• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

USA news & politics

Gather App
Ragey Erasmus said:
Trump and Obama were both accused prior to the elections of being dictators who wanted to stay in power and would not respect the result.

Do you think these 2 claims are identical and can be treated as such?
Click to expand...
Sat on the kitchen floor icing my knees, no better time to rant on the internet lol...


Well the claims are identical, obviously.

But it would depend on what you mean by 'prior' to the election, which one of Obamas 2, or Trumps 3?

From what I remember of the conspiracies about Obama it started run up to election 2, in an attempt to hinder, and then there were some late term 2, especially theories like jade helm and the Clinton puppetry. Obama had an aligned media, and a more stately opposition back then, I remember maybe a dozen stupid big theories, over his terms and probably as many smaller ones, mostly from Fox news contributors and the wild west that was social media. I have no doubt there could have been som more, but research i provided earlier proves the media were on side with Obama year 1.

Its also easier now to look at Obamas terms, with the fog of memory, and hindsight, with a less influencial and used social media, not to mention the pressure social media puts on media today to capture attention by any means necesary, and compare it to the Trump terms favourably.

In comparison, the perceived threat of Trump wanting a 3rd term or being a dictator is much higher, but realistically I think the chances of him attempting a going full dictator mode, is probably only slightly higher.

For a start, hysteria in 2025 about every little thing Trump does, trumps anything we have seen in history, just wait until the next Democrat president hits, and it reverses the other way. This hysteria clouds the ability to assess the chances of a Trump dictatorship. Just look at the videos posted and attitudes to him making a joke about war lol.

The key differences in the 2 presidents were:

1. Obama had the breeding ground that could have allowed a dictatorship, near total control, all Dems aligned and a media industry mostly happy to act like North Korea on his behalf. The fact that we now look back at the civilian murders, the expansion of drone warfare, and winning a Nobel peace prize while simultaneously bombing 4? Countries mean we were in the dark for a lot of things. This includes his brutal deprtation rate, even this criticism was incredibly mute in comparison to what we have seen with Trump and arguably Biden. Again, social media may be an influence here.

2. Jan 6th. Trump put himself in a bad position with the stop the steal and legal campaigns, although he was not criminally liable, he set the wheels in motion and failed to pump the brakes when things got out of hand. I'd probably caveat this, with Bowsers failings, and others, but thats for another time.


3. The term 'dictators' is used in very different ways for both. With Obama it was regarding his expansion of power, executive order abuse, media in his back pocket, and his response to civil unrest (Ferguson). With Trump its literally every joke, or action he makes, in any way, in every aspect possible.
Trump has, as evidenced by Pew, no media to run defence for him, infact the only platform that has any sort of positive views is X from what I've seen.
So the claims against Obama came from a fringe, or Republicans nobodies and right wingers on small platforms. Obamas era say less than half of Americans on social media, today its more like 95% and its reach and effects on traditional media has been devastating for reasonable people, whereas today there are thousands of people who have millions of followers, meaning criticism of Trump reaches far more people immediately, than could have reached people in 2012.

So to conclude, the accusations fundamentally are the same, with many similarities (id argue Biden probably fits the argument over both of these 2), in how they have acted, however with a few key distinctions making Trump a heavier weighting of the accusation over Obama...

But hey, let's have this discussion in 2029, emotions are high on both sides, with irrational fears on both sides.

I remember having a conversation with friends in 2016, who were absolutely hysterical about Trump deporting every non white person, starting global wars, and destroying the environment predicting total global catastrophe before 2020, hardly proved an accurate prediction didnt it
 
dirty harry said:
Sat on the kitchen floor icing my knees, no better time to rant on the internet lol...


Well the claims are identical, obviously.

But it would depend on what you mean by 'prior' to the election, which one of Obamas 2, or Trumps 3?

From what I remember of the conspiracies about Obama it started run up to election 2, in an attempt to hinder, and then there were some late term 2, especially theories like jade helm and the Clinton puppetry. Obama had an aligned media, and a more stately opposition back then, I remember maybe a dozen stupid big theories, over his terms and probably as many smaller ones, mostly from Fox news contributors and the wild west that was social media. I have no doubt there could have been som more, but research i provided earlier proves the media were on side with Obama year 1.

Its also easier now to look at Obamas terms, with the fog of memory, and hindsight, with a less influencial and used social media, not to mention the pressure social media puts on media today to capture attention by any means necesary, and compare it to the Trump terms favourably.

In comparison, the perceived threat of Trump wanting a 3rd term or being a dictator is much higher, but realistically I think the chances of him attempting a going full dictator mode, is probably only slightly higher.

For a start, hysteria in 2025 about every little thing Trump does, trumps anything we have seen in history, just wait until the next Democrat president hits, and it reverses the other way. This hysteria clouds the ability to assess the chances of a Trump dictatorship. Just look at the videos posted and attitudes to him making a joke about war lol.

