That sentence really doesn't make sense, but if you said the GOP used to be a safe haven for constitutional conservatives, then it might have made more sense. But despite this, I think I get your point.pollo hermanos said:this is what is so disturbing about the MAGA cult. Conservatives used to be the safe haven for constitutionalists and limited government. Its so far from that now. It is in a lot of ways an understandable reaction to the craziness of the left but it is disturbing nonetheless.Francis Macomber said:
It's become very clear that the "conservative" party would almost universally accept a monarchy if it was their guy in charge.
The real "patriots" around here have the Founding Fathers rolling in their graves.
Nope. It's trash talking golf smack. If Barry said it, I'd actually respect him a bit more.Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:
I really couldn't care less about the statement. But I imagine that some of you who are saying it's nothing would have lost your ****ing mind if Obama had said the same thing after passing AHA.
Obama took several photos of himself imitating historical (Mousilini) or Biblical (Angelic) figures. From what I recall, this board ridiculed him more than it displayed outrage.Anonymous Source said:
I realize he's probably trolling, but F16 would have had a ****ing thrombo if Obama did this.
But I think the real question is, this is related to state of New York policies. Why is the "party of smaller government" effing around with state politics?
Also whether he was going to fall down stairs or sht himself. It was always a tossup.milner79 said:
Just think: only four years ago, our biggest worry was, "What is old Ice Cream for Brains going to f*** up today ..."
I see we have another person that knows jack and squat about political history in the US and thinks that up until 2016 our political landscape was genteel with everybody courstey-ing and calling one another "my good man!" all of the time.setsmachine said:
Ridiculous that now an "epic troll" would be considered good politics. This was stupid.
This is a dumb statement, but not surprising.Francis Macomber said:
It's become very clear that the "conservative" party would almost universally accept a monarchy if it was their guy in charge.
The real "patriots" around here have the Founding Fathers rolling in their graves.
Yeah good point conservatives didnt really make sense there. I guess my point is that the MAGA crowd screams "lib" anytime someone criticized trump for things that would have universally been decried by constitutional conservatives even very recently. Even though so many that oppose trump are not "libs" but are conservative and so many that are MAGA are clearly not constitutional conservatives.American Hardwood said:That sentence really doesn't make sense, but if you said the GOP used to be a safe haven for constitutional conservatives, then it might have made more sense. But despite this, I think I get your point.pollo hermanos said:this is what is so disturbing about the MAGA cult. Conservatives used to be the safe haven for constitutionalists and limited government. Its so far from that now. It is in a lot of ways an understandable reaction to the craziness of the left but it is disturbing nonetheless.Francis Macomber said:
It's become very clear that the "conservative" party would almost universally accept a monarchy if it was their guy in charge.
The real "patriots" around here have the Founding Fathers rolling in their graves.
However, true conservatives have not had an effective majority in a very long time. Not in my lifetime at least and probably long before that. MAGA never claimed to be for the advancement of conservatism, it has been for the advancement of American culture and greatness. This happens to be something conservatives also believe in, so it makes MAGA and conservatism mutually aligned with a common goal. Leftism in all its flavors or aligned with neither. Conservatives understand their position in regards to MAGA and aren't sweating out the details because defeating leftism and ending the Deep State are far more critical issues than fighting over philosophical details.
Some would love to find schisms to exploit between MAGA fan boys and true conservatives and your post smacks exactly of that. Nice try but I'm not taking the bait
Really? Perhaps you can link those and post them here.BTKAG97 said:Obama took several photos of himself imitating historical (Mousilini) or Biblical (Angelic) figures. From what I recall, this board ridiculed him more than it displayed outrage.Anonymous Source said:
I realize he's probably trolling, but F16 would have had a ****ing thrombo if Obama did this.
But I think the real question is, this is related to state of New York policies. Why is the "party of smaller government" effing around with state politics?
Quote:
The real news, what actually happened, as opposed to what somebody said about it, was Trump's newly confirmed Secretary of Transportation, sent an official letter to New York Governor Kathy Hochul, pulling the plug on her much-despised, Orwellian "congestion pricing" program for New York City.
New York's pricing program pretends to make citizens' lives easier by making their lives harder. The plan, a "fifteen-minute-city" lover's dream, requires a vast electronic surveillance system tracking the movements of millions 24x7. At "peak" traffic, drivers are automatically charged $9 per trip to and from Manhattan. (It was originally $15 per trip.) Nobody voted for it. You could say it was enacted through kingly fiat.
Biden's DOT enthusiastically approved the program. But yesterday, DOT Secretary Sean Duffy revoked that approval.
To say the public widely despised the program is like saying the French resistance somewhat disfavored Hitler. Once again, Trump is making the Democrats argue for the hated 20% side of the argument. But that's when he really piled on.
