What's new

The Biden Administration and All Things Politics

I did not realize you covered this in a different thread before posting the previous comment.
They are taking this quote out of context, just like “very fine people”, “drink bleach”, “stick a flashlight up your ***”. They are doing it again to fit their narrative.

I don’t have to take Kamalas quotes out of context to fit the narrative that she lacks depth on basic topics.

Here is the Border Czar herself being asked about working with the GOP on the border…another 7th grade response with 0 depth.


View: https://x.com/truthorconseq12/status/1817311187614490720?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ


Every poster on this forum would have an answer with more substance than her and none of us are politicians or experts or Border Czars.
 
The immigration issue is crazy because a lot of the stats say the Democrat president has been way harder on immigration than the Republicans.
 
The immigration issue is crazy because a lot of the stats say the Democrat president has been way harder on immigration than the Republicans.
He's got a point... Obama deported more illegals than any other president in our history. Like his bloodthirsty voters he hated Mexicans and especially Christian ones with a passion. Sadly hypocrites like CY only care about that when Trump does it.
 
Last edited:
They are taking this quote out of context, just like “very fine people”, “drink bleach”, “stick a flashlight up your ***”. They are doing it again to fit their narrative.

I don’t have to take Kamalas quotes out of context to fit the narrative that she lacks depth on basic topics.

Here is the Border Czar herself being asked about working with the GOP on the border…another 7th grade response with 0 depth.


View: https://x.com/truthorconseq12/status/1817311187614490720?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ


Every poster on this forum would have an answer with more substance than her and none of us are politicians or experts or Border Czars.
Again, you say she lacks depth on basic concepts.
Meanwhile if you take trumps whole quote in total context then you have to realize just how badly he lacks depth on basic concepts. Like voting and elections. He is saying he will make elections so safe and fair and perfect that he won't need the Christian vote.

You realize how stupid that is right? (I provided the numbers in the other thread but saw no response)

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
I thought this was interesting; I think this is great progress and know
Again, you say she lacks depth on basic concepts.
She does and I have provided multiple instances that, which are in context. (Not hard to do)

Yet, when I post them, the argument is quickly changed to “But Trump”. I’m not fighting for Trump.

I’m just posting that another one of his quotes are taken out of context and used to say “That he will turn into Putin/Kim dictatorship and there won’t be any more elections in the USA”

You called me out on this:
“Does that mean that trump is going to "fix" elections to where voting doesn't matter and if so, you cool with that plan @“

His quote was taken out of context. I provided the evidence.

Yet, the argument changes to Trump he lacks depth on basic concepts. I wasn’t arguing that. At all.

You called me out on the switch:
“But you think trump knows more about topics when discussing them. Its crazy that you haven't yet realized he is an idiot who rarely knows what he is talking about”

Meanwhile if you take trumps whole quote in total context then you have to realize just how badly he lacks depth on basic concepts. Like voting and elections. He is saying he will make elections so safe and fair and perfect that he won't need the Christian vote.
Elon, literally posted almost the same thing I did, in more words, 9 hours later.

View: https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1817349944443040004


If you consider this lacks depth, then yes he is lacking depth.
 
I thought this was interesting; I think this is great progress and know

She does and I have provided multiple instances that, which are in context. (Not hard to do)

Yet, when I post them, the argument is quickly changed to “But Trump”. I’m not fighting for Trump.

I’m just posting that another one of his quotes are taken out of context and used to say “That he will turn into Putin/Kim dictatorship and there won’t be any more elections in the USA”

You called me out on this:
“Does that mean that trump is going to "fix" elections to where voting doesn't matter and if so, you cool with that plan @“

His quote was taken out of context. I provided the evidence.

Yet, the argument changes to Trump he lacks depth on basic concepts. I wasn’t arguing that. At all.

You called me out on the switch:
“But you think trump knows more about topics when discussing them. Its crazy that you haven't yet realized he is an idiot who rarely knows what he is talking about”


Elon, literally posted almost the same thing I did, in more words, 9 hours later.

View: https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1817349944443040004


If you consider this lacks depth, then yes he is lacking depth.

Yes he lacks depth because the voter fraud is an invention that anyone that looks into it would realize.

So Trump heard people say "voter fraud" it was good for him, so he is now pushing very strongly this false idea that there is wide spread voter fraud that changes the outcome of the presidential election to the tune of tens of millions of votes.

Him thinking that he'll fix voter fraud demonstrates one of two things, possibly both. First, that Trump is dumb enough, having access to all the pertinent information, to believe voter fraud is a serious problem. Second, that he is simply using non-existent voter fraud to scare his base.
 
The arguments that Kamala just isn't good enough don't vibe with me.

