Bloodbath
Plus: Space dining, Russian elections, Bernie Sanders' 32-hour workweek, and more...

Another day, another Trump speech controversy: Remember the "grab 'em by the pussy" comments Donald Trump made in the early '00s that came out during the 2016 presidential race? Or his "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters" comment from the same campaign? Those soundbites loom large in people's imaginations, but they weren't especially vague; they required no distortion to be unflattering to the man who said them.
Now, though, each new Trump comment seems like a Rorschach. His "bloodbath" comment in Vandalia, Ohio, on Saturday is no exception, but perhaps indicative of how this campaign cycle is going to go.
Pearls were clutched up and down the Acela corridor: "Trump says country faces 'bloodbath' if Biden wins in November," was how Politico chose to headline Trump's remark. "Trump says some migrants are 'not people' and predicts a 'blood bath' if he loses," was how The New York Times characterized the speech. And don't even get me started on what various MSNBC commentators said. (OK, here's one: "He was sending a call to his supporters to have a reprise of January 6," said former New Jersey Gov. Christine Todd Whitman, who then compared Trump to Adolf Hitler.)
Here's what Trump actually said: "Let me tell you something, to China, if you're listening, President Xi…those big, monster car manufacturing plants that you're building in Mexico right now, and you think you're going to get that, you're going to not hire Americans and you're going to sell the cars to us? We're going to put a 100 percent tariff on every single car that comes across the line, and you're not going to be able to sell those guys if I get elected. Now, if I don't get elected, it's going to be a bloodbath for the whole— That's gonna be the least of it. It's going to be a bloodbath for the country. That'll be the least of it. But they're not going to sell those cars, they're building massive factories."
The "that'll be the least of it" part sure is weird, but to totally remove the context—Trump was talking about tariffs and car manufacturing and loss of jobs—from the "bloodbath" comments strikes me as media malpractice. (More competent pundits might take the opportunity to point out how slapping big tariffs on foreign-manufactured cars would be bad policy, a point made repeatedly by Reason's Eric Boehm.)
Later, Trump said, "If this election isn't won, I'm not sure that you'll ever have another election in this country," which strikes me (and others) as the more concerning soundbite than the one the media is seizing on. And he referred to illegal immigrants as "animals" in his speech, which doesn't tell us anything new about what Trump believes, but sure isn't aligned with what I value.
Still: The media chose not to focus on these chunks of the speech or on the actual trade policy Trump was promoting. Many mainstream publications did not even provide viewers and readers with full context so they could judge the comments themselves. This strikes me as a problem—one that's been pointed out repeatedly over the last eight years—requiring some self-reflection that may unfortunately never come.
Fighting at Al Shifa: In Gaza, fighting has once again broken out at Al Shifa hospital, where the Israeli military says Hamas fighters are shooting from.
Back in November, the Israel Defense Force (IDF) decision to raid Al Shifa was controversial. Isreal said the hospital was being used as a Hamas command center and a means of covering the entrances to the terrorists' underground tunnel network. (The November raid uncovered stockpiles of weapons hidden in MRI rooms as well as tunnel entrances on the grounds.)
The IDF is calling the new raid a "high-precision" operation, saying it is based on new intelligence that indicates senior Hamas militants are hiding out at the hospital. Still, it's a high-risk operation with lots of potential to harm civilians—and some evidence that's already happened.
"The hospital and the surrounding area house about 30,000 patients, medical workers and displaced civilians, and a number of people were killed and wounded, the [Hamas-controlled Gazan] health ministry said," reports The New York Times. "It added that a fire had broken out at the gate of the complex, which caused some people to suffocate and made it difficult to reach those who were injured."
Scenes from New York: New York Gov. Kathy Hochul is ordering a review of how the state has been issuing cannabis dispensary licenses, having already called the legal weed rollout "a disaster." (I have a Reason documentary in the works about this precise issue.)
QUICK HITS
- "Who are currently the most influential thinkers/intellectuals on the Left?" asks Tyler Cowen over at Marginal Revolution.
- Check out this Bloomberg explainer on the end of Japan's negative interest rates.
- Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) wants the government to establish a 32-hour workweek; National Review editors tearing the idea apart.
- High-end space dining is now a thing (if you're willing to fork over half a million).
- "The Kremlin stage-managed Russia's presidential vote over the weekend to send a singular message at home and abroad: that President Vladimir V. Putin's support is overwhelming and unshakable, despite or even because of his war against Ukraine," reports The New York Times' Paul Sonne.
- lol:
Two of the last four movies I've seen in the theater were set in 1989. Another was set in 1999. Another took place 10,000 years after the Butlerian Jihad. What I'm saying here is: Screenwriters *really* don't like it when characters have access to cellphones.
— Jesse Walker (@notjessewalker) March 18, 2024
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
These comments are going to be a bath of blood.
And then according to Biden, at least for all the colored folks, Trump "Will put y'all back in chains."
First a bath of blood, then chains. Then Hitler, then muh democracy. Oh, how can I avoid this grim fate?
Have your penis and/or vagina removed.
Seems apt.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byDiILrNbM4
there will be blood
Aw, the only "bloodbath" Trump could talk about is pussy-grabbin' while she's on the rag!
🙂
😉
Blood for the Blood god! Skulls for the skull throne!
MILK FOR THE KHORNE FLAKES!
WAAAAGH!
Trump says country faces 'bloodbath' if Biden wins in November...
NO CONTEXT NECESSARY.
The MSNBC/NYT crowd really know how to sell Donald to the American people. Probably better than he could do himself.
I can't tell if it's bullshit or desperation I smell coming from them, but it's rather amazing. Twitter is full of all kinds of politicians, pundits, and media members seriously pushing a narrative that is absolutely discredited all over the place.
The odor of mendacity?
A collective queef of progressive angst.
ha! a creative turn of phrase!
Band name?
My future handle?
Odor of mendacity. Is that the same as "stinkin' lie"?
Whatever anyone thinks of Trump, he is a political genius.
The DNC press will not cover his speeches, now the auto workers speech has gone viral. All he has to do is throw out a controversial word (in context of the speech of course), and his rallies and speeches go viral. The crypt keepers (Pelosi) crawl out of their insider trading holes and give him ever expanding coverage. Who’d thunk it, a NYC developer is better at this politico game than the crypt keeper swamp insiders.
^+1
I'm honestly stunned that they're chimping out like this. You'd think after 2020, they'd have the playbook all set and wouldn't be so hysterical. Apparently they're legitimately afraid that the 3 am ballot dump/broken water main/voting machine breakdown reindeer games aren't going to be enough to overcome him this time.
Their addiction to the Trump outrage dollar is greater than standing for (D)emocracy.
That’s my take as well.
It was pretty ridiculous the cries over the weekend.
Shocked the usual clowns here didn't push the false narrative.
I just can't believe how many rats crawled out to eat some rotten cheese. This was like the walls closing in, but at breakneck speed. They are so fucking desperate to get Trump that they are demolishing every fiber of credibility any of them have to prove how bad he is.
every fiber of credibility any of them have
The same fibers used to craft the emperors new clothes.
They're just fucking with us now.
“Now, if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the whole – that’s gonna be the least of it. It’s going to be a bloodbath for the country. That’ll be the least of it.”
I saw CNN snuck this back in too:
"He has also repeatedly used dehumanizing language to refer to migrants, including saying last year that they were “poisoning the blood of our country,” echoing words used by Adolf Hitler."
Except Hitler didn't actually say that, but that didn't stop Jeff and Sarcasmic from calling Trump 'Hitler' for weeks.
Ahh. So thats where sarc gets it. CNN.
Oh, I get it. What Trump said was ok because Hitler didn't use those exact words. That makes total sense.
No. You don't get it.
In sarc’s defense, he’s very dumb.
And/or drunk.
Say, bud, you haven't complained much about anything Bernie says. Aren't you all about BOAF SIDEZ?
https://reason.com/2024/03/17/after-a-century-the-federal-tea-board-is-finally-dead/?comments=true#comment-10487519
Oh wait, no you aren't.
I don't give a shit about what Bernie says. He's not one of the two geriatrics with dementia vying for the throne. Though I'm sure that won't stop you from making something up based upon what I didn't say and arguing against it, like you mentor Jesse.
This is just getting sad. Yes sarc. Everyone who thinks you're an ignorant hypocritical piece of shit is my acolyte. I'm sure you believe this.
To be fair, you are the undisputed king of arguing against stuff you make up to explain what people don't say or don't do.
Even more pathetic. Lol. I use your own posts word for word.
You stopped posting links because when my comments are put into context you're shown to be a liar. Which is funny considering you accuse those who take Trump at his word of doing the same thing.
Well this is a lie. I post links whenever anyone but you asks.
One of my favorite things at reason now is watching you try to add context to be shown that you lied a 2nd time.
If others ask I post links. For you I let you dig your own hole.
So you admit to cherry picking and lying by taking things out of context. Wow. A rare moment of honesty.
I thought he did not post links every time due to you calling him weird for remembering anything and ignoring them regardless.
I thought he did not post links every time due to you calling him weird for remembering anything and ignoring them regardless.
He stopped when I started following the links and posting what I was responding to in full context, as opposed to his edited versions of what I said with no context at all, showing that he’s a sack of shit who couldn’t be trusted to tell someone the time of day without lying. After embarrassing him a couple times (if that's possible considering he has no concept of shame) he started doing cut and paste only without links.
Sarc, is your reading comprehension level that of a 3rd grader?
He stopped when I started following the links and posting what I was responding to in full context, as opposed to his edited versions of what I said with no context at all,
Lol. I’m sure you believe this lie. But it is a complete lie. This is just pathetic. Hilarious. But pathetic.
After embarrassing him a couple times (if that’s possible considering he has no concept of shame) he started doing cut and paste only without links.
Even more hilarious. I post links when I want and don’t bother when I’ve posted multiple times. You can go back years to see this.
What fucking pathetic lies do you tell yourself buddy?
Cite one example or time you embarrassed me. Just one.
You posted a link to the smoking gun where I supposedly mocked Saint Babbitt, and I was clearly mocking those who made her a saint.
You posted a link to the smoking gun where I supposedly applauded Rittenhouse’s prosection, and I clearly said he engaged in self defense.
You posted a link to the smoking gun where I supposedly defended Australia’s COVID quarantines, and I was clearly talking about how you were disrespecting actual Holocaust victims.
Links tell the whole story, which is why you don’t post them anymore. You just rattle off boilerplate lies.
Your definition of clearly is quite odd as you rush in to call her saint babies before anyone has ever brought her up.
The biggest irony is the only Babbitt post I have if you is defending the cop because he didn’t have a good line of site, here, justifying the shooting.
https://reason.com/2024/02/01/bipartisan-tax-credit-bonanza/?comments=true#comment-10425139
The reason I didn’t bookmark Babbitt threads is because you’ve called her saint Babbitt and laughed at her death dozens of times.
So youre lying about that one lol.
Good work buddy. Can’t even come up with a valid lie.
Care to try again?
Links tell the whole story, which is why you don’t post them anymore. You just rattle off boilerplate lies.
Is this why you never provide any links for your lies?
Thanks. You proved me right by cherry picking one part of what I said and acting as if it was the totality. Big Mac, ML, Dlam and ICP all creamed their jeans.
There's about thirty to forty people here who regularly call you a dishonest idiot or have blocked you, Sarc, but they're all just bullying you. You're never the problem, right?
Damnit, I told your ex-wife to keep her nickname for me to herself.
What Sarc said was ok because Hitler didn’t use those exact words.
Yeah. Comparing people who behave like attack dogs to attack dogs is the same as comparing immigrants to vermin, vermin being vile things to be exterminated, or poison in the blood that will kill the host if not removed, or cleansed.
You’re sooo smart.
Defends his own use of dehumanizing language. Lol.
Never change hypocrite.
