Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[tehdang]

Sigh. And here's the reason for my "insulting tone".

You were trying to defend your position as an "enlightened centrist".

You've asked for quotes that back up what I've said, so now it's your turn. Find me one time I've defended "my position as an enlightened centrist."

Not a Trump supporter at all.

This is also a problem for you. Some things Trump does will be boring Republican stuff that could just as likely come from a President Romney or a President George W Bush or a President Jeb Bush. You're trying very hard to paint with a wide brush, when it's much simpler to go to issues and gain clarity on the kinds of stuff I support and oppose.

No sir. In fact you suggested that you repeatedly make it clear with your posts that you distance yourself from Trump and his policies. And when I call you out on this, you respond with 4 examples of how harsh you are to Trump and his policies.

Well, I made it this far until you go bad faith. You're moving the goal posts and it's a strain. You previously said "I couldn't find a single example of you criticizing his economic policy," and when I bring you four examples, you pretend that the question was distancing myself from Trump and his policies in general. Nope. I don't get paid to defend Trump, and I don't get paid to examine every single Trump policy and contrast it with historical conservatism or factions within the conservative movement within the Republican party. So you can find the old posts from last time this or that political policy came up in the thread or the last time I was asked. So like I told the other guy, give a pause and a break to get off whatever "gotchas" you're aiming for, and please recognize basic things like "Huehuecoyotl asked a question and got a germane and specific answer" and less "... which he then pretended was never his question in the first place."

[Breccia]

Trump flat-out says meeting with Putin would be a waste of time. The man who used ending the Ukraine war within 24 hours as a major campaign promise has now completely abandoned it, admitting he was either too incompetent to make a deal, or that he was lying when he said he both could and wanted to.

"It says here he refuses to meet with Putin until he has a deal."

That's what the meeting would be for. It's the same thing as his budget "negotiations" where he refused to meet with Democrats unless "they" opened the government, either forgetting that he needed to sign off on whatever it was, or just demanding that Democrats give him everything before starting to negotiate, which incidentally, isn't how negotiation works.

While this is a step up from "Russia wins, Ukraine should just give their country away" this is still Trump announcing his complete failure on the world stage. I guess this was all a publicity stunt to get the Nobel Prize, and now that he didn't, he's giving up and letting the genocide run? We've literally seen more US military support sent to Portland.

There is no reasonable way to view this other than Trump being a lying failure.

[DarkTZeratul]

Just so long as they are required to hire back the same workers they got rid of. Otherwise them firing off the workers to intentionally hire loyalists instead would actually be an even worse outcome.

Well, when they're furloughed they're not actually fired, they're just not working and not getting paid. They're expected to come back when the shutdown ends.

[D Luniz]

Russell Vaught, the man that pretty much wants to get rid of federal government outside of things he likes, pretty much has been told to sit down and shut up, just not in so many words but in action.

He claimed that a whole mess of people were going to be fired during the shutdown. The problem is that the Department heads are the ones who decide if there is any downsizing. And for the most part, very few people are actually getting fired and just being furloughed.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...4e697fb9&ei=15



Much like how DOGE found out, you cannot run a public body like the government like a business. As it isn't there to make money or profit and shouldn't be. And it also takes people to actually get things done in government. A lot of people. This is why every time they try and fire a bunch of people, they then call a whole bunch of them back and tell them that they still have jobs.

The thing is, they dont even want to run it like a business, because at the end of the day, they dont want the government to run at all because its either competition or regulation.

They're defunding the police

[Dontrike]

This is also a problem for you. Some things Trump does will be boring Republican stuff that could just as likely come from a President Romney or a President George W Bush or a President Jeb Bush.

No, fuck you. We had a W Bush presidency where he didn't come close to the fascism, rape, pedophilia, or straight up corruption. He was shit, but he wasn't actively pushing the rhetoric the Nazis took from America 100 years ago. Romney wouldn't have come that close to even W.

Republicans are pretty shit, but Trump is easily in the top 1% of shitty republicans.

[PenguinChan]

Appreciate it.

no problem

The current administration heads up the Executive, but there's still two other constitutional branches of government with abundant oversight and legal authority. To quote a Supreme Court justice, "To the extent that excessive force has been used, the Fourth Amendment prohibits such action, and remedies should be available in federal court." But I don't want to get too far ahead of myself here. Do you understand the concept that this isn't the cops investigating themselves, and there is still separation of powers and constitutional authority not under Trump's control? You might have noticed that the President is unable to fund his own government right now.

I was using it as a comparison, 'cause government bodies both state and federal level tend to 'find no wrong doing' in themselves, naturally. And trying to actually get anything legally done in that case can be a huge headache and cost tons of money. Sometimes not, as it may go through the right avenues or judges with damning evidence and not enough legal money to prolong the actual process. I won't pretend to be fully understanding of it all, I just know it gets shit up by assholes with money often or settling out of court instead of actual justice happening.

Or, in the case of Trump - the Jan. 6 guys being pardoned, and then one or two (so far) being arrested later on by cops for being pieces of shits. Writes itself, it does.