The key differences in the 2 presidents were:

1. Obama had the breeding ground that could have allowed a dictatorship, near total control, all Dems aligned and a media industry mostly happy to act like North Korea on his behalf. The fact that we now look back at the civilian murders, the expansion of drone warfare, and winning a Nobel peace prize while simultaneously bombing 4? Countries mean we were in the dark for a lot of things. This includes his brutal deprtation rate, even this criticism was incredibly mute in comparison to what we have seen with Trump and arguably Biden. Again, social media may be an influence here.

2. Jan 6th. Trump put himself in a bad position with the stop the steal and legal campaigns, although he was not criminally liable, he set the wheels in motion and failed to pump the brakes when things got out of hand. I'd probably caveat this, with Bowsers failings, and others, but thats for another time.


3. The term 'dictators' is used in very different ways for both. With Obama it was regarding his expansion of power, executive order abuse, media in his back pocket, and his response to civil unrest (Ferguson). With Trump its literally every joke, or action he makes, in any way, in every aspect possible.
Trump has, as evidenced by Pew, no media to run defence for him, infact the only platform that has any sort of positive views is X from what I've seen.
So the claims against Obama came from a fringe, or Republicans nobodies and right wingers on small platforms. Obamas era say less than half of Americans on social media, today its more like 95% and its reach and effects on traditional media has been devastating for reasonable people, whereas today there are thousands of people who have millions of followers, meaning criticism of Trump reaches far more people immediately, than could have reached people in 2012.

So to conclude, the accusations fundamentally are the same, with many similarities (id argue Biden probably fits the argument over both of these 2), in how they have acted, however with a few key distinctions making Trump a heavier weighting of the accusation over Obama...

But hey, let's have this discussion in 2029, emotions are high on both sides, with irrational fears on both sides.

I remember having a conversation with friends in 2016, who were absolutely hysterical about Trump deporting every non white person, starting global wars, and destroying the environment predicting total global catastrophe before 2020, hardly proved an accurate prediction didnt it
Click to expand...
Yes the claims are identical, but claims are not viewed in a vacuum, the context behind the claim matters. The events that follow on from said claim also matter in terms of determining the validity of it. If you said that someone was likely to be violent, that claim would have very different weight if you said it about a criminal with a history of violence compared to an old lady with a history of being kind and peaceful. You could say exactly the same thing about both but those 2 claims, although identical in terms of what they say, are not identical in the full context of which they are said. One is distinctly more plausible than the other. This is why when you draw comparisons to Democrats etc for the same claims being made, that doesn't make those claims equally valid or show that the motivation behind each is identical.

Let's take the dictator one, Obama was no saint and I'm not going to pretend otherwise but there was never any realistic move by him to stay in power when his time was up. The claim was shown to be completely false. It had minimal credibility before and it had none after. Compare that to Trump, he had been undermining the results before they even arrived. Going into the election he was already engaging in borderline criminal behaviour to achieve his goal. He resorted to blackmailing Ukraine to try to get dirt on a political rival, he tried ordering election representatives to simply find votes for him to win, he tried to get alternative electors selected, he tried to order his VP to ignore the results, he tried forcing courts to nullify the results and it all culminated in him egging on a violent assault on the capitol itself.

So 2 identical claims, 2 very very different results, both before, during and after the election. This is what I'm getting at. simply saying they are the same completely ignores the context that, in one case, reality was very close to making the accusation true. Trump has come closer than any president in certainly centuries of outright overthrowing the democratic process. The fact he failed didn't mean he wasn't trying. Do you think that if he didn't get pushback, he would have restrained himself if any of his attempts could have actually gone forwards? Of course not, he WOULD have tried to overthrow the democratic process if he could.

Now, he doesn't have that same degree of pushback, he has loyalists in key positions for the primary purpose of solidify his control and protecting him. Re-run the above scenario without the blockers and what do you think the outcome is?
 
Ragey Erasmus said:
Yes the claims are identical, but claims are not viewed in a vacuum, the context behind the claim matters. The events that follow on from said claim also matter in terms of determining the validity of it. If you said that someone was likely to be violent, that claim would have very different weight if you said it about a criminal with a history of violence compared to an old lady with a history of being kind and peaceful. You could say exactly the same thing about both but those 2 claims, although identical in terms of what they say, are not identical in the full context of which they are said. One is distinctly more plausible than the other. This is why when you draw comparisons to Democrats etc for the same claims being made, that doesn't make those claims equally valid or show that the motivation behind each is identical.