“Comparing people who behave like attack dogs to attack dogs is the same as comparing immigrants to vermin, vermin being vile things to be exterminated, or poison in the blood that will kill the host if not removed, or cleansed.”
Except that’s not what he said in any of those cases, you gullible fuck.
Or maybe it isn’t credulity? Do you honestly believe any of those lies you just typed or are you being deliberately disingenuous?
Abysmal stupidity will explain it quite easily.
What lies?
Almost everything above. Just like for data you kept claiming trump said they were a cancer of the blood. A term you added respite being corrected multiple times.
Just like for data you kept claiming trump said they were a cancer of the blood.
I don't know who said that. Is this another one of arguments you rehearsed in your car and are trying against me, even though I never said what you're arguing against?
“What lies?”
These ones:
“Comparing immigrants to vermin, vermin being vile things to be exterminated, or poison in the blood that will kill the host if not removed, or cleansed.”
I don't understand. I was engaging in sarcasm to point out that the "dehumanizing" you accuse me of is comparing you to a barking dog (whoof whoof), while the dehumanizing you are defending compares immigrants to vermin (rats, cockroaches and other disease vectors) and poison in the blood (poison, as in something that will kill if not... cleansed).
I don’t know who said that.
You said it buddy.
. I was engaging in sarcasm to point out that the “dehumanizing” you accuse me of is comparing you to a barking dog
AHH. The old im not a hypocrite it was sarcasm defense.
Do you need the definition of dehumanization?
"what the “dehumanizing” you accuse me of"
Am I being rused here? What the hell is sarcasmic babbling about? For 6 months he's been squawking out Creemjeff talking-points about how calling Nazi's vermin is dehumanizing and we mustn't speak ill of them, and now he's saying I'm accusing him of dehumanizing?
It's far too early in the week to be this drunk, Sarckles. Did you get canned again?
I guess I've gotten lost in the funhouse mirrors and strawmen.
Jesse - you never even pretend to be honest. please fuck off
ML - When you pretend to be honest you're almost believable, and once or twice I actually thought you were arguing in good faith. I almost like that guy, even if I disagree with him a lot.
Yeah, that didn't make sense either.
ALL HAIL THE MIGHTY JESSEAZ! HAIL! HAIL! HAIL!
Did you ever criticize Bernie when he was a Presidential candidate?
When was the last time you criticized Biden, who is not only an actual Presidential candidate, but is the current President?
I double dog dare you to show your most recent criticism of Biden. After all, you are the undisputed king of showing citations.
Did you ever criticize Bernie when he was a Presidential candidate?
More than likely. The guy is a raving lunatic who has never had a real job, knows dick about economics, and promotes things he simply does not understand.
When was the last time you criticized Biden…
In the comment you’re responding to where I called him a geriatric with dementia.
I double dog dare you to show your most recent criticism of Biden
“He’s not one of the two geriatrics with dementia vying for the throne.”
Or does that not count because I was criticizing Trump as well?
After all, you are the undisputed king of showing citations.
No, that title goes to your mentor Jesse with his trove of cherry picked comments that he will not post with links because full context always shows him to be a liar.
Besides, what does it matter who or what I criticize? Your entire argument is based upon what was not said, and you making up reasons why. It's textbook strawman fallacious argumentation.
You've proven day after day to never reading a textbook.
Do you really think you can gaslight me? Haaaa ha ha ha ha!
You're so deep in the ether any 'gaslighting' Jesse could attempt would be a fart in the wind.
Is that another term you dont understand?
I cut and paste the definitions of words and am told that I don't know what they mean. Gaslighting is an attempt to get someone to doubt what they know. So saying I don't know what words mean when I'm quoting from the fucking dictionary is a textbook attempt at gaslighting. And a poor one at that. Only people who are convinced are folks with room temperature IQs, like dlam and big mac.
Lol. Even when you give the textbook definition you can't use the word correctly. Such as you calling insults ad hominrm. An example of an actual ad hominem is you dismissing facts by attacking the source. Such as here.
https://reason.com/2024/03/09/the-future-of-immigration-is-privatization/?comments=true#comment-10479818
Now who here was gaslighting you? Give us the exact post so you can demonstrate you dont understand the term.
I never said they're wrong. I said they openly admit to only providing one side of the debate. That means telling only part of the story by cherry picking and lying by omission. It's not important enough to me to go and find the information they are deliberately ignoring. Just pointing out that it exists.
That's not an ad hominem. That's just being honest.
The amount of lies you fucking tell yourself sarc. This is why people think you’re a hypocritical piece of shit.
That means telling only part of the story by cherry picking and lying by omission.
This is you dismissing their evidence without providing any counter evidence solely by attacking the source you retarded fuck.
What did they omit? Be specific.
Youre a fucking dumb child. Lol.
That’s not an ad hominem. That’s just being honest.
That is a perfect example of the ad hominem attack, you gaslighting bag of shit.
I never said they’re wrong. I said they openly admit to only providing one side of the debate. That means telling only part of the story by cherry picking and lying by omission.
Here, you admit that they could be right and then proceed immediately to impugn their motivations without even a pretense of evidence. Their actual argument is never addressed. It is without question that you fail to grasp what is or isn’t an ad hominem fallacy.
It’s not important enough to me to go and find the information they are deliberately ignoring. Just pointing out that it exists.
This is pure solipsism. You might consider that this kind of behavior is why your family hates you.
sarcasmic 2 hours ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
This is not correct. Derived from the play/movie Gaslight, the term gaslighting, from context, means “accusing another person of having false perceptions (being crazy, stupid, partisan, etc.) in an effort to establish a false version of reality as the truth to ones own advantage.”
So Sarcasmic is gaslighting about the definition of gaslighting. It has been explained to him multiple times, with detail about the events of the play. Despite this, he continues to present his false, vague and oversimplified version, “get someone to doubt what they know,” by which definition even an honest and sincere attempt to challenge someone else’s perception of an event is gaslighting. He then accuses others of “gaslighting” based on his false version to avoid their criticism of him for his actual gaslighting.
When I say: “if you watch the video of the Babbitt shooting instead of relying on media reports, it is clear that she was in a completely defenseless position with her hands visible above her head when the officer rushed forward and shot her in the throat without any warning.” I am being honest and sincere. That is not gaslighting. If someone else watches the video and comes to a different conclusion, they can engage in honest discourse by presenting evidence for their conclusion.
Pour sarc.
By your own declarations you are Hitler as well since you used dehumanizing language here.
And that makes what Trump said ok. Got it.
What makes what Trump said okay, was because it was okay, and because you and the Democrats were essentially lying by comparing it to Hitler.
Oh, by the way. I heard Hitler said words to the effect of "Got it" before, and now I'm worried you're going to kill all the Jews.
Disingenuous fuck.
If a Democrat used the same language you'd be freaking the fuck out and claiming they're calling for the extermination of everyone who owns a red hat.
Cite?
Blaming others for what they might do as you do it is my favorite trait of yours.
Words are more important than actions Jeese, I thought you knew that.
He doesn't even have words 90% of the time lol. He just justifies his own behaviors because someone else might be as retarded as him in the future.
Joe uses that language constantly you disingenuous fuck, except times one thousand, and we never hear a peep from you.
If Trump had said the shit Joe did in the State of the Union you’d be squealing like a stuck pig about the end of democracy and incipient Hitlering.
Democracy in this country is over no matter what. If Trump wins he’s going to declare the opposition to be criminal, and if he loses his followers will start a civil war. At least that's what I expect.
So more projection of a future argument as you ignore and even applaud what the left is already doing.
"If Trump wins he’s going to declare the opposition to be criminal"
Oh look, you're both retarded and deliberately lying. You don't even believe that, but you're stupid enough to think others will.
I hope I'm wrong, but that's what I expect.
Sure he had 4 years to do it after lock him up, but sarc has FEELZ that he is right this time. Meanwhile, let's lock Trump up! But not Joe. He gave the documents back after 40 years and giving them to a ghostwriter so he could make 8M.
Principle free sarc is his name.
"I hope I’m wrong, but that’s what I expect."
No it isn't. You're just trying to slime the Democrats political opponents by accusing them of shit the Democrats constantly do, but they never have.
When have I ever said anything remotely positive about Democrats, other than their policies being guided by tunnel vision on intentions and blindness to results?
As if that’s positive. You interpret it as a defense. I’m just saying that they’re wrong, not evil.
When you say everyone who disagrees with you is a liar, then you leave no room for explaining to them why they're wrong. They're evil. They can't be redeemed. No reasoning with them. They know what's up. They're lying. No need for debate. Just attack. Whoof whoof!
Here’s a bunch of Democrats doing just that hypocrite.
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1769475951119724710
“Bloodbath at RNC: Trump team slashes staff at committee.”
Oh my lord, Trump’s team literally attacked an undisclosed number of people at the RNC with a knife! Lock him up!
They’ve literally used the same language multiple times (especially vermin), just since 2016, and nobody here compared them to Hitler for it.
Sarc only cares when Trump does it because he’s a hypocrite with TDS.
And he referred to illegal immigrants as "animals" in his speech, which doesn't tell us anything new about what Trump believes, but sure isn't aligned with what I value.
Because Liz simps for MS-13? That's a weird flax, but OK. Oh wait, I'm guessing Liz didn't actually watch the bit that had that in it. So she's using someone else's viewpoint of what Trump said.
More competent pundits might take the opportunity to point out how slapping big tariffs on foreign-manufactured cars would be bad policy...
ZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZzzz huh? Did someone say bloodbath? Now I'm listening.
"More competent pundits..."
More competent politicians, as well.
In Gaza, fighting has once again broken out at Al Shifa hospital...
I went to the hospital and a hockey game broke out.
Then the lights turned off and everyone went crazy with anticipation, thinking the Undertaker's music was going to start playing... but instead we learned that the generators had finally run out.
...but then since the generators actually didn't run out, yet again...
...darkness goes on for a few more seconds...
...*glass shatters, lights back on*...
*Stone cold theme plays*
Take off you hoser!
"It added that a fire had broken out at the gate of the complex, which caused some people to suffocate and made it difficult to reach those who were injured."
Oh no. Hamas has discovered the passive voice.
Next thing you know they'll be driving red SUV's.
Err, riding in . . . being transported by? Yeah, that's the ticket.
That is the only passive thing they know - - - - - - -
Well, here's one voice made from Down Under that is decidedly not passive:
"We will not let the Holocaust survivors who built our country end their lives worrying about the State of Israel" Israeli actress Shani Atias
https://youtu.be/UF9w5ec41Y4?si=xUygWI6tTGy-LtuF
Although I don't share her prayer or anyone else's prayer, I do extend my kindest and most helpful thoughts and do spread those same thoughts of others like her!
L'Chaim! (Hebrew toast meaning: "To Life!")
"If this election isn't won, I'm not sure that you'll ever have another election in this country," which strikes me (and others) as the more concerning soundbite than the one the media is seizing on.
But it pretty much echoes what the rabidly anti-Trump people have been saying all year.
Yes, so why does Trump say it? He could separate himself from those loonies.
I'm not endorsing it. I agree Trump would do well to tone it down a bit.
Sorry, that was meant as a more general question to the commentariat.
I agree, too. He could seem like a fiery but still rational candidate, if he could just tone it down one single notch.
if he could just tone it down one single notch.
You see, most blokes, they're doing a campaign speech at 10. Where can you go from there? Where? Nowhere, exactly! When Trump needs that extra push over the cliff, he goes to 11.
I saw what you did there.
It is to play to his crowd. To rile up those who attend his events. Same as the lock her up chants in 2016. But he never actually used the state to go after his opponents unlike the current set of politicians.
And as seen with the bloodbath over the weekend or the Hitler cries a month or two ago, it doesn't actually matter what he says as the media will spin whatever narrative they want in regards to him.
So why self regulate his tone or words? People will still misconstrue him loudly. I dont think he sees a reason too. Not like he would get glowing press.
