Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
T___A

US Politics Thread: Year 2 of 1000 of the TrumpenReich

Recommended Posts

California is turning into Australia, except the inhabitants of Australia can handle all the shit that can “kill yah”. 

 

Anyone think Australia should annex California? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Donward said:

Clearly the Iowa State University are shills for the Trump Administration.

 

 

OH WAIT!!! Actual guys who go out in the woods and work for a living use rakes!

 

Edit: But good fucking luck getting The Left or the media to issue a retraction because "Orange man bad".

 

22 hours ago, Donward said:

And because The Left and the media are not only fucking morons but completely ignorant of any occupation that actually involves working for a living, HERE is what "raking the forest" means.

 

 

 

 

It doesn't mean going out with a fucking garden rake, for Chrissakes.

 

But then, the Democratic Party ceased being an actual Blue Collar party decades ago and are not only ignorant of basic blue collar terminology. But they're ignorant of the fact that they're completely ignorant.

 

 

 

 

 

Personally, I love the verbal gymnastics y'all have to constantly go through to justify all the weird shit that comes out of Trumps mouth.  Normal President's can generally speak in clear sentences not easily open to misinterpretation (well, maybe not Bush Jr.)  Trump on the other hand talks like your old drunken uncle at a family holiday.  So yeah, call us all idiots because we can't easily discern the true meaning of the verbal garbage that spills from Trumps piehole.  

 

Anyhow, it's not working, the country is turning away from Trump.  The recent election is proof of that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

Anyhow, it's not working, the country is turning away from Trump. The recent election is proof of that.  

 

I don’t think the last election proves that Trump is less popular: the senate has more republicans than last year, and the house has more democrats. Personally, I call that a net 0. The house is a cesspool anyway, and is best ignored when possible :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

 

Personally, I love the verbal gymnastics y'all have to constantly go through to justify all the weird shit that comes out of Trumps mouth.  Normal President's can generally speak in clear sentences not easily open to misinterpretation (well, maybe not Bush Jr.)  Trump on the other hand talks like your old drunken uncle at a family holiday.  So yeah, call us all idiots because we can't easily discern the true meaning of the verbal garbage that spills from Trumps piehole.  

 

Anyhow, it's not working, the country is turning away from Trump.  The recent election is proof of that.  

 

And I can't get enough of your cognitive dissonance.

 

It's said that his supporters take him seriously but not literally, while his detractors take him literally but not seriously.

 

Also, as far as last election goes, the Republicans were vulnerable in the house because a lot of RINO congress critters decided to not run again, giving up the incumbency advantage they had for that seat. A fair number of them were also in areas that Trump didn't perform very well in during the 2016 election. The Democrats were similarly vulnerable in the Senate, and they lost seats there just like the Republicans lost seats in the House. That's not the country turning away from Trump, that is the circumstances of local elections producing predictable results. Also, all but one of the candidates that Trump held a rally for won their race, and he held a staggering number of rallies for the 2018 midterms.

 

The objective assessment of the midterms is that the opposition party (Democrats) did regain control of the house, but underperformed compared to historical results for similar elections. They can be a roadblock for Trump now, but they still will not be able to advance their own agenda. Meanwhile, Trump will have an easier time getting judicial appointments through the Senate because of the modest gains that the Republicans made, assuming that they don't cower in the corner and shit themselves the way they historically have.

 

The Democrats also have their own problems because of a schism that is forming between the establishment boomers and the new wave of younger, farther left people working their way in. The worst part is that this new wave isn't entirely unified, and there is potential for infighting, further weakening them against the old guard. I could see it devolving into a situation like the Syrian civil war where the rebel groups occasionally turned on each other, but that might be overly optimistic of me.

 

But you can just not acknowledge things that make you uncomfortable and stay inundated in your confirmation bias, that's cool. 

 

Maybe I should throw a whataboutism in there so you have some low hanging fruit to latch onto and accuse me of being a KGB spy using Soviet propaganda techniques to redirect the conversation away from the proven fact that Donald Trump is actually Vladimir Putin's doppelganger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lord_James said:

 

I don’t think the last election proves that Trump is less popular: the senate has more republicans than last year, and the house has more democrats. Personally, I call that a net 0. The house is a cesspool anyway, and is best ignored when possible :D 

 

No you see, the blue wave turning into a blue ripple means the country has rejected Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

 

Personally, I love the verbal gymnastics y'all have to constantly go through to justify all the weird shit that comes out of Trumps mouth.  Normal President's can generally speak in clear sentences not easily open to misinterpretation (well, maybe not Bush Jr.)  Trump on the other hand talks like your old drunken uncle at a family holiday.  So yeah, call us all idiots because we can't easily discern the true meaning of the verbal garbage that spills from Trumps piehole.  