Let's take the dictator one, Obama was no saint and I'm not going to pretend otherwise but there was never any realistic move by him to stay in power when his time was up. The claim was shown to be completely false. It had minimal credibility before and it had none after. Compare that to Trump, he had been undermining the results before they even arrived. Going into the election he was already engaging in borderline criminal behaviour to achieve his goal. He resorted to blackmailing Ukraine to try to get dirt on a political rival, he tried ordering election representatives to simply find votes for him to win, he tried to get alternative electors selected, he tried to order his VP to ignore the results, he tried forcing courts to nullify the results and it all culminated in him egging on a violent assault on the capitol itself.

So 2 identical claims, 2 very very different results, both before, during and after the election. This is what I'm getting at. simply saying they are the same completely ignores the context that, in one case, reality was very close to making the accusation true. Trump has come closer than any president in certainly centuries of outright overthrowing the democratic process. The fact he failed didn't mean he wasn't trying. Do you think that if he didn't get pushback, he would have restrained himself if any of his attempts could have actually gone forwards? Of course not, he WOULD have tried to overthrow the democratic process if he could.

Now, he doesn't have that same degree of pushback, he has loyalists in key positions for the primary purpose of solidify his control and protecting him. Re-run the above scenario without the blockers and what do you think the outcome is?
Click to expand...

Thats exactly right, the motivations behind claims are important, thanks for acknowledging.

Whoa whoa whoa, you said dictator, but now pivot to 3rd term only. Thats fine, so Obamas accusations of a third term after his 2nd were proved false, whats the outcome of Trumps 3rd term accusation after his 2nd? You cant compare a completed 2nd term, in hindsight, with your predicted accusations going forward. Hats silly.

Your not comparing apples to apples, your comparing apples to omg i hate Trump he touched me in my private area! Your listing trumps backdoor dealings and ignoring Obamas.

Of the 2 of us, one seething with hate toward Trump, who criticises everything he does and tries to make the argument that jokes are deep seeded beliefs, the other who doesnt like him, but acknowledges positives and negatives, can view him objectively and doesnt allow emotion to cloud judgement, who is in the better position to judge?

Just look at the language you use, egging on violence, thats nonsense for a man who continually used the word peaceful and talked about law and order in speech. You have him promoting violence, I have him as setting wheels in motion and failing to take responsibility for pumping the brakes. My analysis is much more nuanced than your literal Democrat talking points.

No, reality didnt almost make Trump a dictator, his stupidity in 2020 was in keeping with his regular stupidity, the situations was actually elevated his standing with the American public, why is that? People saw the speech, listened to Democrats lie about him calling for violence, and 3 odd million MORE people decided he was their guy. I won't defend Trump over the Jan 6th and election stuff, it all must be condemned, but also should the stupidity from the Democrats, refusing guard to help capitol police, lying about Trumps speech, and the outrage of a group of people rampaging (lol) around the capitol, when they promoted months of rioting all over the country the year previous.

This is exactly what im talking about by giving Trump carte blanche with stupid faux hysteria. It doesnt work, it literally radicalised numerous people to attempt on Trumps life, the shooting essentially winning him 2024!

So you can complain about him not having the same degree of pushback, but you have to take responsibility in helping that scenario, not to a great extent personally, but in creating an atmosphere of scaring and intimidating nearly 80 million Americans who genuinely believe the establishment are out to get them, Holly wood movies are telling them they are dumb and racist, hell even you have vilified them today as bad, wanting to harm and lacking any intention to help...

Americans are simple creatures, they agree with freedom, immigration management, and the constitution, and the Democrats seem to have found themselves on the opposing side to those issues. They need to rectify that quickly!

So you can weigh Trump dictatorial chances higher, as do, but you have to be honest about the context of why, and not hysterically scream he is literally Hitler, and anyone who disagrees is (insert ad hominims you like tou use against me).
 
Last edited:
dirty harry said:
Thats exactly right, the motivations behind claims are important, thanks for acknowledging.

Whoa whoa whoa, you said dictator, but now pivot to 3rd term only. Thats fine, so Obamas accusations of a third term after his 2nd were proved false, whats the outcome of Trumps 3rd term accusation after his 2nd? You cant compare a completed 2nd term, in hindsight, with your predicted accusations going forward. Hats silly.

Your not comparing apples to apples, your comparing apples to omg i hate Trump he touched me in my private area! Your listing trumps backdoor dealings and ignoring Obamas.

Of the 2 of us, one seething with hate toward Trump, who criticises everything he does and tries to make the argument that jokes are deep seeded beliefs, the other who doesnt like him, but acknowledges positives and negatives, can view him objectively and doesnt allow emotion to cloud judgement, who is in the better position to judge?

Just look at the language you use, egging on violence, thats nonsense for a man who continually used the word peaceful and talked about law and order in a speech. You have him promoting violence, I have him as setting wheels in motion and failing to take responsibility for pumping the brakes. My analysis is much more nuanced than your literal Democrat talking points.