There is a big difference between using the word "bloodbath" to describe the auto industry and suggesting that there won't be another election, if he isn't elected.
One is word choice, which can be easily disproved after watching the clip. The other is loony idea that would be laughed at had a Democrat said it.
He has continued to campaign on the 2020 illegal election changes. Half the country agrees 2020 had election issues. Elias has over 50 lawsuits trying to overturn election rules. Garland went on TV to say he was going to sue over voter ID laws.
Many people have issues with what the democrats are doing in their pursuit to 'fortify' elections. I have no problems with it.
The irony is the media castigsting the weekend Russia elections with the same issue.
Read the entirety of his speeches. Not single clips. He often talks for an hour or more. Taking a short 1 min clip doesn't state what he is actually saying. Your focusing on rhetoric instead of substance.
When he talks about elections he is talking about election fraud and the such. Which many agree with.
I'm sorry, but if everyone needs to watch an hour of his speeches each time to understand what he is saying, then he has a messaging problem.
We know the media is going to lie about what he says, but we shouldn't have to parse every bit of what he says to find the real meaning either.
You can’t take anything he says at face value. First one of his defenders must clarify what he really meant. For example when he calls immigrants vermin and says they’re poisoning the blood of the nation, he isn’t really using Hitleresque language by comparing them to rats and saying they’re killing the country from within. No way. He was just innocently using some figures of speech and doesn’t really mean what he says. Anyone who thinks he means what he says has TDS.
And sarc is a perfect example of what happens when you only expose yourself to the narratives of leftist media.
Don't be like sarc.
If you're interested in not being ignorant, educate yourself on the totality.
And Jesse is a perfect example of a bad-faith actor who gives Trump the benefit of the doubt to the point of claiming he meant something totally different than what he actually said, while at the same time portraying what others say in the worst possible way to the point of claiming they meant something totally different than what they actually said.
No you little fucking troll. The bad faith actor here all morning has been you.
Comparing someone or something as a rat is a time honored NY tradition.
One of the unions have a giant rat they inflate and put on certain job sites.
Sarc and Jeff were given the evidence of the left media calling trump and conservatives vermin for years. He continues to deny it. Even now he will claim he didnt know it despite me giving it to him a half dozen times.
https://twitter.com/0rf/status/1732746683274932259
Comparing someone or something as a rat is a time honored NY tradition.
I chose rat because of the movie ‘The Eternal Jew’.
Sarc and Jeff were given the evidence of the left media calling trump and conservatives vermin for years. He continues to deny it.
I don’t click your links, dumbfuck. Regardless there’s a big difference between some progressive echo chamber calling conservatives vermin, and man seeking an office with the power to round people up and kill them saying vermin immigrants are poisoning the blood of the nation.
Look at the a) intentional ignorance of sarc and b) the excuse making of sarc to defend democrats. Lol.
You dont click links so you can continue using lies to defend your own bald assertions. Mike had the same bad habit.
If you dont click someone’s links (I’d be wary of shrike’s), then you have no way of arguing against them expect from a place of emotion.
You also can’t turn around and claim that they never informed you because you refused to let them. That’s some hypocritical catch-22 bullshit.
@DesigNate If he argued in good faith you’d have a point. But he doesn’t, is proud of it, and will no doubt justify it with a bunch of things I never said or things taken out of context without a link. The good old “they did it first so it’s ok” defense.
Awe, pour sarc.
One of the unions have a giant rat they inflate and put on certain job sites.
A lot of the unions do. It even has a name, “Scabby”, and they put it up at damn near every nonunion, and even out of area union job sites around Chicagoland.
Images of Scabby: https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/eTVK8lXc_pNCq4AOVATP3YkkNMw=/0x0:920x613/1200x800/filters:focal(499x72:645x218)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/65019754/RATS_08XX19_01.0.0.jpg
@sarc “The good old “they did it first so it’s ok” defense.”
I don’t want to speak for anyone else, but when I point out that the Democrats do/did something it’s to either highlight the hypocrisy of shitting on Republicans for doing the same thing or pointing out that the Democrats are currently engaged in X and it’s stupid to worry about the Republicans possibly engaging in X at some point in the future. Not necessarily saying it’s ok.
Because at the end of the day, we’re talking about politics and political parties and neither one is going to be taking the high road (and I think it’s extremely naive to expect the R’s to take the high road and think it’s not going to end up in an electoral bloodbath since it seems completely anathema to the D’s).
YMMV
You dont need to watch an hour. But then maybe don't watch the same small out of context clips?
Not sure why you feel it is better to watch only what those that hate him choose to expose. That seems pretty dumb to me.
if he is an honest actor here, then, yes – it seems stupid.
As an example of mendacity or gaslighting then it starts to make more sense.
In context he was referencing Biden’s policies, and saying they will create an economic bloodbath for the auto industry and autoworkers.
He wasn't saying he was going to create a bloodbath. There was zero wrong with what he said or how he used it, and he was a hell of a lot less inflammatory than Joe's speeches.
I understand. His comment about the bloodbath can easily be disproven by watching the speech or reading the transcript.
The problem is saying, “If this election isn’t won, I’m not sure that you’ll ever have another election in this country...”
What's the problem? Did you somehow grossly misinterpret it as Trump saying that Biden winning the election would somehow end with Trump as dictator?
Half the country feels this way with the ballot harvesting issues.
The Jimmy Carter voting group called mail in ballots the number one source of fraud. With the democrats doing their best to undo any and all forms of voter identity or fraud protections, not sure why this is so concerning as rhetoric for you.
Jesse, some people cannot believe in election tampering. In their heads, it is the one institution that is fair and above reproach. If vote counting is compromised, then all of "representative democracy" crumbles. They can't mentally allow this.
I think Bob has hit the nail on the head. If they admit the game has been rigged, that knocks America off it’s pedestal for them and they can no longer see America as a Shining City On a Hill.
All of a sudden it’s the same as any other banana republic out there, and that thought is anathema to them. So rather than agitate to fix it, they bury their heads in the sand.
We see this with several otherwise prescient and intelligent commenters here.
Yep.
"The problem is saying, “If this election isn’t won, I’m not sure that you’ll ever have another election in this country…”
Judging from all the shenanigans since 2021 that's absolutely true. I'm not entirely sure that the DC establishment is even going to let the one this fall happen. They're certainly doing their best to remove the leading candidate from the equation.
Observing the obvious isn't a "problem".
The problem is saying, “If this election isn’t won, I’m not sure that you’ll ever have another election in this country…”
The problem is that Biden is all in on mandates and subsidies for electric vehicles and charging infrastructure and has no plan to stop the Chinese from exporting cheap EVs to the US using Mexico as a proxy.
Considering that context, you have to be at least a little obtuse to not parse Trumps comment as: "if, having demonstrated that the Democrat policies of Biden will destroy the American economy, we still cannot defeat them under the current electoral process, then why bother having elections?"
I wouldn't even call that hyperbolic. Cynical, maybe, but mostly just pragmatic.
The problem is saying, “If this election isn’t won, I’m not sure that you’ll ever have another election in this country…”
I'm seeing leftists make this claim unironically on fucking sports boards, only for their side. Most of it seems to be centered on their dialectic that "right-wing extremism" is the biggest threat to this country behind climate change.
The neocons seem to be all-in on Biden at the moment, too. Keep in mind that these are the people who love to peacock as True and Honest Conservatives, but somehow can't bring themselves to vote for the Libertarian or Constitution candidate, or write in the True and Honest Conservative Politician of their choice.
Yup, neocons are tactical without any moral principles.
And the totalitarian left may or may not be self-aware, but they are certainly dedicated to the ends, and willing to use any means they feel necessary.
"There is a big difference between using the word “bloodbath” to describe the auto industry and suggesting that there won’t be another election, if he isn’t elected."
Seems to be little more than a response for what the Democrats have been saying about him.
Well considering that in 2016 the then president alongside the now current president spied on Trump and the efforts to imprison Trump, he may have a point.
Really he could say whatever the fuck he wants now and people will just chalk it up to the establishment being overdramatic.
Donald Trump could save a toddler from being eaten by a tiger and the headline would be "Trump Cruel to Animals. Denies Them Food".
^ This.
It matters not what Trump says.
"Trump starves tiger, just like Hitler"
You need more dramatic flair:
"Trump denies endangered species much needed nourishment."
Even better if the tiger was one of those white cats.
Pfft! Tigers are Asian. Much better if it were different big cat that makes it fraught with political context and has the bonus effect of an insult to an adopted cultural icon.
"Trump Denies Basic Sustenance to African Black Panther"
Not to pile on, but that big cat has to be malnourished from climate change.
As I've been saying for 6+ years, Donald Trump would walk across the Reflecting Pond and the headlines would read "Trump Can't Swim".
He's never going to convince the people who believe he's literally Hitler, but I think there is a decent chunk of people who could be persuaded, but just really don't like his personality and unfiltered speaking style.
Fuck 'em. They want a swamp critter? That's what we got.
I like to think that it is possible for someone without some of Trump's less desirable personality traits to not be a swamp critter.
Do you know of one? Do they have the charisma needed to get votes?
can they withstand the barrage of lawfare and media attacks?
the constant unrelenting lying by all sectors of organized society... academia, administrative, popular media, the courts, news media, schools, you name it....
Got no problem with that at all, but I'm not willing to await the 2nd coming.
I'm not saying you should.
"I’m not saying you should."
And I see you offer no alternatives.
This is a comment section. I'm commenting on what's in the roundup and what people are talking about, not writing a treatise on my complete assessment of the current political situation.
And I see you still offer no alternatives. Doing a sarc imitation, or just hoping no one will notice your misdirection?
WTF are you talking about? Alternatives to what? I didn't say you or anyone shouldn't vote for Trump. I'm talking about ways I think he could appeal to more people. And I did propose the alternative that Trump could be slightly less obnoxious. It's OK for me to have opinions on things even if I don't have all the answers.
You know, Joe Biden rants and raves and calls, calls half the country the enemy, and says they're trying to kill you and end democracy. But somehow it's Trump using the word "Bloodbath" in reference to Joe's economic policies that's the real problem.
Fuck that. The hypocrisy is so thick here it's like Vaseline on people's glasses, and I can't believe even sensible people like are falling for it.
Yeah, but Joe delivers what the "elite" class wants to hear, and they predetermine not just that he is right, but that progressive tactics are properly "civilized", in contrast to the uncouth MAGA rabble.
The "bloodbath" freakout is completely ridiculous. But Trump does say some stuff that really isn't helping. I agree Biden's divisive rhetoric is very troubling. Maybe Trump should do more to try not to be the mirror of that kind of nastiness.
Maybe Trump should do more to try not to be the mirror of that kind of nastiness.
The lesson of the last 25 years or so is that they aren’t going to vote for the GOP guy anyway, no matter how nice he is. Politics is about getting out your most dedicated voters now, not appealing to independents or centrists or as wide of a swath as possible.
Maybe that will change in the next couple of election cycles, but I doubt it. The centrists simply don’t want to deal with the fact that the country is effectively divided in all but name now, and they’re going to end up having to pick a side one way or another. This idea that they can fly above the fray until things settle down is going to be disabused rather quickly this year and up through 2030, I suspect. They're going to be made to choose, whether they want to or not.
So, do you think that Trump's abrasive and obnoxious style is necessary to his keeping the support he already has? I suppose that could be true, but it seems unlikely. Assuming not, then what has he got to lose by toning it down? Those centrists you mention are going to make up their minds based on something. I think there are people who are really just turned off by his style and rhetoric, but on policy would choose him over Biden.
Or maybe he just can't help himself and Trump is just Trump. I've never been quite able to decide how much of Trump's behavior is calculated and how much is just him being a really weird person.
"So, do you think that Trump’s abrasive and obnoxious style is necessary to his keeping the support he already has?"