 

Anyhow, it's not working, the country is turning away from Trump.  The recent election is proof of that.  

 

So in other words I show you actual equipment and logging techniques called "rakes" and "raking" which are standard forestry practices and which just so happen to corroborate what Trump said and that STILL isn't good enough for you?

 

I don't know what I'm supposed to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, let’s not devolve into another politically fueled shouting match; leave that for the retards on other forums. 

 

58 minutes ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

Personally, I love the verbal gymnastics y'all have to constantly go through to justify all the weird shit that comes out of Trumps mouth.  Normal President's can generally speak in clear sentences not easily open to misinterpretation (well, maybe not Bush Jr.)  Trump on the other hand talks like your old drunken uncle at a family holiday.  So yeah, call us all idiots because we can't easily discern the true meaning of the verbal garbage that spills from Trumps piehole.  

 

Anyhow, it's not working, the country is turning away from Trump.  The recent election is proof of that.  

 

I didn’t see any verbal or mental gymnastics from Don, Walt. Trump used the term “raking”, which (as displayed) is a term the logging industry uses to describe cleaning up an area of the forest. Now, IT IS DEBATABLE that Trump might not have known that, and is indeed talking about the common, late year chore or raking leaves from ones yard (which wouldn’t surprise me for most politicians, whom have probably never even held a rake in their lives). But, it should also be considered that Trump does (or is trying to) understand the working class, and is actively showing that using lingo from various blue collar jobs; the same people whom most likely elected him in 2016. 

 

As for his accent, that’s common for born and raised New Yorkers, and this is also probably why he is appealing to the disenfranchised working class: he speaks like a citizen, not a hoity toity, life long Congress critter who live in a fantasy world where they actually believe they represent the common citizen (Trump might be one of these people, but the fact that he doesn’t sound like one is enough to fool the peons into supporting him). 

 

36 minutes ago, Ulric said:

 

And I can't get enough of your cognitive dissonance.

 

It's said that his supporters take him seriously but not literally, while his detractors take him literally but not seriously.

 

Also, as far as last election goes, the Republicans were vulnerable in the house because a lot of RINO congress critters decided to not run again, giving up the incumbency advantage they had for that seat. A fair number of them were also in areas that Trump didn't perform very well in during the 2016 election. The Democrats were similarly vulnerable in the Senate, and they lost seats there just like the Republicans lost seats in the House. That's not the country turning away from Trump, that is the circumstances of local elections producing predictable results. Also, all but one of the candidates that Trump held a rally for won their race, and he held a staggering number of rallies for the 2018 midterms.

 

The objective assessment of the midterms is that the opposition party (Democrats) did regain control of the house, but underperformed compared to historical results for similar elections. They can be a roadblock for Trump now, but they still will not be able to advance their own agenda. Meanwhile, Trump will have an easier time getting judicial appointments through the Senate because of the modest gains that the Republicans made, assuming that they don't cower in the corner and shit themselves the way they historically have.

 

The Democrats also have their own problems because of a schism that is forming between the establishment boomers and the new wave of younger, farther left people working their way in. The worst part is that this new wave isn't entirely unified, and there is potential for infighting, further weakening them against the old guard. I could see it devolving into a situation like the Syrian civil war where the rebel groups occasionally turned on each other, but that might be overly optimistic of me.

 

But you can just not acknowledge things that make you uncomfortable and stay inundated in your confirmation bias, that's cool. 

 

Maybe I should throw a whataboutism in there so you have some low hanging fruit to latch onto and accuse me of being a KGB spy using Soviet propaganda techniques to redirect the conversation away from the proven fact that Donald Trump is actually Vladimir Putin's doppelganger.

 

I agree with the “take him literally and/or seriously” statement. If you take Trump’s word seriously, it makes some sense (protect our borders and immigration, equalize trade with our competitors, etc.). If you take him literally, it sounds very odd (built a wall and make Mexico pay for it/ no travel to Muslim countries, cut trade with China, etc.), and possibly counter productive. 

