Trump Derangement Syndrome - Orange man bad. Read the OP! (ᴛʜɪs ᴛʜʀᴇᴀᴅ ɪs ʟɪᴋᴇ ᴋɪᴡɪ ғᴀʀᴍs ʀᴇᴠɪᴇᴡs ɴᴏᴡ) 🗿🗿🗿🗿

It's never been about convincing the people on the outside, it's about gaining status within your own social circle by having the "right" opinions. As long as your group has 50% plus one of the voters on your side, then your stance is a mandate from heaven.

They have to understand that at some point, people will be burnt out on that rhetoric, right? At some point they'll see diminishing returns with the more moderate of the party that aren't completely stupid.
 
People only ever say, "He's a racist! His policies! He's MEAN!"

No, it's not the fact of being mean; it's the fact of being mean to the wrong people. They have the right absolute to be as cruel as they please to people they don't like--Christians, white people, men, conservatives--but just because they dish it out, doesn't mean they should have to take it!
 
No, it's not the fact of being mean; it's the fact of being mean to the wrong people. They have the right absolute to be as cruel as they please to people they don't like--Christians, white people, men, conservatives--but just because they dish it out, doesn't mean they should have to take it!

No bad tactics, only bad targets?
 
How exactly has Trump harmed the "dream of America"?

People only ever say, "He's a racist! His policies! He's MEAN!"

When you ask for proof for racism or bad policies, you get crickets. You concede the third because he is indeed a dick, but he needs to be. But that clearly overrules everything else which is why he needs to be impeached.
What policies? According to this random guy I once talked to, Trump has no economic policies of his own.

And proof of Trump's racism is everywhere in the mainstream media, and on national television. I can't believe how you can't see this. How can you not trust CNN or MSNBC?
 
Última edición:
Hilary's campaign was disconnected from reality they were as worried she would loose the popular vote while getting 300ish electoral votes. In the last month of the campaign they spent more on ads for the Omaha district of NE than they did in MI, MN, and WI COMBINED. All for 1 fucking electoral vote.



I thought everyone knew Tom Clancy wrote the playbook for 9/11. Thank fuck the goat fuckers were too stupid to use if for more than an outline.
Everyone knows The Lone Gunmen did 9/11.
 
Morning Joe bitching about Trump being worse than 9/11 is now in article form! Channels his inner Bob "MovieBob" Chipman and Dobson in this article.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/joe-scarborough/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.fdd4e518d756

Fucking retard dijo:
Cataclysmic events often bring with them violent and abrupt endings to settled ages and long-established norms. Those absorbing the impact of these historical aftershocks rarely grasp the epochal changes in real time.

Who could have imagined during their commute home on the night of Nov. 21, 1963, that an event in Dallas the next day would shake the postwar order guaranteed by America’s victory in World War II? Even after Lee Harvey Oswald’s shots rang out from the Texas School Book Depository, could anyone have foreseen the collapse of such an ordered age soon overtaken by the anarchy of Vietnam, the murders of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and Bobby Kennedy, the race riots, Chicago, Kent State, Watergate, postindustrial rot and the cultural chaos set loose across the country by these events?

And could even the most insightful observer have foreseen — while staring at the billowing smoke set against New York’s brilliant September sky — the avalanche of strategic blunders set in motion by Osama bin Laden’s attack on the United States?

Of course not. But two wars, three presidents and 17 years later, the tragic lessons of that time are still lost on our leaders.

On Sept. 10, 2001, the United States dominated the world stage in a way no other country had since the height of the Roman and British empires. NATO’s long twilight struggle against the Soviet Union ended with Russia in ruins. The Japanese economic miracle, predicted by some to turn America into little more than a granary for Japan, had flatlined. And a rising China was still struggling with a multitude of internal security concerns and was eclipsed on the world stage by the Pax Americana. The United States deployed a dazzling display of both soft- and hard-power assets across the globe.

Seventeen years later, endless wars abroad and reckless policies at home have produced annual deficits approaching $1 trillion. President Trump’s Republican Party will create more debt in one year than was generated in the first 200 years of America’s existence. And while the United States has been mired in endless wars and bloody occupations over the past 17 years, China has used that same period to aggressively develop economic partnerships across Asia, Europe, Latin America and Africa. Perhaps that is one reason China will soon overtake the United States as the world’s largest economy.

Any discussion of policy failures since 2001 must begin with George W. Bush’s decision to invade Iraq even though no evidence linked Saddam Hussein’s regime to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. Even a majority of Senate Democrats voted for a resolution supporting the Iraq invasion, and more than 70 percent of Americans agreed. But we were wrong. That war cost nearly 5,000 American lives, $2 trillion and inestimable damage to America’s credibility across the globe.

The excesses of Bush’s military adventurism led to his successor, President Barack Obama, placing the United States in a defensive crouch for the better part of eight years. The commander in chief defined his foreign policy approach this way: “Don’t do stupid [stuff].” Even Democratic foreign policy experts would quietly complain that their president’s strategic retreat from the world would come at great cost. The ignoring of crossed red lines, the rise of the Islamic State and the deaths of 500,000 Syrians proved Obama’s Democratic critics right.