I feel like I got on a plane with a coach middle seat between two women with lap riding infants that never stop crying and I got upgraded to Comfort+ and people are trying to tell me how ****** my seat is compared to first class.

Yeah, I know better seats exist, but this seat compared to the hell I thought I was condemned to is a welcomed and cherished improvement.
 
I thought this was interesting; I think this is great progress and know

She does and I have provided multiple instances that, which are in context. (Not hard to do)

Yet, when I post them, the argument is quickly changed to “But Trump”. I’m not fighting for Trump.

I’m just posting that another one of his quotes are taken out of context and used to say “That he will turn into Putin/Kim dictatorship and there won’t be any more elections in the USA”

You called me out on this:
“Does that mean that trump is going to "fix" elections to where voting doesn't matter and if so, you cool with that plan @“

His quote was taken out of context. I provided the evidence.

Yet, the argument changes to Trump he lacks depth on basic concepts. I wasn’t arguing that. At all.

You called me out on the switch:
“But you think trump knows more about topics when discussing them. Its crazy that you haven't yet realized he is an idiot who rarely knows what he is talking about”


Elon, literally posted almost the same thing I did, in more words, 9 hours later.

View: https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1817349944443040004


If you consider this lacks depth, then yes he is lacking depth.
Quick easy question. Do you agree with trump that after he fixes the election he (and other Republicans) won't need the Christian vote?

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
The arguments that Kamala just isn't good enough don't vibe with me.

I feel like I got on a plane with a coach middle seat between two women with lap riding infants that never stop crying and I got upgraded to Comfort+ and people are trying to tell me how ****** my seat is compared to first class.

Yeah, I know better seats exist, but this seat compared to the hell I thought I was condemned to is a welcomed and cherished improvement.

Great analogy. I'd like to add that those people talking **** about your Comfort+ seat are on a Boeing about to plunge into the ocean.
 
They are taking this quote out of context, just like “very fine people”, “drink bleach”, “stick a flashlight up your ***”. They are doing it again to fit their narrative.

I don’t have to take Kamalas quotes out of context to fit the narrative that she lacks depth on basic topics.

Here is the Border Czar herself being asked about working with the GOP on the border…another 7th grade response with 0 depth.


View: https://x.com/truthorconseq12/status/1817311187614490720?s=46&t=BMMZjW7vq0_zwnmLDjNTgQ


Every poster on this forum would have an answer with more substance than her and none of us are politicians or experts or Border Czars.

Well….Trump ambiguous statements do lend themselves to multiple meanings. I blame Trump 100% for that, and I do believe it is often calculated and deliberate.

Various perspectives offered in this piece. I think it is well worth mentioning, that it is very true that Trump is well known by now for ambiguous statements that can be interpreted in more than one way:

“Erica De Bruin, a professor of government at Hamilton College whose research focuses on civil-military relations, civil war and policing, said, “Trump frequently makes these kinds of deliberately ambiguous statements that can be interpreted in multiple ways.”

But she added that “to understand what another Trump presidency would involve, I think it is more useful to look at his past behavior than to attempt to parse what might be the ‘true meaning’ of any individual set of remarks he makes.” She pointed out that the last time he was in office, “he attempted to subvert the outcome of an election and remain in power longer than the American public voted to keep him there.”

Also:
“Steven Levitsky, a professor of government at Harvard University, and co-author of “Tyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point,” also said that while he didn’t think Trump’s recent comment was “indicative of an organized plot to end elections in the United States,” it did represent yet another sign that “the guy has got authoritarian reflexes.”

“Over the course of 10 or 15 years,” Levitsky added, a growing number of Republicans “convinced themselves that they weren’t going to be able to win elections in this new, multiracial America. I’m not so sure that’s true, but they were deeply fearful that was true. And so Trump, I think more than anything else, he senses … where they’re going and they’re feeling”.

And, absolutely this:

“Levitsky’s co-author, Daniel Ziblatt, also a professor of government at Harvard, put a finer point on the significance of Trump’s comment. “I can’t think of a major candidate for office in any democracy on Earth since at least World War II who speaks in such overtly authoritarian ways,” said Ziblatt. “Not Victor Orban in Hungary, not Recep Erdogan in Turkey. Nowhere.”

And:

Jennifer Mercieca, a communications professor at Texas A&M University and author of “Demagogue for President: The Rhetorical Genius of Donald Trump,” said in an email that she interpreted Trump’s comment as an attempt to address the “double bind” that supposed “strongmen” leaders face……

……“I think Trump is here promising Christians that he will actually solve the problems that he has promised them he’ll solve (a full abortion ban … and various ‘culture war’ issues) and so with all of the problems solved, they won’t feel like the world is so chaotic that they have to vote to save the nation.”