The official White House account fired off a celebratory tweet: "CONGESTION PRICING IS DEAD. Manhattan, and all of New York, is SAVED. LONG LIVE THE KING!" The post included a fake Time Magazine cover showing a smiling Trump wearing a crown. More massive triggering ensued.
To truly appreciate the transgressive humor, you have to remember where the whole "king" canard came from the Democrats! They cranked up the "Trump as king" rhetoric last year, while the Supreme Court was defining the boundaries of Presidential immunity. When Trump invoked "THE KING!" he knew exactly what he was doing. See! See! We told you! He thinks he's a king now!
Meanwhile, as the progressives' court jesters lose their minds in performative outrage over unsent invitations, mean tweets, and his Highness' royal references, Trump's Swamp-draining troops storm the battlefield. The irony is Imperial hilarity.
Its so wild but it makes sense for the type of folks that are MAGA. Similar to being ultra woke there is little consistency or logic. Two sides of the same coin. Imagine this but with an ultra woke president. gross.Gordo14 said:
Of the defining qualities that I want our president to have, loser internet troll is among the worst. Words are actions when you are president. I'm glad MAGA bots find the joke hilarious. I'm sure they'd be slapping their knees laughing if Obama had been so pathetic to tweet that out.
Among the worst? Really? Hope you didn't hit your head too hard on the floor when you fainted.Gordo14 said:
Of the defining qualities that I want our president to have, loser internet troll is among the worst. Words are actions when you are president. I'm glad MAGA bots find the joke hilarious. I'm sure they'd be slapping their knees laughing if Obama had been so pathetic to tweet that out.
Then you are an idiot. Your prior post is also idiotic in that you're trying to "pwn" while asking asinine hypotheticals, and when answered, you play some sort of Margaret Brennan game acting like you as the interviewer gets to set the perameters of the hypotheticals as if they're actually going to happen.Francis Macomber said:I don't see you saying you don't want him as king. In fact, I specifically asked a question about what you would do if he didn't follow the SCOTUS and you deflected and didn't answer it, leading me to believe that you would still support him if he did that.jrdaustin said:I passed over this gem the first time.Francis Macomber said:
It's become very clear that the "conservative" party would almost universally accept a monarchy if it was their guy in charge.
The real "patriots" around here have the Founding Fathers rolling in their graves.
It shows your ignorance and disdain for anyone who doesn't agree with you. Your use of "almost" isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card for a malicious ad-hom against over half the country.
Flagged.
I guess I want to know what the breaking point will be for some of you, or if there is one? So far, the feeling I get is as long as "We're pwning libs!" then he can do whatever he wants and you and your like will be on board.
Mr. Fingerbottom said:
No not at all
Obvious joke that only idiots are upset about
Trump killing it as usual
Lmao. Still can't answer a simple question. And it's not some "asinine hypothetical," when the Vice President has gone on record several times saying things like:jrdaustin said:Then you are an idiot. Your prior post is also idiotic in that you're trying to "pwn" while asking asinine hypotheticals, and when answered, you play some sort of Margaret Brennan game acting like you as the interviewer gets to set the perameters of the hypotheticals as if they're actually going to happen.Francis Macomber said:I don't see you saying you don't want him as king. In fact, I specifically asked a question about what you would do if he didn't follow the SCOTUS and you deflected and didn't answer it, leading me to believe that you would still support him if he did that.jrdaustin said:I passed over this gem the first time.Francis Macomber said:
It's become very clear that the "conservative" party would almost universally accept a monarchy if it was their guy in charge.
The real "patriots" around here have the Founding Fathers rolling in their graves.
It shows your ignorance and disdain for anyone who doesn't agree with you. Your use of "almost" isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card for a malicious ad-hom against over half the country.
Flagged.
I guess I want to know what the breaking point will be for some of you, or if there is one? So far, the feeling I get is as long as "We're pwning libs!" then he can do whatever he wants and you and your like will be on board.
And in this response, you follow an idiotic allegation and ad hom with the comment that since I didn't make a outright denial of the idiotic allegation, I must be in support of it. That, by the way, is a documented argumentative fallacy:
The fallacy of making an outrageous allegation, then asserting that since support of the allegation isn't denied, it must be supported is called "Appeal to Ignorance" or "Argumentum ad Ignorantiam" in logical terms.
Explanation:So to summarize, I don't really care (Margaret) what you SAY you want to know, as by your responses I suspect your question was never in good faith. So you go right on ahead and continue to think every supporter of Trump secretly hopes he becomes king. It's what you want to do.
- How it works:
This fallacy occurs when someone makes a bold, often extreme claim and then puts the burden of proof on the other person to disprove it, assuming that if the opposing party cannot immediately refute it, then the claim must be true.- Key point:
The fallacy lies in the incorrect assumption that lack of evidence against a claim automatically constitutes evidence for it.
Quote:
"If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal. If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that's also illegal. Judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power," Vance wrote on X on Sunday morning.
