Jump to content

Donald Trump 2018

TheFlyingBoat

By TheFlyingBoat
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

hobbes2702

hobbes2702 12,791

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, 'stache said:

This part doesn't bother me as much.  It's always been fuck you, pay me.  That's just 'murica and will never change.  The biggest problem to me is their willingness to accept flat out lies to that end.  Not political puffery, over-promises, and sly half-truths, which have been part of politics and human nature forever.  I'm talking about flat out fucking lies.  Things that can be proven unequivocally to be lies.  And the absolute most concerning is that it's not just a fringe group.  This mother fucker is still somewhere like 80-90% approval among Republicans.  A full fucking political party which supports it.  That is what scares the ever living shit out of me.  And I'm just about where bamachick is.  At this point anyone who supports this fucking guy is flat out deplorable.  There is no rationale that makes it acceptable to support him, at all.

This. Stop trying to pretend we have to speak to the Trumpkins. Anyone who supports his at this point is complicit in his criminality against this country. Fuck them.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 44.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Hugo Stiglitz

    3593

  • retread

    1324

  • Brisketexan

    1195

  • jimmyjazz

    1186

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

M12BH
M12BH

SInce y'all seem to be my clearinghouse for all things political, let me tell a story.  A couple of them, actually.  Three, if you want to be specific. When I was 14 I went with a family frien

ConferenceRoom
ConferenceRoom
brown water
brown water

Slocum’s Razor

Brisketexan

Brisketexan 104,537

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

I’m looking at you, Brisket.

You mean me, the guy who shouted from the mountains that we MUST not elect Trump because this is EXACTLY what would happen?  The me who said we would irrevocably turn the political landscape into a place where immorality and lack of decency are the only currency that matters?  So that the opposition must resort to them if they want to at least take control of the rubble of the Republic (and, being that we have now definitively chosen that path, we need to make the best of it, and play to win that pile of rubble)?  That Brisket?  Ok then.  You can keep looking at me.

But what I said would happen has happened.  Knowing that it would has done us zero fucking good.  We saw the train wreck coming.  We see it happening.  There is nothing to stop it from its natural explosive culmination.  So, the only sane choice is to try and make our way out of the train wreck with as much control of the debris as we can muster.  There is no winning here.  Only different degrees of losing.  We lost long ago -- I'd say on election day, but probably the day that Trump secured the GOP nomination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45,538

Posted
Posted

I'm not actually sure I remember you saying that pre-election.  

I sure did.  I was probably guilty of underestimating the depths of his depravity as well as the degree to which the Republicans would kowtow, but I sure as hell warned that he would be the worst, most irredeemable POTUS in our history.

You?  I think you were still transitioning from old school conservative into defeated anarchist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26,271

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

I’ve always been a liberal and a Democrat but I’ve never hated conservatives or Republicans.

I’m related to some. I married one. I birthed one.

Now? HATRED.

Anyone that looks at the garbage Trump tweets or hears what he says and doesn’t immediately condemn it without reservation is a deplorable garbage can of person.

No trying to parse it or look at it from another angle or translate what he said into what he meant. Nope. No more of that. He doesn’t get the fucking benefit of the fucking doubt any longer.

Paul Ryan and Lindsay Graham and all the rest of these ass sucking supplicants can get fucked with a rusty garden rake. Then eat dog shit by the shovel. Then hang from the highest bridge while the braying mob screams insults about their mothers’ sexual proclivities.

TL;DR - GET FUCKED REPUBLICANS

"You can only hold a smile for so long, after that it's just teeth. "

- Chuck Palahniuk, "Invisible Monsters"

 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SaucyJack

SaucyJack 3,487

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

You mean me, the guy who shouted from the mountains that we MUST not elect Trump because this is EXACTLY what would happen?  The me who said we would irrevocably turn the political landscape into a place where immorality and lack of decency are the only currency that matters?  So that the opposition must resort to them if they want to at least take control of the rubble of the Republic (and, being that we have now definitively chosen that path, we need to make the best of it, and play to win that pile of rubble)?  That Brisket?  Ok then.  You can keep looking at me.