Yes, the working class wants a fighter, someone who sounds like they will defend them against the depredations of the current pseudo-aristocratic elite. They don't want another insider and they don't want a milquetoast who tells them he can work things out with their oppressors.
So, do you think that Trump’s abrasive and obnoxious style is necessary to his keeping the support he already has?
I think it's a primary feature, yeah. GOP voters don't want a Romney or McCain, they want someone who hits their enemies back twice as hard, the way Obama literally counseled the Democrats to do. Especially when it's become blatantly obvious now that the Current Year left not only isn't cowed by accusations of hypocrisy, indulging in such double standards is literally the whole point of them securing more power.
That's not to say they want someone like Gaetz, who really is a total spastic, but they do want someone who doesn't flinch in the face of media/left finger-wagging and smugging. They want someone who's going to smash those people in the face when they indulge in that kind of smart-ass snark, especially after the Jon Stewart Daily Show years where that became the de facto attitude of Current Year leftists.
There is a lot of room between Trump and Romney, so why are you pretending that the only options are to be an asshole like Trump or a milqetoast piece of shit like Romney or a general piece of shit like McCain? I'm not saying that Trump should start acting like every other politician. Of course a lot of his appeal is that he isn't like them and just says what's on his mind. But I do think he could do better if he would just be a little more careful about some of the things he says. He has been gaining support in certain demographics. I think he could do even better with some minor adjustments.
There is a lot of room between Trump and Romney, so why are you pretending that the only options are to be an asshole like Trump or a milqetoast piece of shit like Romney or a general piece of shit like McCain?
This is just the recent history. The problems that GOP voters had with the party's donor class and their politicians go back a lot farther than 2008. They go back decades, especially when the latter kept working overtime to squash its populist wing in the wake of the collapse of McCarthyism. Trump was, and is, the party's voters telling the establishment "We've had enough, and if you're not going to work in our interests, we'll go with a guy who doesn't give a single fuck about your precious norms, because at least he acts like he gives a shit."
Trump gaining with minorities is entirely incidental to this, and he's hardly going to moderate his approach, because this is how he's been his whole time in the media spotlight. I'll believe the minority gains when I see them on election day, too--these demos might be dissatisfied with Biden, but come election time they'll mostly still vote Dem (and if they don't, they're vote will be "fortified" to protect "Our Democracy").
So, do you think that Trump’s abrasive and obnoxious style is necessary to his keeping the support he already has?
To some extent, yes. I dunno if he needs to be 100% Trump, but I think he needs to be at least 95% Trump. The people who like Trump like him because he's actually punching back at the shit-gargling sacks of festering hog cunts that have been calling them racist deplorables in flyover country and claiming to care about the working class while doing everything they can to impoverish them while turning their kids into medical freaks of nature. And he can punch back at those folks in a way the people who support him can't, because they'll lose the shitty job they have and never be able to get another one after they've been doxxed on Twitter. To them, he's Dirty Harry.
Cmon fat. Joe Biden has good intentions. Ask sarc.
Trump behaves the way he does because he knows that he earns support not by being logical or rational, but by creating an emotional connection with his audience. That is what demagogues do. His supporters support him BECAUSE he says over-the-top nonsense.
Say Jeffy, did you watch the last State of the Union address? Or what about Biden’s red speech?
Here’s two Soros funded authors on MSDNC telling your flock how evil white rural people are, but they’re totally not doing what you just accused the other side of, right?
"earns support not by being logical or rational, but by creating an emotional connection with his audience"
- trans people are being genocided
- unarmed black men being killed in droves by police
- white rural voters are a threat to democracy and the country
Ya, there are people that definitely have a problem with demagoguery not connected to logic and reality, and they are called leftists
Ya, he is already starting to get the benefit of the doubt from a lot of people that are looking at this more in the light of the media, govt, basically everyone is out to get him and will lie to do it.
If he just took some of the shit down a notch it really would highlight the hypocrisy and partisanship of the media, but he does give them a good bit of ridiculous shit too.
But, Trump gonna Trump
"...If he just took some of the shit down a notch it really would highlight the hypocrisy and partisanship of the media, but he does give them a good bit of ridiculous shit too..."
I doubt it; their lies would be more outrageous than they are, but the lying would continue.
After 45 years or so in the media spotlight, and with how fucking old the guy is, there's absolutely no taking it down with him. Both he and Biden are in their "I'm old and I don't give a fuck anymore" phase of their life.
plus he's been attacked constantly for 4+ years now - mostly dishonestly
when you're in fight or flight mode you stay in it till the danger is averted.... they will never relent.
You try to 'moderate' yourself when everything you are and have is under constant threat from literally everywhere
"Yes, so why does Trump say it? He could separate himself from those loonies."
You're right. Why he could just become another run-of-the-mill swamp critter, get elected and not do anything to raise any hackles, right?
Yeah. Not sure how this is worse than the end of democracy rhetoric we've heard for over a year. Trump also commented on locking up the J6 committee for destruction of evidence. How dare he. That is just as bad as the dems actually arresting political opponents over the last few years and charging him with everything under the sun.
Again, to the Democratic faithful, not only are they expressing partisan policy bias, they are playing culture wars in the context of "sophistication". See, uncouth rabble do things like mob protests. More sophisticated people do things like Congressional dog and pony shows, followed by "incidental" destruction of evidence. And only uncouth people would criticize their betters for what they did.
The Democrats are literally trying to exclude exclude Trump and Republican members of the house from the ballot. Does Liz think they'll back off if they completely control the federal government?
Garland in just the last week talked about using the federal government to go after republican election laws.
How to get literal bloodbath.
Just imagine if that goose-stepping fascist had made it onto the SC.
If he did nothing else good in his entire political career, McConnell helped the nation dodge a bullet with that one.
naw - he'd be no worse than ketanji or ruthBG or any dem appointed judge... totally predictably partisan in his jurisprudence
No need for Trump to tone it down since I'm pretty sure most future "elections" will be just like the last. In other words fake just like in Russia. Democracy for appearances sake only.
Also, it doesn't matter if he tones things down or not. His political enemies on the left will just lie about it. Remember the 'very fine people' baloney? Half the country still believes that. And it's a deliberate tactic used by the Dems.
https://twitter.com/SaveLibertyUS/status/1769366280560070932
Holy shit, she literally admitted how dems and media collude to smear their opponents.
And dumbasses like sarc and Lying Jeffy fall for it every time.
The current Democrats are indistinguishable from the Marxists of 60 years ago. They are reading out of the same playbook. Get out in front and accuse your opponents of doing whatever you are doing so that when you get accused it sounds false.
The dumbasses scream BOTH SIDES!
Do you still think I’m a Marxist?
“Get out in front and accuse your opponents of doing whatever you are doing so that when you get accused it sounds false.”
From my perspective both sides are doing that.
First, If you are being honest about your perspective you should be able to convince others of its validity. Merely stating it is not going to do that. If you sincerely believe both sides are preemptively accusing the other of their own tactics, you need to show your work. Where did Republicans have protesters arrested? Where did they ignore voting laws and engage in massive ballot harvesting?
Second, Marxism is not a side in a contest. A massive failure as an economic theory, it turned out to be an incredibly effective strategy to consolidate power through the promotion of class struggle. You can study the history of how it was used by the Soviets, the Chinese, the NorKs, Cuba, and throughout SE Asia and Central America. It led to the deaths of as many as 150 million citizens at the hands of their own governments in the last century. Mostly through starvation, but also 10s of millions through political persecution.
One of the most prominent faces of Marxism, Che Guevara is known to have shot a 12 year old boy in the head in front of his father because the father refused to kneel for his own execution.
America was far too resistant to Marxism at the national level, so they went after the institutions. The ACLU is a perfect example of an organization that was infiltrated, corrupted and then taken over by Marxists. You can watch how its priorities change over time.
Modern organizations like BLM don't even bother to disguise their roots in Marxism. Marxist infiltration of academia has made it mainstream.
Or 160 years ago.
Example:
Far-left MSNBC host Rachel Maddow works herself into a panic and claims Donald Trump will remain in office for life if elected in 2024.
https://twitter.com/CollinRugg/status/1763045727759204498
LOL, "for life" at this point is, what, another 5 years for him, max? And that's assuming the CIA doesn't suicide him within the first year.
Heh. And Biden is even more likely to be president for life if he is reelected. Especially if they keep juicing him up with uppers when he has to give a speech.
Rachel Maddow works herself into a panic and claims Donald Trump will remain in office for life if elected in 2024.
Rachel Maddow is SQRSLY?
I would've wagered a body part that the headline this morning would be "Bloodbath".
I would’ve wagered a body part
Trump already grabbed all the pussies.
Is that why it's getting harder to find any?
Are you talking born-with pussies, or the new age used-to-be-a-penis pussy?
or the new age used-to-be-a-penis pussy
Ain't nobody grabbing that.
He still knows how to get lots of free advertising.
To me Biden and the attorney in D.C. bragging about 1400 J6 convictions with a goal to get to 2000 is far more of an issue than using rhetorical flourishes.
Still no word on what hundreds of FBI agents were doing as the J6 protesters committed all these horrible insurrections 3 blocks from their HQ?
Were they all on assignment in Michigan?
Apparently, there was a plot against Frau Whitmer to orchestrate.
Does the FBI even have agents that would be trained and equipped to try and stop a riot? I honestly don’t know, but it wouldn’t surprise if they don’t.
No, but they have agents trained how to start riots.
I know that’s what he was implying.
You actually make a good point here. It had not really occurred to me to consider that their tactical response teams are not equipped to deploy non-lethal force. They are not so good at not killing people once they respond.
I have been suspicious for 4 years because they did nothing to assist the DC police despite the march literally passing in front of their giant HQ building where hundreds of armed agents report to work each day. They most definitely lied about not having agents in the crowd. A number of identified protesters who have not yet been prosecuted is particularly telling.
Can we at least conclude that the FBI should have responded if there was any actual threat to Congress? Therefore it is pretty clear they did not consider it a real threat even as the day unfolded. Otherwise they were derelict in their duties. There were reports of pipe bombs and arms being illegally carried on federal property which definitely falls within their jurisdiction.
If they’re just a bunch of G-men who aren’t equipped to deal with an out of control crowd I don’t know what they could of done. A bunch of guys in suits are probably not effective in a situation like that. Sending in heavily armed agents would be seen as a disproportionate response as well.
I suppose ask the DC Police, Capitol Police, or National Guard if there’s anything they can do to assist them.
The National Guard were offered and refused by both Pelosi and the mayor.
Sending in heavily armed agents would be seen as a disproportionate response as well.
So calling it an insurrection is a gross exaggeration? Because it would be ludicrous to think the FBI to sat on their hands 3 blocks away while Congress was under a true threat. Threat assessments are the kind of thing the FBI is supposed to be good at.
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul is ordering a review of how the state has been issuing cannabis dispensary licenses...
She can't understand why there's still a black market.
I bet if they have a couple more layers of review, things will all work out. Kind of how IL made sure racial equity was a priority in the bill, but it costs millions of dollars to nab a license. I was shocked to see it not be nearly as equitable as "intended".
I believe the issuing of licenses has been suspended.
https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/new-york-state-recreational-marijuana-cases-settled/
That's the problem when you start trying benefit certain groups. Other groups may sue.
Currently I'm seeing free market weed in NYC. Damn near a weed shop on every block. As a result, prices have dropped. These are not legal shops either. I think there are only 4 legal shops in Manhattan. That's how slow the licensing process has been. Growers were allowed to grow two years ago. Then wasn't able to sell their weed as expected to legal stores since the state screwed that up. The state screwed the growers.
In MO, there are multiples in every town of 5000. NY can cover it with 4. With planning that good, what could fail.
That's "market of color."
Market color is the most important thing.
"Trump was talking about tariffs and car manufacturing and loss of jobs—from the "bloodbath" comments strikes me as media malpractice. (More competent pundits might take the opportunity to point out how slapping big"
from the people that brought us "Trump called Nazis fine people"
"He said to drink bleach!"
