*** Official Politics Shitposting Thread ***

[Poopadoop]

I mean if they're really trying to promote such a narrative, why be so subtle about it that only paranoids will notice?

Why not just come out and say 'this attack on some people somewhere is bad, but nowhere near as bad as all those Muslims who got killed in NZ. They're the real victims.'

You know why they don't say that? Because they don't actually think it.

DJT on the other hand, would say something like 'good people on both sides' and 'blame on both sides' because that's what he actually believes.

[TheSpoonald]

DJT on the other hand, would say something like 'good people on both sides' and 'blame on both sides' because that's what he actually believes.

I really wish you were smarter.

[Poopadoop]

I really wish you were smarter.

Sure whatever.

[TheSpoonald]

Well come on man...if your'e going to invoke Trumps comments on Charlottesville, at least get the full quote

I'm not seeing how it's relevant, but it will be fun to watch your head explode when you fact check yourself and see what trump *actually* said.

[TheSpoonald]

It really is outrageous that whenever someone is challenged to explain why they think Trump is a racist....the first thing they go to is Charlottesville.

Yet the "Charlotesville showcases Trump's racism" narrative is a TOTAL HOAX. All anyone has to do is listen to Trumps quote for more than the first three seconds and it's overwhelmingly obvious what he is talking about.

Oskar, are you paying attention to this? Because this applies to you and Poop. Your belief that Trump is a racist is the result of a coordinated propaganda campaign across the mainstream media. Your whole value judgement about the man is based on a ruse that you bought hook line and sinker because "ORANGE MAN BAD!!"

[TheSpoonald]

oooh I can't wait. Here it is.

bolded emphasis added

You had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides. … You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, — to them — a very, very important statute and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name. George Washington was a slave owner. Was George Washington a slave owner? So will George Washington now lose his status? Are we going to take down statutes to George Washington? How about Thomas Jefferson? What do you think about Thomas Jefferson? Do you like him? Are we going to take down his statute? Because he was a major slave-owner. Now are we going to take down his statute? You’re changing history. You’re changing culture, and you had people — and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally — but you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists, okay? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly

CNN took that and said that Trump equates vehicular homicide with anti-hate protesters.

And they get pissed at Trump when he says that they are the enemy of the people.

[Poopadoop]

oooh I can't wait. Here it is.

bolded emphasis added



CNN took that and said that Trump equates vehicular homicide with anti-hate protesters.

And they get pissed at Trump when he says that they are the enemy of the people.

So you're mad they reacted to this, but it makes sense that calling Christians "Easter Worshippers" is some kind of code for "non-victims".

Also, you're right Trump isn't racist. He just says racist things and gets support from racists. Not the same thing at all.

[TheSpoonald]

So you're mad they reacted to this, but it makes sense that calling Christians "Easter Worshippers" is some kind of code for "non-victims".

I'm not seeing the connection. You invoked Trump's racism based on the comment about "very fine people" on both sides. I'm merely pointing out that is a complete hoax.

Also, you're right Trump isn't racist. He just says racist things and gets support from racists. Not the same thing at all.

Holy crap. You are beyond help. You just found out that the foundation of one of your core beliefs about the POTUS was a con job perpetrated against YOU. A normal person would be mad about that. A normal person would be kind of offended. A normal person would start to doubt every other thing the fake news told him. A normal person would start to challenge his belief that Trump is a racist.

Instead, cognitive dissonance hurts too much, and you'll just cling to some other fake news hoax about Trump being a closet nazi.

[Poopadoop]

I'm not seeing the connection. You invoked Trump's racism based on the comment about "very fine people" on both sides. I'm merely pointing out that is a complete hoax.


Holy crap. You are beyond help. You just found out that the foundation of one of your core beliefs about the POTUS was a con job perpetrated against YOU. A normal person would be mad about that. A normal person would be kind of offended. A normal person would start to doubt every other thing the fake news told him. A normal person would start to challenge his belief that Trump is a racist.

Instead, cognitive dissonance hurts too much, and you'll just cling to some other fake news hoax about Trump being a closet nazi.

lol you're the master of cognitive dissonance. As soon as you start to lose an argument you either start hurling insults or change the subject.

[Poopadoop]

Wasn't that quote you referred to there Trump's second try at acting presidential. What did he say the first time again? I forget.

[Poopadoop]

Oh, and who was that guy that got sued in NY for being unwilling to rent to black people? Some non-racist I'm sure....

[Poopadoop]

How big a pile of evidence do you want?

