Trump Derangement Syndrome - Orange man bad. Read the OP! (ᴛʜɪs ᴛʜʀᴇᴀᴅ ɪs ʟɪᴋᴇ ᴋɪᴡɪ ғᴀʀᴍs ʀᴇᴠɪᴇᴡs ɴᴏᴡ) 🗿🗿🗿🗿

[Iceland Heavy]

"We need gun control! Stronger background checks! More regulations!"
Trump: We need stronger background checks.
CNN: Here's how background checks hurt minorities and are bad, actually.

I swear to fucking God.

I don't think it's just reflexive orange man bad contrarianism, they're also letting the mask of gun confiscation slip, same as when a shooting happens in a state that already has heavy gun regulations (like the garlic festival in CA just before actually). Then they start talking about how common sense gun regulations just don't work until it's nearly impossible to get a gun in every state.

 

[Dante Alighieri]

Liberals don’t seem to understand that. Firstly, taking guns away isn’t going to stop the people who already have them from using them. And even if they do get taken away, all that’s every going to do is stop good people from getting them while incentivizing illegal methods of obtaining them. They’d only make the situation worse, but of course, they can see past their veil of idiocy.

They do understand. They know exactly what they're doing, they have all the stats and evidence proving them wrong. They want to disarm the populace to subjugate them/us.

 

[AprilRains]

"We need gun control! Stronger background checks! More regulations!"
Trump: We need stronger background checks.
CNN: Here's how background checks hurt minorities and are bad, actually.

I swear to fucking God.

Looney Tunes was a better preparation for my future than ever I thought.

 

[MirrorNoir]

With these tweets accompanied with the fact that he put all money on Hillary winning, I am convinced Nate Silver is either an idiot or shilling for someone. Maybe both.

Silver is a guy who has been riding the fame he got successfully predicting both of Obama's elections, even after it became apparent that he's a hack who got lucky with said predictions.

His chief supporters are all members of the Democrat elite, because he tells them what they want to hear. Hence him fucking up as badly as he did in 2010 and 2016.

He was also one of the chief pushers of the "demographic shift" meme after 2012 that said that demographic shifts make it impossible for the right to win an election off the white male vote.

He won't ever give results that make the Democrats look bad, because they are the people who push the meme that he's always right and bury the story when he fucks up.

 

[heyitsmike]

Silver is a guy who has been riding the fame he got successfully predicting both of Obama's elections, even after it became apparent that he's a hack who got lucky with said predictions.

His chief supporters are all members of the Democrat elite, because he tells them what they want to hear. Hence him fucking up as badly as he did in 2010 and 2016.

He was also one of the chief pushers of the "demographic shift" meme after 2012 that said that demographic shifts make it impossible for the right to win an election off the white male vote.

He won't ever give results that make the Democrats look bad, because they are the people who push the meme that he's always right and bury the story when he fucks up.

The problem with Nate Silver is not his statistical analysis. The problem with Nate Silver is that he is an absolutely terrible political pundit masquerading as an expert on the strength of his reputation as a statistician.

If it can't be expressed as a number he can't see it, understand it or account for it. You can't assign a mathematical value to an image of 10 presidential candidates raising their hands to give away free, taxpayer funded healthcare to people who don't even respect our laws and sovereignty enough to not illegally enter.

 

[Ashen One]

I wonder if these people understand you don't have to be some starry-eyed worshiper who thinks Trump is the literal Christ Child who will deliver us to the promised land to be willing to vote for him again. You don't even necessarily have to like him. You just have be really uninterested in what the other guy is selling.

Even better. You don't have to listen to Trump at all, just pay any attention to the candidates opposing him.

"Abortions for trans men." brought up as an important point in the debate.
Wanting to raise taxes to pay for illegal immigrants.
"Dark Psychic Energies."
High school level spanish in the debates.
Campaigning in Mexico to become US president.
"Medicare for all!" but not raising their hands when asked if they would use it.

Trump's campaign promise could be "I will do nothing for four years." and it would still be better than what his opposition is offering at the moment.

 

[BR55]

And yet you're still going to get people who insist Orange Man doesn't know exactly what he's doing.

You know it's not even some 4D Chess move that he does.
All he does is say a thing and then the Left rush off to make asses of themselves because "Trump is Always Wrong" and by God the people must know how wrong he is.
That line of thought is what's fundamentally wrong with "Resisting" someone instead of merely opposing them.

 

[CheezzyMach]

You know it's not even some 4D Chess move that he does.
All he does is say a thing and then the Left rush off to make asses of themselves because "Trump is Always Wrong" and by God the people must know how wrong he is.
That line of thought is what's fundamentally wrong with "Resisting" someone instead of merely opposing them.

Pretty much, at this point the Left has no platform except "free" healthcare and being contrarian faggots.

Like others said that shit did wonders for Romney's election attempts against Obama.

 

[Lucas Silva #4903141]

This is trending in New York.
Is this just another example of TDS and "it's never enough"? Sure looks like it

 

[Flexo]

They must think that drumming up the perception that anyone who votes Trump is an evil pariah will trigger crowd psychology, making Trump fans ask "Are we the baddies?".

Sarah Hoyt recently had a piece on that you may enjoy.