No, reality didnt almost make Trump a dictator, his stupidity in 2020 was in keeping with his regular stupidity, the situations was actually elevated his standing with the American public, why is that? People saw the speech, listened to Democrats lie about him calling for violence, and 3 odd million MORE people decided he was their guy. I won't defend Trump over the Jan 6th and election stuff, it all must be condemned, but also should the stupidity from the Democrats, refusing guard to help capitol police, lying about Trumps speech, and the outrage of a group of people rampaging (lol) around the capitol, when they promoted months of rioting all over the country the year previous.

This is exactly what im talking about by giving Trump carte blanche with stupid faux hysteria. It doesnt work, it literally radicalised numerous people to attempt on Trumps life, the shooting essentially winning him 2024!

So you can complain about him not having the same degree of pushback, but you have to take responsibility in helping that scenario, not to a great extent personally, but in creating an atmosphere of scaring and intimidating nearly 80 million Americans who genuinely believe the establishment are out to get them, Holly wood movies are telling them they are dumb and racist, hell even you have vilified them today as bad, wanting to harm and lacking any intention to help...

Americans are simple creatures, they agree with freedom, immigration management, and the constitution, and the Democrats seem to have found themselves on the opposing side to those issues. They need to rectify that quickly!

So you can weigh Trump dictatorial chances higher, as do, but you have to be honest about the context of why, and not hysterically scream he is literally Hitler, and anyone who disagrees is (insert ad hominims you like tou use against me).
Click to expand...
I haven't pivoted to "just" a 3rd term, I'm talking about a president undermining or outright discarding the entire democratic process. That is at the very heart of dictatorship.

It's nothing to do with 3rd terms, nowhere did I mention a 3rd term in my comment. My comment was about subverting the democratic process. Whether than occurs at the end of a 1st or 2nd term has little matter and trying to portray it that way is a complete strawman. I am definitely comparing apples with apples, although it's funny you've gone from arguing that they are the same to now arguing they are completely different and not comparable, this is why I insult you, you are utterly shameless in how you abandon a position and claim you never held it.

You have a list of comparable "backdoor dealings" Obama did to subvert the election? Go ahead, find me something comparable. This is you doing your usual both sides bullshit with nothing to substantiate it. You are also making childish comments, this is not a "Trump touched me in my private area" thing, this is things Trump actually did. Clear, objective reality.

You aren't this bastion of reason that you claim to be and it's hilarious you try to portray yourself as such. I listed factual things Trump did and your response is "waaah you h8 Trump so much". You don't address a single claim, you ignore the merits of a claim being made because it actually happened, you then assert vague things that Obama did but give no examples and then do your usual both sides nonsense. Again, you aren't the great judge you think you are, you are the Jordan Peterson of this forum, just obfuscating and denying but presenting nothing in return.

Yes I have him promoting violence. The violence happened precisely because of what he said and told his supporters to think. He also demanded metal detectors be removed and that his supporters not be searched for weapons. He stated he wasn't afraid because they were "his people", not because they were peaceful. Trumps remarks were not promoting peace at all, nor were they about law and order. He openly stated the election was stolen, he said he would not concede, he told his supporters to fight like hell. In fact he only used the word "peacefully" once in his speech, whilst he used the word fight 20 times, so again you are lying claiming he "continually" used the word peaceful, he used it ONCE. Again this is why I insult you, you are a ******* liar.

https://apnews.com/article/election...-siege-media-e79eb5164613d6718e9f4502eb471f27 Here is the full transcript of his speech, go ahead and do a search for "peace", see how many times it pops up. Oh that's right, once. Now do the same for fight. How about steal, stolen, illegal, corrupt, fraud, lie? But you want to pretend his speech was all about peace and lawfulness? Yeah you can **** right off with your lies.

I tried to engage by stating simple facts of what happened and you are still operating in pearl clutching mode, still offering up no evidence, still "both sides" it, still lying. This is why I insult you Harry, you have no integrity.

But I notice again you failed to answer a simple question: If the people had done what Trump had told them to the first time round, do you think he would have accepted the election result or do you think he would have pushed ahead to stay in power. Simple question.
 
Ragey Erasmus said:
I haven't pivoted to "just" a 3rd term, I'm talking about a president undermining or outright discarding the entire democratic process. That is at the very heart of dictatorship.

It's nothing to do with 3rd terms, nowhere did I mention a 3rd term in my comment. My comment was about subverting the democratic process. Whether than occurs at the end of a 1st or 2nd term has little matter and trying to portray it that way is a complete strawman. I am definitely comparing apples with apples, although it's funny you've gone from arguing that they are the same to now arguing they are completely different and not comparable, this is why I insult you, you are utterly shameless in how you abandon a position and claim you never held it.

You have a list of comparable "backdoor dealings" Obama did to subvert the election? Go ahead, find me something comparable. This is you doing your usual both sides bullshit with nothing to substantiate it. You are also making childish comments, this is not a "Trump touched me in my private area" thing, this is things Trump actually did. Clear, objective reality.

