The GQP: Trumpist Death Cult

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

Janus corporations double dealing handout stealing no good dirty rotten scoundrels.

 

[landman 559]

28 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I have no idea if that’s true. I didn’t keep records about when gas prices went over $3 per gallon. Might’ve happened before Katrina. And Katrina can’t be blamed for gas prices going over $2 per gallon while daddy Bush was President.

Gas didn't go above $2/gallon during Bush 1's term.  It was about halfway through W's term when it happened.  Probably something to do with a war, supply and demand, inflation, etc.

[Neonmoon 38129]

27 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I have no idea if that’s true. I didn’t keep records about when gas prices went over $3 per gallon. Might’ve happened before Katrina. And Katrina can’t be blamed for gas prices going over $2 per gallon while daddy Bush was President.

There is nothing nefarious. US Presidents don’t affect gas prices whatsoever. They may claim they do for political reasons, but they don’t. Iran-Iraq War ended in 1988, supply increased, lowering prices, but then Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, which cut a large amount of supply, increasing prices. US wasn’t producing as much back then. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

18 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

There is nothing nefarious. US Presidents don’t affect gas prices whatsoever. They may claim they do for political reasons, but they don’t. Iran-Iraq War ended in 1988, supply increased, lowering prices, but then Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, which cut a large amount of supply, increasing prices. US wasn’t producing as much back then. 

President’s can influence public perception which in turn can dramatically influence the buying and selling of commodity futures so in fact, Presidents can affect the prices of shit, like a lot. 

[Guest Lobo]

Obviously Covid-19 effected it, but the world continues to use 93-97 million barrels/day.  Depends on the day, on the weather, on the vacation schedule, on the shipping needs of certain areas.  But the planet uses ~95mm/day.  Undersupply, oversupply, what the POTUS says, what the POTUS doesn't say, etc., etc., etc.  None if it changes this spinning ball of 7.5 billion people needing 95 million barrels/day.  May go up a bit with population spikes in developing economies, may go down a bit with your new Tesla.  But no Presidential promise or gaffe will change the fact that all around the world, 95 million barrels need to be standing by like a tall milkshake. 

It'll be different, markedly lower 10 years from now.  But for now, nothing Trump or Biden or Bernie or Boebert can say will change the demand nor the price (save for some lunatic press briefing where they run up to a press room podium sweating and delirious shouting, "You must get to the pumps, the end is nigh!).  Which, in 2021...I fully expect 1 or all 4 of them to say at some point this year.  

[HenryJames 65965]

 

[aggie08 21478]

1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I have no idea if that’s true. I didn’t keep records about when gas prices went over $3 per gallon. Might’ve happened before Katrina. And Katrina can’t be blamed for gas prices going over $2 per gallon while daddy Bush was President.

"I didn't keep close tabs on the actual dates and possible causes, so I'll just stick with my evil Bush family conspiracy!"

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[Neonmoon 38129]

12 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

President’s can influence public perception which in turn can dramatically influence the buying and selling of commodity futures so in fact, Presidents can affect the prices of shit, like a lot. 

Oil is a global commodity. The price is determined by supply and demand. Many things affect the supply and demand, like a war or a pandemic, but in the end it is supply and demand. If the President outlawed offshore production, that could affect supply, so yes, there are things the President could do. (Although I don’t know if the President has the authority, it might be up to Congress). If the President took your advice and wanted to affect prices through perception (like saying we need to transition off oil and gas, approve Federal wind farms, address climate change) it would be a blip on the radar, unless it was backed by actual things that affect supply and demand. 

[yoladu 4088]

8 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Loyal to Trump; not the Constitution.

[WhatTheBuck 28763]

1 hour ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

I love how people use Gas Prices as an indicator of something nefarious.  Gas prices are largely predicated on Global Oil Supply and Demand.  If you believe the President of the United States has enough power to significantly alter that market for personal gains, well, I have some Ocean Front Property in Arizona and New Mexico that I would be happy to sell you.  

I recall Johnny Carson complaining about the price of gas going over 75¢ per gallon back in the 70’s. I recall the OPEC oil embargo. I recall that Iran was once our principle oil partner in the Middle East. I recall that, after the Iranian revolution, George H.W. Bush was instrumental in forging a relationship with the Saudis as our new oil partners. How many shared interests do the Bushes and Saudis have and how many are represented by Baker Botts?