I know people who still insist he said this verbatim even though it was actually an uncharacteristically lucid moment for Trump as he described an antiviral UV light treatment (but in his stupid Trump way that the lying media twist into a pretzel - it's not right, but the man also does himself no favors sometimes).
Kind of like the lunatic who drank fish tank cleaner (chloroquine) when Trump said *hydroxy*chloroquine looked promising. Media also tried to say he said to drink fish tank cleaner, I think, which as just as far removed from reality as the bleach lie.
He is right to call out the lying globalist scum but I don't see how it doesn't end in a bloodbath regardless of the result. Both sides would rather be dead than ruled by the other and Trump is (for once) 100% right that there is NOTHING left to lose if the globalists cheat again.
Though I am not a fan of gun grabbing climate cultists like him, RFK Jr might be able to hold off the USA from ripping itself apart for a few years, but I doubt that's going to happen.
Divided States of Iraq, coming to a municipality near you. For years I have predicted the USA will degrade into asymmetric terroristic warfare/lawfare and break apart around 2030. Depressingly, I was apparently somehow OVERLY optimistic in this view (and I'm basically... never optimistic).
We're kind of in that already, and the only question is how long it stays one-sided. Right now I'm only seeing a race to the bottom.
"Though I am not a fan of gun grabbing climate cultists like him, RFK Jr might be able to hold off the USA from ripping itself apart for a few years, but I doubt that’s going to happen."
I honestly think RFK Jr. would do a better job of dismantling the deep state than Trump, but yeah, his attraction to fashionable climate causes is the problem.
RFK, even if elected, would be added to the Kennedy assassination list before he could do anything.
Trump is (for once) 100% right that there is NOTHING left to lose if the globalists cheat again.
It's why these people hate Putin, they can't stand the competition.
The reprise of 1/6 already happened, didn't it?
When Trump said something that could kinda-sorta-maybe sound like something Hitler said, but in a different language and with a different meaning using different words referring to a different situation.
It was worse than a thousand 9/11s.
Noticed a CNN vid on YT. The headline had it that 'Trump used Hitler's words'. Pretty sure they were "if", "and" and "but".
Who are currently the most influential thinkers/intellectuals on the Left?
Ta-Nehisi Coates and Dylan Mulvaney.
Your first example would have fit with MR's list.
Whomever is doing the canceling today of yesterday's canclers.
Ibram Kendi and Norm Finkelstein, lately
Finkelstein?
I almost when to military school with him.
Son of a bitch!
Not Kamala?
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) wants the government to establish a 32-hour workweek...
The Or Hardly Working Act
The TCOBS Act: Taking care of business... sometimes.
Younger snowflakes have told us that work is oppressive, unfair, and optional.
The LBLF act (Let’s Be Like France)
So the guy that got kicked out of a hippy commune for being too lazy, then spent his entire life on the taxper dollar wants to work less?
He's living the American dream. Hasn't done shit, goto filthy rich while railing against the rich.
Filthy rich is overstating it a bit. He's done alright on book deals.
He's a multi-millionaire without ever having a real job. I'd consider that filthy rich. Do you think he pays his own bills, or is it more likely that he bills his campaign extensively like all the other crooks in DC?
I think he's worth like $3 million. That's more like a comfortable retirement savings than filthy rich these days. He's definitely on the low side of wealth for long term federal legislators.
And in Vermont no less, where $3 million doesn’t go all that far.
Still, having $3 million in the bank is pretty good for a communist that doesn’t believe in private ownership. Especially a person that’s never held a real job in their life.
I wonder if he invested in the same stocks that Hillary did?
Aiming for a 32-hour non-work week.
The new inflation reduction act (now with even more inflation)!
From the article:
We could easily produce 1950s levels of output only working a few hours per week. But that would mean 1950s levels of technology, 1950s levels of poverty, 1950s levels of housing, 1950s levels of air-conditioning, 1950s levels of food quality and variety — and it turns out nobody really wants that. So we keep working, and innovating, so we can be better off, not just as well off.
OTOH, I sure wouldn’t mind the 1950s levels of “being able to afford a house for a spouse and multiple children on a single salary”. Ultimately, this is a disingenuous paragraph in an otherwise sane article. I get why Millennials and Gen Z are pissed off at the Boomers and Gen X. It is absolutely not the same field of play as 50 – 70 years ago, in terms of the actual value of an hour’s labor.
High-end space dining is now a thing...
"Waiter, there's a face-hugger in my lobster paste."
I know, that's the garnish
A line for potatoes, borscht, and vodka in zero-Gs doesn't make it any more appealing.
The Irish Government intends to use new redefined "hate speech" law to suppress dissent. Similar actions by governments all over the West to ban "far right" ideas instead of using reason persuading their people that their policies are correct.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gm4ITjSRE8M&lc=UgyPDoqW0tGkowGJXil4AaABAg
"We are governed, in virtually every Western country, by an elite, by a governing class, that is addicted to nonsense. From Net Zero, to open borders, to the hollowing out of the democracy be it by increasingly allowing international institutions and courts to make decisions about policy."
"Far Right" ideas including saying things like "we need a police department", "criminals should go to jail", and "white people can take pride in their home and nations". It would be bad enough if they actually suppressed extremist positions and actual calls to violence. That would be a stupid and misguided policy but could at least claim to mean well. That is not what they are doing. This has nothing to do with extremist "far right" anything. This is about criminalizing any dissent no matter how reasonable.
Exactly, they disparage any dissent as far right extremism so as to disingenuously discredit it and to give an excuse to violate free speech principles to criminalize it.
It is weird. If I see someone walk around with a MAGA sign, or a Bluelivesmatter sign, or a "men arent women" sign, itll be labeled far right extremism...
But when a bunch of Antifa/BLM folks literally take over a city block and burn, rape, and murder people somehow that isn't "left wing extremism" or frankly terrorism.
The world should be thanking Elon daily for spending $44B on Twitter. Imagine what it would look like without X still being pretty free-wheeling. The same people doing this are the same ones that wanted Substack gone because of all the Nazis they couldn't find.
"Imagine what it would look like without X still being pretty free-wheeling. "
It would certainly be pretty one-sided, more so than what it was like in the last election...but I sort of want him to sell it off so we can get tons of journalists saying "Twitter, formerly X, formerly Twitter."
I thought the journalists were all on Mastadon now that blue checks cost money.
Sorry, wrong acronym.
Forget who it was, but someone was showing on Twitter how often even black rioters are labeled as white by the federal agencies.
There is a theater in town with a large Black Lives Matter sign over the bar in the lobby.
I refer to them as racists, and tell people I have decided not to frequent racist establishments. But for some reason, even though an awful lot of people know BLM is basically was giant, racist, grifting organization, they get really uncomfortable at someone pointing that out.
It's still ingrained. But the BLM flag is like wearing a hood and burning a cross to me. It tells me you're living in the past and supporting a pretty vile cause.
' instead of using reason persuading their people that their policies are correct'
Hey, how can we possible have democracy if people are allowed to choose their own ideas?
Yeah, I've noticed that any liberalized country showing resistance against the homosexual diversity state is a "backsliding democracy" these days.
People use the term "bloodbath" metaphorically all of the time. This isn't a case of Trump being imprecise with his language. This is a case of the state media being morons and desperate to say something negative about Trump and change the topic. Trump was absolutely correct. Biden's EV mandates and mileage requirements will be a bloodbath for the US auto industry.
It is a case of selective outrage.
I do not think they are being stupid. They will criticize metaphors like what Trump used by people they do not like. They will ignore or even praise similar language by politicians that they favor. The only stupidity is that they think the public will not notice.
A great example would be Bribem's SOTU speech which every leftist "journalist " described as "fiery ." A similar speech by Trump would have been described as "dark" or "ominous " at best.
The speech where he accused his political rival party as threats to democracy and stated they can't gain power, with them sitting right there and no on batted an eye.
It was an example of purposefully leaving out context to paint it in the worst possible way.
Liz is correct, absolute malpractice. Lying scum
And the only rational counterclaim one could make is ignorance, which isn't much better. You'd have to get a lobotomy to be that ignorant.
Trust the experts.
The Kremlin stage-managed Russia's presidential vote over the weekend...
Get a load of the election deniers over that the NYTimes.
Duranty is rolling over in his grave.
Laughing
Dem AGs continue to go after pregnancy centers.
https://justthenews.com/nation/states/center-square/mayes-issues-consumer-alert-crisis-pregnancy-centers-republicans-want
Because providing post-partum care somehow restricts abortion if you have the morals of devils.
Screenwriters *really* don't like it when characters have access to cellphones.
And yet The X-Files thrived on it.
Yet, they will constantly rely on absurd magical work arounds that go against the premises of the world the film inhabits.
Star Trek invented the cell phone!
Pffft. Yeah, flip phones.
Without flip phones we wouldn't have had The Wire.
Sort of - - - -
They did not allow private stuff on any ST; communicator transmissions were open, and all were monitored by "the computer".
So exactly like cell phones.
VOIP has been a thing for quite some time now.
Screenwriters *really* don’t like it when characters have access to cellphones.
The last 3 movies I've seen featured scenes of people eating snacks purchased or attained from behind the counter in the vestibule or lobby...
https://newrepublic.com/article/179885/bloodbath-trump-auto-industry-media
CAR TALK
“Bloodbath”-Gate: Yes, Trump Meant the Auto Industry. At First, Anyway
The media may have taken the former president out of context this weekend, but adding it back does him no favors.
The above link well summarizes the Trumpian "slow walk" of not-quite-explicit, veiled threats, which we WILL see more of, as we approach the erections, and the Proud Boys are standing by!
I also see LOUD and EXTREME Trump threats to “specially protect” the USA auto industry. What if ALL of us workers in ALL USA industries get “special protection”, and we trade with NO ONE? Answer is, we ALL pay out the ass for EVERYTHING! Also, trade wars can lead to shooting wars! Where goods and services don’t pass through, boots and armies soon might! Economic interdependence militates against militaristic wars!
Using the term “bloodbath” is also piss-poor judgment on Trump’s part in the first place, in view of his many past veiled threats against judges, etc.
“And if Spermy Daniels doesn’t show up on time in the middle of the night, for my assorted short-notice goings-on and making of campaign porn videos… Handlers and flunkies take note… There will be a BLOODBATH!!!”
Hey, butt don’t worry, Dear Leader can NOT incite vile violence, in Trumpian parlance at least, ’cause He's got Absolute Immunity!
You shouldn’t be criticizing anyone’s word choices.
Sqrsly was blindly pushing the bloodbath narrative on the other thread. He is angry Liz called it out.
Who cares what that retard says?
I don't use my word choices to threaten ANYONE with violence! I don't even get CLOSE to doing that! And Trump has a LONG history of teasing the lines (playing footsie) on this shit! Recall when He offered to pay the legal bills of a political-violence thug at a Trump rally?
https://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/272822-trump-im-looking-into-paying-legal-fees-of-supporter-who/
Trump looking into paying legal fees in sucker punch incident
No. You guys have a long history of lying about what he said.
You know who does regularly threaten violence against the other side though?
Your withered puppet-king, Joe.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/blame-abc-news-finds-17-cases-invoking-trump/story?id=58912889
'No Blame?' ABC News finds 54 cases invoking 'Trump' in connection with violence, threats, alleged assaults.
https://www.axios.com/2022/05/02/trump-call-violence-presidency
The times Trump has advocated for violence
Mammary-Necrophiliac, Suicide-Lover, do You ever Perfectly research the udderly STUPID shit that You say? These kinds of things that I have found are VERY easy to find!
(Butt twatever disagrees with twat YOU already stink, is ALL LIES, all the time, right, right-wing wing-nut twit-twat?)
Well, thanks for providing two links that prove exactly what I just said, you retarded fuck.
