Have you ever seen the South Park episode where they were trying to vote for a new school mascot and their two choices were a giant douche and a terrible sandwich? Randy had to explain to Stan that those are always your choices because they're the only ones who suck up enough to make it to the top. There's a lot of truth to that. Just because the new guy didn't suck up enough to make it to the top doesn't mean he's not qualified. But wait a second, actually he probably did just suck up enough to make it to the top so I take that all back.
Trump supporters, how do you square this?
- Thread starter CP87
- Start date
So here's a question. Once Trump gets all of his people into place, if he starts arresting democrats and trying them in deep red states, are people going to assume the arrests were warranted? Or will they just say Trump is just going after is political opponents? That's going to be a conundrum.
Hay Man
Well-Known Member
Depends on what side your on. That's why hypocrisy is running wild on both side.
If Trump does great things (no fucking chance), then great for us....but if he fucks everything up (which a good amount of people believe he will), it's going to be hard for the MAGA crowd to listen to those trying to tell you who he's always been.
Good luck
If Trump does great things (no fucking chance), then great for us....but if he fucks everything up (which a good amount of people believe he will), it's going to be hard for the MAGA crowd to listen to those trying to tell you who he's always been.
Good luck
SCHawkeye2
Well-Known Member
I do.
I didn't ask you for evidence that there were BLM riots. There were.
I asked you for evidence linking these riots to Biden.
Let's unpack this whole "tying BLM protests to Jam 6th" thing. The way I compared them (and I stand by it) is they were both protests that escalated into riots. The ways they aren't similar is location of where they happened, who they affected, and reasons behind it. So if you think one is fine and the other isn't, it means you're either ok with where the riots took place (black neighborhoods) , who the riots affected (black people) or the reasons behind the protests. If it's one of the first two reasons, that's really racist of you. If it's the last reason, that means you are only ok with protests that turn into riots if you agree with the reasoning behind the protest.
Thats fine if you feel that way. I'm just more consistent in my belief that protest should always be legal. I will add this tho. I think the BLM protest/riots were worse because of who they affected. I feel a lot worse for the small business owners in black neighborhoods than I do for the rich white people who hid in a room behind people with guns to protect them.
I didn't say Biden. I said Biden's minions. There were a lot of prominent democrats calling for violence during that time. Some of them were on the link I posted a bit ago.
Last edited:
A lot of people will think his first presidency was sabotaged by the people he hired. His excuse is he had to hire a lot of people and didn't know anyone and this time he will hire the right people. If he doesn't noticeably clean up corruption this time (I'm talking cut the national debt, end pointless wars by showing strength, and hopefully getting term limits in congress) then a lot of people will say he got sabotaged again. I will absolutely not be one of those people.
In my mind he's got four years to show noticeable improvement in all of the areas that won his support. I'm talking enough improvement to win over half of the people that hate him now. Then after four years, he absolutely has to step down, even if people are begging him to stay. Then in an ideal world the team he put together will have the support to win and keep the momentum going. If that happens, I'll feel vindicated. If it doesn't happen, I'll know I was either wrong or too hopeful.
SCHawkeye2
Well-Known Member
Evidence please- connecting Biden to instigating and encouraging the riots as Trump did on Jan 6
Trump beats him hands down. Attack your own government and call war heroes suckers and losers 40 of 44 staff, his VP unwilling to support him, multiple 3 and 4 star US Generals openly telling Americans he is a threat and unfit, lifelong big name Republicans campaigning for the Democrat nominee yet the gullible American electorate supports this non principled traitorous individual. That’s Jim Jones territory. Musk is not this good.
The democrats inciting the violence were Biden's minions. That was my point. But truthfully, Biden was the minion (as proof by the coup pulled on him) so technically I was wrong.
Trump was in office for 4 years. What did he do that was so bad that so many career politicians refuse to support him? If your only answer is Jan 6th, you need to ask yourself some serious questions about that day. There was a zero percent chance that Trump would ever gain anything from that day. There was 100% chance that the political elite would gain everything from that day. If you disagree with either of those stats I just made up out of thin air, please explain how.
