If someone has advice on how to break through to trump fans I'm all ears.

[Mashmont]

They're hikes against consumers who frequently pay for the price increases passed on by importers.

Well, aren't corporate tax increases also passed to consumers?

 

[sealybobo]

Again you divert, suppressing free speech is the issue and the government has no business pressuring media to suppress free speech. I’m good with you wanting government to control free speech, I am not.

Doesn't the government have free speech?

 

[Papageorgio]

Doesn't the government have free speech?

The First Amendment protects individuals from government restriction on their speech: “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…”

That means citizens have free speech rights against the government, but the government itself isn’t a “person” with First Amendment rights in the same way.

 

[sealybobo]

" How to. Get through to Trump Voters"???


That's easy: call the call them Maggats, Tell them that they're stupid, remind them of how ignorant they are, continue to make long and verbose posts highlighting the mental retardation of Trump voters, never let a day pass without calling out the social guilt that all Trump supporters are responsible for and above all never ever consider that such a person might be able to make their own decision without your help.

That should do it.

Just remind Trump voters that they were duped. But give examples.

Trump thundered. “If Kamala wins, you are three days away from the start of a 1929 style economic depression. I believe that.”

But, “if I win, you are three days away from the best jobs, the biggest paychecks, the brightest economic future that the world has ever seen,” Trump reassured.

Show them the reality

Republican lawmakers are expressing alarm and uncertainty over the strength of the U.S. economy after the Labor Department reported Tuesday that the nation had created nearly 1 million fewer jobs from March 2024 to March 2025.

And they fret that the economic picture could worsen over the next six months heading into the midterm elections.

Many Republicans view President Trump’s global trade war as the biggest reason for weaker-than-expected jobs data, noting that tariffs have increased prices, stifled consumer demand and spooked employers and investors.

While the major stock market indices have reached record highs, Republicans on Capitol Hill worry that doesn’t reflect the economic reality experienced by many Americans.

“My take is that we’re in rough spot. The jobs numbers are low,” said Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.). “If you look at industrial jobs, if you look at the farm economy right now — the farm economy is looking pretty bleak.”

“I don’t see where tariffs have helped us yet; I don’t see a lot of corn and soybeans being bought,” he said.

Other Republicans on Tuesday voiced similar views that the strength of the economy will be the biggest issue in 2026 and that it’s struggling because of widespread uncertainty created by Trump’s trade policies.

 

[dblack]

The First Amendment protects individuals from government restriction on their speech: “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…”

That means citizens have free speech rights against the government, but the government itself isn’t a “person” with First Amendment rights in the same way.

I love it when statists start talking about the "rights" of government. Displays a complete and utter misconception of what Constitutionally protected rights are.

 

[justoffal]

Just remind Trump voters that they were duped. But give examples.

Trump thundered. “If Kamala wins, you are three days away from the start of a 1929 style economic depression. I believe that.”

But, “if I win, you are three days away from the best jobs, the biggest paychecks, the brightest economic future that the world has ever seen,” Trump reassured.

Show them the reality

Republican lawmakers are expressing alarm and uncertainty over the strength of the U.S. economy after the Labor Department reported Tuesday that the nation had created nearly 1 million fewer jobs from March 2024 to March 2025.

And they fret that the economic picture could worsen over the next six months heading into the midterm elections.

Many Republicans view President Trump’s global trade war as the biggest reason for weaker-than-expected jobs data, noting that tariffs have increased prices, stifled consumer demand and spooked employers and investors.

While the major stock market indices have reached record highs, Republicans on Capitol Hill worry that doesn’t reflect the economic reality experienced by many Americans.

“My take is that we’re in rough spot. The jobs numbers are low,” said Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.). “If you look at industrial jobs, if you look at the farm economy right now — the farm economy is looking pretty bleak.”

“I don’t see where tariffs have helped us yet; I don’t see a lot of corn and soybeans being bought,” he said.

Other Republicans on Tuesday voiced similar views that the strength of the economy will be the biggest issue in 2026 and that it’s struggling because of widespread uncertainty created by Trump’s trade policies.