You aren't this bastion of reason that you claim to be and it's hilarious you try to portray yourself as such. I listed factual things Trump did and your response is "waaah you h8 Trump so much". You don't address a single claim, you ignore the merits of a claim being made because it actually happened, you then assert vague things that Obama did but give no examples and then do your usual both sides nonsense. Again, you aren't the great judge you think you are, you are the Jordan Peterson of this forum, just obfuscating and denying but presenting nothing in return.

Yes I have him promoting violence. The violence happened precisely because of what he said and told his supporters to think. He also demanded metal detectors be removed and that his supporters not be searched for weapons. He stated he wasn't afraid because they were "his people", not because they were peaceful. Trumps remarks were not promoting peace at all, nor were they about law and order. He openly stated the election was stolen, he said he would not concede, he told his supporters to fight like hell. In fact he only used the word "peacefully" once in his speech, whilst he used the word fight 20 times, so again you are lying claiming he "continually" used the word peaceful, he used it ONCE. Again this is why I insult you, you are a ******* liar.

https://apnews.com/article/election...-siege-media-e79eb5164613d6718e9f4502eb471f27 Here is the full transcript of his speech, go ahead and do a search for "peace", see how many times it pops up. Oh that's right, once. Now do the same for fight. How about steal, stolen, illegal, corrupt, fraud, lie? But you want to pretend his speech was all about peace and lawfulness? Yeah you can **** right off with your lies.

I tried to engage by stating simple facts of what happened and you are still operating in pearl clutching mode, still offering up no evidence, still "both sides" it, still lying. This is why I insult you Harry, you have no integrity.

But I notice again you failed to answer a simple question: If the people had done what Trump had told them to the first time round, do you think he would have accepted the election result or do you think he would have pushed ahead to stay in power. Simple question.
Click to expand...

"move by him to stay in power when his time was up."

For a 3rd term.... but i the your point, you pivoted to relinquishing power and not alm the other tenets of dictatorship, like the ones I used.

Would you consider Zelensky a dictator by any chance?

This is where you make me giggle, your justifying your insults, based on an argument I never made and compared it to an argument I never made. Ive been very consistent, and its easy to see if you are rational. At no point have I said that Trump and Obama were the same, the claims against both were the same, but I listed a myriad of differences of types of claim, and claimants, and weighted the claims differently, using context, and reason to discuss the differences in culture, technology, hindsight, and rationale of differing types of tenets of dictatorship.

I think where your struggling, is your so desperate to make me an enemy, your seeing my benevolent points, and through lack of empathy or willingness to learn, your assuming the worst intention purposefully to fit your narrative. And I dont know why you do this, because as ive said 1 million times, this attitude, your attitude right here is exactly the problem.

When a MAGA supporters makes a claim to me, I listen, research and either agree or combat it, you are totally unable to listen to the claim, without inferring malice, and your only instinct is to contradict, insult or bully. Now to me that doesnt sound like what you are interested in is truth or conversation, to me it feels like what you want is to humiliate, or even harm.

When I talk about radicalisation, it probably evokes a response, and I get it, but you must understand this is how you behave, not that im trying to upset you.

But hey, lets look at what happened on thenday, you call me a liar for:

Claiming Trump continually used the word peaceful, and talked law and order.

"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."

"Stay peaceful!"

"Remain peaceful. No violence!"

"…the men and women of law enforcement are incredible."

"We love our police."

"I am asking for everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful. No violence! Remember, WE are the Party of Law & Order – respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue."

"Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country."

"Go home in peace… love you, you are very special."

"And after this, we're going to walk down — and I'll be there with you — we're going to walk down to the Capitol, and we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women... and we're probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them."

There we go, direct quotes, through various forms, speech, tweet, video...


But let's get into the fight quotes, they must be damning no?

"We're going to fight like hell."

"You have to show strength."

"We fight for the future of this country."

"We will never back down."

"This is our country, and we have to fight for it."

"We have to be strong"

Are these included in the 20? These damning calls for violence?!

Jesus the balls on you man, to ignore what you want, the parts of the speech, the tweets of calling for calm, the video asking for a resolution, then the Condemnation of violence, and to utilise some pretty geeneric terms in calls to be strong, resilient and stubnorn, and present them as calls for violence.

You dont catch me defending Trump.on Jan 6th, ive said about 3 times already he was at fault, but you also dont catch me painting a one sided picture, or come to think of it foaming at the mouth hahaha

My stance on Jan 6th is consistent, Trump was at fault, but did nothing criminal. I can go and re quote myself if it helps...