Click on Shillsy links, anyone who doubts me.
No need; the spastic asshole has yet to back any of his bullshit claims.
I provided 2 (TWO) links. Did you read (let alone refute) ANY of the contents thereof?
Where are YOUR links, empty-headed homeless buffoon, AKA SmegmaLung?
Fuck off and die a slow painful death, spastic asshole.
SHOW US how shit's done, hypocritical punk!
Yes, you have provided some excellent examples of media distorting what Trump says.
How is the media supposed to know that Trump (that retarded, hot-headed, blathering old fool) means the opposite of what He says? Could many of them also be "trial balloons"? They are ONLY jokes, about Him becoming Our DickTator... Unless no one is brave enough to call Him on shit, and then he IS Our DickTator, Dear Leader! It wasn't just a trial balloon, joke, after all!!!
Did you even read your links? The first on is all other people blaming their bad actions on Trump because their lawyers told them to. The second lists some things that he has said that I am not a fan of (police should not be unnecessarily roughing people up or shooting people in retribution) but most of it is exactly the kind of distortion and taking out of context that people are talking about.
"Did you even read your links?"
I guarantee you he didn't, or if he did it was several years ago when he created his obsolete cut and paste jobs. One's from four years ago and the other is from two.
The man is little better than a spam bot from 15 years ago.
Hitler finished up doing all of his Perfectly Evil shit 79 years ago, so ALL of that shit is SOOOOOO old and stale! Human nature has TOTES changed since then, and we can learn NOTHING from twat Shitler did 79 and more years ago! Same with way-old shit that Trump did and said!
-Mammary-Farter-Fuhrer WISDOM here, folks!!!
(PS, when SOME folks actually LISTEN to Trump's pro-political-violence, hot-headed talk, and commit violence, then that's ALL on THEM, 'cause they didn't REALIZE Trump was "just joking", even when Trump offers to pay their legal bills! And-or pardon them! Besides, Trump's heart is obviously in the RIGHT place!)
Absurdum reductio Hitlerum.
Sqrlsy can't provide current links because 75 years ago there was Hitler.
Twat Trump did 3 days ago or 3 or 30 years ago!!?!?
SOOOO stale!!! 'Cause Dear Leader is now a NEW SOVIET MAN!!!! Mammary-Farter-Fuhrer SAID so!!!
Yes, I already knew that You have a Perfectly Fossilized reality-denying so-called "Mind".
Doesn't just threaten. Brags about locking them up.
Trump never said he was going to create a bloodbath. He said Biden’s policies will create an economic bloodbath for the auto industry and autoworkers.
There was zero wrong with what he said or how he used it, and he was a hell of a lot less inflammatory than Joe’s speeches, but you don't care about that because you're tribalist vermin.
Odor of mendacity, bloodbaths and now the retarded squirrel is here to fling some spermy around.
This place is gross today.
USSC about to begin biggest censorship case in recent memory. Case involves government coercion to remove information related to covid.
https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/supreme-court-biden-administration-covid-speech-65eaaa36?mod=hp_lista_pos1
Taibbi goes into how the liberal media is trying to disparage the claims of censorship and attempt to influence the court.
War Over Disinformation.”
.
The Times implies both the Twitter Files reports and my congressional testimony with Michael Shellenberger were strongly influenced by former Trump administration official Mike Benz, whose profile occupies much of the text. Benz is described as a purveyor of “conspiracy theories, like the one about the Pentagon’s use of Taylor Swift,” that are “talking points for many Republicans.” They quote Shellenberger as saying meeting Benz was the “Aha moment,” in our coverage, and the entire premise of the piece is that Benz and other “Trump allies” pushed Michael, me, and the rest of the Twitter Files reporters into aiding a “counteroffensive” in the war against disinformation, helping keep social media a home for “antidemocratic tactics.”
https://www.racket.news/p/on-todays-absurd-new-york-times-hit
"Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) wants the government to establish a 32-hour workweek"
Gotta love American "socialists." They pretend to fight for junk like this that will obviously go nowhere.
Then on the really important issues, they side with the billionaires they claim to hate. They want the same guy in the White House that billionaires want. And they demand an immigration policy closer to Charles Koch's gimme cheap labor! vision.
(Yes I'm aware pre-sellout Bernie was honest enough to admit open borders is a pro-billionaire, anti-worker policy.)
"Then on the really important issues, they side with the billionaires they claim to hate. "
That's how you get 3 mansions on a congressman salary.
BloodBath? No mystery.
If Donnie loses again he wants war. He wants every redneck in America to gun up and shoot everyone that doesn't look like them.
Poor buttplug.
Apparently he bought into it hook line and sinker, like a good Morning Joe fan
He didn’t buy anything, which is what makes his use of it even more egregious. At least with Sarcasmic you know he was tricked.
Axis of Evil (Russia, Saudis, Trump) conspire to inflate gasoline prices ahead of election:
Opec+ members extend production cuts in bid to boost oil price
https://www.ft.com/content/d6236674-75e5-4893-889a-b412501891fa
The largest US refinery in Port Arthur TX will shut down “for maintenance” this fall. Trump facilitated the sale of the American asset to the criminal Saudi regime.
Saudi Arabia Now Controls the Largest Oil Refinery in North America
The move is a huge boon to Aramco before a big IPO, experts say.
By Robbie Gramer, a diplomacy and national security reporter at Foreign Policy.
A pedophile Soros simp talking about axis of evil.
Absolutely nobody on this earth cares about what you think.
“Opec+ members extend production cuts in bid to boost oil price”
OH NO!
What the fuck is your point? OPEC has tried to keep oil prices high since the seventies. It's the whole reason it exists. Is right now somehow any different than any other day in the last fifty years?
Stupid fuck. No wonder Open Society canned you.
turd lies. That's not a surprise to anyone who reads his constant stream of bullshit.
But it's becoming obvious that as Misek is too stupid to understand the concepts of "evidence" or "relevance", the concept of "honesty" is simply beyond turd's ken.
Lol. Defends Bidens wars. Imagines the non war president starting wars. Never change dumbass.
Yeah, I'm pro-Israel and anti-Soviet. That must really piss you off that we are selling arms against Vlad's interests.
"anti-Soviet"
You must have been furious when Obama dismissed Romney's warning about Russia with a pre-packaged zinger.
LOL j/k!
That was 2012. Your Democrat handlers hadn't programmed you to hate Russia yet. That wouldn't come until 2016, when they needed an excuse for Hillary's humiliating defeat to a hand-picked opponent. 🙂
Buttplug was cool with the reset button until the Hillary campaign needed a smear operation.
It’s frankly amazing that Hillary lost because of ‘Russian interference’ when she was in the photo op with the stupid reset button. Grinning like an idiot, I might add.
If anything they said regarding the matter was true (it wasn’t) then it indicates that Hillary was unelectable due to her obvious idiocy since she was the architect of her own failure.
I mean, it’s truly a wonder to watch such a massive self own on the national stage. There was no way out of that hole, and it was by and large a completely unforced error in judgement no matter what angle or spin you might try to put on it.
I had an exchange not long ago with a commenter who tried to spin Hillary's loss as understandable. Not at all embarrassing. Because of "pendulum theory."
You know, the idea that it's difficult for the same party to win 3 consecutive Presidential elections, since voters get tired of one party's excesses after 8 years - and the "pendulum swings back"? She (I think the commenter was "she") said Hillary was at such a disadvantage in 2016 because of Obama winning in 2012 and 2008, that losing to Trump was nothing to be ashamed of.
I pointed out that, even if pendulum theory is valid, Hillary still lost to a hand-picked opponent. Someone with sky-high disapproval ratings. And zero relevant political or military experience.
Rationalization is one hell of a drug. Whomever it was, it would be worth asking them why she didn't run against Trump instead of Biden last time around. Or, hell, this time around.
There have been plenty of politicians that run for President time and time again but get nowhere. Hillary is just one more of them for the pile. Fortunately, even Nixon was more electable than Hillary.
The confirms he supports wars despite his first post criticism.
God damn. What a dumb clown.
I support the self-defense of Israel and Ukraine. WTF is wrong with you?
US isn't defending itself in Ukraine retard. You support the world wide continuation of a war. A war that could have ended over 2 years ago. You applaud wars. Lol.
US isn’t defending itself in Ukraine retard.
Of course not. We don't have troops there.
You wingnuts don't get off the hook for Iraq. It's stuck to your shoe like dogshit. You defended Dumbya for eight years just like you defend Donnie now.
turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
"Of course not. We don’t have troops there."
You certainly want to change that, don't you, warmongering fuck.
"You wingnuts don’t get off the hook for Iraq."
That was you guys, you stupid neocon fuck.
Iraq was a uniparty decision, both of them had a hand in that. You can tell a partisan if they try to blame the 2001 garbage on either party. I was an adult then, it was both of them that gleefully went to war over 9/11 and just about the entire country was on board with it.
Iraq was on the Bushpigs, you idiot. Cheney fabricated intelligence to con the Senate into the war.
turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a TDS-addled lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
Iraq was supported by both parties, including your masters Hillary and Joe.
Nice try shrike.
Iraq was on the Bushpigs, you idiot.
The only Bushpig here is Buttplug.
Cheney fabricated intelligence to con the Senate into the war.
“Poor little Joe was tricked into pushing the war as the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.”
Also, is that the same Dick Cheney you lovingly quote as the bastion of principled conservatism against Trump?
It’s really weird how you’re cheerleading for the leaders of the Iraq war debacle, but also using it to attack supporters of one of the few guys who spoke out against it.
I suppose stupidity like that is why Open Society canned you.
turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
The TDS-addled turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
Lol. “Selling arms”.
Why does it cost us 60 billion every few months to sell arms?
We need a new salesman in chief.
He doesn’t actually mean what he says. He’s just a funny old man using colloquialisms. So when he says immigrants are vermin that are poisoning the blood of the nation, he’s really just using common phrases. Or when he says there’s going to be a bloodbath if he loses, he’s really just being figurative. See? He isn’t stirring hatred against immigrants and people who don’t vote for him. Only a deranged person thinks he actually means what he actually says.
1/10. Could have added a few more liberal narratives to that.
Amazing you even got the bloodbath quote wrong despite the roundup article writing about it.
I’m surprised he didn’t try to slide “Nazi’s are good people” in there too.
turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of TDS-addled lefty shit and a pederast besides.
" He wants every redneck in America to gun up and shoot everyone that doesn’t look like them."
He wanted that in 2020. He got unarmed, face painted clowns in bison horn hats instead.
lol
And a whole passel of TDS-addled steaming piles of shit like you.
Sarc supporting the anti-semite who has a favorite Nazi and admits it.
You are operating on a new level of simplistic stupidity and weak partisan tripe, aren't you?
He's a Nazi loving anti-semite, so your description goes without saying.
Influential thinkers on the left? Pedofile, ibrim 10 kendi, Kathleen Kennedy...
Holy shit, the actual list on there...
1 Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC)
2 Kimberlé Crenshaw
3 Ibram X Kendi
4 Robin Deangelo
5 Mariame Kaba
6 Bhaskar Sunkara
...Number fucking 1 is a braindead retard. Number 2 is one of the CRT founders, and 3-4 are straight up race hustlers bases on #2's work. Race hustlers who cant stand up to literally any academic scrutiny and refuse any sort of debate to defend their work.
I cant imagine making this list and not being like "fuck we are in trouble"
The Reason commenter with "radical individualist" in his name probably appreciates the emphasis on race-obsessed thinkers.
Skin color is the most important thing!
Marxist power is the most important thing. Skin color is just a tactic.
Everything Is So Terrible And Unfair!!!
I don’t know if that fits here, but there it is.
Can you image a debate between Thomas Sowell and ibrim 10 kendi?
It would be a bloodbath
Because Kendi would notice Sowell is in his 90s and sucker punch him from behind when he thinks nobody is looking.