 

[sealybobo]

The First Amendment protects individuals from government restriction on their speech: “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…”

That means citizens have free speech rights against the government, but the government itself isn’t a “person” with First Amendment rights in the same way.

I want to say first it's horrible what happened to Charlie Kirk. I will look into all the things he said and why people were so offended. I know he would ask "what is a woman?" a lot. But even little girls loved him. I saw them being interviewed. Truly loved. I'm going to look into all the things he preached. He's a martyr for the right now. I'm even sad. What is happening to our society?

But Trump says the left's rhetoric (free speech) is responsible for this. Of course we said the same thing about him. But now lets see what he does. Free speech still? Or is he going to say "that speech is dangerous because it riles up wackos who shoot at me and Charlie Kirk?" And will you agree with him? Biden thought lies on facebook was dangerous to our society. He wanted lies taken down. He asked, sternly. But he didn't do anything or threaten facebook. So don't get that twisted. The White House YELLED at Facebook. Facebook sometimes went along, sometimes didn't. Zuckaberg's own words dude. Don't forget the White House has free speech too.

Also, the right says it's us being violent. Okay, so maybe we need to pass some common sense gun legislation/regulations. Like a psychological review before you get your first gun. Maybe even have to go get interviewed by the police (well regulated militia). Pass a lie detector test.

 

[Papageorgio]

I want to say first it's horrible what happened to Charlie Kirk. I will look into all the things he said and why people were so offended. I know he would ask "what is a woman?" a lot. But even little girls loved him. I saw them being interviewed. Truly loved. I'm going to look into all the things he preached. He's a martyr for the right now. I'm even sad. What is happening to our society?

But Trump says the left's rhetoric (free speech) is responsible for this. Of course we said the same thing about him. But now lets see what he does. Free speech still? Or is he going to say "that speech is dangerous because it riles up wackos who shoot at me and Charlie Kirk?" And will you agree with him? Biden thought lies on facebook was dangerous to our society. He wanted lies taken down. He asked, sternly. But he didn't do anything or threaten facebook. So don't get that twisted. The White House YELLED at Facebook. Facebook sometimes went along, sometimes didn't. Zuckaberg's own words dude. Don't forget the White House has free speech too.

Also, the right says it's us being violent. Okay, so maybe we need to pass some common sense gun legislation/regulations. Like a psychological review before you get your first gun. Maybe even have to go get interviewed by the police (well regulated militia). Pass a lie detector test.

Thanks sealy, this is why I love the 1st Amendment and I liked Charlie Kirk not so much for his stand on issue but how he was open to talk about issues ans find common ground and move forward. You and I rarely agree on politics but we communicate our positions, I may disagree with you on many, I do respect you and your right to have a differing opinion. To me the left and the right’s rhetoric is responsible, it cuts both ways and as far as I’m concerned.

The White House is the government, nowhere in the constitution does it give the government a right to free speech, they are specifically ordered to give the right of free speech to its citizens.

Again, I think Biden tried to infringe and you and I will never agree to it but that is fine. Trump has no right to infringe on our free speech regardless of how disgusting and vile it is.

As far as gun laws, everyone that uses a gun for an illegal purpose is violating the law and that is why more gun laws won’t protect because those that want to do illegal things will do so whether there is more gun laws or not.

Again, we don’t agree but thank you for being a person that is open to debate and sharing thoughts and ideas which is a reason we need free speech.

 

[sealybobo]

Thanks sealy, this is why I love the 1st Amendment and I liked Charlie Kirk not so much for his stand on issue but how he was open to talk about issues ans find common ground and move forward. You and I rarely agree on politics but we communicate our positions, I may disagree with you on many, I do respect you and your right to have a differing opinion. To me the left and the right’s rhetoric is responsible, it cuts both ways and as far as I’m concerned.

The White House is the government, nowhere in the constitution does it give the government a right to free speech, they are specifically ordered to give the right of free speech to its citizens.

