Jan 6

Yes trump came through and saved us, the non-stop surveillance by the 3 letter agencies has stopped, the 9/11 info got declassified and of course he didn't give any favored positions to family because he was above that
What could he do? He was under siege from the left, the right, his own justice department. He could hardly fire anybody or get any no DC approved confirmed.

Shit it's congress that let the leash off the the IC dog. They couldn't take back control if they tried now, they are all afraid. It's was Smuck Schumer told Fuck Todd that you never mess with the IC, they have 6 ways from Sunday to get back at you.
 
What could he do? He was under siege from the left, the right, his own justice department. He could hardly fire anybody or get any no DC approved confirmed.

Shit it's congress that let the leash off the the IC dog. They couldn't take back control if they tried now, they are all afraid. It's was Smuck Schumer told Fuck Todd that you never mess with the IC, they have 6 ways from Sunday to get back at you.
So voting for Trump was useless, he never had any real power and he was only another puppet head out there stroking his own ego. Why do you care who won?
 
So voting for Trump was useless, he never had any real power and he was only another puppet head out there stroking his own ego. Why do you care who won?
I would guess that if he is reelected he would fire everyone the first day. Move the Doj, State dept, Fbi, and Pentagon to Kaktovic Alaska. I would be more than happy to pony up some funds for temporary tents. Fuckin burn it to the ground should replace the make America great again campaign slogan.
 
I would guess that if he is reelected he would fire everyone the first day. Move the Doj, State dept, Fbi, and Pentagon to Kaktovic Alaska. I would be more than happy to pony up some funds for temporary tents. Fuckin burn it to the ground should replace the make America great again campaign slogan.
He didn't have the power to do it last time how would he have it the next time? He was to impotent to have a fair election in a country he ran for four years, he failed as a leader
 
He didn't have the power to do it last time how would he have it the next time? He was to impotent to have a fair election in a country he ran for four years, he failed as a leader
I can't understand your perspective at all joe.

I get @Test_Subject and @Big_paul on the understanding that although they are left leaning guys,, it was more that they simply detested the character of Donald Trump, and that nothing was more important than seeing him go for that reason. I don't agree with that. But I understand it. I don't like it, but I respect it as thier opinions that they've made clear. It's understandable because trump is a very unlikable person. He's brash, loud, boastful and a bit narcissistic. I can let those faults go and give it a pass if he upholds the policies I like. But I get that not everyone can.

You on the other hand seem to acknowledge the toxicity of the modern left, amd the corruption of the entrenched establishment, but also hate Donald Trump, the only person in a generation to openly challenge it. You don't make any sense to me. I'm curious as to what you're getting at. You seem like you would oppose Donald Trump if he tried to burn out the establishment, but at the same time you accuse him of being inept because he didn't?

Can you explain?
 
Last edited:
You can also add Trump and Biden to that list. They’re all the same. You don’t get where they got without selling out.

It seems to me, the progressive movement, such as it is, isn't going to get anywhere until it separates itself from the democrat party.

That may be true as well for the libertarian movement on the right.
 
It seems to me, the progressive movement, such as it is, isn't going to get anywhere until it separates itself from the democrat party.

That may be true as well for the libertarian movement on the right.
I foresee a coming future where socialists and liberals are going to clash, liberals failed horribly distributing wealth in their own urban cities and they know this.

Somewhere down the line people believe free fiat currency lowers cost of living when in reality it's productivity that really distributes wealth. More food, more homes, more goods/services, low taxes is actual basic economics. Poor productivity just leads to reduced goods and services inevitably rising prices as that person richer than you can just outbid you obviously hurting those who are at the bottom the most :)


Anyone remember when you used to be able to buy goods off Amazon with no taxes? Who do you think took the bigger hit the consumer or Jeff Bezos (Net worth: 200.3 billion USD). Taxes makes no sense especially now these days as the US Govt never balanced their budget since the gold standard, it's only hurting those who are at the bottom and small businesses. Whenever govt gets involved prices will always rise and quality inevitably drops, ALWAYS!

Donald Trump is a fool attacking cryptocurrency, it only shows he is socialist in his own way, most logical thing he ever said was Bitcoin is a threat to the USD, GOOD!

Difference between the poor and rich is the poor don't believe in inflation, the rich do that's why they invest to STAY RICH even gain more capitalization, stocks, real estate, even crypto ;)
 
Last edited:
When you left, where did you go?

