US US Politics General 2: Hope Edition - Discussion of President Trump and other politicians

General Trump Banner.png

Should be a wild four years.

Helpful links for those who need them:

Current members of the House of Representatives
https://www.house.gov/representatives

Current members of the Senate
https://www.senate.gov/senators/

Current members of the US Supreme Court
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx

Members of the Trump Administration
https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/
 
Última edición por un moderador:
Like does anyone have examples of good content from him [HHH]?
He's changed. I was reading a thread from four years ago recently, he's in there, he posts completely differently. But you know who else was in there? People who disagreed with him. A whole range of opinions, also plenty of people on his side. This whole thread segregation thing is new. And it's definitely not solely HHH's fault things ended up this way.

The phenomenon troubles me, I can't stop noticing it now. I don't know exactly what happened. A popular thing to blame is paid saboteurs or glowies; while there are explanations you can come up with that could fit the evidence, HHH himself is not a glowy or anything like that. Personally I doubt it's that. I think we want this for some reason. People feel vulnerable and they're grouping up and rejecting opportunities to interact with those who aren't likeminded. HHH these days isn't quality, so many of his comments I could just write for him, he basically Patposts; but the thing I actually dislike about him (current day) is how, in threads with a consensus that matches his own views, he will rules-lawyer and backseat mod, trying to silence dissent by hinting "helpfully" about potential violations of rules about whiteknighting. Back when he was working in the admin through DOGE, the Elon thread spent an awful lot of time talking about Trump. It was pretty obviously a release valve for the leftwing politics that wasn't getting posted here, and he was absolutely a soldier in enforcing that consensus.

I don't know that I could blame anyone here for trying to enforce consensus like that, but for whatever reason we're missing a huge chunk of popular sentiment here and I do think we're worse off for it. Perhaps just because I think people end up with unrealistic expectations and predictions. Without the visceral experience of opposition, your idea of what you'd like to have happen doesn't get tempered into an idea of what might actually happen. But...when we do come together, it sure doesn't seem that productive. And one theory I have is that it may be asymmetrical, leftists just can't take the heat and won't come out to play when they're not winning; if they do well in the midterms, all of a sudden we'll be getting a mix of views and lively debate again.

Whatever, I should probably try and get my thoughts together on this and just make a thread. I can see why Null was frustrated by the Kirk thread, but I don't think why he did will really make a difference, and it doesn't get to the root of the problem. But it's a really hard problem!
 

I was revisiting this article written on the eve of Trump's first inauguration in 2017 that detailed leftist violence in the 60s and 70s and predicted how it would evolve over his presidency. Some of his predictions were on point, and some have simply delayed until now.
Left and Right also have different vulnerabilities. The Left is far better at allowing its people, esp radicals, to rise and mainstream. As a result, way more new Lefties attain prominence and effective leadership status than Righties. This makes for a deeper activist bench. With a sea of effective, prominent Lefties, Lefties who are lost will be mourned but not irreplaceable. This is emphatically not the case for Righties. To be perfectly blunt: the Right would be extremely easy to disrupt with targeted assassinations. The Left would not.
So these are the tactics I see the Left using for early political violence:

  1. use as many different nonmurderous but disruptive-to-violent tactics as possible — “shut it down,” occupations, property damage, riots
  2. weaponize Institutions against Righties, when possible
  3. drag events out — long, very low-level conflict works in Lefties’ favor
  4. target individual Righties for intimidation/disemployment, to discourage others
  5. target the most effective Righties for Unpersoning, lawfare, and (only if absolutely necessary; this would be very rare) assassination
Yes, the Left is doing almost all of this stuff already. But it could be ramped up. Take disemployment: Lefties clamoring to get somebody fired. The way it works now is reactive, news-cycle driven. It doesn’t have to be. Political donations are public record. So are voter registrations. It would be trivial to set up a Disemployment Committee to scrape these. HR departments tend to have a lot of Lefties in them. They could bring back a coordinated blacklist. You’d never know it.
These parts are especially salient now.
 
Oh for some good news, I am happy to report that the subreddit “the deprogram” has been deleted. There has been a 2nd subreddit called the “deprogram1” that has been created to take its place. Wether it will be banned becuase it violates the rules against ban evasion has yet to be seen.
 
I don't know that I could blame anyone here for trying to enforce consensus like that
What consensus? Not to be a fucking pest and post “Trump is a pedo” over and over regardless of the discussion?

I think the morons that feel the need to engage with it are a bigger problem because it’s easy to ignore the annoying posters but the pages of people who can’t resist responding are the worst.

@Levitcus prime24 I am happy to report that the subreddit “the deprogram” has been deleted.
what is that?
 
King is such a disingenuous fuck. Even when clearly proven wrong he is still doing his best to link the guy's name with stoning gays.