I'm not saying everything on this list is blatantly racist, some of it is just stupid. But some of it definitely is.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...mp-racist.html

[TheSpoonald]

I'm not saying everything on this list is blatantly racist, some of it is just stupid. But some of it definitely is.

I think there is a lot of wishful interpretation on behalf of the author in about 70% of those statements. Others are really old news. How many politicians got in hot water recently for wearing blackface in college? They all get a pass. But stuff Trump said in the 80's must not be forgotten?? WTF?

Trump did say that a judge could not properly rule on his case because he has hispanic heritage. He said that, and there's no excuse for it that I can see. If you wanna make a check mark in the minus-column for that one, go ahead.

But you can't find one single thing Trump has DONE that advances any kind of government or social policy that subverts, marginalizes, or disempowers any racial or cultural minority in America. Not a single thing.

So you really just *want* him to be a racist. Which is something I just don't get.

[Poopadoop]

btw, all of Gardner, Grassley and Rubio (all Rs) openly challenged Trump's remarks.

At best what he said was stupidly inappropriate; at worst he was openly pandering to white supremacists.

But...but...omfg "Easter Worshippers??????"


ONG-ANA.jpg

[oskar]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial...f_Donald_Trump

This is never going to get resolved, because you think that black people are inferior ""culturally"" but you don't think you're a white supremacist. So Trump can say immigrants are "not people... animals" - and yes, I know the context, and if you paid attention you'd see that he's talking about immigrants. This is not an isolated incident. See above.

... The double-think involved in believing it's ok to permanently separate parents from their children after they've asked for asylum at a port of entry, but at the same time losing your shit over Obama referring to people who worship on easter "easter worshippers" instead of listing all the denominations that celebrate easter in some form (#5 will shock you)

Also eversince yesterday - the way you talked about the impossibility of getting over walls, I now think of you as a literal bowling ball with ant legs. I am seriously out of wits how you're both: able to form sentences and spell correctly, but at the same time not understand basic ladder/wall interaction.

[TheSpoonald]

This is never going to get resolved, because you think that black people are inferior ""culturally"" but you don't think you're a white supremacist

WHOA! Careful son. I never said anything like that. I just read data.

So Trump can say immigrants are "not people... animals" - and yes, I know the context,

Apparently you don't.

... The double-think involved in believing it's ok to permanently separate parents from their children after they've asked for asylum at a port of entry, but at the same time losing your shit over Obama referring to people who worship on easter "easter worshippers" instead of listing all the denominations that celebrate easter in some form (#5 will shock you)

You've CNN'd yourself here. Calm down and talk about one thing at a time, ok? The family separation shit is another fake news hoax. And I don't have a problem with Obama saying "easter worshipers". I am suspicious of an obviously coordinated communications campaign that seeks to avoid using certain language. I ask myself "why don't they want to say the c-word?"

Also eversince yesterday - the way you talked about the impossibility of getting over walls, I now think of you as a literal bowling ball with ant legs. I am seriously out of wits how you're both: able to form sentences and spell correctly, but at the same time not understand basic ladder/wall interaction.

I don't see what's so hard to understand. Climbing over a wall with a ladder takes a lot more time, energy, and risk than simply walking through open land. That obstacle drastically increases the chances of apprehension. What are you missing?

And with regards to the 30 foot prototypes for a new border wall, I also don't understand your confusion. People who very much understand wall/ladder interaction tried for 3 weeks to get over the wall, and they could not do so. That's not the ranting misunderstanding of a bowling ball with ant legs. That's the documented result of a weeks long US military exercise.

And just for your own understanding of wall/ladder interaction. If you climb to the top of a wall, you have to get down the other side. IF the wall is 30 feet tall, you can't jump. You can't climb down, the wall has a sheer face that prevents it. The bars start lower down. You'll die if you jump. So you will have to perch yourself on top of the wall, lift the ladder over, and use it to climb down the other side. But the wall is built with apparatus at the top that prevents you from safely perching yourself at the top.

Again, people highly trained in wall/ladder interaction couldn't do it. So what makes you think it's so easy?

[Poopadoop]

blah blah blah

You're already admitted there's more cost effective ways to police the border than the Wall. Your main remaining reason for building it are so Trump can fulfill his promise, while simultaneously not fullfilling his promise about Mexico paying for it.

Your other reason is that a Wall is more effective than no Wall. That's pretty advanced thinking there, and I congratulate you for it. However, a robot army armed with lasers would be even more effective, so why not do that AND the Wall if you really want to waste the taxpayer's money?

[TheSpoonald]

You're already admitted there's more cost effective ways to police the border than the Wall. Your main remaining reason for building it are so Trump can fulfill his promise, while simultaneously not fullfilling his promise about Mexico paying for it.