I was a Republican, then a Libertarian, but I find I do not land comfortably within either party. I am a classical liberal, but there is no party like that, so I do not currently have a home.

You?
Well...I may regret getting involved in this thread because I quickly tire of political discussions, but regardless. I know you and I disagree on various things around politics/economics, but I am in the same boat. I am very much unrepresented. Neither Democrat nor Republican represent me, especially these far left and far right assholes. I consider myself a "Liberal Libertarian" which is somewhat self-contradictory and I can't think of a single person who represents my values in full.

They are both despicable organizations who serve mainly their special interest groups and themselves, not caring how it affects the people. Personally, I think the Dems care a little more about "The People", but I think they are mislead in how their policies will affect the world. Such as: taking away our guns or making big government oversight even bigger. They can go fuck themselves. This new fucking IRS bank account snooping proposal which is just blatant government overreach. They do NOT need to know every single thing I buy at any given time. Plus it will disproportionately hurt poorer people and people who work cash jobs like service industry folks. It is just a fucking ridiculous idea and I hope it gets shot down...but I digress.

I really, truly, honestly wish we could get rid of this retarded 2-party system and have an equal footing for 4, 5, even 6 parties. Give the people options and variety. That is probably why ~100 million people didn't vote in 2016, both Trump and Hillary were fucking disgusting options. That's also why over 80 million people didn't vote in 2020, which had the best voter turnout ever. People are so disillusioned with the system and how inefficient it is that they just sit it out. I don't remember the last time the person I voted for in the primary actually got through to run on the presidential ticket. The DNC or RNC always fucking fucks it up and picks the most puppet-like, controllable, corrupt asshole on the list.

If I claim that Joe Biden is secretly a member of the lizard race, for example, it’s up to me to prove that he is; it’s not up to him to prove that he isn’t because I’m the one making the claim. Likewise, without definitive evidence that the election was fraudulent, there’s no reason to believe that it was and thus no need to “prove” its legitimacy.
Dude, there is SO much proof of this already. Check THIS out:
1631695333809.png

Boom. Proof obtained. Based off this 100% non-edited image I believe the majority of Americans will see Biden IS indeed a lizard...and Kamala is a fucking gigantic alien preying mantis from Enceladus . Though I don't have a picture of her in her natural form yet, but will keep hunting and hope to get one soon... XD

I totally agree with you though. People just believe stuff because some authoritative figure repeats it over and over for months. It is a well-known psychological tactic, but it doesn't make it That is pathetic. The reason the cookie crumbled the way it did is because there was no fucking proof of any "rigging" going on.

I don't like it, but I respect it as thier opinions that they've made clear. It's understandable because trump is a very unlikable person. He's brash, loud, boastful and a bit narcissistic. I can let those faults go and give it a pass if he upholds the policies I like. But I get that not everyone can.

You on the other hand seem to acknowledge the toxicity of the modern left, amd the corruption of the entrenched establishment, but also hate Donald Trump, the only person in a generation to openly challenge it. You don't make any sense to me. I'm curious as to what you're getting at. You seem like you would oppose Donald Trump if he tried to burn out the establishment, but at the same time you accuse him of being inept because he didn't?

Can you explain?
You also should add that he was a complete failure of a president. He did a horrible job, neglected his job duties, ran a skeleton crew of a cabinet and refused to appoint various positions that were truly needed to lead different subsets of agencies and organizations. He surrounded himself with yes-men that only served to inflate his ego. He truly did not have any idea how to function within government, especially at a national level--which is not surprising. His mental illness of narcissism truly got in the way of him fulfilling his duties. He vacationed more than any other president (which Republicans used to criticize Obama for, and Trump took WAAY more vacations than Obama--spending taxpayer money at his own resorts too).

Bernie Sanders also challenged the establishment. So did Andrew Yang. Andrew Yang, while I didn't agree with everything he said, had some very, very good ideas, and he was young and ambitious. I think he would have made a great president given good guidance within his cabinet. WAY better than Trump or Biden. He was a true creative problem solver, unlike either of them.

The DNC tried to sue Arizona to prevent the audit.

Other states face the same situation.

