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

[Fanatical Pragmatist]

Net neutrality offers protection for the consumer so that companies don't overreach and gouge their customers with shady practices.

Net neutrality prevents ISPs from charging Facebook and Google who use up fuckloads of data at different rates than my grandmother who uses up minuscule amounts of data.

2016 I was a 3rd-Party voter, I wouldn't say I was "never Trump" but I was definitely "fuck Trump".
Ironically, the repeal of NN was one of the first things I was really in favor of. Then Kavanaugh happened and suddenly the 5th Amendment doesn't apply to men. Then Impeachment happens and suddenly its a crime to go against the NeoCon/NeoLib globalist agenda. YEET'ing Soleimani was just the nail in the coffin of my support.

I'm still no fan of his environmental policy, and I think the borderwall is a stupid solution to the problem; but fuck the left.

 

[Dante Alighieri]

I can't remember the exact phrasing or where I got it from, but essentially the left takes Trump literally while the right takes Trump seriously.

"Grab her by the pussy", what he meant is that some women are groupies and will be attracted to rich men, but with how the left reacted you would think he's going around assaulting women.

 

[Iwasamwillbe]

What Trump says ≠ What Trump Does

The fact that it still has to be repeated after at least three World War 3 scares (North Korea, Syria, and Iran) that what Trump threatens to do or get done is not necessarily what Trump actually does or gets done is mind-boggling to me.

Trump only really causes happenings when it's not what anyone could have predicted, even his allies and those who support him.

 

[The Last Stand]

I can't remember the exact phrasing or where I got it from, but essentially the left takes Trump literally while the right takes Trump seriously.

"Grab her by the pussy", what he meant is that some women are groupies and will be attracted to rich men, but with how the left reacted you would think he's going around assaulting women.

Still a slimeball if you ask me.

The women are entitled floozies. Of course they'd be attracted to a rich old man.

 

[It's HK-47]

Trump said the Wall. The Wall happened. Credit where it's due.

Are you trying to say that Trump shouldn't always be taken literally?

Mind you, the Left said Abolish the Police. A couple cities are already taking that into action.

Which is why I get worried when anybody says something.

Yes, I've been saying, "Take Trump seriously, but don't take him literally." for a very, very long time, now. What he says isn't always what he does, because if he told everyone what he was going to do, there's a whole swathe of people who would get the notice ahead of time and move to counter-act whatever he was trying to do. Trying to interpret him literally is a very good way to go insane, and we've got a 3,308-page thread to prove it.

In the same train of thought, whatever he comes out in support of or expresses admonition towards, his political opponents take the opposite stance as a knee-jerk reaction, so you also have to take into account that what he's saying could very well be intentional disinformation to fuck with the politicos because they have absolutely no ability whatsoever to think about what they're doing before they lash out. Trump says the sky is blue, and these people pick up paintbrushes and run outside to try and paint it purple just to spite him.

You'd have to be crazy to not exploit that kind of predictability.

 

[Jigglyjogglers]

Net neutrality prevents ISPs from charging Facebook and Google who use up fuckloads of data at different rates than my grandmother who uses up minuscule amounts of data.

Like didn't proponents of net neutrality ever think it was a bit suspicious that all these giant corporations were so heavily in support of net neutrality? If it was such an attempt to collar and leash corporations to keep them from running rampant, why did every single one of them, including the ISPs, support it so ardently?

Because net neutrality was great for the ISPs too. It kept them from charging people more for certain sites (which none of them were really doing anyway), and it kept them from charging the major bandwidth hogs like Netflix and Facebook and Youtube directly (which I think they were through some method)... but it also made competition with them virtually impossible. Startup internet providers effectively vanished under net neutrality because the regulatory knot was virtually impossible to navigate for anyone but an already established megacorp. Like they're gonna profit either way, because without it they can always try leaning on Netflix or Facebook again (though I think they've probably worked out some other arrangement by now), but with it they could still hold virtual monopolies in large sections of the country. (Ever lived somewhere that the sole internet provider was Cox? It's hell.)

 

[Sekirodiealot]

 

[heyitsmike]

You'd have to be crazy to not exploit that kind of predictability.

That's why they hate Kayleigh McEnany so much. That journo yelling, "You were prepared for that!" will never not be funny to me. But not once do they stop and think that if they didn't telegraph their move every single time she wouldn't have known it was coming.

Like didn't proponents of net neutrality ever think it was a bit suspicious that all these giant corporations were so heavily in support of net neutrality? If it was such an attempt to collar and leash corporations to keep them from running rampant, why did every single one of them, including the ISPs, support it so ardently?

Judging by how they also don't see anything suspicious that the multinational corporations they accuse of underpaying their workers are all now socially aware and posting black squares on their Twitter pages out of solidarity... Imma go with 'No.'

 

[Iwasamwillbe]

You'd have to be crazy to not exploit that kind of predictability.

It doesn't matter to these people that their actions and statements may be exploited by Trump to his own ends, those people gotta one-up Trump and the "Trump cultists" somehow.

 

[AprilRains]

I can't remember the exact phrasing or where I got it from, but essentially the left takes Trump literally while the right takes Trump seriously.

"Grab her by the pussy", what he meant is that some women are groupies and will be attracted to rich men, but with how the left reacted you would think he's going around assaulting women.

Sadly, that's not even taking him literally. What he said was that women would allow that. It's been twisted into something even less savory, largely through deliberate distortion by a few and then repetition by a mindless multitude.

