... what exactly, as a 'lefty'? Which policy goals do you think are advanced this way?

Gingerbeardman said:
Right, because you're not going to claim that antifa's motivations are grounded in real world concerns and suffering that require attention and human activity, even if their proposed strategy is arse backwards? :sneaky:
Some of it is, some of it isn't.

Gingerbeardman said:
And that's exactly the same argument that will be used to normalise paedophilia.
Yeah, totally. Just like marriage equality led to people marrying dogs.

Gingerbeardman said:
Because marriage as a social institution has to be respected if it is to be effective. It no longer is, btw, the value of the institution has become deleterious in the eyes of many men. See the recent thread for what this looks like in action. You can't have the norm without the discrimination, but you are blind to the value of discrimination in this regard.
So conservatives in practice have discriminated against people, for example by denying marriage to a whole class of people, instead of assuring equal rights for all... in an effort to 'respect' marriage?

Not to mention the discrimination went (and still goes) way beyond marriage.

Truly a mystery.



Joe Walsh, a former Illinois congressman, says he’ll challenge President Donald Trump for the Republican nomination in 2020. The tea party favorite argues that Trump is unfit for the White House.

Walsh announced his candidacy during an interview on ABC’s “This Week’” on Sunday. Also in the race is Bill Weld, a former Massachusetts governor.

Walsh won a House seat from suburban Chicago in the 2010 tea party wave, but lost reelection in 2012 and has since hosted a radio talk show.

He has a history of inflammatory statements regarding Muslims and others, and said just before the 2016 election that if Trump lost, “I’m grabbing my musket.” Walsh has since soured on Trump.

Good little mini-thread about why Walsh has potential to do some damage, even though he has no chance in hell.

 

Gingerbeardman

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
4,043
Sure. But it shows what a farce conservatism as a movement is, and has been for a very long time.
Trump's only doing good things in that regard.

Gabbard's fine, as is Yang. But they're not going anywhere in this race.
Which is more than enough reason for me to treat the Dems with contempt and scorn.

Why don't you spend any time discussing actual policy issues and ways of moving them forward, though?
Pretty sure I do when they actually crop up. But unfortunately, most of the policy proposals on the left have been downright retarded.

Including the things that Gabbard are putting forward as part of her campaign?
No, I'm not going to be baited into virtue signalling as you deem appropriate.

It's really weird that as someone who claims to be a 'lefty' and supports someone like Gabbard, you spend so little time discussing the ways that the Trump admin are harming the things you supposedly view as goals?
Just because immortality is your goal, that's no reason to swallow mercury. What Trump is harming is more the plan to swallow mercury than the project for immortality. Making sure globalism dies a horrible death takes priority with respect to ensuring personal freedom for humanity.

So you're tilting at windmills and fighting right wing culture wars in pursuit of... what exactly, as a 'lefty'? Which policy goals do you think are advanced this way?
The ones that prevent the West slipping into the same kinds of societal standards that turned the Soviet Union into Hell on Earth.

Some of it is, some of it isn't.
Just like the Proud Boys, then.

Yeah, totally. Just like marriage equality led to people marrying dogs.
MAP activism is already a fact. All the arguments that apply to homosexuality as a sexual orientation apply to MAPs, and the sole defence against normalising it, that the minor is too young to give informed consent has been obliterated by the advent of transtrending and giving minors life-altering hormone blockers and the like.

So conservatives in practice have discriminated against people, for example by denying marriage to a whole class of people, instead of assuring equal rights for all... in an effort to 'respect' marriage?
An effort to respect Marriage as an institution that forms monogamous pair-bonds between males and females such that giving birth outside of those circumstances qualifies legally as an "illegitimate" birth, thus setting up a whole social system that makes marriage a meaningful social arrangement.

Do I agree with the idea of making sex acts outside of marriage illegal? No. But nevertheless marriage is the single most effective institution against combatting poverty ever to be invented. And now that sex outside of marriage is the norm, men are increasingly becoming unwilling to commit to long term relationships and the basic outcome is single-motherhood along with all the negative consequences entailed there-in.

Not to mention the discrimination went (and still goes) way beyond marriage.
Now you're shifting the goalposts. The point is you cannot create a social institution without enforcing that institution so that people respect it, and manifesting a norm necessarily entails an act of discrimination which cannot be avoided. The very act of telling good apart from bad is discrimination.

The radicals on the left expect that discrimination can be done away with entirely, but that's tantamount to claiming that anything goes, and nobody but the anarchists want to inhabit a society without any standards at all. So instead what we're dealing with is a cost/benefit calculation.

Good little mini-thread about why Walsh has potential to do some damage, even though he has no chance in hell.
In terms of damage, Walsh ain't doing jack. Here's why:


:ROFL:
 
Last edited:

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
41,287
Pretty sure I do when they actually crop up. But unfortunately, most of the policy proposals on the left have been downright retarded.
I disagree, but okay. Give me some policy proposals that you think are good ideas.

Gingerbeardman said:
No, I'm not going to be baited into virtue signalling as you deem appropriate.
How is asking you what you think of policy issues and goals baiting you into virtue signalling?

Gingerbeardman said:
The ones that prevent the West slipping into the same kinds of societal standards that turned the Soviet Union into Hell on Earth.
Truly, it would be terrible if the US were to degenerate into a hellscape like Australia, New Zealand, or Denmark.

Gingerbeardman said:
MAP activism is already a fact. All the arguments that apply to homosexuality as a sexual orientation apply to MAPs, and the sole defence against normalising it, that the minor is too young to give informed consent has been obliterated by the advent of transtrending and giving minors life-altering hormone blockers and the like.
Nope, and the slippery slope fallacy about what marriage equality would lead to remains just as false as it always has.

Gingerbeardman said:
An effort to respect Marriage as an institution that forms monogamous pair-bonds between males and females such that giving birth outside of those circumstances qualifies legally as an "illegitimate" birth, thus setting up a whole social system that makes marriage a meaningful social arrangement.

Do I agree with the idea of making sex acts outside of marriage illegal? No.
So how would you enforce it?

And either way, this is still absurd logical and moral reasoning. Discriminate against rafts of people on all sorts of issues (including issues unrelated to marriage) because you're trying to keep marriage an exclusive club.

Gingerbeardman said:
But nevertheless marriage is the single most effective institution against combatting poverty ever to be invented.
Do you have a citation for that? Welfare institutions actually do pretty well. Better than anything else tried.

Although empowering women generally goes hand in hand with that.

Gingerbeardman said:
And now that sex outside of marriage is the norm, men are increasingly becoming unwilling to commit to long term relationships and the basic outcome is single-motherhood along with all the negative consequences entailed there-in.
Single motherhood is at the lowest point in 50 years. Sex outside marriage has always been the norm.

And if you want to limit unwanted pregnancies, provide better access to education, healthcare, birth control, and legal abortion. All things conservatives oppose or stymie.

Gingerbeardman said:
Now you're shifting the goalposts.
Nope. You shifted the goalposts by trying to ring-fence the discussion to marriage equality for some reason.
 

greg0205

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
12,866
Went to my local for a pint yesterday. Drunk at the end of the bar was going on and on about dropping nukes on hurricanes to stop them making landfall...

Oh, no, wait...

That was POTUS.
 

rietrot

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
14,765
Went to my local for a pint yesterday. Drunk at the end of the bar was going on and on about dropping nukes on hurricanes to stop them making landfall...

Oh, no, wait...

That was POTUS.
It is actual real science bro. Have you never seen sharknado?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top