If everything was legitimate, why would the DNC fight the audits, when it would vindicate them?
The GOP would have done the same thing in the DNCs shoes. It's just a matter of "look we won, it's settled, don't fuck with us". Super, super common on both sides. There really isn't any room for criticism here. You can even see right here where they did the same thin in 2016 when Trump won and the DNC ordered recounts: What's the GOP fighting for in trying to kill the recounts? Donald Trump's massive but fragile ego

So the same question: if it really is legit, why would the GOP fight it? It is just because they can, and that's politics. If nothing else it is a play to cast doubt into the minds of their supporters and make it seem like they are fighting against the "enemy".

Yes trump came through and saved us, the non-stop surveillance by the 3 letter agencies has stopped, the 9/11 info got declassified and of course he didn't give any favored positions to family because he was above that
This cracked me up, thank you for adding some humor to an otherwise humorless, stressful thread. I try to avoid these political threads but sometimes I get sucked in and can't help but respond...ugh....

Happy Hump Day y'all!
 
It seems to me, the progressive movement, such as it is, isn't going to get anywhere until it separates itself from the democrat party.

That may be true as well for the libertarian movement on the right.
Honestly, both parties are corrupt, self-serving shells of what they claim to represent. They’re both beholden to their elite donors and their policies reflect that. Maintaining their supply of money is more important to them than representing the will of the people and that, to me, is a huge problem.

Representative government only works when the government represents the electorate. Once that stops happening and policies are based on retaining private funding, you have a plutocracy.

I don’t really consider myself a leftist. Politically I’m kind of all over the place depending on the issue.
 
I can't understand your perspective at all joe.

I get @Test_Subject and @Big_paul on the understanding that although they are left leaning guys,, it was more that they simply detested the character of Donald Trump, and that nothing was more important than seeing him go for that reason. I don't agree with that. But I understand it. I don't like it, but I respect it as thier opinions that they've made clear. It's understandable because trump is a very unlikable person. He's brash, loud, boastful and a bit narcissistic. I can let those faults go and give it a pass if he upholds the policies I like. But I get that not everyone can.

You on the other hand seem to acknowledge the toxicity of the modern left, amd the corruption of the entrenched establishment, but also hate Donald Trump, the only person in a generation to openly challenge it. You don't make any sense to me. I'm curious as to what you're getting at. You seem like you would oppose Donald Trump if he tried to burn out the establishment, but at the same time you accuse him of being inept because he didn't?

Can you explain?
I don't like how the die hard Trumpers want to have it both way, like zerg was trying to do. They want to say what a great leader he was, how he was cleaning out the swamp, but then say he was powerless to do anything.

Trump was the sitting president who appointed 3 supreme court justices. If he can't get a fair election than no 9ne can and the only step left is a revolution. A revolution seems very unlikely since he lost the popular vote both times.

My question is more to the people that started hating him while he was president, like I said I voted for him both time?
 
I don't like how the die hard Trumpers want to have it both way, like zerg was trying to do. They want to say what a great leader he was, how he was cleaning out the swamp, but then say he was powerless to do anything.

Trump was the sitting president who appointed 3 supreme court justices. If he can't get a fair election than no 9ne can and the only step left is a revolution. A revolution seems very unlikely since he lost the popular vote both times.

My question is more to the people that started hating him while he was president, like I said I voted for him both time?
"Fair election" has to do with the states joe. Because state authorities handle elections. Not the supreme court.

But, it's really unclear at this point if there is such a thing as a fair election. How can anyone honestly be sure?

I agree that Trump was obviously unsuccessful in cleaning out the swamp. As we can clearly see, the swamp cleaned him out instead. But, he's the only one I've ever seen try. So I'll give him that.

I can say one thing about rights and revolution. Nowhere in history will you find an example of a people reclaiming rights lost to a government any other way than shot and shell. It just doesn't happen any other way. So anytime you concede any small bit of liberty, just know it's a piece you'll never get back.

I don't know where this all goes. But I do know it was around before Trump. And it's still here after. So hating him for it pointless.

The question is, what do you intend to do about it?
 
Did you vote for Trump the first
No. My opinion of trump was formed over the last several decades.

I don't have a problem giving my thoughts on the topic, but I try to understand those who support him, including family members, who by the way are all making a slow recovery from covid. I tried :)
 
"Fair election" has to do with the states joe. Because state authorities handle elections. Not the supreme court.

But, it's really unclear at this point if there is such a thing as a fair election. How can anyone honestly be sure?

I agree that Trump was obviously unsuccessful in cleaning out the swamp. As we can clearly see, the swamp cleaned him out instead. But, he's the only one I've ever seen try. So I'll give him that.