Sixteen years of strategic missteps have been followed by the maniacal moves of a man who has savaged America’s vital alliances, provided comfort to hostile foreign powers, attacked our intelligence and military communities, and lent a sympathetic ear to neo-Nazis and white supremacists across the globe.

For those of us still believing that Islamic extremists hate America because of the freedoms we guarantee to all people, the gravest threat Trump poses to our national security is the damage done daily to America’s image. As the New York Times’s Roger Cohen wrote the month after Trump’s election, “America is an idea. Strip freedom, human rights, democracy and the rule of law from what the United States represents to the world and America itself is gutted.”

Osama bin Laden was killed by SEAL Team 6 before he accomplished that goal. Other tyrants who tried to do the same were consigned to the ash heap of history. The question for voters this fall is whether their country will move beyond this troubled chapter in history or whether they will continue supporting a politician who has done more damage to the dream of America than any foreign adversary ever could.
 
Who could have imagined during their commute home on the night of Nov. 21, 1963, that an event in Dallas the next day would shake the postwar order guaranteed by America’s victory in World War II? Even after Lee Harvey Oswald’s shots rang out from the Texas School Book Depository, could anyone have foreseen the collapse of such an ordered age soon overtaken by the anarchy of Vietnam, the murders of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and Bobby Kennedy, the race riots, Chicago, Kent State, Watergate, postindustrial rot and the cultural chaos set loose across the country by these events?

Never thought I'd see the day when left-wingers were nostalgic for the 50's.
 
Sixteen years of strategic missteps have been followed by the maniacal moves of a man who has savaged America’s vital alliances, provided comfort to hostile foreign powers, attacked our intelligence and military communities, and lent a sympathetic ear to neo-Nazis and white supremacists across the globe.
OH WOE! OY VEY! How could we allow someone to savage "vital" (read: parasitic) postwar alliances with countries that consistently fail to do their part? Or comfort "hostile foreign powers" (read: Russia, the left's new boogeyman)? How could we allow him to attack our intelligence and military communities (because they've never been wrong or outright lied before, obviously)? Or lend a sympathetic ear to neo-Nazis and white supremacists across the globe (even though he condemned racism multiple times)? I didn't even know neo-Nazis and white supremacists existed outside of the West.
 
https://nypost.com/2018/09/11/court...trump-for-getting-booted-from-campaign-rally/
A federal appeals court on Tuesday ruled on First Amendment grounds that protesters at a campaign rally in Kentucky cannot sue President Trump because he told the crowd to “get ’em out of here” and the demonstrators were manhandled.
>manhandled
Says everything you need to know about Mark Moore's stance on this issue.

https://people.com/politics/donald-trump-double-fist-pump-911-memorial-service/

Donald Trump is facing widespread social media backlash after he was pictured greeting supporters with a triumphant double fist pump as he arrived to a 9/11 memorial service on Tuesday, the 17th anniversary of the terror attacks.
>widespread social media backlash
>widespread
>backlash
>for a fucking double fist pump

https://grrrgraphics.com/trump-living-in-her-head-rent-free/
rent_free_maxine.jpg
 
Última edición:
https://nypost.com/2018/09/11/court...trump-for-getting-booted-from-campaign-rally/

>manhandled
Says everything you need to know about Mark Moore's stance on this issue.

https://people.com/politics/donald-trump-double-fist-pump-911-memorial-service/


>widespread social media backlash
>widespread
>backlash
>for a fucking double fist pump

https://grrrgraphics.com/trump-living-in-her-head-rent-free/
rent_free_maxine.jpg
Ya know I can think of worse ways a president might handle a 9/11 remembrance ceremony....
GZKwmpu.gif
 
Última edición:
I like Scott's analysis of a lot of interesting issues, but he doesn't seem to get that the social justice crowd isn't arguing in good faith, but is instead consumed by its own 'tism.

I know Scott is a smart guy and it would be foolish to just say he's wrong because I don't share or like some of his political beliefs. I've seen him make enough solid arguments to know his brain works.

But I still have to conclude he's so far out in left field, sociopolitically, that he isn't aware of that himself. For example, this is a dude who is scientifically minded to an autistic degree but still sticks fucking "trigger warnings" at the beginning of his posts. Everything in modern psychology tells us those are not only unnecessary but that they do the exact opposite of what SocJus types claim they are intended to do: help people with problems. At best they do nothing but virtue signal to SJWs. At worst, they prevent people with problems from facing and overcoming them (in perhaps the least threatening way possible).

Why would a smart guy interested primarily in where the evidence takes us continue to include pure nonsense like that with every post on his blog? Either he's doing what he thinks he has to do to get through to SJWs (and I don't find that convincing) or he's not as interested in the truth as he is in signaling his left-wing biases/alliances.

But yes, occasionally he has an insightful analysis of a complicated issue. That's what makes the rest of his bullshit so frustrating.
 
Última edición:
Atrás
Top Abajo