Poll for Trump Supporters: Will you push back if he goes full fascist?

[AntonToo]

The government is full of shit. Leftists hate freedom of speech.

Those are just silly, irrelavant assertions, because you have nothing else.

 

[AntonToo]

Tell me how and where I'm wrong, and on what issue. Cure me of my "mental disease", enlighten me.

Thats not how mental illness works unfortunately.

 

[daveman]

Those are just silly, irrelavant assertions, because you have nothing else.

Oh, did I hurt your feelings by criticizing your god government?

Oh, well.

 

[lennypartiv]

Americans want a strong leader.

 

[dblack]

Americans want a strong leader.

Trump isn't a leader. He doesn't persuade, he doesn't inspire. He just trolls. And some people like that.

 

[Monoculturalist]

You are being dense - there was a national increase in voting rates in 2020 election, during a historic pandemic.

The phenomenon was not local to specific states of electoral significance, so saying that phenomenon was driven by electoral goals of some sort of neferious, undetectable conspiracy is incoherent. You don't run a vote fraud effort in CA to win in GA.

To me this is clear and obvious and I think your difficulty in realizing this is simply from not wanting to understand it.


You spoke about group-think among the left, yet right here you've shown yourself to be prey for mass rightwing delusions about 2020 election.

Sure, there was a national increase, but it stands out as odd, because usually, one election does not vastly outnumber the turnout of the preceding and subsequent elections. You believe a pandemic and mail-in voting can somehow explain that. I don't believe it does.

As far as fraud goes, CA has loose laws regarding things like ballot harvesting. So, it doesn't require a conspiracy to fabricate votes there. It just takes individuals willing to exploit the loose regulations. My argument is that it happened in various states, including ones that weren't as consequential as swing states. My focus in the discussion was the swing states because they are the most consequential, but I wasn't arguing that it didn't happen in CA.

 

[Monoculturalist]

The funny ("funny" as in "fuck it, you may as well laugh") is that HIS OWN PEOPLE have said horrible things about him.

From his own Chief of Staff to RFK Jr to his own fucking INCOMING VICE PRESIDENT to his former Vice President, staff, lawyers, generals, Cabinet and Security Department officials.

These aren't Dems. These aren't commies. They're all just saying what they think, what they say, WHAT THEY EXPERIENCED.

So none of this Trumpster deflection bullshit and blaming the Dems is real.

From what I understand, Carter was a good person, but he was still a shitty president. Trump, in my opinion, is kind of the opposite. He was a good president in his first term, but it sounds like he's not the most pleasant person to be around.

I've had similar experiences in my working life. I've had bosses that were nice but incompetent, and I've had bosses that were assholes but good at their job.

In short, I vote for who I think is best at the job, not who I would go out drinking with.

 

[SweetSue92]

From what I understand, Carter was a good person, but he was still a shitty president. Trump, in my opinion, is kind of the opposite. He was a good president in his first term, but it sounds like he's not the most pleasant person to be around.

I've had similar experiences in my working life. I've had bosses that were nice but incompetent, and I've had bosses that were assholes but good at their job.

In short, I vote for who I think is best at the job, not who I would go out drinking with.

This, exactly this.

Too many Americans think voting for president is like voting for your best friend, spouse, or pastor. It's not. It's a JOB. We hire him to do a job, not marry into the family.

 

[Monoculturalist]

I'm still blaming the dems. Historically, unhinged populists tend to ply their trade in the wake of a corrupt, disconnected regimes. Dems also fight to defend the dysfunctional two-party system that gives us such dismal "choices" every election, ensuring we stay mired in shit.

Populism has a lot more merit that globalism. Granted, the ideal is what Milei is doing. America could really use someone like him in office.

 

[Lesh]

This, exactly this.

Too many Americans think voting for president is like voting for your best friend, spouse, or pastor. It's not. It's a JOB. We hire him to do a job, not marry into the family.

Funny. That’s the opposite of what you folks said about Bush the Lesser.

Seems your logic and arguments change pretty subjectively

 

[SweetSue92]

Funny. That’s the opposite of what you folks said about Bush the Lesser.

Seems your logic and arguments change pretty subjectively

Who's "we"--or are you just making things up again?

 

[Monoculturalist]

Funny. That’s the opposite of what you folks said about Bush the Lesser.