Again, I think Biden tried to infringe and you and I will never agree to it but that is fine. Trump has no right to infringe on our free speech regardless of how disgusting and vile it is.

As far as gun laws, everyone that uses a gun for an illegal purpose is violating the law and that is why more gun laws won’t protect because those that want to do illegal things will do so whether there is more gun laws or not.

Again, we don’t agree but thank you for being a person that is open to debate and sharing thoughts and ideas which is a reason we need free speech.

The people in the government are citizens too. They have free speech. CLEARLY they do. They can even lie right to our faces.

Trump blames rhetoric from left for political violence after killing of Charlie Kirk. He said it's their fault.... they talk about those they disagree with "in the most hateful and despicable way possible,"

Trump said his administration would find "those who contributed to this atrocity and to other political violence, including the organizations that fund it and support it, as well as those who go after our judges, law enforcement officials and everyone else who brings order to our country."

This will be way worse than your cute little 1st amendment story about Biden and Facebook. Stay tuned.

 

[Papageorgio]

The people in the government are citizens too. They have free speech. CLEARLY they do. They can even lie right to our faces.

Trump blames rhetoric from left for political violence after killing of Charlie Kirk. He said it's their fault.... they talk about those they disagree with "in the most hateful and despicable way possible,"

Trump said his administration would find "those who contributed to this atrocity and to other political violence, including the organizations that fund it and support it, as well as those who go after our judges, law enforcement officials and everyone else who brings order to our country."

This will be way worse than your cute little 1st amendment story about Biden and Facebook. Stay tuned.

If it happens, but also had Biden succeeded it would have been terrible as well.

Presidents can have opinions, but his is no better or worse than your or mine.

Speech that incites violence is not covered under free speech, Tom Metzger was held accountable for his violent rhetoric. I am not seeing a direct link but there could be a group of far left nuts behind this murder but I think it was a mentally ill nut.

 

[sealybobo]

If it happens, but also had Biden succeeded it would have been terrible as well.

Presidents can have opinions, but his is no better or worse than your or mine.

Speech that incites violence is not covered under free speech, Tom Metzger was held accountable for his violent rhetoric. I am not seeing a direct link but there could be a group of far left nuts behind this murder but I think it was a mentally ill nut.

Trump is going to rule that things the left have said led to this violence.

 

[Papageorgio]

Trump is going to rule that things the left have said led to this violence.

He can say all he wants, he can’t do anything to suppress their rights to have an opinion.

 

[sealybobo]

He can say all he wants, he can’t do anything to suppress their rights to have an opinion.

But you just agreed with him. Speech that incites violence is not covered under free speech. He says their speech incited violence.

BTW,

• The White House spokesperson stated the administration merely "encouraged responsible actions to protect public health and safety" during the pandemic.
• The White House maintains its position: tech companies should consider the effects of their actions on public health while making independent decisions about content.
• In June 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that the Biden administration could continue to communicate with social media companies about harmful content, throwing out a lawsuit that had accused the administration of "coercion" and violating free speech by pressuring platforms.

So the Conservative Supreme Court threw out a lawsuit that accused Biden of violating their free speech. But in this case, let me guess, that won't be enough for you. Suddenly, you'll call them the corrupt Supreme Court and you won't accept their ruling. It's called cherry picking.

You believe Zuckaberg not the Supreme Court. Got it. He donates a lot to Trump you know. Maybe you are MAGA and just don't know it.

 

[Papageorgio]

But you just agreed with him. Speech that incites violence is not covered under free speech. He says their speech incited violence.

BTW,

• The White House spokesperson stated the administration merely "encouraged responsible actions to protect public health and safety" during the pandemic.
• The White House maintains its position: tech companies should consider the effects of their actions on public health while making independent decisions about content.
• In June 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that the Biden administration could continue to communicate with social media companies about harmful content, throwing out a lawsuit that had accused the administration of "coercion" and violating free speech by pressuring platforms.