Quote:
"When the courts stop you, stand before the country, like Andrew Jackson did, and say, 'The chief justice has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.'"
Quote:
"For me, this is not a limited-government thing this is a democracy thing," he continued when I prompted him to explain. "Like, you need the bureaucracy to be responsive to the elected branches of government. The counterargument is, you know, 'Aren't you promoting a constitutional crisis?' And my response is no I'm recognizing a constitutional crisis. If the elected president says, 'I get to control the staff of my own government,' and the Supreme Court steps in and says, 'You're not allowed to do that' like, that is the constitutional crisis. It's not whatever Trump or whoever else does in response. When the Supreme Court tells the president he can't control the government anymore, we need to be honest about what's actually going on."
45% approval rating?samurai_science said:Only mouth breathers on Reddit and Blue Sky care, that is clear by the polling.hoopla said:
Do you think this was good politics (an epic troll, so to speak), or a bridge too far?
We just went through 4 years of that.aggiedent said:Mr. Fingerbottom said:
No not at all
Obvious joke that only idiots are upset about
Trump killing it as usual
I'm going to save this thread for when a Dem president says something that stupid………because I guarantee you……..this forum's sense of humor will dry up in a nanosecond
*******s get held to a higher standard with a lot of people just waiting for a gotcha. Nice people get a pass. That's life.Stat Monitor Repairman said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:
I really couldn't care less about the statement. But I imagine that some of you who are saying it's nothing would have lost your **** mind if Obama had said the same thing after passing AHA.Obama has said all this before, but he just did it in a more soft and effeminate manner.Quote:
"Elections have consequences," he told then number two Republican Rep. Eric Cantor. "And at the end of the day, I won. So I think on that one I trump you."
-Obama, 2008
Half of what triggers people on Trump is based in, "I don't like your tone."
nu awlins ag said:We just went through 4 years of that.aggiedent said:Mr. Fingerbottom said:
No not at all
Obvious joke that only idiots are upset about
Trump killing it as usual
I'm going to save this thread for when a Dem president says something that stupid………because I guarantee you……..this forum's sense of humor will dry up in a nanosecond
nu awlins ag said:We just went through 4 years of that.aggiedent said:Mr. Fingerbottom said:
No not at all
Obvious joke that only idiots are upset about
Trump killing it as usual
I'm going to save this thread for when a Dem president says something that stupid………because I guarantee you……..this forum's sense of humor will dry up in a nanosecond
Anyone that doesn't agree with the same 20 or 30 posters is immediately dismissed as not being conservative.BTKAG97 said:Does that account for the "conservatives" on this board who rage against the authoritarian members of the Republican party?Francis Macomber said:
It's become very clear that the "conservative" party would almost universally accept a monarchy if it was their guy in charge.
Well, his side kick did enough for both of them.Tramp96 said:nu awlins ag said:We just went through 4 years of that.aggiedent said:Mr. Fingerbottom said:
No not at all
Obvious joke that only idiots are upset about
Trump killing it as usual
I'm going to save this thread for when a Dem president says something that stupid………because I guarantee you……..this forum's sense of humor will dry up in a nanosecond
Not really....we went through 4 years of not being able to understand a word mushmouth said.
She was unburdened by what had been.nu awlins ag said:Well, his side kick did enough for both of them.Tramp96 said:nu awlins ag said:We just went through 4 years of that.aggiedent said:Mr. Fingerbottom said:
No not at all
Obvious joke that only idiots are upset about
Trump killing it as usual
I'm going to save this thread for when a Dem president says something that stupid………because I guarantee you……..this forum's sense of humor will dry up in a nanosecond
Not really....we went through 4 years of not being able to understand a word mushmouth said.
Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:
I really couldn't care less about the statement. But I imagine that some of you who are saying it's nothing would have lost your ****ing mind if Obama had said the same thing after passing AHA.
schmellba99 said:Also whether he was going to fall down stairs or sht himself. It was always a tossup.milner79 said:
Just think: only four years ago, our biggest worry was, "What is old Ice Cream for Brains going to f*** up today ..."
I love this mentality. I mean, it's the mentality of a 3 year old, but funny still the same.Francis Macomber said:I don't see you saying you don't want him as king. In fact, I specifically asked a question about what you would do if he didn't follow the SCOTUS and you deflected and didn't answer it, leading me to believe that you would still support him if he did that.jrdaustin said:I passed over this gem the first time.Francis Macomber said:
It's become very clear that the "conservative" party would almost universally accept a monarchy if it was their guy in charge.
The real "patriots" around here have the Founding Fathers rolling in their graves.
It shows your ignorance and disdain for anyone who doesn't agree with you. Your use of "almost" isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card for a malicious ad-hom against over half the country.
Flagged.
I guess I want to know what the breaking point will be for some of you, or if there is one? So far, the feeling I get is as long as "We're pwning libs!" then he can do whatever he wants and you and your like will be on board.