Coleman Hughes has challenged Kendi multiple times to debate and offered some pretty sweet deals to him, and Kendi wont come near him.
Hughes is of course a Sowell guy. He as well as many other actual academics have torn Kendi and Deangelo (and Hannah-Jones) to shreds, and none of them will ever actually debate their work with anyone, as they know its just propaganda.
This list explains why they are loathe to use a younger D to replace Biden.
I've been hammering that point for a few years now. The reason why the positively ancient portion of the Democrat party is the only one they put forward is because the 'younger' group of Democrats are frankly unelectable to President...even among most Democrats.
The same could be said of plenty of 'young' Republicans too, I suppose, but there are reasonably electable people among them...although perhaps not in the era of Trump.
Dissonant voices on the right tend to be more reasonable than the party, dissonant voices on the left tend to be way more unhinged than the party. There are exceptions to that, of course, but as a general rule it works.
I don't hear any massive support of terrorist organizations from young republicans. Most of the hard left issues that a lot of the D base hold so dear are quite frankly childish and ridiculous.
The D base and hard left are at odds and hate each other.
Biden is hated by progressives because he campaigned against St Bernie's Medicare For All plan - which then caused the D base to rally around him and defeat Bernie handily.
Biden is also pro-Israel and that alienates the Progs.
fuck Bernie and all the Progs.
turd certainly is dishonest, but he’s got a heaping helping of stupid to go with his dishonesty. Stupid, lying, despicable steaming pile of lefty shit and proud to be!
The "that'll be the least of it" part sure is weird,
And he referred to illegal immigrants as "animals" in his speech, which doesn't tell us anything new about what Trump believes, but sure isn't aligned with what I value.
Liz Wolfe, showing us how to disagree with Donald Trump without noticing that he's an amoral sociopath. Anyway, I'm sure glad to know that Liz thinks that illegal immigrants are human beings. Now how about Palestinians?
"Now how about Palestinians?"
If it walks, talks, kills anyone on sight that isn't fully aligned with their own race and worldview, cant go any length of time without starting war or coups, and quacks like a duck, then...
No, he referred to the guy who murdered that girl in Georgia as an animal, which is what he is. How about not lying? If Trump is such a bad guy, why do you have to lie to make your case? Granted, lying is likely something you just do as second nature. Still, maybe you could make an honest case by accident or something.
Yes, Palestinians are human beings! They are human beings who are used as human shields for Hamas and Hezbollah! And according to Islam, they are only mindless sheeple whose only purpose in life is to serve a bloodthirsty, psychotic Allah!
Dummy!
And he referred to illegal immigrants as “animals” in his speech, which doesn’t tell us anything new about what Trump believes
Except he didn't. He specifically called a narcotraficante gang “animals”, which tells us everything about what you believe.
Gee, imagine! One more lying TDS-addled shit pile!
Has China really even started building a plant in Mexico? It seems that building the plant is just talk at this point. If Trump were elected, he would likely not even be President when the plant starts producing. So, he is unlikely to do anything about the plant nor is President Biden.
Parody... you would have spent less time doing a quick search for your answer rather than proving your ignorance.
https://thechinaproject.com/2023/07/03/chinese-auto-firms-follow-tesla-to-mexico/
Eitherway Trump renegotiated NAFTA 2.0 so either he did a horrible job or his claims aren't accurate.
Or, as in the case of the Paris bullshit, droolin’ Joe issued an EO.
NAFTA covered 3 countries. Didn't include China.
And I dont like large unilateral trade agreements anyways as they are negotiated tariffs and regulations over large swaths of industry. NAFTA wasn't actually free trade.
Yes, but he is talking about Chinese owned autos being built in Mexico. So either they don't qualify for NAFTA's low/no tarriffs which means no big deal big deal since China already has 25% tarriff on autos from both Trump and Biden tariffs or it does qualify for NAFTA and Donald negotiated that deal.
So Trump's crystal ball didn't predict Chinese building cars in Mexico? For SHAME!
In all fairness, that wasn't a hard thing to predict and given that Trump is a businessman himself who has evaded all kinds of idiot laws this would seem to be a no brainer.
Of course, Trump didn't write the deal himself he just wanted the credit from it. He may not be a long time politician, but there isn't all that much difference between a used car salesman and a congressman either.
I actually think his "bloodbath" claim is inaccurate, not that he negotiated poorly. Large part of NAFTA defines these limits to foreign* ownership, parts originating from foreign* countries, etc... but I could be wrong.
*not Mexico, Canada or USA.
You are correct, which is why manufacturers are careful (generally) not to exceed those requirements.
I can't say that about cars in particular, but I know for a fact it's a stipulation for certain other products.
Well, the article you provided is not talking about cars but rather parts manufacturing. There is talk of BYD, the Chinese Car Company, locating a factory in Mexico but that talk only started in February of 2024. So, I will standby my comment that neither Trump nor Biden will likely be President when Mexican made Chinese cars actually start coming to the US. As for car parts, some are already made in Mexico and current trade agreements likely will not differentiate between the factory owners, but rather only address country of origin.
Enjoy the actual list:
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Kimberlé Crenshaw
Ibram X. Kendi
Robin DiAngelo
Mariame Kaba
Bhaskar Sunkara
I see Mike did it before and better!
Intellectual giants. If the IC wasn't actually running the show, the Democrats would be fucked.
Seriously, imagine if someone on the right was making a list and the best they came up with was Matt Gaetz, someone from the daily wire, alex jones, and LibsofTiktok.
Its legit embarassing that what they consider to be intellectuals are glorified activist bomb-throwers with degrees in victim studies who refuse to debate anyone that disagrees with them
Who are "they"? Serious question. That list lacks any gravitas.
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a TDS-addled lying pile of lefty shit.
Claude 3 is "they." I would love if MR had a large enough readership that some people would propose their list and we can laugh at that one, too.
"Who are “they”? Serious question."
Asking this question is such a tell, it should be studied by colleges.
"it should be studied by colleges."
It doesn't need to be, this tactic is taught and engrained into students by the colleges currently
We all need a healthy dose of Alex Jones every once in a while. It's good for you.
AOC is hot. That ass is prime.
You Denny Hastert conservatives won't understand.
She's too old for you.
A few years back you posted kiddy porn to this site, and your initial handle was banned. The link below details all the evidence surrounding that ban. A decent person would honor that ban and stay away from Reason. Instead you keep showing up, acting as if all people should just be ok with a kiddy-porn-posting asshole hanging around. Since I cannot get you to stay away, the only thing I can do is post this boilerplate.
https://reason.com/2022/08/06/biden-comforts-the-comfortable/?comments=true#comment-9635836
If I was a guy who had actually posted kiddie pron links here in the comments and got banned, I would totally avoid referencing Hastert, Clinton, or Anthony Weiner here in the comments, but Harvey Weinstein's Buttplug isn't smart enough for that.
turd, the TDS-addled ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
Last time you used hastert Republicans the AP got sued for the story. Yet you persist.
"AOC is hot."
Politics is Hollywood for ugly people.
Kristi Noem is hotter than her. And she is just above average.
Spend enough time inside the Beltway and you get the political equivalent of beer googles.
The "that'll be the least of it" part sure is weird, but to totally remove the context—Trump was talking about tariffs and car manufacturing and loss of jobs—from the "bloodbath" comments strikes me as media malpractice.
The problem with taking him to only mean something about economics or the auto industry is how often his says things like that. He wanted his followers to "peacefully and patriotically" march to the Capitol to protest, but he also said, "If you don't fight like hell you're not going to have a country anymore." He talks out of both sides of his mouth so often that you might think he has two mouths.
You are the idiot the liberal media is hoping reads their narratives.
The argument doesn't even make any internal sense. Trump said a "bloodbath in the auto industry". So, what literal blood bath is he supposed to be calling for here? By its own terms, the media's interpretation is that he is calling for the death of his own supporters. It is just astounding how stupid these people are.
Not so much stupid as dishonest.
And a result of an un-checked case of TDS; Jason is a slimy pile of shit.
Are you so stupid you don't understand what he meant or so out of touch with reality that you think no one else but you understand. There is literally nothing wrong with what he said. The term "bloodbath" is used metaphorically all of the time. There is zero doubt about what he meant. Claiming that there is makes you look really stupid.
That's not an 'appearance'.
“If you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore.”
We didn't fight hard enough apparently.
This country is fine. The notion the USA is only great when we have Fatass Donnie as POTUS is just ridiculous.
turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit, an asshole and a pederast besides.
This country is fine.
Then what's with all the loose talk about "the soul of the nation" and "saving democracy"?
LOL, yep:
"Biden: The Obama Years and the Battle for the Soul of America"
This is why the whole attempts by the left to deflect from the culture war are so disingenuous. They're fully invested in controlling the nation's culture from stem to stern, and don't want the right fighting for their piece of it. Neither does the neocon faction, for that matter.
This country is fine.
Fine for the leftists currently in control.
Weaponized DOJ
Unfettered illegal immigration
$34.5T in debt
^This steaming pile of lefty shit support murder of the unarmed as a preventative for, well, he's not quite sure:
JasonT20
February.6.2022 at 6:02 pm
“How many officers were there to stop Ashlee Babbitt and the dozens of people behind her from getting into the legislative chamber to do who knows what?...”
Fuck off and die, asshole.
"He wanted his followers to “peacefully and patriotically” march to the Capitol to protest, but he also said, “If you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore.”"
Why nobody in politics has ever said you need to fight.
Is anyone really going to claim that Trump does not use apocalyptic language constantly? That he isn't always framing things in terms of him winning or the country going to hell worse than anything we've ever seen?
Trump is a textbook demagogue. He uses that kind of language so often with the specific hope that most loyal followers really will do anything to support him. There has never been a political figure since at least FDR with anything close to the kind of tight control over his own party that Trump has. His daughter-in-law is co-chair of the RNC now, for Christ's sake. Good luck seeing any of its money going to help down-ballot Republicans get elected.
I'm sure your concern for the innerworkings of the Republican party are sincere.
We're you concerned that the previous chairwoman of the RNC, Ronna McDaniel is the niece of the previous Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney?
*Were not We're
I’m sure your concern for the innerworkings of the Republican party are sincere.
They are sincere. I registered Republican for more than 20 years until Trump. I only voted for Republicans for President this century before Trump. Of course I was a "RINO", as I really picked one party so that I didn't have to sit out primaries in my state. See how many presidential elections a party can win without voters in the middle, though. I also want more than one functioning political party that values democratic ideals. I don't relish having to choose between an 81 year old Democrat and a 77 year old demagogue, but the most overwhelming deal-breaker for me in any election is going to be if a candidate won't accept losing.
You all can vote for a President for Life that would never accept any loss if you want to, but I prefer to be able to vote someone out if I change my mind about them.
You all can vote for a President for Life that would never accept any loss if you want to
This sounds deranged. Trump has a demonstrable history of peacefully transferring power. Pelosi and Milley conspired to create the narrative that anything else was ever considered.
81 year old Democrat and a 77 year old demagogue
Biden isn’t a demagogue?
President for Life
You and others like you claimed the same thing would happen before Trump was elected in 2016. I’m certainly biased, but I work to mitigate that as much as possible, to varying levels of success. But you are showing your bias here, yourself, in the way you frame things. This accusation seems unfounded when Trump did walk away from the White House in 2021.
Your complaint that I responded to was that Trump put in a family member as RNC (co)chair. Romney did the same thing. Also, the Republican party had to approve the appointment–Trump didn’t just declare it and it was done.
You didn’t answer my question as to whether you were vocally condemning it when it was Ronna McDaniel. I suspect you didn’t care with that one (but I don’t know you, so maybe?).
I certainly have worries about what Trump would and would not do in a 2nd term. The alternative of a 2nd Biden term or a Kamala/Newsom/M. Obama term seems far more dangerous to me, at least.
