Mr. Trump and the Military

[eider]

Much like the Trump trial, we all know what the verdict will be. The prosecution completely slow walked even charging him.

What rubbish? You had no clues about the trial verdicts!

[Cow Poke]

YThankyou! So you admit that Biden does not control the justice system....

At this point, it appears Biden has enough trouble just controlling his own bowels.

[rogue06]

You must be thick if you don't think that Hitler was killing off all opposition in Germany

Neither what I said nor what you originally stated. You originally wrote of his rounding up and imprisoning folks which you then later switched to killing them only after I mentioned old Joe has rounded up and imprisoned people.

Thankyou! So you admit that Biden does not control the justice system.

You apparently have confused the "justice system" with the Department of Justice.

The judge who voided the agreement has been accused of political bias, for calling out the highly irregular deal that old Joe's Justice Department and Hunter's lawyers had hatched, by a number of those on the left since Trump had appointed her, but that of course ignores the fact that he did so on the basis of the recommendation of both of that state's Senators (who are Democrats).

That system is what has convicted your idol.

My idol now? I guess you're like little jimmy regarding this.

Little jimmy seems to think unless you say you hate Trump with every fiber of your being you are a supporter.
Saying that you hope he drops out isn't sufficient. You need to want him to get Ebola and be hanged drawn and quartered, or else you're a "Trumpster."

That's pretty much true pee wee.

[Sparko]

Were JimL and Eider separated at birth?

[Cow Poke]

Were JimL and Eider separated at birth?

Who says they were separated?

[Diogenes]

What rubbish? You had no clues about the trial verdicts!

The only place Trump or Hunter could get a fair trail would be on North Senegal Island.

[eider]

My idol now? I guess you're like little jimmy regarding this.

Certainly! You obviously in Mr Trump.

And Biden, Obama and such are your devils. You do believe in devils and demons, don't you?

[rogue06]

Certainly! You obviously in Mr Trump.

And Biden, Obama and such are your devils. You do believe in devils and demons, don't you?

I would greatly prefer that both parties had someone better to put forth.

[tabibito]

Neither what I said nor what you originally stated. You originally wrote of his rounding up and imprisoning folks which you then later switched to killing them only after I mentioned old Joe has rounded up and imprisoned people.


You apparently have confused the "justice system" with the Department of Justice.

The judge who voided the agreement has been accused of political bias, for calling out the highly irregular deal that old Joe's Justice Department and Hunter's lawyers had hatched, by a number of those on the left since Trump had appointed her, but that of course ignores the fact that he did so on the basis of the recommendation of both of that state's Senators (who are Democrats).


My idol now? I guess you're like little jimmy regarding this.

Pee-wee?

TomTom3 reduced.jpg

I thought you was an old fossil.

[rogue06]

Pee-wee?

TomTom3 reduced.jpg

I thought you was an old fossil.

I can still claim that the ladies are usually surprised to discover that I'm older than I look. The same with guys, but then who cares?

[carpedm9587]

I'm sure it was nefarious.

I said nothing about nefarious, CP, but it is important to note the difference. No wars were started by either president, but wars outside of the U.S. that were not started by the U.S. started under Biden. I am not sure why that fact is relevant.

At least 2 as opposed to ZERO. But the panic was that Trump was going to start wars.

I was one of those fairly sure that Mr. Trump would use "war" as a rallying cry to the presidency, since most presidents see a surge in their support in times of war. I was pleasantly surprised when that did not happen. I had no such fear with Mr. Biden because Mr. Biden is not a "power and prestige first" person. Mr. Trump is.

Every hear the expression "The Buck Stops Here"?
Russia attacked Ukraine on Biden's watch - not Trump's.
Hamas attacked Israel on Biden's watch - not Trump's.

And, now the spin and folly....

"The Buck Stops Here" does not apply as a blanket statement for everything that happens in the world, CP. If It is a statement that says, "if there are things going on within my administration, the responsibility stops here. I find your attempt to try to link wars, which had nothing to do with Mr. Biden, to his administration. Blaming him for them is akin to me trying to blame Trump for the five African wars that started during his administration. The idea is preposterous. A president cannot influence, but not control, what other countries choose to do.

ANd your argument here is even more amazing given the fact that the person you are about to vote for has NEVER, to my knowledge, acknowledged responsibility for anything. All he does is blame someone else.

And here's the folly....

Cite, please.

So Biden's administration did a post-event analysis to identify problems and make recommendations for changes. It cited several things that should have been done better: https://abcnews.go.com/US/biden-admi...n%20government.

That report was written by the National Security Council and could not have been released without Biden's blessing, especially given that the president is the chair of the NSC.

They also pointed to several things done by the Trump administration that largely tied their hands, like committing to the Taliban for a specific date and excluding the Afghan government from talks with the Taliban.

"Most" of the "good Christians"???? and have been "repeating it ever since? cmon, man - this kind of nonsense usually comes about when one can't seriously argue the point.

CP, the response from the Christian right was overwhelmingly "it was just locker room talk" and looking the other way. Are you saying you deny this?

Yeah, Trump's a jackass --- but maybe that's one of the reasons no wars happened on his watch!

Trump is more than just "a jackass." He is a dangerous narcissist with no moral compass whatsoever.

And I have to say, my friend, for someone who is just holding his nose and voting for the "lesser of two evils," you spend an awful lot of time defending the man and the only criticism I hear is "he's a jackass" or "he's a jerk," neither of which are very specific. Perhaps you aren't just holding your nose after all? This is a pattern I see throughout the right - claiming they are just going with the lesser of two evils and then bending over backwards to defend him. It is curious.