"I have him as setting wheels in motion and failing to take responsibility for pumping the brakes"
"Trump put himself in a bad position with the stop the steal and legal campaigns, although he was not criminally liable, he set the wheels in motion and failed to pump the brakes when things got out of hand. I'd probably caveat this"

I just dont jndersyand why Trump evokes such a vitriolic emotionally charged response in some of you, i can only assume its because of the content you consume that os designed to enrage. I mean, look at the barrage posted on this thread, your going to look back on day, when Trump is out of office, everything settles down, your all sat around agreeing about how amazing madam democrat president is, and think, geez what were we so scared of, that total global collapse of war, environment, finance, and US democracy just never happened, did the media, were they exaggerating?
 
dirty harry said:
"move by him to stay in power when his time was up."

For a 3rd term.... but i the your point, you pivoted to relinquishing power and not alm the other tenets of dictatorship, like the ones I used.

Would you consider Zelensky a dictator by any chance?

This is where you make me giggle, your justifying your insults, based on an argument I never made and compared it to an argument I never made. Ive been very consistent, and its easy to see if you are rational. At no point have I said that Trump and Obama were the same, the claims against both were the same, but I listed a myriad of differences of types of claim, and claimants, and weighted the claims differently, using context, and reason to discuss the differences in culture, technology, hindsight, and rationale of differing types of tenets of dictatorship.

I think where your struggling, is your so desperate to make me an enemy, your seeing my benevolent points, and through lack of empathy or willingness to learn, your assuming the worst intention purposefully to fit your narrative. And I dont know why you do this, because as ive said 1 million times, this attitude, your attitude right here is exactly the problem.

When a MAGA supporters makes a claim to me, I listen, research and either agree or combat it, you are totally unable to listen to the claim, without inferring malice, and your only instinct is to contradict, insult or bully. Now to me that doesnt sound like what you are interested in is truth or conversation, to me it feels like what you want is to humiliate, or even harm.

When I talk about radicalisation, it probably evokes a response, and I get it, but you must understand this is how you behave, not that im trying to upset you.

But hey, lets look at what happened on thenday, you call me a liar for:

Claiming Trump continually used the word peaceful, and talked law and order.

"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."

"Stay peaceful!"

"Remain peaceful. No violence!"

"…the men and women of law enforcement are incredible."

"We love our police."

"I am asking for everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful. No violence! Remember, WE are the Party of Law & Order – respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue."

"Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country."

"Go home in peace… love you, you are very special."

"And after this, we're going to walk down — and I'll be there with you — we're going to walk down to the Capitol, and we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women... and we're probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them."

There we go, direct quotes, through various forms, speech, tweet, video...


But let's get into the fight quotes, they must be damning no?

"We're going to fight like hell."

"You have to show strength."

"We fight for the future of this country."

"We will never back down."

"This is our country, and we have to fight for it."

"We have to be strong"

Are these included in the 20? These damning calls for violence?!

Jesus the balls on you man, to ignore what you want, the parts of the speech, the tweets of calling for calm, the video asking for a resolution, then the Condemnation of violence, and to utilise some pretty geeneric terms in calls to be strong, resilient and stubnorn, and present them as calls for violence.

You dont catch me defending Trump.on Jan 6th, ive said about 3 times already he was at fault, but you also dont catch me painting a one sided picture, or come to think of it foaming at the mouth hahaha

My stance on Jan 6th is consistent, Trump was at fault, but did nothing criminal. I can go and re quote myself if it helps...

"I have him as setting wheels in motion and failing to take responsibility for pumping the brakes"
"Trump put himself in a bad position with the stop the steal and legal campaigns, although he was not criminally liable, he set the wheels in motion and failed to pump the brakes when things got out of hand. I'd probably caveat this"

I just dont jndersyand why Trump evokes such a vitriolic emotionally charged response in some of you, i can only assume its because of the content you consume that os designed to enrage. I mean, look at the barrage posted on this thread, your going to look back on day, when Trump is out of office, everything settles down, your all sat around agreeing about how amazing madam democrat president is, and think, geez what were we so scared of, that total global collapse of war, environment, finance, and US democracy just never happened, did the media, were they exaggerating?
Click to expand...
You still haven't answered the simple question and I'm going to keep asking it until you do, if Trump had not faced the blockers he did at the end of his first term and had been able to enact any of the things he was trying to, do you think he would have proceeded to try to stay in power or would have restrained himself and not done it? These include:
- Having the votes changed in the states to show he won
- Accepting alternate electors who would vote against how the populace voted
- Throwing out votes entirely for Democrat areas he lost to give him enough to win
- Having the VP nullify the result

He tried and failed with all the above so don't bother lying again and saying he wouldn't have tried.

Why would I discuss other points of dictatorship when that was never my argument? Taking control of the democratic system is one of the first steps in establishing a dictatorship that is not achieved through brute force alone. To separate dismantling the democratic system as somehow now dictatorial is nonsense.

Did Zelensky fabricate the scenario he is in to remain in power? In fact can you name any country that has had elections whilst being invaded and occupied? Pointless strawman.

No, you have been anything but consistent. You claimed Republicans were in the doldrums and that Trump saved them, then you claimed you never conflated their fortunes despite doing so, then you deny claiming they were in the doldrums and actually it was always obvious they would get record breaking wins prior to Trump taking power. You responded to an accusation against Trump by claiming the same accusations against Obama, now you deny you were trivialising it by making out they were the same. Just yet more lying.

Aha oh lovely you post a bunch of tweets about him saying be peaceful, did you bother to check when he did that? He posted those tweets AFTER the storming had already been ongoing, not before. So again, your claims he was promoting peace and law and order in the build up to the riot is a lie and one you continue to build on. FFS stop lying. https://www.factcheck.org/2023/02/t...ets-exonerating-him-for-jan-6-capitol-attack/

You realise incitement to riot doesn't have to have someone literally saying "we need to riot" right? He repeatedly talks about corruption, about criminality, about losing their country, about fighting, about lies etc and whips his supporters into a frenzy, this all happens BEFORE the events. Again you show what a piece of work you are by trying to pretend that some insufficient tweets he posted after the event a literally a single ******* line in which he mentions being peaceful proves he was all peace and law and order but about 60 lines of calls to fight, lying, calling the whole thing corrupt, saying they won't concede etc immediately before the event somehow is irrelvant. Again, this is why I insult you, you have absolutely zero integrity.

You don't understand why a serial liar, criminal, narcissist who tried to overthrow the entire democratic process gets hated by me? Take one ******* guess. I happen to think arseholes who try to dismantle an entire country for their benefit are worthy of hatred. I think people who defraud charities and people are worthy of hatred. I think liars, cheats, thieves are deserving of it and I think when you roll all that into one person, they definitely deserve it.
 
Saintjay said:
Definitely get why people didn't vote for the Dems. I might don't agree why people voted for Trump but get why they did.
Click to expand...
thats what ive always struggled with...because i dont actually disagreed with all of the actual policies (strong border for example).....but if it was about policies then why didn't the Republicans find someone more likeable to the other side to spout the same policies...they might have even attracted a few more centralists....at the core i feel a LOT of people like all his "grab em by the pussy" BS
 
"You claimed Republicans were in the doldrums and that Trump saved them, then you claimed you never conflated their fortunes despite doing so, then you deny claiming they were in the doldrums and actually it was always obvious they would get record breaking wins prior to Trump taking power."

Are you having a stroke?! You've totally mischaracterised everything ive said to fit a narrative you've made up in your head hahaha

Republicans were decimated by Obama 09, Tea party saw minor success in midterms, but ultimately failed in their gameplan, a mid term trends we see very regularly in favour of the opposition, Republicans then we're smashed in 2012, then saw the usual trend of gains midterms, before heading into the primaries in a real bad position, with Sanders looking strong, before Clinton emerged as clear favourite. Republicans didnt have a front runner, they were divided and confused, Trump steamrolled the Republicans, as ive told you numerous times. This is a clear and consistent stance, im not surenof you've been drinking, but this isnt making you look good.

Those quotes range from some speech quotes before the protest turned bad, then around 3pm, 4pm and 5pm tweets and videos... hence why my stance is (i cant beleive I have to keep blwdi repeating myself) that he set the wheels in motion and failed to pump the brakes!

Name me where ive said what Trump said is irrelevant, im going to wait right here for you to quote me, where ive stayed what he said was irrelevant and did nothing wrong. When you cant ill expect an apology.

This is what im talking about, your fabricating arguments not made, its delusion, and yes, im inferring the most charitable description of your actions. I cant keep having to repeat myself, ive criticised Trump 5 times now? My stance is so simple, trumps a ********, your a drama queen!

But all of this is irrelevant, let me flip flop for a second, you are right, Trump is a monster, a dictator, a lying, cheating scumbag hell bent on overturning democracy in the USA and is absolutely deserving of your hatred...

What are you doing about it? If i felt that way, i would act. I couldn't be able to sit back and allow this to happen, I would not be able to not do something, how radical that something was I dont know, but if I was as worked up and believed what you do it might be pretty radical.

So this is your 1930 Germany what would I do on that scenario moment, you get to chose bravery or cowardice, what are you going to do about this evil, that will definately effect all of us real soon?
 
Kiwiwomble said:
thats what ive always struggled with...because i dont actually disagreed with all of the actual policies (strong border for example).....but if it was about policies then why didn't the Republicans find someone more likeable to the other side to spout the same policies...they might have even attracted a few more centralists....at the core i feel a LOT of people like all his "grab em by the pussy" BS
Click to expand...

I think its a combination, Republicans were in a bad position, the primaries in 2016 had a bad field, noone resonated with the centre, the lineup was awful.... the Republicans didnt want Trump, leaders condemned him, and sitting senators refused to vote for him. That combined with his ability to be a bad ass, it is appealing as an anti establishment candidate in a system people were frustrated with.
 
dirty harry said:
"You claimed Republicans were in the doldrums and that Trump saved them, then you claimed you never conflated their fortunes despite doing so, then you deny claiming they were in the doldrums and actually it was always obvious they would get record breaking wins prior to Trump taking power."