I recall Ronald Reagan removing the solar panels from the roof of the White House. We should’ve devoted ourselves to breaking our addiction to fossil fuels back then. We’d have come a long way by now. I don’t really care if it would’ve deprived some of you of an easy income during that time. We’d be better off. Dick Cheney was motivated to invade Iraq so we could get rid of the sanctions that prevented Iraqi oil from being part of the global market. Was that a good idea? They said the Iraqi oil would pay for the war? Did that happen?

A Texas board is probably not the place where that argument will be well received. Because a bunch of you definitely are making a living in the oil and gas industry and some of you think you were really smart to accidentally live on top of natural resources that just happened to be lying under your feet and you could just dig it up and get rich.

I have a poker book written by a guy named A.D. Livingston and originally published in 1971. He describes a game called “Hold Me Darling” that was growing in popularity in the poker world at the time. He mentioned that he ran into different players who knew it by different names. I have a suspicion that it became known as “Texas Hold’em” because players like Doyle Brunson found that they could make good money from Texans who got too oil-rich too easily and didn’t really value their easily found riches. Tell me the movie Giant doesn’t support that suspicion.

Yeah, going by gas prices is anecdotal evidence but higher gas prices corresponding to two Texas oil men being President is a little suspicious. And gas prices falling even after Barack Obama blocked the XL Pipeline defied the warnings from the Republicans who are totally owned and financed by the fossil fuel industry. (And the NRA and other special interests, to be fair.)

I could go on a litany of all the ways the Bushes (and Republicans in general) suck. First and foremost would be their assault on public education. Maybe the Bushes just accidentally presided over high gas prices that fell back down when they were succeeded by Democrats. Maybe.

 

Edited May 14, 2021 by WhatTheBuck

[WhatTheBuck 28763]

21 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

"I didn't keep close tabs on the actual dates and possible causes, so I'll just stick with my evil Bush family conspiracy!"

If you defend George W. Bush as a President then you’re a fucking idiot. He’s the idiot son of a mediocre President father and Donald Trump is the best thing that could happen to him because it actually makes him look better by comparison and that’s really hard to do.

 

And then Trump’s incompetence gave us that death toll on a daily basis. 

[Biff Tannen 45639]

1 hour ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

I love how people use Gas Prices as an indicator of something nefarious.  Gas prices are largely predicated on Global Oil Supply and Demand.  If you believe the President of the United States has enough power to significantly alter that market for personal gains, well, I have some Ocean Front Property in Arizona and New Mexico that I would be happy to sell you.  

This.  I was in Junction a few weeks back and some trumpkin in line at a convenience store to pay for gas was bitching about gas prices and gave a "Thanks Joe Biden" for everyone to hear.  It's a classic boogeyman scenario.  Gas prices and presidents are very rarely correlated.

[aggie08 21478]

1 minute ago, WhatTheBuck said:

If you defend George W. Bush as a President then you’re a fucking idiot.

Is that what I'm doing? I thought I was just laughing at you for clinging to a half-baked conspiracy theory that you pretty clearly have put minimal research into when, yes, there's a laundry list of legitimate, easily-provable gripes with the Bush presidencies.

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19100]

9 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

If you defend George W. Bush as a President then you’re a fucking idiot. He’s the idiot son of a mediocre President father and Donald Trump is the best thing that could happen to him because it actually makes him look better by comparison and that’s really hard to do.

 

And then Trump’s incompetence gave us that death toll on a daily basis. 

 

We get it, you hate all the Bushes.  Your hatred blinds to you the big picture.

[Walden Ponderer 12639]

4 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

We get it, you hate all the Bushes.  Your hatred blinds to you the big picture.

Put another way, don't let the merely "bad" blind you to the "mind-numbingly horrific."