What he said disgusted me enough, but I'm more disgusted by the people lying about it. Besides, he's almost certainly telling the truth.

 

[The Last Stand]

What he said disgusted me enough, but I'm more disgusted by the people lying about it. Besides, he's almost certainly telling the truth.

Any woman with self respect wouldn't subject themselves to such sleaze for a buck.

 

[AprilRains]

Any woman with self respect wouldn't subject themselves to such sleaze for a buck.

Life isn't as simple as that. People want things they know they shouldn't. You can't go through life hating people for that, because you'll find it's just as true of you as of anyone. You owe it to yourself to understand.

 

[Flexo]

As a Black person, the left wing loonies annoy me. The right wing loonies DISGUST me. Although now, it's back and forth.

I never knew you were black. (Not that it matters. All organics are equally inferior to robots.)

Not defending loonies, but I am curious how much media plays into this. Random rightish loony says something, the media will blast it from shore to shore. Meanwhile leftish loonies are either ignored or rationalized as not being loony at all.

Overexposure alone would account for rejection reactions.

Not to be rude, but shouldn't the fact that Net Neutrality was repealed and none of the doomsday claims made have come to pass suggest to you that you were wrong for opposing its repeal?

If I supported Net Neutrality because I thought its repeal would do bad things A, B and C, it gets repealed anyway yet bad things A, B and C never happen, why would I still want Net Neutrality? Personally, that would suggest to me that I was wrong about opposing the repeal of Net Neutrality.

Also, you've seen with this pandemic firsthand how conservatives have been right that science is being politicized, that their predictions and models are wildly inaccurate, that the actions suggested are extreme overreactions and that the left is hijacking these issues to bring about their desired agenda... and yet you're STILL going along with the climate change thing?

Seriously, at what point will you consider reassessing?

Just to be the pedantic robot, but net neutrality wasn't "repealed." It was moved out from an unanswerable bureaucracy into the democratically elected house. (You think activist would have figured out why this was a good thing when they howled and even threatened the guy's family and he was all, "lol suck it.") If people want net neutrality, they can still get it. You just have to - you know - do the societal work to get it passed by law and - even more important - if something backfires the people can have their representatives do something about it.

Few things proved the old adage about ideal vs real and the power of marketing than net neutrality.

 

[Linako 2.0]

I thinks this tweet was the best thing to come up during that hashtag

He did say many times that he wasn't happy about the News and Happening areas, because they made the site more politicized and was always on the edge about getting rid of both of them.

So much for his love of freedom of speech huh, what a sellout.

 

[Flexo]

Any woman with self respect wouldn't subject themselves to such sleaze for a buck.

And as far as I'm aware, neither of them have.

 

[neverendingmidi]

Any woman with self respect wouldn't subject themselves to such sleaze for a buck.

Dude, have you never heard of the yacht babes and such in the Mediterranean, or in the Gulf States? Their whole schtick is fucking rich guys in order to get "gifts" of money and jewelry, and at best, a marriage. That's a well known reason why Lindsey Lohan was wandering around there. Hell, Victoria's Secret is damn near a bordello with how they whore out the models of the runway shows.

 

[X Prime]

Verizon and Netflix have indeed worked out a deal independent of Net Neutrality.

Also, I do not recall Net Neutrality stopping Comcast from throttling torrents. The FCC has never had any ability to enforce that stuff. It really is something that has to be handled at the legislative level.

Problem is, much like with Section 230, do you trust the current Congress to pass something simple and clean?

 

[Flexo]

Problem is, much like with Section 230, do you trust the current Congress to pass something simple and clean?

No, but I trust the idea of unaccountable bureaucrats running the show even less. (and sometimes simple and clean can be even more of a headache as far as law goes)

Sometimes life is not about the perfect solution, but the least bad one available.

 

[X Prime]

I agree. Repeal 230 and try again!

I joke but yeah, I see your point.

 

[TowinKarz]

Any woman with self respect wouldn't subject themselves to such sleaze for a buck.

In a just world, that would be true.

But in the real world we all live in..... they do, no matter what you or I think of it.....

That's like saying "No respectable person would stoop to sex work for a buck"

Maybe, but, economics and human nature means some do and consider the pros (whatever is being offered) fair trade for what they're selling (dignity, autonomy in relationships) up and down the economic scale, attractive women with pedigrees and clout sell out for a Soccer star or Saudi Prince, desperate women with drug addictions sell out to anyone with a pulse for $30.


The difference between a moralist and a regular person is the regular person says "You shouldn't" when it comes to a certain behavior, but leaves it at that. The moralist says "Only evil people do, and if YOU are one of those, I"ll see you crushed" and commits the fundamental error of thinking a just world can be created by destroying the ultimate justice of all: free will.

Interesting how the two parties hold those ideas, and, in the last 20 years, have done the unthinkable and switched sides.

The right went from "You heathen devilspawn Satanists will ruin the country with your drugs and rock music!" to "People will act in self-destructive ways when they don't have good jobs and stable lives, we should try and make life better rather than more rule-filled"

And the left wen from "People gonna be people, you can't legislate morality" to "GET IN LINE OR YOU'RE CANCELED! RACISTS! WE'LL SEE YOU BURN IF YOU DEFY US! "

The Democrats in particular going from "Blowjobs in the Oval Office are no big deal" to "Impeach the pussy-grabber" in a decade is proof of this.