[carpedm9587]

Troops may be punished for rejecting preferred pronouns, experts warn


https://americanmilitarynews.com/202...-experts-warn/

US Navy says it’ll punish sailors who misuse gender pronouns intentionally

https://americanmilitarynews.com/202...intentionally/

Iirc, there was an incident in the UK surrounding a similar issue with an instructor.

All of which shows that the military is acting on this topic, which I believe they should be. It does nothing to show that this is the primary focus, or that it is in any way compromising military readiness.

[carpedm9587]

Hi Carpe -

Some thoughts on your efforts to persuade people to change their political leanings..

(1) Looking from outside, it seems to me that many have little or no trust in the MSM to report Trump fairly, especially in regard to things he says. Over the last few years there have been a number of outright distortions if not actual lies about Trump's statements (ex: 'inject yourselves with bleach')

Implications: If you want to be credible to 'Trump supporters' then you need to show yourself as being as objective as you can, for example by pointing out any serious misrepresentations of Trump's actual statements.

If you are going to reject Trump for saying something, you need to show that statement accurately reported in context, so that people can see that it is actually what he said, and what he means.

I won't pretend that there haven't been misrepresentations of Trump - most commonly in opinion pieces. Most of the places where the media has made these the people involved were disciplined, or it was an error that was acknowledged and corrected. Your example, however, is not a good one. Here is what Trump actually said - with HIM saying it - and he is clearly suggesting the injection of disinfectants (though he does not use the word "bleach"). It was, however, immediately after the report that was given that using bleach would kill the covid virus on surfaces, so the reference was pretty clear.

(2) I think it would be helpful if you were to outline what you want the country to be like in the (near) future, and what policies and leadership qualities might take America there. You may find some common ground and at least you will be comparing Biden and Trump to some outside measurement, rather than just saying 'I don't like Trump'

At no point do I simply say "I don't like Trump." That would be silly. Indeed, I don't particularly like Biden (for a number of reasons) and I would rather have someone else running for president. What I DO say is that I consider Trump an existential risk to our country, and then outline why and with examples. I do not consider Biden to be such a risk.

(3) I feel that America political life has shifted to the left of what it once was, so calls for a return to the 'centre' come across to many as 'just accept how much things have changed, and don't try to return them to how you prefer'.

I agree that America has shifted to the left. No argument there. And I can understand why those who lean right feel they have lost ground. Indeed, I would expect the pendulum to swing back to the right for some time before it again swings left. None of that bothers me. Policies come and policies go. But what is happening now is not merely a "shift to the right." It is a shift towards autocracy, a fundamental undermining of democracy. Why? I thin it is because, in a fair democratic fight, the right simply is not going to win. More people want some amount of freedom for abortion than do not. More people want sensible gun control than do not. More people want civil rights for the LBGTQ+ community than do not. More people want church and state to be kept separate than do not. So the only way the right can gain ground is to limit democracy and shift to an autocracy/theocracy model with their own people in control.

If you think otherwise, I suggest you read Project 2025 from the Heritage Foundation and the similar documents arising from conservative think tanks. And you might note that many of the proposals focused on in the Project 2025 document have now become Trump talking points at rallies and in interviews.

This seems to suggest that civil servants lean (or at least donate) pretty strongly left

https://www.fedsmith.com/2021/02/12/...ral-employees/https://www.fedsmith.com/2021/02/12/...eral-employees

So many responses. First, Max, are you surprised that a president who has been calling the civil servants of the U.S. a "swamp" has produced widespread dissatisfaction and support for the opposing party? Are you surprised that unions throw their support behind a pro-union party rather than an anti-union party? The data here is all from within the "Trump window," and what little there is from before seems to be limited to unions. None of these numbers surprise me, nor do they give me much concern. Even federal employees are people - and if a party is coming in that is threatening their jobs, they are going to stampede to the other side. If Trump doesn't want that effect, maybe he should repudiate Project 2025 and come to the support of federal employees, instead of denigrating them at every turn.

I have zero data for the distribution of Republicans and Democrats in the federal government. I don't think such data exists. Given the time span involved, and the fact that there have been 11 presidential terms since 1980 of which six have been Republican and five have been Democrats, I would expect the division to be fairly close to evenly split.

And I frankly trust people to be able to do their jobs whatever their political biases might be. Maybe I'm a bit unique in that respect.

A lot of this is unsourced rhetoric, and I can't give much weight to it for the reasons above

I will give you that I did not cite sources for the data I listed. I will not give you that it is merely "political rhetoric." Any/all of the facts I listed can be easily verified from any number of sources; none of the numbers or statements described were made up. They come from the words and claims made by the actual participants. If the requirement is that I provide a link for every single data point I offer, than I have to ask why I am being held to this unique standard; no one else here is doing that. They don't usually even cite data. They simply dismiss anything said as "TDS" and seem to think they've said something meaningful.

You are one of the rare ones - you engage in conversation without polemic - for that I am grateful. It is a refreshing change.

[carpedm9587]

In Carp's defense, he's admitted he's not here to persuade people, but merely here to use Tweb as a proving ground to go to other places to argue.

Not 100% correct. I actually have said several times that I also hope that some of the lurkers who are reading will see the difference between the arguments I am making and the responses I am getting, and perhaps be swayed.

A longshot, I give you...but hope is just that - hope.

And yes, I also see this as a useful place to test out arguments and ideas to help me hone them for use in more receptive venues.

[carpedm9587]

Which is odd. As admitting you don't really care about your discussions here, just goes a long way towards making your conversations being taken with a grain of salt, which makes using this as a proving grounds kind of useless.

Dio is focusing on ONE of the things I said was a reason for being here, and excluding the others. It's a bit disingenous, but...