I can say one thing about rights and revolution. Nowhere in history will you find an example of a people reclaiming rights lost to a government any other way than shot and shell. It just doesn't happen any other way. So anytime you concede any small bit of liberty, just know it's a piece you'll never get back.

I don't know where this all goes. But I do know it was around before Trump. And it's still here after. So hating him for it pointless.

The question is, what do you intend to do about it?
States run the election but just like many other aspects of government if the state is not following the law the federal government can and will step in. If the state won't let black kids 8n a school the fed can intervene, if the state won't prosecute cops for killing someone the fed can intervene and if rioters(I mean peaceful protests) are running amuck burning everything down and the state refuses to do anything the fed can intervene. There were several issues taken to the supreme court, they didn't see enough evidence to step in and as I said Trump appointed 3 of them so why would I get up in arms to burn the whole thing down?

As far as fair elections go I thought the 2000 election was just as fishy but at least this time the guy with the popular vote won.

As far as getting rights back, I'll have to disagree. Blacks, women and Indians all got the right to vote with out burning the system down. It was illegal to buy or even own gold and I now have a decent little egg. Weed is steadily getting more legal. I've seen high capacity clips made illegal and then legal again (and I've seen a president make bump stocks illegal but for some reason the trumpets were quiet on that one), so while it's scary to give up rights they can be regained
 
States run the election but just like many other aspects of government if the state is not following the law the federal government can and will step in. If the state won't let black kids 8n a school the fed can intervene, if the state won't prosecute cops for killing someone the fed can intervene and if rioters(I mean peaceful protests) are running amuck burning everything down and the state refuses to do anything the fed can intervene. There were several issues taken to the supreme court, they didn't see enough evidence to step in and as I said Trump appointed 3 of them so why would I get up in arms to burn the whole thing down?

As far as fair elections go I thought the 2000 election was just as fishy but at least this time the guy with the popular vote won.

As far as getting rights back, I'll have to disagree. Blacks, women and Indians all got the right to vote with out burning the system down. It was illegal to buy or even own gold and I now have a decent little egg. Weed is steadily getting more legal. I've seen high capacity clips made illegal and then legal again (and I've seen a president make bump stocks illegal but for some reason the trumpets were quiet on that one), so while it's scary to give up rights they can be regained
Actually joe, you're somewhat misinformed here.

The fed can't intervene in most matters of the state. See Portland last year when the governor kicked out the national guard to allow protesters to destroy the city.

And the supreme court, and no state court for that matter dismissed the cases in question on lack of evidence. They didn't even hear any evidence. It never got that far. The judges tossed the cases on procedural grounds. And the supreme court denied to hear it because election laws are matters of the state.

And lastly. I challenge you to find just one example in all of human history where property holding, or representative rights have been restored or given without a show of force. Just one. Because I submit, with cool forethought and deliberation that it's never happened before.

And don't tell me about the civil rights movement. Because their was plenty of blood spilled there on both sides.
Women's suffrage also required a show of force that got somewhat violent at times. So be realistic and don't tell me about weed or beer. I'm talking about property holding, participatory and representative rights.
 
Last edited:
Actually joe, you're somewhat misinformed here.

The fed can't intervene in most matters of the state. See Portland last year when the governor kicked out the national guard to allow protesters to destroy the city.

And the supreme court, and no state court for that matter dismissed the cases in question on lack of evidence. They didn't even hear any evidence. It never got that far. The judges tossed the cases on procedural grounds. And the supreme court denied to hear it because election laws are matters of the state.

And lastly. I challenge you to find just one example in all of human history where property holding, or representative rights have been restored or given without a show of force. Just one.

And don't tell me about the civil rights movement. Because their was plenty of blood spilled there on both sides.
Russia, they can own land now
 
Russia, they can own land now
Obviously you don't know much about what's been going on in Russia. There's a great podcast about some of the history called the anti-humans by martyrmade. You should listen to it.

They've been killing each other and dissedents since the Bolshevik revolution of 1917. Millions upon millions of Russian people have starved to death or died fighting for freedom.

What little Rights the Russian people have, they've bought dearly and paid in blood.
 
Russia, they can own land now
In fact Joe, if you really are interested. The anti-humans podcast by martyrmade is very interesting. It'll change the way you see the world if you look into it. It's focused on Russia from the Bolshevik revolution to today. But it's got some stuff that'll really open your eyes to what's going on today.
 

Sponsors

Back
Top