It would be like me saying: I have no evidence that STEPHEN KING FUCKS LITTLE KIDS. In fact I have no reason to believe that STEPHEN KING FUCKS LITTLE KIDS. Now, STEPHEN KING wrote about FUCKING LITTLE KIDS. And if STEPHEN KING FANTASISIES ABOUT FUCKING LITTLE KIDS it may be expressed that way. But that alone is hardly EVIDENCE THAT STEPHEN KING FUCKS LITTLE KIDS. And no one should use that as evidence to say IT IS A PROVEN FACT THAT STEPHEN KING FUCKS LITTLE KIDS.

A reminder that the rabid shitlibs we see online are not necessarily representative of real life. I logged on my old Facebook and was pleasantly surprised to see most of my old liberal friends horrified by the murder and saying they didn't agree with him but that he shouldn't have been killed. Of course, my extreme (ex) shitlib friends were gloating and grave dancing, but I didn't expect anything less from them, they lost the plot a long time ago.

Most people aren't going to agree with killing someone over political differences. Most people, Dems especially, seem to have "woke" fatigue and want things to go back to normal.

Another thing to note, that video of the Ukraine girl getting murdered seemed to really rattle people. I could not believe how many progressives/liberals I've seen that are saying stuff that was verboten a last year, or hell, even a few months ago.
Three out of four of my liberal friends bemoaned that Trump didn't die in the first assassination attempt. These are people who know I'm right wing and I general consider pretty moderate. Refusing to condemn and wishing that their political opponents die just seems to be the moderate left position from all evidence I've seen.

To be clear, this is not some thing I relish or celebrate. These are people I care about and want to find common ground with. But I'm not going to lie to myself about their clear viewpoints or how they act.
 
Última edición:
People feel vulnerable and they're grouping up and rejecting opportunities to interact with those who aren't likeminded.
Healthy discussions with people with different opinions than you is good. Politsperging, slapfighting, and general faggotry gets exhausting especially in a huge happening thread like the first Charlie Kirk thread. It rarely happens here because people don't want to make the effort, or they're all looking for the next gotcha to post to sit back smugly like a redditor. But also do not be surprised when you go to a side's respective echochamber containment thread, and get threadbanned for being a sperg.
 
honestly banning the biggest powerusers for the week has felt like a net positive today. Usually this fucking thread is full of nonsense. this thread goes an average of over 35 pages a day and its the same group of people treating this like its a thread on /b/. if we're honest almost all of us just use the highlights for this place and yet because of the trash usually in here even the highlights are retarded. I once say a highlighted post talking about Zorro. fucking Zorro.

As cute as shitposting about Captain Planet and Zorro and other annoying things from last century are, i don't come to this thread for that bullshit. when i see a highlighted post, i expect to get something similar to the insider scoops and white pills that were all over the highlighted posts in the last general. Remember those?

Null was right on the money with who to ban too, if you're arguing with Hogan, you've lost the plot. beyond that, as bad as Hogan's opinions are, someone needs to push back against the insane echo chamber that was in here. if its not inane posts about the Mark of goddamn Zorro, its schizos that actually believe JD Vance is a user here because none of the retards that usually habituate this thread seem to know that twitter exists.

Hogan was a typical old school user too, the reason guys like him or Android Raptor were appreciated outside of their political takes was because of how fucking well rounded they were. its fairly obvious guys like Toji or the others that got the ban had no life outside of this forum. I'm sure Toji was threatening suicide when null gave him the red strikethrough

Yet Hogan doesn't seem like he's on here 24/7 like the rest of the users who argued with him, Android had so many fucking hobbies i'm sure half the forum could create a good dating profile for her just from how often she talked about that among the rest of her private life and worldview. Hogan's BBQ knowledge is legendary. But i don't think anyone can say anything nice about the weird fucks that got the ban.

Didn't that israeli dude stay up for like a week straight to report about the iran stuff and it was literally just the usual info from twitter but he presented it as hot scoops?

If i can be more honest i swear the site is running better too with them gone. their constant annoying posts were clogging up all the bandwidth or something,
 
I don't know that I could blame anyone here for trying to enforce consensus like that, but for whatever reason we're missing a huge chunk of popular sentiment here
It was about a week or two ago someone came in and posted how they wanted to give their left-wing viewpoint and the concerns they have with the Trump administration. They got as far as I saw zero hate and many people talked about things they agreed with.

You're right to call out only one side can post inflammatory shit without people piling on. It's not like I'm innocent of doing that. And you would be right to say that makes the environment not equal.

But when people can come in and post 10 points of things they disagree with and don't like that most of the thread does, and get nothing but support for giving an alternative viewpoint, attempts at finding common ground, or reasoned explanations for why someone still disagrees, that is hardly enforcing consensus.
 