Now hold on there. You've twice given me only two choices on how to answer a question on my motivations. Both were decidedly bad motivations. That's putting your opponent in a box.

Mayhaps. Feel free to rephrase things if you want to. But sometimes people realize they're already backed into a corner / box without anyone needing to do anything, and pointing it out isn't really the issue here.

Sometimes I vote for Republicans, sometimes I leave it blank, go third party, or vote for the least worst Democrat on the ticket. You may not know, but I live in California. Democrats run things around here. Democrats not only have a majority, they have a supermajority in the senate and assembly. They have the governor's office too. Sometimes, it comes to the election and literally the only options on the ballot are both Democrats (usually referred to as a jungle primary). Sometimes, the Republican candidate is personally foul or is only running to gain celebrity and influence. Sometimes the moderate Democrat is the best option out of all the major party candidates. I've lived in many different congressional districts in my life, and sometimes the best move is to pick the Democrat you hate least/like best in the primary.

I had assumed the California part, because of the profile. And yeah, that happens when it's just one side always winning (For better or for worse). Although, some people here HAVE pointed out (I dunno how truthful it is) that you did vote for Trump once. I'm assuming this was his first term though, not his second term or second try losing to Biden. Regardless, thanks for at least communicating back.

[Huehuecoyotl]

Well, I made it this far until you go bad faith.

He said, removing the key part of my quote where I pointed out that his quotes were all from six months ago.

You may not actually be a Right Wing Trumpist, but you sure fucking project like they do.

You previously said "I couldn't find a single example of you criticizing his economic policy"

I said I couldn't find one in the last month of your posts. You gave examples from six months ago. Which makes it clear WHY you removed that part when you quoted me.

BAD. FUCKING. FAITH. Don't ever complain about people calling you out again, when you pull stupid transparent shit like this.

[draynay]

You may not actually be a Right Wing Trumpist

Don't worry, he is.

[Belize]

You may not actually be a Right Wing Trumpist, but you sure fucking project like they do.

That's because he is a Trump supporting wingnut.

Any and all of his "criticism" of the Trump admin is limp-wristed and performative at best, where any disagreement is always undercut but ultimately admitting he ultimately supports the goal. Yet any time anyone has something bad to say about the Trump admin, he comes flying in to the defense, spinning up whatever lies or bad faith arguments are needed.

It isn't clever, or particularly difficult to sniff out.

[david0925]

How about you stop moaning, bitching, and tone policing so god damn often, people would actually engage with your arguments.

Well, argument, because it looks like the only thing you stomach to criticize Trump for is the easiest things of all, tariffs. Shows your character pretty perfectly; months of posts, and you find four, one of them is you basically complaining that people can't read your thoughts, all of them about the very same topic.

ICE won't get oversight and lawsuits because the government will not fight itself. You know very well how ridiculous that argument of yours is, but it's an easy one to hide behind because in a world where the three pillars of government are working as they should, it is absolutely valid.

People "don't engage" with his "discussions" because he runs away/ignores half the ones he is unable to answer and dances around the other half. As soon as you fact check him he moves onto his next talking point.

Nobody on the forums long enough that used to engage with him engage with him anymore because there's no point. He's not here for an honest discussion. The only reason people still quote him is to refute his BS for the newcomers (however many there are in a WoW forums)

- - - Updated - - -

He said, removing the key part of my quote where I pointed out that his quotes were all from six months ago.

You may not actually be a Right Wing Trumpist, but you sure fucking project like they do.



I said I couldn't find one in the last month of your posts. You gave examples from six months ago. Which makes it clear WHY you removed that part when you quoted me.

BAD. FUCKING. FAITH. Don't ever complain about people calling you out again, when you pull stupid transparent shit like this.

he absolutely is a Trumpist and/or at least a far right that is benefiting from centrist/democratic-leaning policies, or he would not still be camping in California (according to him). Every time someone factchecks something he links he runs away to the next link. And after he runs low on this he goes for the classic "i don't like your tone" argument to derail. If you want to engage with his posts at all just keep calling his BS even if you don't get a response, as he's not the one we are trying to convince.

let him tone-police. Just ignore and focus on just his bullshit

[Paranoid Android]

@Breccia


Bessent on American farmers being hurt by tariffs: "Martha, in case you don't know it, I'm actually a soybean farmer, so I have felt this pain too."

Scott Bessent net worth is $600 million. He is a Hedge Fund manager who yes owns a $25 million farm(s) in North Dakota that grow soybeans. I don't believe that is a small farm. Plus he has millions in other investments. I wish the reporter could do the minimum follow up to his wealth.


Bessent on Trump bailing out Argentina: "It is America first because we are supporting a US ally.

America First but giving money to a country? An ally? Up to my first post I will tell people again that $20 billion has been reported that this is to save more of Bessent's buddies ass than anything. Then the extra $20 billion is from banks and investors who want to sweep in and carve up Argentina. Remember this is Milei, with his libertarian shit just wanting to farm out what is left of Argentina to private investors.

Edit: Oh btw

Here’s an article from August about how Bessent still hadn’t divested from all his assets, including farmland, as he had pledged to do before his confirmation.

Now he’s just going on TV bragging about it in the most pathetic way possible.