“It’s a big promise,” she added, “and he doesn’t give specific details here.”


As noted, I did not immediately think “he won’t leave office”, but, hey, he already tried it once!! I don’t even understand how the hell he’s even allowed to run again after trying to overthrow the government. Naw, he means it. Just put him in that Oval Office, and he’ll leave the day he dies, not one day sooner….Not ONE day sooner….
 
Last edited:
I thought this was interesting; I think this is great progress and know

She does and I have provided multiple instances that, which are in context. (Not hard to do)

Yet, when I post them, the argument is quickly changed to “But Trump”. I’m not fighting for Trump.

I’m just posting that another one of his quotes are taken out of context and used to say “That he will turn into Putin/Kim dictatorship and there won’t be any more elections in the USA”

You called me out on this:
“Does that mean that trump is going to "fix" elections to where voting doesn't matter and if so, you cool with that plan @“

His quote was taken out of context. I provided the evidence.

Yet, the argument changes to Trump he lacks depth on basic concepts. I wasn’t arguing that. At all.

You called me out on the switch:
“But you think trump knows more about topics when discussing them. Its crazy that you haven't yet realized he is an idiot who rarely knows what he is talking about”


Elon, literally posted almost the same thing I did, in more words, 9 hours later.

View: https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1817349944443040004


If you consider this lacks depth, then yes he is lacking depth.

I know you aren't defending Trump per se, so this isn't necessarily directed at you, but the very fact that there is still some discussion regarding voter fraud being tied to ID laws betrays an extreme lack of depth of understanding of our voting system and a continued insistence on pushing a proven hoax and lie on the American people for the sole purpose of fear-mongering and "othering" to dehumanize entire swaths of the populace. It's loathsome.
 
... pushing a proven hoax and lie on the American people for the sole purpose of fear-mongering and "othering" to dehumanize entire swaths of the populace. It's loathsome.
You are a straight up bigot if you honestly believe what you just wrote. Ethnic background makes no difference in how hard it is to get an ID. Anyone falling for the 'requiring of voter ID is racist' narrative requires they believe this or that ethnicity is less capable. Anyone parroting that line is a bigot. full stop.

The reason the GOP is pushing voter ID is that it makes ballot harvesting impossible, and no GOP candidate can win a national election if certain key states allow ballot harvesting, which currently they do. Without a voter ID mandate, no GOP candidate can win a national election, and that has nothing to do with fraud. It is based purely on the unfortunate fact the majority of the American voter base is lazy and apathetic which leaves a massive pool of votes proactive gathering campaigns can pull from to help their candidate win an election.
 
Well….Trump ambiguous statements do lend themselves to multiple meanings. I blame Trump 100% for that, and I do believe it is often calculated and deliberate.

Various perspectives offered in this piece. I think it is well worth mentioning, that it is very true that Trump is well known by now for ambiguous statements that can be interpreted in more than one way:

“Erica De Bruin, a professor of government at Hamilton College whose research focuses on civil-military relations, civil war and policing, said, “Trump frequently makes these kinds of deliberately ambiguous statements that can be interpreted in multiple ways.”

But she added that “to understand what another Trump presidency would involve, I think it is more useful to look at his past behavior than to attempt to parse what might be the ‘true meaning’ of any individual set of remarks he makes.” She pointed out that the last time he was in office, “he attempted to subvert the outcome of an election and remain in power longer than the American public voted to keep him there.”

Also:
“Steven Levitsky, a professor of government at Harvard University, and co-author of “Tyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point,” also said that while he didn’t think Trump’s recent comment was “indicative of an organized plot to end elections in the United States,” it did represent yet another sign that “the guy has got authoritarian reflexes.”

“Over the course of 10 or 15 years,” Levitsky added, a growing number of Republicans “convinced themselves that they weren’t going to be able to win elections in this new, multiracial America. I’m not so sure that’s true, but they were deeply fearful that was true. And so Trump, I think more than anything else, he senses … where they’re going and they’re feeling”.

And, absolutely this:

“Levitsky’s co-author, Daniel Ziblatt, also a professor of government at Harvard, put a finer point on the significance of Trump’s comment. “I can’t think of a major candidate for office in any democracy on Earth since at least World War II who speaks in such overtly authoritarian ways,” said Ziblatt. “Not Victor Orban in Hungary, not Recep Erdogan in Turkey. Nowhere.”

And:

Jennifer Mercieca, a communications professor at Texas A&M University and author of “Demagogue for President: The Rhetorical Genius of Donald Trump,” said in an email that she interpreted Trump’s comment as an attempt to address the “double bind” that supposed “strongmen” leaders face……

……“I think Trump is here promising Christians that he will actually solve the problems that he has promised them he’ll solve (a full abortion ban … and various ‘culture war’ issues) and so with all of the problems solved, they won’t feel like the world is so chaotic that they have to vote to save the nation.”


“It’s a big promise,” she added, “and he doesn’t give specific details here.”


As noted, I did not immediately think “he won’t leave office”, but, hey, he already tried it once!! I don’t even understand how the hell he’s even allowed to run again after trying to overthrow the government. Naw, he means it. Just put him in that Oval Office, and he’ll leave the day he dies, not one day sooner….Not ONE day sooner….
He created the biggest lie and hoax around voting in the history of the country. He encouraged his followers to attack the capital and fomented and supported the single biggest attack on our democracy the country has ever seen. Yet somehow we are supposed to believe he won't try to stay in office again? Especially now that the supreme Court has essentially handed him a get-out-of-jail-free card? How ****ing stupid do they think we all are? How stupid is anyone to believe that ****?
 
Well….Trump ambiguous statements do lend themselves to multiple meanings. I blame Trump 100% for that, and I do believe it is often calculated and deliberate.

Various perspectives offered in this piece. I think it is well worth mentioning, that it is very true that Trump is well known by now for ambiguous statements that can be interpreted in more than one way:

“Erica De Bruin, a professor of government at Hamilton College whose research focuses on civil-military relations, civil war and policing, said, “Trump frequently makes these kinds of deliberately ambiguous statements that can be interpreted in multiple ways.”

But she added that “to understand what another Trump presidency would involve, I think it is more useful to look at his past behavior than to attempt to parse what might be the ‘true meaning’ of any individual set of remarks he makes.” She pointed out that the last time he was in office, “he attempted to subvert the outcome of an election and remain in power longer than the American public voted to keep him there.”

Also:
“Steven Levitsky, a professor of government at Harvard University, and co-author of “Tyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point,” also said that while he didn’t think Trump’s recent comment was “indicative of an organized plot to end elections in the United States,” it did represent yet another sign that “the guy has got authoritarian reflexes.”

“Over the course of 10 or 15 years,” Levitsky added, a growing number of Republicans “convinced themselves that they weren’t going to be able to win elections in this new, multiracial America. I’m not so sure that’s true, but they were deeply fearful that was true. And so Trump, I think more than anything else, he senses … where they’re going and they’re feeling”.

And, absolutely this:

“Levitsky’s co-author, Daniel Ziblatt, also a professor of government at Harvard, put a finer point on the significance of Trump’s comment. “I can’t think of a major candidate for office in any democracy on Earth since at least World War II who speaks in such overtly authoritarian ways,” said Ziblatt. “Not Victor Orban in Hungary, not Recep Erdogan in Turkey. Nowhere.”

And:

Jennifer Mercieca, a communications professor at Texas A&M University and author of “Demagogue for President: The Rhetorical Genius of Donald Trump,” said in an email that she interpreted Trump’s comment as an attempt to address the “double bind” that supposed “strongmen” leaders face……

……“I think Trump is here promising Christians that he will actually solve the problems that he has promised them he’ll solve (a full abortion ban … and various ‘culture war’ issues) and so with all of the problems solved, they won’t feel like the world is so chaotic that they have to vote to save the nation.”


“It’s a big promise,” she added, “and he doesn’t give specific details here.”


As noted, I did not immediately think “he won’t leave office”, but, hey, he already tried it once!! I don’t even understand how the hell he’s even allowed to run again after trying to overthrow the government. Naw, he means it. Just put him in that Oval Office, and he’ll leave the day he dies, not one day sooner….Not ONE day sooner….
Everyone should watch Bad Faith

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
You are a straight up bigot if you honestly believe what you just wrote. Ethnic background makes no difference in how hard it is to get an ID. Anyone falling for the 'requiring of voter ID is racist' narrative requires they believe this or that ethnicity is less capable. Anyone parroting that line is a bigot. full stop.

The reason the GOP is pushing voter ID is that it makes ballot harvesting impossible, and no GOP candidate can win a national election if certain key states allow ballot harvesting, which currently they do. Without a voter ID mandate, no GOP candidate can win a national election, and that has nothing to do with fraud. It is based purely on the unfortunate fact the majority of the American voter base is lazy and apathetic which leaves a massive pool of votes proactive gathering campaigns can pull from to help their candidate win an election.
Huh? If ballot harvesting is allowed, happening, and being done by Democrats only then why the **** arent the Republicans doing it?
And why are these harvested ballots by democrats voting for Republican governors, senators, and congress people?

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top