First off i wish I could be as ignorant towards horrible left subreddit, but it was basically a big standered lefty subreddit that did the usual. Suck off the corpse of Stalin label anyone they didn’t like a Nazi etc. it seems they tipped their hand to far and now have been banned.
 
It would be like me saying: I have no evidence that STEPHEN KING FUCKS LITTLE KIDS. In fact I have no reason to believe that STEPHEN KING FUCKS LITTLE KIDS. Now, STEPHEN KING wrote about FUCKING LITTLE KIDS. And if STEPHEN KING FANTASISIES ABOUT FUCKING LITTLE KIDS it may be expressed that way. But that alone is hardly EVIDENCE THAT STEPHEN KING FUCKS LITTLE KIDS. And no one should use that evidence to say IT IS A PROVEN FACT THAT STEPHEN KING FUCKS LITTLE KIDS.
Yeah, he’s practically just doing the Gottfried Bob Saget joke rn, except not just for a laugh:
 
First off i wish I could be as ignorant towards horrible left subreddit, but it was basically a big standered lefty subreddit that did the usual. Suck off the corpse of Stalin label anyone they didn’t like a Nazi etc. it seems they tipped their hand to far and now have been banned.
Tankies, they were tankies. Loved Xi, loved Mao, loved North Korea, hates anything western. So when Charlie died they went even further beyond the crazy shit we have been seeing from people.
 
So funny that this current phenomenon happened here of all places too. The leftists on this site were so excited, so inspired by their hatred and misery hard-ons, that they came out of the woodwork to spam their ghoulish glee all over the multiple threads. People with 8 year old accounts and 100 posts just HAD to come and give their take, they were that inspired.

Think on this; that's how strongly their dopamine is tied to misery and negativity. It brought accounts out of retirement.



In other news, please start rolling out targeted RICO charges and labeling these groups as domestic terrorists. Whether we like it or not, the internet is our storefront, our community center, and our children's daycare. So why, then, are we allowing organized crime to target adults and children alike with political bullying and grooming? I want these people scared to operate in the light, and I want our justice system taking down cyber criminals as well. Also fire Kash Patel.
 
LMAO, the gauge Jersh used to decide who got put into the blanket ban because of the Charlie Kirk thread was EVERYONE WHO RESPONDED to Hollywood Hulk Hogan at least once in the thread.
That's an interesting thought experiment. What if there was a type of ban that didn't prevent the user from posting, but simply banned anyone who tried to talk to them? Like the forum version of shunning. You'd end up with a user desperately trying to get someone, anyone to interact with them, unable to do anything but plead with an empty room for companionship.

That's pretty evil, to be honest.
 
Three out of four of my liberal friends bemoaned that Trump didn't die in the first assassination attempt. These are people who know I'm right wing and I general consider pretty moderate. Refusing to condemn and wishing that their political opponents die just seems to be the moderate left position from all evidence I've seen.
I don't really consider it as big as a deal when people celebrate high profile politician assassination attempts. I'm not saying it's "right", but at least it makes some sense. This is someone very powerful and actually has a say in what laws are passed. Trump in particular was the victim of an all out media smear campaign for years. The media spent billions gaslighting the public against him. So, it makes sense to me that the average leftist want Trump dead, they're convinced he is Hitler 2.0, after all.

Charlie Kirk is different though. Guy was a normie/moderate and even got made fun of by his own party. I can understand why the same leftists that are okay with Trump dying are not okay or are uncomfortable with Charlie being shot dead.

Note, I'm not trying to imply that Leftists as a whole are sane. A lot of them are not. Most "sane" people left the party a while ago. I do think there are still some holdout normal/moderate shitlibs that are peaking, especially after that black guy killing that Ukraine girl.
 
That's an interesting thought experiment. What if there was a type of ban that didn't prevent the user from posting, but simply banned anyone who tried to talk to them? Like the forum version of shunning. You'd end up with a user desperately trying to get someone, anyone to interact with them, unable to do anything but plead with an empty room for companionship.

That's pretty evil, to be honest.
That's a shadow ban essentially. And yes, it's fucking evil and we don't want it.
 
He's changed. I was reading a thread from four years ago recently, he's in there, he posts completely differently. But you know who else was in there? People who disagreed with him. A whole range of opinions, also plenty of people on his side. This whole thread segregation thing is new. And it's definitely not solely HHH's fault things ended up this way.
Its the same thing that happened to every 2000s era 4chan person. They either triple down on the leftism or realize the crazy fundies when you were a kid turned out to be more right than wrong.

He actually believes in leftism, he has too, the alternative would cause more cognitive dissonance than he could bear. He could literally get fired and replaced by a dei Shaniqua and would blame Trump. If you dont believe in God then you believe in power. You cant have a conversation with someone who has as a cornerstone of their ideology that there is no objective truth and only a shared truth and he guard rails the shared truth by shitting on you. The only consensus you can arrive at with those people is submission.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo