US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians

Status
Not open for further replies.
BidenGIF.gif
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Informative
Reactions: ThisIsGonnaBeGood, The Shredder, ActualCracker and 120 others
Click to expand...
I remember the memes of everybody wanting Tulsi to be their mommy or whatever retarded shit that was, but for her being VP and potential successor to Trump, what the actual fuck?
She isn't a republican, and isn't even pretending to be one (Unlike say, Nicki Failey). That's honestly not a deal-breaker by itself... Most republicans are cucked beyond saving, and we'd be better off without the lot of them, but Tulsi still holds many views that are not compatible with "MAGA". I do admit that there are many worse choices, but that doesn't mean that she's a good one.

The "Rogue" white streak in her hair is pretty badass though.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Dislike
Reactions: Yamma Damma, Lady Round Buns, Breadbassket and 12 others
Seething Troon Collector said:
Only in clown world would you need a court ruling to tell insane people that, no, non-citizens of a country do not have any representation in a election that impacts the citizens of said country/state/municipality.

If they want to affect political change, they can go back and do it in their country of citizenship. I sure as fuck can’t go to ‘their’ country and demand enfranchisement, then fuck off back home once I vote on candidates and therefore policies that won’t have any effect on me.
Click to expand...
Almost none of them want to vote.
The DNC wants them to be eligible to vote so they can join the dead in being their biggest voting bloc.

The only beaners who want to vote are activist/NGO types. The average Pedro and Juan couldn't care less about who the mayor or governor is.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Wendell X, duckbutter&toejamsandwich, Cyber Floyd and 5 others
UnKillShredDur said:
I remember the memes of everybody wanting Tulsi to be their mommy or whatever retarded shit that was, but for her being VP and potential successor to Trump, what the actual fuck?
She isn't a republican, and isn't even pretending to be one (Unlike say, Nicki Failey). That's honestly not a deal-breaker by itself... Most republicans are cucked beyond saving, and we'd be better off without the lot of them, but Tulsi still holds many views that are not compatible with "MAGA". I do admit that there are many worse choices, but that doesn't mean that she's a good one.

The "Rogue" white streak in her hair is pretty badass though.[/ISPOILER]
Click to expand...
She literally quit the DNC because they were dicking over Bernie and she broadly agrees with his platform.
Like, I like her as a fence-sitting centrist (listen if you are an ex-soldier who has huge issues with the DOD after the war on terror I'm going to like you), but I don't understand Republicans liking her as a VP option in the slightest.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Rainbow Idiot, Wendell X, madethistocomment and 6 others
UnKillShredDur said:
I remember the memes of everybody wanting Tulsi to be their mommy or whatever retarded shit that was, but for her being VP and potential successor to Trump, what the actual fuck?
Click to expand...
That simp shit was so fucking cringe, I wouldn't vote for her even if she went full MAGA. Any grown-ass man that unironically calls a woman "mommy" should kill themselves IRL and not in Minecraft.
 
  • Winner
  • Like
  • Feels
Reactions: MrJokerRager, dark night, Wendell X and 23 others
Absolutego said:
She literally quit the DNC because they were dicking over Bernie and she broadly agrees with his platform.
Like, I like her as a fence-sitting centrist (listen if you are an ex-soldier who has huge issues with the DOD after the war on terror I'm going to like you), but I don't understand Republicans liking her as a VP option in the slightest.
Click to expand...
I totally agree. She's a Bernie Bro... (Err.. Bernie Sis.) She isn't even remotely pretending to be maga though, so I don't get why so many people are pretending like she is.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Yamma Damma, duckbutter&toejamsandwich, Drag-on Knight 91873 and 1 other person
Absolutego said:
She literally quit the DNC because they were dicking over Bernie and she broadly agrees with his platform.
Like, I like her as a fence-sitting centrist (listen if you are an ex-soldier who has huge issues with the DOD after the war on terror I'm going to like you), but I don't understand Republicans liking her as a VP option in the slightest.
Click to expand...
Probably has to do with the Republicans becoming more anti-war due to trumps influence (remember back in 2015 they were booing him for being against Iraq but later started coming along to the opinion) so along with being a vet, since she claims she's staunch anti-war they're for it. they're also gullible to think getting a left leaning politician will bring forth the mythical anti-establishment left to join the fight!^tm. I wouldn't want her though. She would turn on trump to further her own career.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drag-on Knight 91873 and The Nothingness
Gehenna said:
That's just it, constantly reinforcing it ironically has the opposite effect after a point and @Your Girlfriend's Dad actually said why. This only works if everyone buys into it.

Well, not truly everyone but let me explain because its something many here will have observed.

Event A Occurs, the media immediately puts out a spin that gives rationale B, the truth is C. Everyone hears B first and the media continues to push it until only a small minority believe C. Any proof of C is thus dismissed for B because "Everyone knows its B". The very idea of C is thus memoryholed and never mentioned again outside of the fringes.

Everyone here has observed this, so why is it not working this time? Simply put, the tactic only works if that initial push manages to immediately make the truth a small minority. So long as it maintains any sort of real presence the push fails to rewrite history. It very well may be the first time it has actually failed and the response from the Media has been... to just keep pushing B. Which only reminds people that there is an alternative and thus means not only is it never memoryholed, it also slowly is gaining traction because the proof now has a foothold to sway opinions.
Click to expand...
There's other, simpler, arguably stupider reasons as well.

Firstly, stupider for the Media and the Ds is what I call Negative Credibility Resonance. Both the government and the media have lost a lot of trust in general, but they keep trying to reinforce each other, rather than striving to distance themselves, and that just amplifies the effect. People who don't like the news wonder why they tongue the government's butthole, and people with issues with the government wonder why the news seems so eager to defend them. It's like a guy who smells like shit trying to clean a guy who smells like piss - soon they both smell like Shit and Piss.

Stupider for the general populace, left and right alike, is that many people associate credibility with competence, we reassess things after the fact, and - perhaps stupidest of all to the edgelords - we assume the general populace is competent enough to generally pick the right choice; we wouldn't believe in voting if we didn't. See a lot of people unironically liking that one South America dictator who actually seems to be fixing things by kicking the right assholes' shins in. If Biden had proven to be generally competent, even just to the point of getting the trains running on time and not letting things crash and burn, people would assume he rightfully won, and the populace had correctly and logically seen that and voted him in. Considering he has so completely and utterly fucked things up, and even now antagonises his base by cheering on the Greatest Ally Ever (sic) people are seeing the obvious, massive parallels between what's wrong and what the trump supporters told them would go wrong, and are wondering how the public made what was in hindsight such an obviously bad choice, eventually deciding it must be because of corruption.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Wendell X, Aurelianus, ShitLurker and 7 others
I am echoing the "no pajeet" rule. Do not redeem!

Sithis said:
Because of her past ties to the WEF
Click to expand...
The problem with this is that it doesn't actually mean as much as you'd think. For decades, the WEF billed itself as a neutral place for politicians and such to gather and discuss world economic issues. Most of the people attending only did so because everyone else was going and they didn't want to miss out.

In a lot of ways it's like those business directory scams, where you pay to be put in a book of people, often with some sort of implied "you're among the elite" messaging. A letter arrives out of the blue, saying something like "you have been selected for membership of an exclusive organisation of entrepreneurs" or whatever, with a "special 90% reduced sign-up fee" and a promise that you'll be ranked amongst the great and good of the world. Then, a few months later, a certificate of membership and a useless directory of people who fell for the same scam turns up. That's what most of the WEF is. You get invited, pay the fee, turn up on the day, and get called a "WEF young global leader".

This is how they cover up the underlying reason for the WEF's existence; by including a huge outer layer of people who are "associated" with the WEF brand, through their attendance and membership of the "davos summit", they can create a situation where anyone who opposes the WEF agenda in any way will still be dismissed by the opposition, because "they're associated with the WEF", even if their association amounted to little more than paying for a vanity award. They can also argue that any crackpot plan the WEF concocts is explicitly endorsed by thousands of members, even though most of them were only there for the hors d'oeuvres and free hookers. Meanwhile, the inner circle concocts its schemes under the cover of the outer party, and only unvails them once it has a critical mass of membership that can be used as interference.

Basically, what I'm saying is, rejecting someone because of "past association" with the WEF is short-sighted. Donald Trump has "past association" with the WEF. The WEF claims that everyone agrees with it, when we all know that's bullshit.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Halfnium Bomb, dark night, Wendell X and 15 others
I think Micheal Flynn would be a good VP pick if just for the fact it would make BlueAnon faggots go insane that Trump is consorting with a "QAnon conspiracy theorist". Not to mention he is a veteran general, with a vendeta against the Fed because of how the railroaded and fucked him over before Trump pardoned him.

He looks like he would go full Caesar is his boss got murdered, which is bound to scare the fuck out of the deep state.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Winner
Reactions: dark night, Esquilax, Wendell X and 22 others
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back