Dude, we've been over this many times. A wall is permanent, those other "more cost effective ways" are not.

[Poopadoop]

Projecting again. It is YOU who wants him to be NOT racist. I actually would prefer he's not racist too; but I have the evidence before my eyes.

[TheSpoonald]

I actually would prefer he's not racist too; but I have the evidence before my eyes.

You call it 'evidence', but it's a coordinated media hoax meant to fool you.

[Poopadoop]

You call it 'evidence', but it's a coordinated media hoax.

You call it a 'coordinated media hoax', but it's really evidence.

[Poopadoop]

You call it 'evidence', but it's a coordinated media hoax meant to fool you.

Good that you added that in there for clarity. Otherwise I mighta wondered what the purpose of a hoax was.

[oskar]

Do you think Trump has built more, an equal amount, or less wall than Obama so far?

[TheSpoonald]

Do you think Trump has built more, an equal amount, or less wall than Obama so far?

Depends on what you mean by "wall". If you're talking about an effective barrier to effectively stop immigration between ports of entry, then the score is tied. They've both built 0.

If you're talking about mere wall-shaped obstacles, I don't give a fuck what the score is. Trump and Obama are not operating in anywhere near the same environment

[oskar]

Trump and Obama are not operating in anywhere near the same environment

Huh?

[Poopadoop]

Huh?

I think he means there wasn't a refugee crisis during Obama's time. But now zomgcaravans are going to become a permanent occurrence at the border from here to eternity.

[TheSpoonald]

I think he means there wasn't a refugee crisis during Obama's time. But now zomgcaravans are going to become a permanent occurrence at the border from here to eternity.

That's part of it. The numbers don't lie. 60,000 people a month is too fucking many. Obama never had to deal with that.

Also, the opioid crisis wasn't nearly the monolith it is today, so the urgency is different.

But mostly I was referring to the fact that Obama operated in a world where there was such a thing as honest disagreement. You didn't have to agree with Obama, but he was president, and that meant something. Trump is in a completely different situation. He has every partisan politician working in concert with academia and the news media to challenge everything he does on contrived moral grounds, leaving no room for honest disagreement or compromise. That's a completely new phenomenon for American legislating.

[OngBonga]

Wait, Obama was building a wall? Why weren't the left utterly outraged? Was the wall designed to keep immigrants in USA, stop them fleeing back to Mexico? Or was it a little garden wall, just to look nice?

[TheSpoonald]

Wait, Obama was building a wall? Why weren't the left utterly outraged?

Funny how that works huh.

Remember when the media collectively soiled their diapers because there were pictures of kids in an indoor fenced structure or "cage" inside of a border detention facility? Remember how loudly they screamed ORANGE MAN BAD!!??

Do you also remember how quietly they retracted that story....when it was proven that the pictures were taken in 2015!!!

[oskar]

Wait, Obama was building a wall? Why weren't the left utterly outraged? Was the wall designed to keep immigrants in USA, stop them fleeing back to Mexico? Or was it a little garden wall, just to look nice?

Democrats aren't against border security, they're against a dumbfuck concrete wall from sea to sea.

Up until after the shutdown Trump insisted on the wall being concrete, 30 feet high and to range across the entire border - mountain ranges, lakes, private property, everything. It was estimated to cost 16 billion to built, take decades to finish and would cost billions in maintenance every year. That is what he shut down the government for. It wasn't until he lost badly that he said: A fence really is a kind of wall, and it has a concrete base, so that counts, and we won't build any of it, but I'll tweet out pictures of a construction site and his dumbass base will eat it up, and that is exactly what happened: https://www.vox.com/2019/2/21/182346...tion-explained

I think he himself underestimated how impressionable his devotees are. He never needed to build a wall. All he has to do is lie about it.

[TheSpoonald]

Democrats aren't against border security, they're against a dumbfuck concrete wall from sea to sea.

Once upon a time, there was an average of 6,353 people illegally crossing from Serbia into Hungary every day.

Then they built a wall

A week later, the average was 29 per day.

Walls fucking work.

[TheSpoonald]

https://www.dailywire.com/news/46403...man-daily-wire

I'm really not in the pro-life camp at all, so alot of this is lost on me. But the way he describes the dynamic between the woman and the uber driver is pretty chilling, and true.

I hate Uber, but I'm on their side on this. The guy deserved to get fired. But the fact that this woman is suing him for damages is beyond my understanding. I can't believe a person thinks like that.

[BananaStand]

Maybe it was just spoon.

Fuck you.