Clearly how this guy is of course focusing on getting rich for himself. Yet, once more why this effin "journalist" didn't follow up. Gotta protect the wealth class, always.

[Mayhem]

People "don't engage" with his "discussions" because he runs away/ignores half the ones he is unable to answer and dances around the other half. As soon as you fact check him he moves onto his next talking point.

Nobody on the forums long enough that used to engage with him engage with him anymore because there's no point. He's not here for an honest discussion. The only reason people still quote him is to refute his BS for the newcomers (however many there are in a WoW forums)

Oh, I know, I've been actively ignored by him for years now.

[Edge-]

https://archive.is/Fmg3D

Fun fact - the plans to the Epstein Ballroom keep changing!

NYT Went back and looked through all the public images that the White House has shared of the plans and noticed a lot of inconsistencies.

Which brings up a question I think we all know the answer to already: Were there actually final, approved, signed off on plans before they demolished the historic East Wing?

It doesn't seem like there were.

[Poopymonster]

https://archive.is/Fmg3D

Fun fact - the plans to the Epstein Ballroom keep changing!

NYT Went back and looked through all the public images that the White House has shared of the plans and noticed a lot of inconsistencies.

Which brings up a question I think we all know the answer to already: Were there actually final, approved, signed off on plans before they demolished the historic East Wing?

It doesn't seem like there were.

The Tin Foil Hat brigade to the rescue!
They're enlarging the bunker, which is under the ̶E̶a̶s̶t̶ ̶W̶i̶n̶g̶ Epstein Ballroom.
So once they act, Kokolums can finally stop edging (Seriously girl, you have to have fingers like a raisin, it's been YEARS, just finish already), they and their inner circle have a secure place for however long it takes.

[Fugus]

The next question becomes, what exactly are the planning on to need this emergency bunker reinforcements.

Edit: or they are planning on causing the next guy to need it and want to make sure they can still get to them.

[Huehuecoyotl]

https://archive.is/Fmg3D

Fun fact - the plans to the Epstein Ballroom keep changing!

NYT Went back and looked through all the public images that the White House has shared of the plans and noticed a lot of inconsistencies.

Which brings up a question I think we all know the answer to already: Were there actually final, approved, signed off on plans before they demolished the historic East Wing?

It doesn't seem like there were.

Not only do the plans keep changing, but the cost appears to be drastically higher than it should be; three times higher for the footage that the Epstein Ballroom is supposed to cover.

Which means, when you also consider that Trump is just going to not pay the contractors that are doing the work, that there's a great opportunity to pad his own bank account off the back of this.

Sure, there might also be a bunker planned, so Trump can hide in there when he start Civil War 2 in 2029. But my money is on pure old fashioned grift and theft from the orange one.

[Belize]

The Tin Foil Hat brigade to the rescue!
They're enlarging the bunker, which is under the ̶E̶a̶s̶t̶ ̶W̶i̶n̶g̶ Epstein Ballroom.
So once they act, Kokolums can finally stop edging (Seriously girl, you have to have fingers like a raisin, it's been YEARS, just finish already), they and their inner circle have a secure place for however long it takes.

Hopefully it ends like another historical figure that built a ballroom atop his bunker.

But sooner this time.

[Edge-]

Anyone see Donald doing his patented "Double Handjob" dance in Malaysia?

Just making sure America is respected everywhere.

[alach]

Anyone see Donald doing his patented "Double Handjob" dance in Malaysia?

Just making sure America is respected everywhere.

It was so utterly cringe I was beyond words. Having a grown man move like that was the most horrifying halloween image i have ever imagined. Next time he presents himself as a tough guy this dance needs to be a response. I've said over and over how can any one who thinks themselves "cool" support this man.
The late shows are going to love this this week, which will upset dear leader and will try harder to cancel them and we will all laugh at feeble dancing don.

[tehdang]

He said, removing the key part of my quote where I pointed out that his quotes were all from six months ago.

You may not actually be a Right Wing Trumpist, but you sure fucking project like they do.

Hilariously, you move this to a standard where I have to update you every 6 months on criticism of Trump's economic policies when nothing has changed about my criticism of his economic policies!

I have a better idea. How about you admit when I said "I have repeatedly in this thread and in other threads criticized his economic policy" it was a true statement, and when you said "My instant response to this sentence was to think "bullshit" you were wrong. It's so, so easy. And it doesn't mean you have to shift the goalposts twice in order to try and fail to score a gotcha. And it means I have reason to believe you're operating in good faith, instead of changing the question every time I answer the previous.

I said I couldn't find one in the last month of your posts. You gave examples from six months ago. Which makes it clear WHY you removed that part when you quoted me.

BAD. FUCKING. FAITH. Don't ever complain about people calling you out again, when you pull stupid transparent shit like this.

It's right in front of you. "Sorry, tehdang, I now know you have repeatedly criticized Trump's economic policies."

Because I linked the posts. To you. And then you got incredibly defensive about why they didn't show up in your searches. I don't care that you failed to find them; in fact, I both found them for you and linked them as a response! You're really getting sidetracked raging against new things that don't matter.