[DDD Dad 14311]

I recall Johnny Carson complaining about the price of gas going over 75¢ per gallon back in the 70’s. I recall the OPEC oil embargo. I recall that Iran was once our principle oil partner in the Middle East. I recall that, after the Iranian revolution, George H.W. Bush was instrumental in forging a relationship with the Saudis as our new oil partners. How many shared interests do the Bushes and Saudis have and how many are represented by Baker Botts?
I recall Ronald Reagan removing the solar panels from the roof of the White House. We should’ve devoted ourselves to breaking our addiction to fossil fuels back then. We’d have come a long way by now. I don’t really care if it would’ve deprived some of you of an easy income during that time. We’d be better off. Dick Cheney was motivated to invade Iraq so we could get rid of the sanctions that prevented Iraqi oil from being part of the global market. Was that a good idea? They said the Iraqi oil would pay for the war? Did that happen?
A Texas board is probably not the place where that argument will be well received. Because a bunch of you definitely are making a living in the oil and gas industry and some of you think you were really smart to accidentally live on top of natural resources that just happened to be lying under your feet and you could just dig it up and get rich.
I have a poker book written by a guy named A.D. Livingston and originally published in 1971. He describes a game called “Hold Me Darling” that was growing in popularity in the poker world at the time. He mentioned that he ran into different players who knew it by different names. I have a suspicion that it became known as “Texas Hold’em” because players like Doyle Brunson found that they could make good money from Texans who got too oil-rich too easily and didn’t really value their easily found riches. Tell me the movie Giant doesn’t support that suspicion.
Yeah, going by gas prices is anecdotal evidence but higher gas prices corresponding to two Texas oil men being President is a little suspicious. And gas prices falling even after Barack Obama blocked the XL Pipeline defied the warnings from the Republicans who are totally owned and financed by the fossil fuel industry. (And the NRA and other special interests, to be fair.)
I could go on a litany of all the ways the Bushes (and Republicans in general) suck. First and foremost would be their assault on public education. Maybe the Bushes just accidentally presided over high gas prices that fell back down when they were succeeded by Democrats. Maybe.
 

TLDR

Also, “principal”.

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19100]

7 minutes ago, Walden Ponderer said:

Put another way, don't let the merely "bad" blind you to the "mind-numbingly horrific."

Yeah, you are another one that has completely irrational hate for the Bushes.  It makes me take everything you think about them with a massive grain of salt.  

[Walden Ponderer 12639]

5 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Yeah, you are another one that has completely irrational hate for the Bushes.  It makes me take everything you think about them with a massive grain of salt.  

Not at all. Bush Sr. was personally responsible in the 70s for helping Sadaam complete his coup, but other than that, he was merely wrong about most things -- no different than most other politicians. Bush Jr. delegated too much to Cheney, whom I do despise (along with anyone else who champions torture), but he was a decent man who happened to be a bumbler. Both were bad, but not even in the neighborhood of Trump.

Edited May 14, 2021 by Walden Ponderer
Typo. Bush was CIA head early 70s, not 80s.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

This is like a right wing Yahtzee. 

So many boxes checked. 

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13562]

11 hours ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

yeah, he's that dry old turd sitting amongst mounds of steaming piles. it might not be as revolting, but it's still shit

And every Saturday we work in the yard

Pick up the dog doo, hope that it's hard

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13562]

23 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

This is like a right wing Yahtzee. 

So many boxes checked. 

NAHTZEE!

[Captainant 27565]

28 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

This is like a right wing Yahtzee. 

So many boxes checked. 

this is the ultimate outcome of arguing "both sides" about every issue. It enables your own worst behavior because you operate on the assumption that everyone is as feckless as you

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19100]

31 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

This is like a right wing Yahtzee. 

So many boxes checked. 

[Beau Vine 54168]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

This is like a right wing Yahtzee. 

So many boxes checked. 

Dan Patrick needs to write another check.

[TwiceHorn 31407]

On 5/12/2021 at 1:56 PM, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

What is the brown strap he has going across his body under his tie.  Is that part of some Nazi uniform?  I kid but I swear I can picture something like that on a Nazi uniform.  

Sam Browne belt, imo.  Or a murse.  Tie goes under in any event.

[Pescado_Rojo 19397]

5 hours ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

Janus corporations double dealing handout stealing no good dirty rotten scoundrels.

 

Team Moderna. 

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

SIAP but I may have missed it; seems rather obvious results but propaganda pays. The no television news category being greater believers of the Big Lie I'm guessing is due to social media/YouTube types?

 

[BrickHorn 18204]

Stolen Election : 2020s USA :: Stab-in-the-back : 1920s Germany 

[Beau Vine 54168]

It's crazy that there is a "Fox News Republican" and a "far right news Republican."