I don't need to ask myself any of your questions, at all. It is obvious there is nothing Trump could do that would sway you from your support, you are drenched in the kool aid. In my last post there was plenty enough, and I could continue to list the actions of the worst of mankind here but it is a complete waste on you, you have the excuses ready and you will not stop. Project 2025 will be implemented at least as much as the Supreme Court and God will allow now so we get to see now what an unfettered man of no principle can do to America. If you ever think in the way of What would Jesus do then you would know as I do that everything that Trump does is the polar opposite of that. Judas had a purpose, maybe so does Trump. I surely hope and pray that I am wrong but I am a believer in Jesus Christ and these things are not surprising to a believer. Due to knowing so little about the future I will continue to pray that God's will be done, that's it. Take care.
SCHawkeye2
Well-Known Member
This is not evidence. This is your opinion.
Do you understand the difference?
Please provide evidence to support your claim.
Evidence that those inciting the violence were Democrats.
Evidence that those inciting the violence were connected to Biden.
I already posted a video montage of democrats supporting violence. If you don't know who they are, I suppose I can help you with that.
Trump lost my support at the end of his last term by adding ro the national debt and how he completely gave in to Fauci. I was really hoping he wouldn't run again and I was really hoping he would lose the primary once he announced he was running. I barely even like Trump. I really like the people he's surrounding himself with. I really like his message (but I take that with a grain of salt). But most of all, I really dislike the machine that is clearly running the country in place of Biden, and I see right through the lawfare used against Trump. In fact, that lawfare is the only thing that gives me hope that Trump really isn't part of the two party game that Wagington plays. In my mind, this was a choice between Washington elites and a non Washington elite. Anytime I think I have an option to vote for the non Washington elite, I'll take it. This isn't about a love for Trump. It's about a disdain for Washington. If you're someone who likes the way our system runs, you won't understand.
Glass1/2fullguy
Well-Known Member
I believe this is similar to the way so many trump voters feel. Most support him for the policies he’s going to implement, not because they think he’s some great holy person. The democratic agenda is so far gone from the direction of most Americans. If the democrats continue pushing this woke agenda they’ll continue to lose. It’s as simple as that.
Hay Man
Well-Known Member
I would agree with that. The Democrats need wholesale changes at the top and a new direction instead of pandering to the few.
Fryowa
Administrator
Or how about both sides come towards the middle, stop with the extremism, ultra-partisanship, and agree to compromise on issues so the country can get some meaningful work done for the benefit of the country?
Both sides are equally guilty of refusal to compromise because they make more money arguing and posturing at the expense of the taxpayers.
I love how the democratic party and GOP both love to squawk about how they're willing to compromise but the other side isn't. I got news for ya, when that happens it means neither side is willing. It's nothing more than a couple of 4 year-olds not wanting to share their gigantic ice cream sandwich and your party is just as guilty amigo.
Good governance is when no one is happy, but everyone is satisfied. That means there was some give and take, and the final policy was probably balanced. I think there can be instances where a mashup of 2 decent ideas can lead to a horrible policy (worse than either of the competing ideas would have been), but those are rare.
Take climate policy...one side wants to eliminate fossil fuels, while simultaneously making it so difficult to build the necessary transitional infrastructure to make it happen. The other side wants the cheapest energy possible, and to pander to fossil fuel-based company execs.
Decrease the road blocks to building new infrastructure, incentivize the building of that infrastructure, and in the meanwhile keep that oil and natural gas flowing. A lot of that was actually in the oddly-named IRA, which is how it got passed with some bipartisan support. Environmentalists were pissed because it was too permissive of fossil fuel expansion, many on the right were pissed because they have been convinced climate change is a hoax and were worried about increased energy cost, so it probably hit the mark.
I recently heard an Exxon exec say he is opposed to Trump rolling back the green energy policies in the IRA because they have adapted business toward that reality, and having to swing back away from it, and then perhaps have it resume in the future, is much harder on industry then just being told, "This is the new reality, prepare for it."