But what I said would happen has happened.  Knowing that it would has done us zero fucking good.  We saw the train wreck coming.  We see it happening.  There is nothing to stop it from its natural explosive culmination.  So, the only sane choice is to try and make our way out of the train wreck with as much control of the debris as we can muster.  There is no winning here.  Only different degrees of losing.  We lost long ago -- I'd say on election day, but probably the day that Trump secured the GOP nomination.

We lost the day  Atwater, Stone and Manafort showed up. 

Edited by SaucyJack
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Post Oak

Post Oak 20,182

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Aqua Buddha said:

I remember that FCHorn was on here all day obsessively reminding everyone about 57 states and Ted Kennedy.

Then, on a thread about Chris Kyle, he honestly had no idea what was going on.  He was on the Internet all day and missed out on a stunning amount of information.

Anybody who shits on FC gets a like from me.  Fuck that disingenuous, whataboutist, intellectual slug.  

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23,356

Posted
Posted

After reading the Woodward book, I’m starting to the the Anonymous NYT author is Javanka. 

The author(s) would have to be someone that could risk getting caught without any real consequences.

 Jared and Ivanka are the only ones that fit that profile and they pretty much hate everyone in the White House. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12,271

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

After reading the Woodward book, I’m starting to the the Anonymous NYT author is Javanka. 

The author(s) would have to be someone that could risk getting caught without any real consequences.

 Jared and Ivanka are the only ones that fit that profile and they pretty much hate everyone in the White House. 

Yep. Interesting that we haven’t heard about that search for the author in awhile...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goredho

Goredho 17,341

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

After reading the Woodward book, I’m starting to the the Anonymous NYT author is Javanka. 

The author(s) would have to be someone that could risk getting caught without any real consequences.

 Jared and Ivanka are the only ones that fit that profile and they pretty much hate everyone in the White House. 

I am really starting to believe the op/ed was a plant. The author didn't say anything negative about Trump that wasn't already out there.  What was new/shocking was the revelation of a collective within the government working to actively subvert the President.  A deep-state by any other name.  This revelation was laced with trigger words and phrases for the Trump base like 'resistance' and 'deep state' and fits the narrative of Trump being victimized by those that don't want to see him MAGA.  And Trump has only very tepidly attempted to discredit the op/ed's validity or control perception in its wake.  Contrast that to how he has rallied people to attack the assertions of Woodward's book.  His MO is to attack, deny and discredit vehemently until he has no other option.  But not so much here.

The more I consider the op/ed, the more a question keeps popping up in my head:  If the President is such a danger to America that you as a senior staff member would work behind the scenes to thwart his intentions, why on earth would you publicize that?  Putting the governmental 'resistance' into the spotlight only alerts and embarrasses the President to act.  It makes you or others working similarly more likely to be discovered and replaced by someone supportive of the President.  It makes your efforts to protect America much less likely to succeed.  So why do it?  I can't think of any good, logical answer for that.

I believe it more likely that the op/ed was carefully crafted for some other purpose and planted with the NYT by someone who could plausibly have authored it.  The question then becomes what could the op/ed's other purpose of be?  Lets return to the big reveal of the piece.  Who could benefit from the belief that there is a real, no-shit shadow-state in the government that is working against the President, sabotaging his efforts to lead and effectively undermining his election?  

Donald J Trump

If that shadow-state is real, or enough people believe it to be so, then he would be justified in dismantling it.  Expect to see that notion reinforced and acted upon at some point.  Expect it be used as the basis for Trump to carry out a political purge.  Expect it to be used to target people like Sessions, Rosenstein and anyone else who doesn't completely kowtow to Trump's authority.  Expect it to be used in an attempt to end Mueller's investigation.

That scenario is at least logical.  Diabolical, but logical.

Sandlot3.jpg
3o7qDEq2bMbcbPRQ2c.gif

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23,356

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Goredho said:

I am really starting to believe the op/ed was a plant. The author didn't say anything negative about Trump that wasn't already out there.  What was new/shocking was the revelation of a collective within the government working to actively subvert the President.  A deep-state by any other name.  This revelation was laced with trigger words and phrases for the Trump base like 'resistance' and 'deep state' and fits the narrative of Trump being victimized by those that don't want to see him MAGA.  And Trump has only very tepidly attempted to discredit the op/ed's validity or control perception in its wake.  Contrast that to how he has rallied people to attack the assertions of Woodward's book.  His MO is to attack, deny and discredit vehemently until he has no other option.  But not so much here.

