Trump supporters, how do you square this?

[thedukeofearl]

I think Fry has mentioned this a bit earlier, but for those of us who are interested in understanding which media outlets lean left or right, or are more center, this site is helpful. Interestingly it seems to be a pretty even spread. I'm going to try to view more news sources that are center, and slightly left or right leaning, and limit my view of very L or R leaning outlets. Here's a snippet:
View attachment 11270

Very nice, Gracias

 

[PCHawk]

Totally agree that the government (right and left) is corrupt. I also agree about not being able to trust a friend of corrupt people to clean things up, but here's where I disagree. The individual's Trump has chosen are not "red flags" due to their political beliefs or the fact their own party doesn't like them. That may be some of it, but the majority of it is they're simply laughable candidates that have absolutely zero business being in that position.

Matt Gaetz- his first choice for attorney general a potential pedophile.
Pete Hegseth- Defense secretary with limited management history who's never managed more then 100 people combined in the tow organizations he's previously run.
LInda McMahon- Department of Education nominee despite no back ground in education with the exception of a year she spent on a school board in which she lied about a degree in education.
RFK Jr. director of HHS... the list goes on and on.

I have absolutely no back ground in politics whatsoever, but his choices for cabinet reminds me of the class clown in high school picking the least athletic people in the class to be on his team, because he simply doesn't give two shits and thinks it'd be funny while basically giving everyone the finger because he's in charge. Sure it might be funny at first, but as it goes on and on people start thinking "is he serious" and "WTF is he doing". The problem is you can get away with that shit when it doesn't matter, but running the country isn't a game.

While many of us absolutely despise him, nobody wants to see him fail. Because if he fails we all do. And that's why the smug, quick to judge, know it all rhetoric and the way he conducts himself pisses a lot of us off. Not even two weeks in and it's already starting with him immediately politicizing a tragedy, while claiming DEI was behind the plane crash. The most powerful person in the country using a tragedy to push an agenda while people are still mourning the loss of family members. Sorry but there's a reason this country is divided, because there's people that support this behavior and others that are absolutely disgusted by it.

You might be right about the candidates. But it's also entirely possible that you have been led to believe they aren't qualified. I'd be willing to bet that if you wanted to you could find a way to convince most people that anyone is unqualified for a job. All you have to do is focus on the negative and ignore the positive.

I couldn't agree more that Trump talking about DEI right there was stupid. But you have to be honest and admit that a politician using a tragedy to push an agenda isn'ta Trump thing. Everyone on both sides does it. Just wait for the next school shootings if you don't agree.

Also if Jeffrey Epstein showed us anything it's that probably half of Washington is a potential pedophile.

 

[Westernhawk]

Trump On If He'll Visit Site Of Deadly Aviation Collision: 'You Want Me To Go Swimming?'​

"What's the site? The water?" Donald Trump said when asked about the crash in the Washington area that left 67 people dead.

He's a malignant narcissist who has no empathy.

We can and should do so much better as a country. I can't imagine history will look kindly on this administration.

 

[PCHawk]

You're absolutely right about not being one sided, but at the same time you can't use it as a crutch either. The fact is it's used as an excuse. You just said that "they didn't even pursue Hillary or Biden". You're right, but that doesn't make it excusable for Trump, or Hillary or Biden before him. We should be pissed about preferential treatment and turning a blind eye, but we can't sit there and use it as an excuse or use it justify an action. If laws were broken, then there has to be consequences regardless of who broke it. Both sides are guilty and should be held accountable, but when we start saying it's ok for one reason or another then why have laws in the first place.

I'm of the opinion that politicians shouldn't be above the law and holding them responsible has to start somewhere. But the starting point should be corrupt dealings with foreign nations, or assassinations, or something like that. Not overvaluing your property for a loan or changing the statute of limitations so a lady who has a long history of accusing people of rape could accuse him of assaulting her 30 years ago. To be clear, I'm not saying he shouldn't be held accountable necessarily. I'm just saying those are extremely weak "breaking the ice" convictions for holding a politician accountable.

 

[Westernhawk]

You might be right about the candidates. But it's also entirely possible that you have been led to believe they aren't qualified. I'd be willing to bet that if you wanted to you could find a way to convince most people that anyone is unqualified for a job. All you have to do is focus on the negative and ignore the positive.

I couldn't agree more that Trump talking about DEI right there was stupid. But you have to be honest and admit that a politician using a tragedy to push an agenda isn'ta Trump thing. Everyone on both sides does it. Just wait for the next school shootings if you don't agree.

Also if Jeffrey Epstein showed us anything it's that probably half of Washington is a potential pedophile.

False equivalency with school shootings. Guns, and appropriate gun safety (vetting process for registration, etc), is quite relevant to mass shootings.

DEI's relevance to a plane crash?

 

[ajdwhs87]

He's a malignant narcissist who has no empathy.

We can and should do so much better as a country. I can't imagine history will look kindly on this administration.

Truth is you could see the difference. Biden and Trump both in NY and only Trump goes to the cops funeral on Long Island. Biden just leaves. Biden admin pretty much ignores the families of the 13 marines killed in their withdrawal. You want to go talk to the people of East Palestine, Ohio how empathetic the administration was to them.

TBH, I haven't even heard it but it is seemingly a dumb question from a reporter. You go to East Palestine, Hawaii, the border etc. where there disasters. Presidents don't go to car pile ups or plane crashes. If there were survivors I bet Trump would be more likely to go visit the hospital than Biden would. Of course Trump goes to the cemetery with the families and the biased media claims it a publicity stunt and if Biden goes and places a wreathe or something it is a great thing. Same old same old. We saw the difference when Trump goes to a McDonald's or bodega and talks to the people there and when Kamala would go to a diner or convenience store and they would remove people out of it first.