*edited to fix the italicized text
Just complete and total gaslighting attempt on J20's part
Chuck P wrote,
This [my alluding to Trump as "President for Life"] sounds deranged. Trump has a demonstrable history of peacefully transferring power. Pelosi and Milley conspired to create the narrative that anything else was ever considered.
Jefferson Paul wrote,
This accusation seems unfounded when Trump did walk away from the White House in 2021.
Walk away? Maybe stormed away after acting like a child sent to his room.
It is also quite offensive, frankly, to talk about the transfer of power as being "peaceful" after Jan.6, 2021.
Of course I think that political nepotism and dynasty building is a bad thing, no matter who it involves. It's kind of hard to think of someone less competent for the job of RNC co-chair than Eric Trump's wife, though.
BUT... she makes your 'hot' AOC look like a warmed over turd.
Again, nice to know nobody has used what you deem "apocalyptic" language before Trump.
Say, WAS Romney trying to enslave black folks?
Who said Romney was trying to enslave black folks? I didn't hear anyone say that in 2012.
Joe Biden, August 14, 2012, Romney will "put you all back in chains". Widely reported, still on websites of CBS, Reuters.
Joe Biden said it.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/joe-biden-put-yall-back-in-chains/
Thank you. I had forgotten about that. Now shall we count how often different politicians use that kind of language and see where Trump fits? Remember what I had asked:
Is anyone really going to claim that Trump does not use apocalyptic language constantly? That he isn’t always framing things in terms of him winning or the country going to hell worse than anything we’ve ever seen?
It isn't just a matter of fearmongering. It is conditioning his audience to see things in such dire terms that anything he says or does that might be objectionable has to be excused or horrible things will happen. Of course, it's also all "fake news" anyway whenever he supposedly does something wrong. We all know that he is above reproach.
Hyperbolic language is not the issue. The issue is that the majority of the press apologizes for one side while flaming the other.
Biden gets pages of provided context in apology for "back in chains" and "you aint black" while Trump gets accused of calling for a bloodbath and calling immigrants animals, which are not even close to the truth.
Hyperbolic language is not the issue. The issue is that the majority of the press apologizes for one side while flaming the other.
I agree that media outlets shouldn’t play favorites and should treat all politicians the same. The problem is that so many people like it when media outlets paint the other side as bad or at least worse than their side. And if that wasn’t just as true for voters on all sides, there wouldn’t be both ‘liberal’ media outlets and ‘conservative’ media outlets.
[edit: To clarify, treating all politicians the same means, to me, treating them all with the same level of skepticism, not that there needs to be some kind of balancing act, like "we showed Democrats in a bad light today, so we have to show Republicans in a bad light tomorrow."
Yeah, Biden said that. Verbatim.
that's not his mouth
HUNTER BIDEN controversy near conclusion:
Hunter Biden trial on federal gun charges set for June 3
https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/13/politics/hunter-biden/index.html
Peanuts elated.
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
Another day, another TDS-shits parade.
Fixed.
Very common term in reference to poor economic results.
Nothing to see here, just the usual dishonest propaganda media doing their old tricks.
Ya, and plenty of MSM networks like ill use CNBC for example, would call a really bad day in the stock market a bloodbath.
Truly, straight up lying and propaganda.
I have gone from really having no interest in anything Trump to actively rooting for the guy. Everyone involved in the system is showing themselves to be so openly corrupt, im writing 2024 off as "im in it for the schadenfreude".
I think they assassinate him if he looks like he has any chance. No way they let him walk back into office
Defiant L's is having an absolute field day with this one.
https://twitter.com/DefiantLs/status/1769609883899367540/photo/1
https://twitter.com/DefiantLs/status/1769582088309641464/photo/1
The hypocrisy isn’t accidental. The hypocrisy is what defines them.
Joe makes real threats in the state of the union, but that's just being spirited and it’s Trump saying Joe’s policies will cause a bloodbath that’s the problem.
Uh oh, is Welchie boy aware the media are not on board with calling for blood baths?
Didn't he call for a conservative "red wedding?"
I would like to hear him explain how that metaphor works and means anything other than an actual blood bath
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/17/us/politics/trump-disinformation-2024-social-media.html
If you think hate journalists, you still dont hate them enough.
I hate them enough to not even bother at an attempt around their paywall.
Yay fweedom!
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/why-oregon-s-drug-decriminalization-failed/ar-BB1k2myT
"Why Oregon’s Drug Decriminalization Failed"
It failed for the same reason every other left-wing 3rd world shithole city's policies fail. Because pie-in-the-sky, its going to be all upside, no downsides/trade-offs, hair brained, poorly thought out policies based on magical thinking universally end the same way: you eventually face the consequences, both predictable and unintended, that will inevitably come.
See also:
- sanctuary cities / migrant crisis
- decriminalizing everything
- allowing riots for 'racial justice'
the 19th amendment ...
It doesn’t help when they’re too lazy to actually just remove something from the offense book or decide to tax the ever loving shit out of it, this leaving the black market in place,
I agree. And also combining it with de-facto decriminalization of property crimes, violence, and theft.
>>"Who are currently the most influential thinkers/intellectuals on the Left?"
... pending
>>National Review editors tearing the idea apart.
harumph! harumph! (also, The Editors need editors 🙂 )
>>President Vladimir V. Putin’s support is overwhelming and unshakable, despite or even because of his war against Ukraine,” reports The New York Times’ …
Walter Duranty, III
"the [Hamas-controlled Gazan] health ministry said"
Six months of fighting and the [Israeli-controlled] IDF hasn't even been wrest control of the [[Iranian-backed] Hamas-controlled Gazan] health ministry?
Damn Joooooze, right, Nazi shit?
So which is it? Are they using a sledgehammer to kill a gnat, and lots of of poor Palestinians getting murdered over nothing? Or is Israel totally getting pwned by the brave Hamas freedom fighters?
It seems to be both. A frustrated [Jew-controlled] IDF is unable to free hostages, stop [Iranian-backed] militant rocket attacks so easier victims are targeted instead - children, mothers, doctors, nurses, ambulance drivers, journalists, athletes, teachers, poets, the elderly, the infirm - those who are unable to fight back.
"poets" lmao. stop trolling
A Hamas poet. Nothing of value lost.
I still think it's both.
You don't 'think' at all, asshole:
mtrueman|8.30.17 @ 1:42PM|#
"Spouting nonsense is an end in itself."
Poets and artists like Mao and hitler
Hitler was more of actor than a poet or literary figure. Stalin is a better choice. He was the only published poet (at the age of 17) among the top bolsheviks, a prodigious editor, and multilingual, to boot. Stalin also overturned Lenin's ban on the publication of Dostoevsky's work, intervened to spare the lives of artists like Bulgakov and Shostakovitch, inaugurated Russia's first Korean language newspaper, and ethnically cleansed large swaths of the Soviet Union of socialists and Islamists.
In his biography of Stalin, Simon Sebag Montefiore notes that the poems in Iveria "were widely read and much admired. They became minor Georgian classics, to be published in anthologies and memorised by schoolchildren until the 1970s (and not as part of Stalin's cult; they were usually published as 'Anonymous')." Montefiore adds that "their romantic imagery was derivative but their beauty lay in the delicacy and purity of rhyme and language"
Hitler was a painter
I was mocking you thought that because someone describes themselves as a poet or artist doesn't mean they aren't monsters
"Hitler was a painter"
It's interesting to note that Hitler owes what little career as an artist he enjoyed to a Jewish art dealer and a Jewish collaborator/room mate. Unlike Mao and Stalin, Hitler was never known as a poet.
Samuel Morgenstern, an Austrian businessman and a business partner of the young Hitler in his Vienna period, bought many of Hitler's paintings. According to Morgenstern, Hitler came to him for the first time at the beginning of the 1910s, either in 1911 or in 1912. When Hitler came to Morgenstern's glazier store for the first time, he offered Morgenstern three of his paintings. Morgenstern kept detailed records of his clientele, through which it was possible to locate the buyers of Hitler's paintings. It was found that the majority of the buyers were Jewish. An important client of Morgenstern, a lawyer by the name of Josef Feingold, bought a series of paintings by Hitler depicting old Vienna.
This lends credence to my theory that Hitler's anti-semitism was little more than a pose. Like Trump, realizing his promises that Mexico will pay for a wall would get the biggest response from the crowds, Hitler found the same thing with his scapegoating the Jews. The difference being that in power Trump surrounded himself with minions who knew not to take the wall business seriously while Hitler made the opposite mistake.
FTFY:
This has been the case for at least the last 8 years when it comes to Trump, longer than that when it comes to any politician with the wrong letter after their name.
>>High-end space dining is now a thing (if you're willing to fork over half a million).
He cannot have ze duck!
>>His "bloodbath" comment in Vandalia, Ohio, on Saturday is no exception
didn't the media bloodbath us to death last week when LTrump laid off most of the RNC?
Still under reported story. Notably "libertarian" Jacob Sullum hasn't noticed.
https://www.declassified.live/p/arbitrary-enforcement-of-federal
“Arbitrary Enforcement” Indeed
The brazen hypocrisy is not lost on Team Trump or Judge Cannon as Hur represented the elephant in the room during the March 14 hearing. “This case stands alone as applied to President Donald Trump,” Emil Bove, one of Trump’s defense attorneys, said at the onset.
Cannon repeatedly asked both sides for examples of criminal prosecution for “other officials who did the same.” She questioned the “arbitrary enforcement” of the espionage statute, forcing the government to admit that no other former president or vice president has faced criminal prosecution for keeping similar documents and failing to return them. “This speaks to the arbitrary enforcement…featuring in this case,” Cannon told Bratt.
Cannon also pushed back on claims Trump should have expected to face prosecution for storing classified files. Once again noting no former president or vice president—Mike Pence also discovered classified records after Trump was indicted in 2023—has been charged, Cannon suggested it was fair for Trump to expect the same treatment since “no historical precedent” is on the books. “Given that landscape,” Cannon continued, Trump could argue he has been unfairly targeted."
The story so far is that judge Cannon denied, without prejudice, 2 motions to dismiss by Trump's lawyers. But she is now considering a motion to dismiss based on arbitrary enforcement and it looks like she's taking it very seriously.
Ancient Chinese secret: kill the rooster, frighten the monkey.
Justice? – You get justice in the next world, in this world you have the law.
— A Frolic of His Own, William Gaddis. Opening line.
Wolfe, I give you credit for looking up the context of the Trump 'bloodbath' commentary - but you still post 'Gazan Health Ministry' casualty counts as if they were gospel.
She has noted that their stats are questionable on a number of occasions.
she cuts it back to they don't need to be noted at all and we'll have gotten somewhere.
Later, Trump said, "If this election isn't won, I'm not sure that you'll ever have another election in this country," which strikes me (and others) as the more concerning soundbite than the one the media is seizing on.
Isn't this basically what the left says about Trump? IF he wins democracy is dead/he'll never leave willingly/blah blah blah?
Yeah, it's verbatim of what they've been saying. It's why you can't take anything these people say at face value. Even if they actually believe it, they'll blow their stack if their political enemies use the same tactics.
either millions of people believe the right is going to do what the left cries about while the left does exactly the thing ... or millions of people know the right isn't going to do the thing and the left is doing the thing and the millions don't care.
i don't think either one of them will leave voluntarily..... because i don't think either one of them is going to live another 4yrs.
seriously, how the fuck are we ending up with two people who are this fucking old?
"The Kremlin stage-managed Russia's presidential vote over the weekend to send a singular message at home and abroad: that President Vladimir V. Putin's support is overwhelming and unshakable, despite or even because of his war against Ukraine," reports The New York Times' Paul Sonne.
And now you can be confident that no matter what actually happened, this is NOT what happened.
The problem with the "anti-racist" liberals is that they think it's cool for a gay man to blow his load in another man's rectum. That kind of kills their credibility on everything else.
Have you tried it?
Rectum? Damn near killed him!