The more I consider the op/ed, the more a question keeps popping up in my head:  If the President is such a danger to America that you as a senior staff member would work behind the scenes to thwart his intentions, why on earth would you publicize that?  Putting the governmental 'resistance' into the spotlight only alerts and embarrasses the President to act.  It makes you or others working similarly more likely to be discovered and replaced by someone supportive of the President.  It makes your efforts to protect America much less likely to succeed.  So why do it?  I can't think of any good, logical answer for that.

I believe it more likely that the op/ed was carefully crafted for some other purpose and planted with the NYT by someone who could plausibly have authored it.  The question then becomes what could the op/ed's other purpose of be?  Lets return to the big reveal of the piece.  Who could benefit from the belief that there is a real, no-shit shadow-state in the government that is working against the President, sabotaging his efforts to lead and effectively undermining his election?  

Donald J Trump

If that shadow-state is real, or enough people believe it to be so, then he would be justified in dismantling it.  Expect to see that notion reinforced and acted upon at some point.  Expect it be used as the basis for Trump to carry out a political purge.  Expect it to be used to target people like Sessions, Rosenstein and anyone else who doesn't completely kowtow to Trump's authority.  Expect it to be used in an attempt to end Mueller's investigation.

That scenario is at least logical.  Diabolical, but logical.

Sandlot3.jpg
3o7qDEq2bMbcbPRQ2c.gif

It’s a sound theory and plausible but I doubt it.  If it was to inspire a purge, he would have begun firing people by now.  Firing people isn’t Trump’s MO anymore.  He just bitches relentlessly.

The NYT would’ve likely seen through the charade if it was a plant or hoax. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aqua Buddha

Aqua Buddha 14,501

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Goredho said:

I am really starting to believe the op/ed was a plant. The author didn't say anything negative about Trump that wasn't already out there.  What was new/shocking was the revelation of a collective within the government working to actively subvert the President.  A deep-state by any other name.  This revelation was laced with trigger words and phrases for the Trump base like 'resistance' and 'deep state' and fits the narrative of Trump being victimized by those that don't want to see him MAGA.  And Trump has only very tepidly attempted to discredit the op/ed's validity or control perception in its wake.  Contrast that to how he has rallied people to attack the assertions of Woodward's book.  His MO is to attack, deny and discredit vehemently until he has no other option.  But not so much here.

The more I consider the op/ed, the more a question keeps popping up in my head:  If the President is such a danger to America that you as a senior staff member would work behind the scenes to thwart his intentions, why on earth would you publicize that?  Putting the governmental 'resistance' into the spotlight only alerts and embarrasses the President to act.  It makes you or others working similarly more likely to be discovered and replaced by someone supportive of the President.  It makes your efforts to protect America much less likely to succeed.  So why do it?  I can't think of any good, logical answer for that.

I believe it more likely that the op/ed was carefully crafted for some other purpose and planted with the NYT by someone who could plausibly have authored it.  The question then becomes what could the op/ed's other purpose of be?  Lets return to the big reveal of the piece.  Who could benefit from the belief that there is a real, no-shit shadow-state in the government that is working against the President, sabotaging his efforts to lead and effectively undermining his election?  

Donald J Trump

If that shadow-state is real, or enough people believe it to be so, then he would be justified in dismantling it.  Expect to see that notion reinforced and acted upon at some point.  Expect it be used as the basis for Trump to carry out a political purge.  Expect it to be used to target people like Sessions, Rosenstein and anyone else who doesn't completely kowtow to Trump's authority.  Expect it to be used in an attempt to end Mueller's investigation.

That scenario is at least logical.  Diabolical, but logical.

Sandlot3.jpg
3o7qDEq2bMbcbPRQ2c.gif

You're thinking Trump is more like House of Cards but he's much more like Veep.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pancho

Pancho 44,437

Posted
Posted

It’s comical to sit here at watch you people say you’re voting for the “real Hispanic” in Cruz when he doesn’t speak Spanish, hasn’t done anything for Latinx people, doesn’t give a shit about putting Hispanics in cages (in the year 2018), and pretends so hard that he’s White. 

One could argue that you’re voting for the “real Hispanic” when he hates his Hispanic heritage himself. 

Comical. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...