 

As I said before, I don’t think Trump lost any support over this last election, both parties gained and lost seats. To my uninformed eye, it looks like nothing meaningful changed (per usual). 

 

 

I would like this conversation to stay civil, we here at SH are typically higher educated than the common citizen, despite the autism :P and I don’t like conflict between those I respect. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still haven't tallied up the 2018 midterms in detail.  There were three factions; Democrats, Old Republicans and Trump Republicans.  As a rough estimation, I think that the Democrats and Trump Republicans both enjoyed moderate gains against the Old Republicans.

 

The Democrats did pick up seats in the House.  However, the opposing party usually does.  Furthermore, just as the Democrats had, by a quirk of previous election cycles, more seats to defend in the Senate, the Republicans had more seats to defend in the house.  Furthermore, there were some cases of there being no incumbent to defend the seat, as the previous anti-Trump Republican decided to take their marbles and go home.

 

Trump wanted to replace Old Republicans with Trump Republicans, as in the case of Paul Ryan.  But in most cases that wasn't possible.  The replacement of an Old Republican with a Democrat is more or less a wash to him.  Either one would oppose him tooth and nail, although perhaps a Democrat would be more open and honest about it.

 

The largest gains for Trump are in the Senate.  Not only did the red team (which, again, is really two opposing teams that happen to share the same color) pick up some seats there, but Trump managed the substantial coup of getting the Old Republicans of the Senate to kiss his ring.  This gain isn't really reflected by the election ledger, but it's every bit as important.

 

Meanwhile, substantive Trump-related news has been quiet lately, which is a reliable indicator that he is up to something(s).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/21/2018 at 1:54 PM, Donward said:

 

So in other words I show you actual equipment and logging techniques called "rakes" and "raking" which are standard forestry practices and which just so happen to corroborate what Trump said and that STILL isn't good enough for you?

 

I don't know what I'm supposed to do.

 

My point was not about the specific of forest raking.  It was that Trump continuously says things that are so easy to misinterpret or are just so darn bizarre that his critics are bound to make fun of them.  But more importantly, our foriegn allies and enemies, most of them not being fluent in Trumps rather peculiar New York dialect, will also continue to be confused by his word salad.  

 

And I'll throw in a little "whataboutism" (but not really) for good measure.  Remember how many conservatives were willing to actually read Obama's full comments and realize that when he said "you didn't build that", he meant the publically funded infrastructure that made private businesses possible?  Oh wait, they all took it out of context and made it a rallying cry.  So no, don't come crying to me because some people took Trump literally when he said "rake the forest."  Anyhow, I'm pretty sure that a very small percentage of voters on either side of the political spectrum are familiar with the intracies of forest management.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/21/2018 at 12:41 PM, Lord_James said:

 

I don’t think the last election proves that Trump is less popular: the senate has more republicans than last year, and the house has more democrats. Personally, I call that a net 0. The house is a cesspool anyway, and is best ignored when possible :D 

 

On 11/21/2018 at 1:51 PM, Ramlaen said:

 

No you see, the blue wave turning into a blue ripple means the country has rejected Trump.

 

Heh, I see we are moving the goal posts now.  I remember back in the old political thread, some of you were predicting a red wave.  Anyhow, the Democrats wiped the floor when you look at the actual number of votes cast.  The only thing that saved the Republicans in the Senate was the fact that the Senate map was incredibly unfavorable to the Dems this elections.  Republicans had 41.5 percent of all votes cast in Senate races, and Democrats 56.9 percent.  Considering that the 2020 Senate map will favor the Dems, this does not bode well for the GOP with Trump on the ticket.

 

Midterm elections: Democrats lead popular vote in House by largest margin in history

 

Democrats received almost as many midterms votes as Trump in presidential election – results show it's a 'a crazy number'

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/21/2018 at 3:31 PM, Collimatrix said:

I still haven't tallied up the 2018 midterms in detail.  There were three factions; Democrats, Old Republicans and Trump Republicans.  As a rough estimation, I think that the Democrats and Trump Republicans both enjoyed moderate gains against the Old Republicans.