Sheep and Goats

The left is more social than the right. In general. By which I don’t mean they’re more socialist (they’re that too right now, and therein lies their danger, in embracing an anti…

accordingtohoyt.com

Relevant passage:

I think if you have a two-party system, you’re always going to have a system that is more responsive to those who want a group and to really fit in well with the group, and those who just want to be left alone.​

. . .​

This is how the left gets obsessed with things, and all pile on them/imagine it happened to them/see them everywhere. They have a mob mentality, and they become a “distributed mob.”​

It’s all ape-signaling up and down the line.​

It’s baffling for us, who aren’t part of it, or inclined to it, and we tend to think it is on purpose, it’s a strategy and that it was planned.​

Oh, sometimes, perhaps. But most of the time it doesn’t need to be. There is no conspiracy, just everyone wanting to be seen as being right and smart and good.​

They do understand. They know exactly what they're doing, they have all the stats and evidence proving them wrong. They want to disarm the populace to subjugate them/us.

Picture from the protests in Hong Kong.

 

[ES 195]

Picture from the protests in Hong Kong.
View attachment 878265

They need the 1st amendment as well.
Hell I also wish my country had both, they're really good things for countries to have.

 

[Flexo]

I notice very very few of these terrorists come from what we might call an "intact home."

For those who want the numbers.

Link between mass shooters, absent fathers ignored by anti-gun activists

Gun control activists are quick to blame mass shootings on the proliferation of firearms, but are less likely to point to the proliferation of fatherless households.

amp.washingtontimes.com

“Out of this sample of 56 school shooters, only 10 (18%) grew up in a stable home with both biological parents,” Mr. Langman wrote in a 2016 article. “In other words, 82% of the sample either grew up in dysfunctional families or without their parents together (for at least part of their lives).”

Nikolas Cruz, the Parkland, Florida, shooter, fits the profile. He was given up for adoption at birth, and his adoptive father suffered a fatal heart attack when he was just 5 years old. Just a few months before the shooting, his adoptive mother died of pneumonia.

 

[Jarolleon]

Liberals don’t seem to understand that. Firstly, taking guns away isn’t going to stop the people who already have them from using them. And even if they do get taken away, all that’s every going to do is stop good people from getting them while incentivizing illegal methods of obtaining them. They’d only make the situation worse, but of course, they can see past their veil of idiocy.

Maybe they think that the total number of guns will decrease as civilian gun factories go out of business.

 

[verissimus]

Joaquin Castro Posts Names, Employers Of Trump Donors

Joaquin Castro posted the names and employers of 44 San Antonio residents who donated the federal maximum to President Donald Trump's reelection campaign.

dailycaller.com

Doxx them all! Doxx them until they submit. Again, I ask, how is it not obvious to general observers these people are on a warpath which won't be satiated by simply beating their political opponents for just this round.

 

[It's HK-47]

They were literally outside of his home screaming about cutting out his fucking heart but sure let's go with that headline, you cocks.

 

[Jigglyjogglers]

Joaquin Castro Posts Names, Employers Of Trump Donors

Joaquin Castro posted the names and employers of 44 San Antonio residents who donated the federal maximum to President Donald Trump's reelection campaign.

dailycaller.com

Doxx them all! Doxx them until they submit. Again, I ask, how is it not obvious to general observers these people are on a warpath which won't be satiated by simply beating their political opponents for just this round.

View attachment 878371

They were literally outside of his home screaming about cutting out his fucking heart but sure let's go with that headline, you cocks.

See, shit like this is why I don't think Trump's hypothetical reelection in 2020 would be a dash of cold water for the left. They're too all-in on this, they've let the mask slip too far, they've got their bloodthirst too amped up. At this point, with the frenzy they've worked themselves into, they're not going to just be able to calm themselves down and go home, they're invested in the calls for violence, they're hungry for the flesh of their enemies like starving animals.

There's gonna be violence. A lot of violence. How long or how organized is the only question now. Another frenzy of much more violent and destructive rioting is probably the answer, but I don't think we'll get out of this one without a pretty significant death toll, because this time they're not going to hold themselves to looting shops, they're gonna try to burn the homes of people they even think voted for Trump. (Or just whoever they don't like and then claim they must have voted for Trump.)

 

[Godzilla@1989]

So while the farms was down, I discovered this #didobama on twitter and its as retarded as you expected.

Also, here’s a sperg our from Ana Navarro.

 

[Lord_Inquisitor_Kryptman]

Aside from public backlash and defiance, the inherent issues with trying to push harsh gun regulation in the United States is that they are almost unenforceable.

Washington state: at least 20 county sheriffs refuse to enforce new gun laws

Moves may pose a significant threat to the state’s ambitious agenda on firearms reform

www.theguardian.com

Even if in the future a completely unhinged Democrat gets into office and passes broad gun control laws, you are going to have this happen everywhere. Cops will not enforce it. Maybe a few metropolitan forces would, but at large the government wouldn't be able to get the police to cooperate. And so they would then do what? Send in Federal Marshalls and arrest a majority of the country's police force? If I were to go even further, I would bet that not even the Marshalls would agree to it.

 

[It's HK-47]

Oh, would you fuckin' like some? Here's the congressional testimony of Dr. Robert Epstein--a fucking Democrat, no less--concerning his research that shows Google displays content to the American public that is biased in favor of one political party. Since you're journalists and likely too stupid to be able to read, here's the CSPAN video, too.

God I'm so sick of this "without evidence" headline. Seriously, go find a single headline for Obama that says, "Obama insists, without evidence, that..."

 

[Marchesa of the Vast]

So while the farms was down, I discovered this #didobama on twitter and its as exceptional as you expected.

View attachment 878413

View attachment 878414

View attachment 878418

View attachment 878416

Also, here’s a sperg our from Ana Navarro.
View attachment 878419

The ass wiping the media did and continues to do for Obama is the most frustrating part of current US politics.