So the Conservative Supreme Court threw out a lawsuit that accused Biden of violating their free speech. But in this case, let me guess, that won't be enough for you. Suddenly, you'll call them the corrupt Supreme Court and you won't accept their ruling. It's called cherry picking.

You believe Zuckaberg not the Supreme Court. Got it. He donates a lot to Trump you know. Maybe you are MAGA and just don't know it.

He would have to prove it and it is a very very high bar.

A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction in July 2023, barring certain administration officials from urging, encouraging, or pressuring social media platforms to suppress speech protected by the First Amendment. Funny they did that.

And you end with a cheap shot, nice,

 

[sealybobo]

He would have to prove it and it is a very very high bar.

A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction in July 2023, barring certain administration officials from urging, encouraging, or pressuring social media platforms to suppress speech protected by the First Amendment. Funny they did that.

And you end with a cheap shot, nice,

What federal judge? The Trump appointee who's protecting free speech/lies that help the guy who appointed him? This smells like politics to me buddy.

In other words facebook told on certain administration officials who were urging and encouraging facebook to take down the fake news.

Who's a fan of fake news? Republicans. And you it turns out.

 

[Papageorgio]

What federal judge? The Trump appointee who's protecting free speech/lies that help the guy who appointed him? This smells like politics to me buddy.

In other words facebook told on certain administration officials who were urging and encouraging facebook to take down the fake news.

Who's a fan of fake news? Republicans. And you it turns out.

Don’t play games, no one overturned the judges orders.

 

[Etymology gaslight]

I was struck by the revelations of text messages by Jeanine Pirro to Ronna McDaniel for two reasons. But first, here is what she wrote.

Ms. Pirro, a former Fox News host who is now the U.S. attorney for Washington, D.C., told Ronna McDaniel, then the Republican National Committee chair, in a text in the months before the election: “I work so hard for the President and the party.” Ms. Pirro had been pushing for a pardon from Mr. Trump for her ex-husband, Smartmatic argues.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/19/business/media/fox-news-trump-election-documents.html

A weekend personality on Fox made her case for her ex-hubby's pardon by sending the message about how she used her position as a broadcaster to work for trump and the Repub party. Other text messages from other anchors show just how much Fox was in the tank for trump by fomenting the "stop the steal" lie. This, from a cable station many millions of conservatives rely on for accurate information to inform their opinions. The problem being, it isn't accurate.

As a quick aside, consider how radically different the political landscape would be if the Fox talking heads had done what they should have done, what the facts told them to do, acknowledge trump's defeat.

The second thing is Pirro was rewarded for her hard work shilling for trump by being nominated to be the US Attorney for DC. Replacing Ed Martin.......a man so corrupt even Senate Repubs refused to confirm him. Repubs had no problem confirming Pirro despite the obvious compromise of her ethics and lack of ability to make impartial prosecutorial decisions. A furtherance of the corruption of the judiciary by trump as a reward for Jeanine's loyalty.

Back to my original question. How can I get trump devotees to take the small step of recognizing Jeanine Pirro should not have been nominated, nor confirmed, to be DC's US Attorney in light of this unequivocal evidence? Because if you can, perhaps you can take the next step. Maybe look in to Ed Martin and why Repubs refused to confirm him. More importantly, ask yourselves how trump could have put him in a temporary role as US Attorney in the first place and then assigned him to work for the DoJ.

Then maybe, just maybe, you can take the final step. You can ask yourselves why being in agreement with trump on border security has translated to support of what happened to Andry Hernandez Romero. Or this...........

Father of 3 Marines Who Was Beaten by ICE Agents Released, Leaving Family to Process His Detention​

Father of 3 Marines Who Was Beaten by ICE Agents Released, Leaving Family to Process His Detention | Military.com

www.military.com

Or this.........

Judge calls Trump DOJ’s request to release Epstein grand jury records a ‘diversion’​

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/08/20/trump-epstein-grand-jury-judge-diversion.html

Or this.......

Trump says U.S. will not approve solar or wind power projects​

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/08/20/trump-says-us-will-not-approve-solar-or-wind-power-projects.html

Or this.........