Cue the "both sides" people...

[Red Five 40768]

Man, what are the odds. Trump claimed for a year that the election was going to be stolen (only if he lost, of course) and gosh darn it, it damn sure was! 

Imagine being so fucking stupid that you can't see that for what it is. 

[Beantown Express 2.0 6557]

It's crazy that there is a "Fox News Republican" and a "far right news Republican."
Cue the "both sides" people...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

@Beau Vine had posted info in the Trump thread regarding the Project Veritas/Erik Prince scheme regarding females recruited and trained to put FBI, military, and other officials on the record with respect to information/leaks/complaints etc which is chilling enough in its own right. I was digging around a little and here's a little more. Don't want to go russian to conclusions, but McCarthy's original comment regarding Trump sure does come to mind....oh, and PV is losing their minds right now.

 

[LurkingHorn 1065]

This is why I try to stay out of the noise and try to look at things at a macro level. 

This is why all these voting restriction bills are running through state legislators at an amazing pace. The writing is on the wall for the GOP and they know it. This is also why I'm not as concerned about 2024 as many. Trump running again is not going to make these splits better. In fact, it will be a bigger beat down because the base continues to dwindle. I'm starting to believe Trump isn't going to run again and the GOP will try their best with DeSantis. 

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

Trump wants Walker to run.

 

Edited May 14, 2021 by Mrs Whiggins
Edit--Walker has been diagnosed with dissociative identity disorder. Should that be a concern for voters? Why or why not? Also, Walker lives in Texas but apparently that isn't a problem in Georgia...

[Beantown Express 2.0 6557]

4 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

Trump wants Walker to run.

 

So the Republican goal is to fill the US Senate with ex SEC coaches and football players?  If they succeed that strategy should do well for this country as long as President Nick Saban and Vice President Tim Tebow are at the helm to round things out.   

[Pancho 44647]

Something is stupidly fucked up with these radical Republicans. Can someone explain what basis they have to overturn the will of the voters of that shit state?

 

[Brisketexan 104897]

1 minute ago, Pancho said:

Something is stupidly fucked up with these radical Republicans. Can someone explain what basis they have to overturn the will of the voters of that shit state?

Basis?  You're aware of the GQP, right?  "Will of the voters."  You're adorable.

[Beantown Express 2.0 6557]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Basis?  You're aware of the GQP, right?  "Will of the voters."  You're adorable.

But this means the GQP voters voted for politicians (who appointed judges) that aren't actually looking out for what is best for their constituents.  I can't believe something like this could occur.

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

The GQP knows what's best for you and you'll like it.

Work makes free.

Need healthcare? Work more, eat less. There--you're healthy.

If you get sick it's your fault. You didn't work hard enough.

 

 

[Francisco 2.0 32379]

49 minutes ago, LurkingHorn said:

This is why all these voting restriction bills are running through state legislators at an amazing pace. The writing is on the wall for the GOP and they know it. This is also why I'm not as concerned about 2024 as many. Trump running again is not going to make these splits better. In fact, it will be a bigger beat down because the base continues to dwindle. I'm starting to believe Trump isn't going to run again and the GOP will try their best with DeSantis. 

Trump running again isn't the problem.  

The problem is a GOP that retakes the House and Senate and in 2024 just throws everything out the window and anoints Trump even if he loses, because fuck voting.

That's it.  That's the entire problem.

Why worry about a Gen Z, Millenials, etc voting +20 D when you can just toss out the results.  

 

 

 

[atomheartbevo 89581]

6 hours ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Yeah, you are another one that has completely irrational hate for the Bushes.  It makes me take everything you think about them with a massive grain of salt.  

I have a couple of friends who were killed in Iraq.  It was his decision to invade in 2003.  My hate for W is not irrational.

[Pancho 44647]

57 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Basis?  You're aware of the GQP, right?  "Will of the voters."  You're adorable.

My mom thinks so too!

[Biff Tannen 45639]

1 hour ago, LurkingHorn said:

I'm starting to believe Trump isn't going to run again and the GOP will try their best with DeSantis. 

This is also my belief.  Or someone similar that hasn't come out of the woodwork yet.

[Brisketexan 104897]

29 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Trump running again isn't the problem.  

