Trump!

Post Reply New Topic

Funny how that happens.

Trump supporters are hilarious.

21% isn't high (by what I found on google) - going by Rasmussen as Darmok posted 31% isn't either lol.

George Bush (during his presidency) and many other REPUBLICANS are consistently higher than 21% and 31%.

For Bush, 32% was seen as a plunge yet for Trump 21% is seen as a victory? Lmaol.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/8749/blacks-give-bush-low-marks-hispanics-more-positive.aspx

These 2003 "low marks" - 32%.

It's funny how Trump supporters can't read or analyze simple statistics.

If your highest is lower than among the lowest favorability for a past Republican president - that isn't a good thing.

Last edited by Spooky_Mulder on 14 Aug 2018, 10:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

they ARE good at moving the goalposts, though.

Trump supporters: Trump got a 40% on his exam! He's the smartest President ever!

Common sense people: Huh???

(even 40% is way too high - and if it was an essay (taken from his spelling) he'd get a 5% - points for getting his name right)

an alternative common sense for an alternate reality.

Well, it is an “alt fact” that 31 is higher than 32.

2+2 = 5

black is white and white is black and truth is what they want it to be. war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.

The Left's coordinated campaign to suppress online speech they don't like will only grow. Time for some trust-busting of the big online companies.

Aww. Trump supporters going nuts that they can’t discriminate against people by private companies. Trumpsters really need to read what the first amendment actually says (HINT: private companies can do whatever they want). I’d say one of the scariest aspects of Trump supporters is they don’t know the constitution nor Declaration of Independence.

they don't know nor care. LBJ sussed them decades back when he said, "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man,* he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." *you can add jewish/muslim/LBGT/poor et al to that.

Actually book burning looks like ignoring a century's worth of climate science data just to profit from cooking said book.

Did you post the graphic on Facebook?

Good lad.

Agreed, and it doesn't make one look very intelligent either, nor is that the correct angle they should be pushing to effectively get their point across. Also, the right seems to be more prolific in trying to censor the media. Where do they get off thinking that the solution to the notion of one political ideology holding a veritable monopoly on the flow of information (a claim that I believe might be true to an extent, but not nearly to the degree it's made out to be), is to switch to having the opposing ideology holding a similar monopoly?

I'm more or less politically neutral by the way. I'm mostly basing my analysis of the right off of observation. The left annoys me too at times, but they seem to be trolling the internet a lot less and I've come across fewer instances of left-wing individuals trying to argue for censoring the flow of information. By the way, the above meme contains zero evidence of who suspended those accounts and removed those vids and why. By that logic you can add whatever caption you want to any kind of pic to make whatever point you want, because who needs evidence, right? Also, Darmok, are you insinuating that popular opinion is left-wing? You should be careful with your choice of words, as you're effectively insinuating that your point of view is not the popular one.

The right don't want laws to destroy monopolies, now they should assume the consequences.
Remember; what allowed these companies to grow that powerful is capitalism, so you're not well placed to complain.

Right you are. They're also not able to put two and two together to come to the realization that the "establishment" they are so opposed to is right-wing. Hillary lost an election she should have and most likely would have won by a landslide because it was revealed that she and her husband were planning on selling the US economy to a vile corporation. Such is a capitalist offence more associated with the political right. Moreover, if the Democrats were so pro-socialism as the right seems to believe for some reason, they should have backed Bernie Sanders who probably would have won. As for Hillary, it's laughable that she would play the role of a champion of feminism if you look at her history. She was leveraging that and her gender to get more votes, and it probably worked to an extent. She never believed in identity activism.

In reality, the U.S. only has a choice between a right-wing party and a right-wing party masquerading as a left-wing party, like a wolf in sheep's clothing. It really comes down to a matter of whose corporate interests one wishes to support. The establishment is probably loving the strange disdain for the political left. People even elected the most pro-establishment leader in recent memory, somehow believing he's against it. They've fallen for a ruse that will cost us all dearly.

Franklin said, ".... a republic, if you can keep it." but Jefferson said, "freedom and ignorance cannot co-exist..." add those two together, and you get what we have now, a deteriorating republic and an encroaching fascism.