Trump vows to try banning mail-in voting before 2026 midterm elections — can he do that?​

Trump vows to try banning mail-in voting before 2026 midterm elections — can he do that?

President Trump says he plans to sign an executive order "to end mail-in ballots, because they're corrupt." Here's what to know about his claims.

www.cbsnews.com

It's a fair question.

I think some of these posts
are too long.


The premise of
"breaking through to Trump fans"
As if we are outcasts,

"They"
In third person
is if we were some sort of
different species.

 

[Cellblock2429]

I was struck by the revelations of text messages by Jeanine Pirro to Ronna McDaniel for two reasons. But first, here is what she wrote.

Ms. Pirro, a former Fox News host who is now the U.S. attorney for Washington, D.C., told Ronna McDaniel, then the Republican National Committee chair, in a text in the months before the election: “I work so hard for the President and the party.” Ms. Pirro had been pushing for a pardon from Mr. Trump for her ex-husband, Smartmatic argues.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/19/business/media/fox-news-trump-election-documents.html

A weekend personality on Fox made her case for her ex-hubby's pardon by sending the message about how she used her position as a broadcaster to work for trump and the Repub party. Other text messages from other anchors show just how much Fox was in the tank for trump by fomenting the "stop the steal" lie. This, from a cable station many millions of conservatives rely on for accurate information to inform their opinions. The problem being, it isn't accurate.

As a quick aside, consider how radically different the political landscape would be if the Fox talking heads had done what they should have done, what the facts told them to do, acknowledge trump's defeat.

The second thing is Pirro was rewarded for her hard work shilling for trump by being nominated to be the US Attorney for DC. Replacing Ed Martin.......a man so corrupt even Senate Repubs refused to confirm him. Repubs had no problem confirming Pirro despite the obvious compromise of her ethics and lack of ability to make impartial prosecutorial decisions. A furtherance of the corruption of the judiciary by trump as a reward for Jeanine's loyalty.

Back to my original question. How can I get trump devotees to take the small step of recognizing Jeanine Pirro should not have been nominated, nor confirmed, to be DC's US Attorney in light of this unequivocal evidence? Because if you can, perhaps you can take the next step. Maybe look in to Ed Martin and why Repubs refused to confirm him. More importantly, ask yourselves how trump could have put him in a temporary role as US Attorney in the first place and then assigned him to work for the DoJ.

Then maybe, just maybe, you can take the final step. You can ask yourselves why being in agreement with trump on border security has translated to support of what happened to Andry Hernandez Romero. Or this...........

Father of 3 Marines Who Was Beaten by ICE Agents Released, Leaving Family to Process His Detention​

Father of 3 Marines Who Was Beaten by ICE Agents Released, Leaving Family to Process His Detention | Military.com

www.military.com

Or this.........

Judge calls Trump DOJ’s request to release Epstein grand jury records a ‘diversion’​

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/08/20/trump-epstein-grand-jury-judge-diversion.html

Or this.......

Trump says U.S. will not approve solar or wind power projects​

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/08/20/trump-says-us-will-not-approve-solar-or-wind-power-projects.html

Or this.........

Trump vows to try banning mail-in voting before 2026 midterm elections — can he do that?​

Trump vows to try banning mail-in voting before 2026 midterm elections — can he do that?

President Trump says he plans to sign an executive order "to end mail-in ballots, because they're corrupt." Here's what to know about his claims.

www.cbsnews.com

/——/ Murdering one of our best spokesmen isn’t one of them.

 

[sartre play]

I worry that we keep hiring TV personalities, sports personalities, money raisers, & one political party pushers.
That could be some of the mess? We need people with expertise in the area they are hired to preform in.
Need problem solvers, Not political party over country.

 

[Papageorgio]

I worry that we keep hiring TV personalities, sports personalities, money raisers, & one political party pushers.
That could be some of the mess? We need people with expertise in the area they are hired to preform in.
Need problem solvers, Not political party over country.

Like who?