Are you having a stroke?! You've totally mischaracterised everything ive said to fit a narrative you've made up in your head hahaha

Republicans were decimated by Obama 09, Tea party saw minor success in midterms, but ultimately failed in their gameplan, a mid term trends we see very regularly in favour of the opposition, Republicans then we're smashed in 2012, then saw the usual trend of gains midterms, before heading into the primaries in a real bad position, with Sanders looking strong, before Clinton emerged as clear favourite. Republicans didnt have a front runner, they were divided and confused, Trump steamrolled the Republicans, as ive told you numerous times. This is a clear and consistent stance, im not surenof you've been drinking, but this isnt making you look good.

Those quotes range from some speech quotes before the protest turned bad, then around 3pm, 4pm and 5pm tweets and videos... hence why my stance is (i cant beleive I have to keep blwdi repeating myself) that he set the wheels in motion and failed to pump the brakes!

Name me where ive said what Trump said is irrelevant, im going to wait right here for you to quote me, where ive stayed what he said was irrelevant and did nothing wrong. When you cant ill expect an apology.

This is what im talking about, your fabricating arguments not made, its delusion, and yes, im inferring the most charitable description of your actions. I cant keep having to repeat myself, ive criticised Trump 5 times now? My stance is so simple, trumps a ********, your a drama queen!

But all of this is irrelevant, let me flip flop for a second, you are right, Trump is a monster, a dictator, a lying, cheating scumbag hell bent on overturning democracy in the USA and is absolutely deserving of your hatred...

What are you doing about it? If i felt that way, i would act. I couldn't be able to sit back and allow this to happen, I would not be able to not do something, how radical that something was I dont know, but if I was as worked up and believed what you do it might be pretty radical.

So this is your 1930 Germany what would I do on that scenario moment, you get to chose bravery or cowardice, what are you going to do about this evil, that will definately effect all of us real soon?
Click to expand...
So you still haven't answered the basic question, you're not going to get away with just ignoring it.

If Trump had not faced the blockers he did at the end of his first term and had been able to enact any of the things he was trying to, do you think he would have proceeded to try to stay in power or would have restrained himself and not done it? These include:
- Having the votes changed in the states to show he won
- Accepting alternate electors who would vote against how the populace voted
- Throwing out votes entirely for Democrat areas he lost to give him enough to win
- Having the VP nullify the result

He tried and failed with all the above so don't bother lying again and saying he wouldn't have tried.

I can answer the rest of your pack of lies after but you're not getting around this. Answer the damn question.
 
Ragey Erasmus said:
So you still haven't answered the basic question, you're not going to get away with just ignoring it.

If Trump had not faced the blockers he did at the end of his first term and had been able to enact any of the things he was trying to, do you think he would have proceeded to try to stay in power or would have restrained himself and not done it? These include:
- Having the votes changed in the states to show he won
- Accepting alternate electors who would vote against how the populace voted
- Throwing out votes entirely for Democrat areas he lost to give him enough to win
- Having the VP nullify the result

He tried and failed with all the above so don't bother lying again and saying he wouldn't have tried.

I can answer the rest of your pack of lies after but you're not getting around this. Answer the damn question.
Click to expand...

Mate you've ignored my questions, while insisting on specific answers lol.

Im bored of your pretence for one day, the fact is your doing nothing to combat the fascism and dictatorship, because you dont believe what your saying.

The very fact you need to misrepresent, exaggerate, and coerce every action to something more, tells me you dont truly believe what your saying.

Your 20 words of fight copy pasted, and you didn't consider every world leader talks about strengtht, resilience and fighting. Infact Starmer said recently he was going to fight starmer, uh oh, is he telling people to be violent?!?! Infact he regularly uses the word multiple times per speech, dozens of times this year...

But we know Its BS narrative building, straight from Chris Cuomos mouth lol, he literally made the 20 fights to 1 peaceful comments, but again, it doesnt matter does it, you dont believe it.
 

Similar threads

Kiwiwomble
Local Club Rugby
Replies
9
Views
3K
Kiwiwomble
Kiwiwomble
Which Tyler
Proposed law changes - 2024 edition
Replies
9
Views
4K
AlRums
AlRums
4
"Ten simple and effective law changes that should be made to rugby refereeing"
2
Replies
24
Views
3K
Reiser99
R
Y
Blaming
Replies
6
Views
1K
Bruce_ma gooshvili
Bruce_ma gooshvili
Bruce_ma gooshvili
The 'problem' of Leinster 'dominance'
3 4 5
Replies
87
Views
13K
higgik
H

Latest posts

Back
Top