 

[Westernhawk]

Here's a message board experiment (if folks are willing):

Let's take a topic and discuss the pros and cons of a given policy, and do our best to avoid ad hominem attacks or conspiracy theories.

I'll start:

Trump is going to impose tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China, starting soon.

Question for the group:

- What are the potential upsides for our economy and individuals in the US, and conversely, what are the downsides?

 

[thedukeofearl]

Our Own Sen. Chuck Grassley asks Kash Patel to "TEACH LESSONS" when he takes his post

Damn, Chuck

 

[PCHawk]

Yes, we should ensure that nominees are able to have a basic understanding of the service/bureau they will be leading.

I think these are fair questions and not necessarily "gotcha" because they assess the knowledge of the applicant/nominee.

Having said that, in my view, this isn't a "my team vs your team" deal. Biden isn't the president now, and wasn't even a candidate for president. Your point is valid but not relevant to now. I agree that that nominee should've been challenged as well. Not everything is a team sport, pal. We should be looking after the health our our great republic, and not just "owning the libs" as you love to attempt to do.

And, this is a great example of "whataboutism" even if you don't like it when people call you out on it. You attempt to search for equivalencies.

So, based on your own logic, do you think RFK should be able to answer basic questions about Medicaid and Medicare? I can answer them in my sleep.

I think everyone can agree that as a boss, the more you know about the stuff going on underneath you the better. That said, there's also a lot of truth to the fact that leader skills are leader skills. It's a lot better to hire a great leader that can easily get up to speed on all the stuff under him than hire someone who knows all the ins and outs of the stuff at the bottom and try to teach them to lead. I think that kind of answers your question about RFK knowing basic Medicaid stuff. My guess is he's already learned the answer to everything he was asked. Or will know within a week.

And I agree I was using whataboutism there. But again, that's a fancy word for pointing out hypocrisy.

 

[kicker22]

I'm of the opinion that politicians shouldn't be above the law and holding them responsible has to start somewhere. But the starting point should be corrupt dealings with foreign nations, or assassinations, or something like that. Not overvaluing your property for a loan or changing the statute of limitations so a lady who has a long history of accusing people of rape could accuse him of assaulting her 30 years ago. To be clear, I'm not saying he shouldn't be held accountable necessarily. I'm just saying those are extremely weak "breaking the ice" convictions for holding a politician accountable.

Sorry but I completely disagree. Maybe it's because I'm not a politician, but I have a major problem with the President of my country being sexually assaulting a women, whether it was a year ago or thirty. I have a major problem with the overvaluing of property as well. Is it petty on my end? Possibly, but why should someone in a position of power be above the law when there's people who's lives are ruined by these same choices on a daily basis.

It's the exact same issue I have with his personality. Can an effective leader be an asshole? Absolutely, but if I interacted with people the way he does I'd lose my job, my family and probably everything I hold close.
Politicians aren't superheroes and shouldn't be looked at as role models, but based on the values my parents passed on to me and that I'm passing on to my kids, I couldn't for the life of me pretend to be ok with the way he treats people or conducts himself. If that makes me petty for never being able to see past it then so be it, but while you see things as "extremely weak "breaking the ice" convictions I see it as one more reason to want someone else in his or anyone else's position of power. They're all fake, I get it, but at the end of the day he can at least pretend to come off as someone who cares about more then himself.

Sorry for the rant. Generally I don't talk about politics, but you guys are like family LOL.

 

[kicker22]

Truth is you could see the difference. Biden and Trump both in NY and only Trump goes to the cops funeral on Long Island. Biden just leaves. Biden admin pretty much ignores the families of the 13 marines killed in their withdrawal. You want to go talk to the people of East Palestine, Ohio how empathetic the administration was to them.

TBH, I haven't even heard it but it is seemingly a dumb question from a reporter. You go to East Palestine, Hawaii, the border etc. where there disasters. Presidents don't go to car pile ups or plane crashes. If there were survivors I bet Trump would be more likely to go visit the hospital than Biden would. Of course Trump goes to the cemetery with the families and the biased media claims it a publicity stunt and if Biden goes and places a wreathe or something it is a great thing. Same old same old. We saw the difference when Trump goes to a McDonald's or bodega and talks to the people there and when Kamala would go to a diner or convenience store and they would remove people out of it first.

There's no argument it's a dumb question, but there's a better way to answer it. There's an element of empathy and simply just being human that he ignores. California fires, immediately attacks Newsom, plane crash he immediately makes it a DEI issue. The problem isn't that he's necessarily wrong its the fact the timing is completely inappropriate. People are hurting and rather than truly sympathizing with them he's using their pain to immediately spin it into a political issue. That's the difference between him and others. He may truly care, but he can't shut up long enough for it to come across as sincere.

 

[PCHawk]

Wow you are easy to trigger. Yes, I do see Trump and his entire team as authoritarian.

Some of us just said President Musk sarcastically because it triggers the fanboys.

I'm not triggered at all. I've just been hearing Trump is a dictator for years and now suddenly people are saying he's taking commands from someone else. I just want to know which one it is.

 

[PCHawk]

False equivalency with school shootings. Guns, and appropriate gun safety (vetting process for registration, etc), is quite relevant to mass shootings.

DEI's relevance to a plane crash?

I didn't compare those two things. I was talking to someone who said politicians shouldn't use tragedies to push an agenda. Those two things aren't the same in a lot of ways. But they both most definitely fall into the category of using tragedy to push an agenda.