The problem is a GOP that retakes the House and Senate and in 2024 just throws everything out the window and anoints Trump even if he loses, because fuck voting.

That's it.  That's the entire problem.

Why worry about a Gen Z, Millenials, etc voting +20 D when you can just toss out the results.  

 

 

 

This.  This is the end-game.  The GQP isn't looking to win elections.  They are looking to make them irrelevant.

Pay attention.  This is a fascist movement.  It is doing EXACTLY what fascist movements do.

[Biff Tannen 45639]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This.  This is the end-game.  The GQP isn't looking to win elections.  They are looking to make them irrelevant.

Pay attention.  This is a fascist movement.  It is doing EXACTLY what fascist movements do.

I'm not saying you're wrong on their intent, but do you think the people are just going to be like, welp, guess there's nothing we can do?

[atomheartbevo 89581]

1 hour ago, LurkingHorn said:

This is why I try to stay out of the noise and try to look at things at a macro level. \

This is why all these voting restriction bills are running through state legislators at an amazing pace. The writing is on the wall for the GOP and they know it. This is also why I'm not as concerned about 2024 as many. Trump running again is not going to make these splits better. In fact, it will be a bigger beat down because the base continues to dwindle. I'm starting to believe Trump isn't going to run again and the GOP will try their best with DeSantis. 

And there's some evidence that some of the efforts to make voting harder will also make it harder on certain Republican demographics.

I don't think Trump is running either.  He got beatdown last November, and bullies do not take well to defeats, they slink off, in this case to Mar-a-Lago.  If he was running, he should have been much more visible by now, instead of issuing what amounts to whiny little tweets on a shitty little website.

Trump is absolutely defeated, and he is acted like a defeated man.  If he truly believed the election was stolen, he would have been on the re-election campaign trail before Biden was even sworn in.  He would have fixed his jet up and been holding rallies.

In 2024, Trump will not be on twitter or Facebook, he will not have Hillary on the ballot as in 2016, and he will not have qanon like he did in 2020 - qanon are feeling pretty fucking abandoned and used now that the Watkins have scaled everything way back (and pulled the "it's not about what Q said, it's about the friends we made!" bit), and their brethren that went to the Capitol are finding out after fucking around.

I would not be surprised if it was DeSantis.

Edited May 14, 2021 by atomheartbevo

[atomheartbevo 89581]

36 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Trump running again isn't the problem.  

The problem is a GOP that retakes the House and Senate and in 2024 just throws everything out the window and anoints Trump even if he loses, because fuck voting.

That's it.  That's the entire problem.

Why worry about a Gen Z, Millenials, etc voting +20 D when you can just toss out the results. 

So you're saying that if the GOP takes back the House and Senate, and a Democrat wins the White House and is sworn in, a GOP-led Congress will toss that Democrat out and appoint Trump as President?

Even though a Democrat wining the WH probably means the chances of the GOP winning back one or both chambers is slim.

[Brisketexan 104897]

Just now, Biff Tannen said:

I'm not saying you're wrong on their intent, but do you think the people are just going to be like, welp, guess there's nothing we can do?

Two things stand out as remarkable in history:

1) the horrifically shitty, absolutely outside the law, crap that fascists/authoritarians will pull.

2) the degree to which the public just acquiesces to that horrifically shitty stuff that the fascists pull.

Fascists and authoritarians repeatedly come to power because....the people let them.  Through either happy agreement, or lackadaisical acquiescence (because hey, at first, you can't even notice any change to your daily life: American Idol is still on, McDonald's is still selling nuggets, all that stuff!)

[Brisketexan 104897]

1 minute ago, atomheartbevo said:

So you're saying that if the GOP takes back the House and Senate, and a Democrat wins the White House and is sworn in, a GOP-led Congress will toss that Democrat out and appoint Trump as President?

Even though a Democrat wining the WH probably means the chances of the GOP winning back one or both chambers is slim.

You're forgetting the role of Republican state legislatures and governors.  All that Georgia (and AZ, and TX, etc.) has to do is declare "the election was a fraud, all the Republican candidates for office here win, all the Dem candidates lose," and the House and Senate tilt GQP.  They are relentlessly using language to 1) justify and 2) normalize a legislature deciding elections because....that is exactly what they plan to do.  They have TOLD us that is what they plan to do.