Seems your logic and arguments change pretty subjectively

I was never a fan of Bush to begin with, but what is this in reference to? I don't recall the Gore vs. Bush election or the Kerry vs. Bush election being about character on the conservative side of things. Bush won the first time largely on the idea that Gore was too left wing in policy stances, while Bush won the second time mostly because Kerry ran most of his platform on just not being Bush. In general, you win elections on what you bring to the table, not on what you aren't.

 

[Lesh]

I was never a fan of Bush to begin with, but what is this in reference to? I don't recall the Gore vs. Bush election or the Kerry vs. Bush election being about character on the conservative side of things. Bush won the first time largely on the idea that Gore was too left wing in policy stances, while Bush won the second time mostly because Kerry ran most of his platform on just not being Bush. In general, you win elections on what you bring to the table, not on what you aren't.

Bush ran on being a “regular guy “ you’d like to have a beer with

How quickly you forget

 

[Cellblock2429]

Bush ran on being a “regular guy “ you’d like to have a beer with

How quickly you forget

/—-/ Bush didn’t drink.
How quickly you forget.

 

[Monoculturalist]

Bush ran on being a “regular guy “ you’d like to have a beer with

How quickly you forget

There are certainly people who felt that way about Bush, particularly when it comes to his charismatic approach compared to Gore's stiffness. You could even say Trump was like that compared to Hillary. I can see the parallel, although when progressives constantly bloviate about "decorum" with regard to Trump, that tells me they have more of a focus on the drinking buddy concept than conservatives, at least in the last 3 elections.

 

[dblack]

Populism has a lot more merit that globalism.

I have no use for either.

 

[Monoculturalist]

I have no use for either.

In an ideal world, I'd support Austrian economics with no exceptions. Given the world we're in, populism mixed with libertarianism makes more sense. You can't go full free trade when almost none of your trading partners do the same. One of the few countries that has done something close to this is Australia, but as a result, they are a vassal state of the US and China.

In short, nationalism is fundamental to the survival of your country when most of the world is nationalist. Until the West figures that out, it will continue to decline.

 

[dblack]

In an ideal world, I'd support Austrian economics with no exceptions. Given the world we're in, populism mixed with libertarianism makes more sense. You can't go full free trade when almost none of your trading partners do the same. One of the few countries that has done something close to this is Australia, but as a result, they are a vassal state of the US and China.

In short, nationalism is fundamental to the survival of your country when most of the world is nationalist. Until the West figures that out, it will continue to decline.

Nationalism won't save us from decline. It will hasten it.

 

[Monoculturalist]

Nationalism won't save us from decline. It will hasten it.

How so? I'll reference your signature for what I'm getting at. The culture war is probably the most important aspect of politics, because, as Breitbart said, "politics is downstream from culture."

Economic decisions generally are influenced heavily by culture. For example, a culture of people that de-emphasize instant gratification will save more. A culture that is all about instant gratification will consume more and enter debt. Values play a huge part in politics and human behavior, which is why guiding public opinion and values is very important.

Humans are social creatures, and contrary to Classical Liberalism, the individual is not the natural state of man. We have been tribal as far back as prehistoric times, for good reason. While collectivism has a lot of flaws, we cannot deny that it is central to our nature. As a result, every government engages in a certain level of propaganda. Effective propaganda pushes the masses toward productive behavior and pride in the national identity. This, of course, has to be tempered with respect for civil rights, but I think Western culture has overcompensated in this respect and has instead fixated on victimhood culture. This is largely because of leftist agitators that benefit from this mentality and can more easily push revolutionary politics in pursuit of some variation of socialism. The only counter to this is to show how and why decentralization of authority is preferable as is privatization. This can only be accomplished by weeding out leftists from media and academia. Milei understands this well and is currently managing this. Perhaps, Trump can begin the transformation of our institutions, but our system is rather entrenched with statists at the moment.

Contrary to many prior assumptions, nationalism is compatible with a somewhat market-favorable culture. It just has to take into account holding trading partners to the same standards we hold ourselves to while keeping out negative influences that seek to undermine the productivity of the masses.

 

[otto105]

Sure, there was a national increase, but it stands out as odd, because usually, one election does not vastly outnumber the turnout of the preceding and subsequent elections. You believe a pandemic and mail-in voting can somehow explain that. I don't believe it does.

As far as fraud goes, CA has loose laws regarding things like ballot harvesting. So, it doesn't require a conspiracy to fabricate votes there. It just takes individuals willing to exploit the loose regulations. My argument is that it happened in various states, including ones that weren't as consequential as swing states. My focus in the discussion was the swing states because they are the most consequential, but I wasn't arguing that it didn't happen in CA.

Stop the Whine


Already