 

The Democrats did pick up seats in the House.  However, the opposing party usually does.  Furthermore, just as the Democrats had, by a quirk of previous election cycles, more seats to defend in the Senate, the Republicans had more seats to defend in the house.  Furthermore, there were some cases of there being no incumbent to defend the seat, as the previous anti-Trump Republican decided to take their marbles and go home.

 

Trump wanted to replace Old Republicans with Trump Republicans, as in the case of Paul Ryan.  But in most cases that wasn't possible.  The replacement of an Old Republican with a Democrat is more or less a wash to him.  Either one would oppose him tooth and nail, although perhaps a Democrat would be more open and honest about it.

 

The largest gains for Trump are in the Senate.  Not only did the red team (which, again, is really two opposing teams that happen to share the same color) pick up some seats there, but Trump managed the substantial coup of getting the Old Republicans of the Senate to kiss his ring.  This gain isn't really reflected by the election ledger, but it's every bit as important.

 

Meanwhile, substantive Trump-related news has been quiet lately, which is a reliable indicator that he is up to something(s).

 

Every single House seat is up for re-election every two years.  It's apples and oranges compared to the Senate.  The only reason republicans had more seats to defend than the dems was because they have more seats there period. It had nothing to do with a particular election year.  You are just trying to come up with excuses to cover the GOP's terrible performance in the election.

 

Also, considering how house republicans were covering Trump's ass (I'm looking at you Devin Nunes), I'm pretty sure Trump would have much preferred the Republicans to maintain control of the House than the Democrats.  Calling it "a wash" for Trump is just not accurate.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The President tweeted about an author of history, which is a bit unusual.  

 

Victor Davis Hanson was a very good and interesting guest of Mark Levin on @FoxNews. He wrote a highly touted book called “The Second World Wars” and a new book will soon be coming out called “The Case For Trump.” Recommend both.

 

I've watched some youtube lectures of Victor Davis Hanson, since I watch just about any history lecture I can find online.  His World War 2 lectures are ok.  I haven't read his book.  His conservative political leanings are pretty obvious in his lectures, in part from the content, but also from the locations from where they are filmed, conservative colleges and think tanks.  Anyhow, here is a video of his defending Trump's foriegn policy.  Since he is a serious intellectual and not a political hack, I figured I'd post some of his recent lectures here since some of you might enjoy it.  Obviously, I don't agree with his conclusions, but I appreciate someone that can lay out a case in a clear and well informed manner.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ramlaen said:

 

 

He apparently won't give her the money raised in the gofundmes in her name either...  This is the clown the Dems pinned so much hope too! Mikael Moore is probably crushed and binging on Ben and Jerry's resist Icecream! Can you be disbarred for stealing your client's money? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • By Belesarius
      https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/28613/everything-we-know-about-irans-claim-that-it-shot-down-a-u-s-rq-4-global-hawk-drone
       
      Might as well start a thred for this shit.  Looks like there is gonna be enough stuff to keep a solo thred going.
       
    • By Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect
      After seeing the rampant crack down on speech in the UK, I decided that more should be done than just Thoughts and Prayers. 
       
      I know that it's a scary time for our UK members. Knowing that what you say on the internet can put you on the wrong side of a Bobby's nightstick, well, I find that despicable. 
       
      So I've created this place for all your impure or degenerate thoughts. Here's how it works. 
       
      Perhaps you want to say something "offensive". Instead of saying it yourself, you can message any US member of this forum and have them act as your avatar of avarice. 
       
      For example, say you had a particularly heinous fish and chips at the local pub. You may want to say, "Oi, that cheeky fucker Barnaby William can't do a proper chip if he had a fryer for hands!"
       
      This on it's own could send you straight to jail for defamation. Moreso, if instead of chips that sent you reeling it happened to be a kebab from Omar down the street. 
       
      Now your crime has gone from offensive to racially insensitive!
       
      Anytime such an urge comes along, call on your ex colonial friends. We will translate and post your complaint for all the world to revel in, free of charge!
       
      I personally think Omar should learn to pull the fucking kebab off heat before it's crisper than his wife's crotch and blacker than his beard. That tosser!
       
      See? Don't you feel better? And now, no one will be knocking on your door, serving you with a summons for being a racist git. 
       
    • By T___A
      Might as well make a new thread now that the election is over.
×
×
  • Create New...