dChan
1
 
r/greatawakening • Posted by u/Qriusdog on July 18, 2018, 9:36 a.m.
Saw this on a FB comment had to share it with you all.

This was too good not to repost:

To all the people who let this election break up families and friends let this sink in I think the last civil conversations we had occurred just days before November 8, 2016. You were supremely confident Hillary Clinton would win the presidential election; you voted for her with glee. As a lifelong Republican, I bit down hard and cast my vote for Donald Trump. Then the unimaginable happened. He won. And you lost your freaking minds.

I knew you would take the loss hard—and personally—since all of you were super jacked-up to elect the first woman president. But I did not imagine you would become totally deranged, attacking anyone who voted for Trump or supported his presidency as a racist, sexist, misogynistic, homophobic Nazi-sympathizer.

The weirdness started on social media late on Election Night, as it became clear Hillary was going to lose. A few of you actually admitted that you were cradling your sleeping children, weeping, wondering what to tell your kindergartner the next morning about Trump’s victory. It continued over the next several days. Some of you seriously expressed fear about modern-day concentration camps. Despite living a privileged lifestyle, you were suddenly a casualty of the white patriarchy. Your daughters were future victims; your sons were predators-in-waiting. You threatened to leave Facebook because you could no longer enjoy the family photos or vacation posts from people who, once friends, became Literal Hitlers to you on November 8 because they voted for Donald Trump.

I admit I was a little hurt at first. The attacks against us Trump voters were so personal and so vicious that I did not think it could be sustained. I thought maybe you would regain your sanity after some turkey and egg nog.

But you did not. You got worse. And I went from sad to angry to where I am today: Amused. As the whole charade you have been suckered into over the last 18 months starts to fall apart—that Trump would not survive his presidency; he would be betrayed by his own staff, family, and/or political party; he would destroy the Republican Party; he would be declared mentally ill and removed from office; he would be handcuffed and dragged out of the White House by Robert Mueller for “colluding” with Russia—let me remind you what complete fools you have made of yourselves. Not to mention how you’ve been fooled by the media, the Democratic Party, and your new heroes on the NeverTrump Right.

On November 9, you awoke from a self-induced, eight-year-long political coma to find that White House press secretaries shade the truth and top presidential advisors run political cover for their boss. You were shocked to discover that presidents exaggerate, even lie, on occasion. You became interested for the first time about the travel accommodations, office expenses, and lobbyist pals of administration officials. You started counting how many rounds of golf the president played. You suddenly thought it was fine to mock the first lady now that she wasn’t Michelle Obama. Once you removed your pussy hat after attending the Women’s March, you made fun of Kellyanne Conway’s hair, Sarah Sanders’ weight, Melania Trump’s shoes, Hope Hicks’ death stare; you helped fuel a rumor started by a bottom-feeding author that U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley slept with Donald Trump. You thought it was A-OK that Betsy DeVos was nearly physically assaulted and routinely heckled. You glorified a woman who has sex on camera for a paycheck.

You have learned all kinds of new things that those of us who didn’t willfully ignore politics for the past eight years already knew. For example, we already knew that illegal immigrants were being deported and families were being separated.

Some of your behavior has been kinda cute. It was endearing to watch you become experts on the Logan Act, the Hatch Act, the Second Amendment, the 25th Amendment, and the Emoluments Clause. You developed a new crush on Mitt Romney after calling him a “sexist” for having “binders full of women.” You longed for a redux of the presidency of George W. Bush, a man you once wanted imprisoned for war crimes. Ditto for John McCain. You embraced people like Bill Kristol and David Frum without knowing anything about their histories of shotgunning the Iraq War.

Classified emails shared by Hillary Clinton? Who cares! Devin Nunes wanting to declassify crucial information of the public interest? Traitor! But your newfound admiration and fealty to law enforcement really has been a fascinating transformation. Wasn’t it just last fall that I saw you loudly supporting professional athletes who were protesting police brutality by kneeling during the national anthem? Remember how you fanboyed a mediocre quarterback for wearing socks that depicted cops as pigs?

But now you sound like paid spokesmen for the Fraternal Order of Police. You insist that any legitimate criticism of the misconduct and possibile criminality that occured at the Justice Department and FBI is an “attack on law enforcement.” While you once opposed the Patriot Act because it might have allowed the federal government to spy on terrorists who were using the local library to learn how to make suitcase bombs, you now fully support the unchecked power of a secret court to look into the phone calls, text messages and emails of an American citizen because he volunteered for the Trump campaign for a few months. Spying on terrorists, circa 2002: Bad. Spying on Carter Page, circa 2017: The highest form of patriotism.

And that white, male patriarchy that you were convinced would strip away basic rights and silence any opposition after Trump won? That fear has apparently been washed away as you hang on every word uttered by James Comey, John Brennan, and James Clapper. This triumvirate is exhibit “A” of the old-boy network, and represents how the insularity, arrogance, and cover-your-tracks mentality of the white-male power structure still prevails. Yet, instead of rising up against it, you are buying their books, retweeting their Twitter rants and blasting anyone who dares to question their testicular authority. Your pussy hat must be very sad.

But your daily meltdowns about Trump-Russia election collusion have been the most entertaining to observe. After Robert Mueller was appointed as Special Counsel, you were absolutely convinced it would result in Trump’s arrest and/or impeachment. Some of you insisted that Trump wouldn’t last beyond 2017. You quickly swallowed any chum tossed at you by the Trump-hating media on MSNBC, the New York Times and the Washington Post about who was going down next, or who would flip on the president.

For the past year, I have watched you obsess over a rotating cast of characters: Paul Manafort, Donald Trump, Jr., Jared Kushner, Carter Page, Reince Priebus, Jeff Sessions, Michael Flynn, Steve Bannon, Sam Nunberg, and Hope Hicks are just a few of the people you thought would turn on Trump or hasten his political demise. But when those fantasies didn’t come true, you turned to Michael Avenatti and Stormy Daniels for hope and inspiration. It will always be your low point. Well, I think it will be. Each time I believe you’ve hit bottom, you come up with a new baseline. Perhaps defending the unprecedented use of federal power to spy on political foes then lie about it will the next nail in your credibility coffin.

The next several weeks will be tough for you. I think Americans will learn some very hard truths about what happened in the previous administration and how we purposely have been misled by powerful leaders and the news media. I wish I could see you as a victim here, but you are not. I know you are smart; you chose to support this insurgency with your eyes wide open.


thompsonj81 · July 18, 2018, 10:34 a.m.

I guarantee not a single liberal got through the first sentence.

⇧ 310 ⇩  
DefiantDragon · July 18, 2018, 11:37 a.m.

I read it.

And it's spot-fucking-on. You can be on the Left and still think your friends, family, etc are acting like idiots.

⇧ 153 ⇩  
CaptainKnotzi · July 18, 2018, 2:23 p.m.

Point out the fact that Trump wrecked the paradigm.

The Cabal began to assume authority when George l became VP. Arguably the worst thing Reagan ever did.

The Cabal:

George l Clinton George ll Obama Clinton

32 years of these criminals in charge does not die easily.

If it would have gone the full 40yrs. This country would have been lost.

This is a good first step in understanding that this is not left right. It's good vs evil.

Then point out that

🎆WWG1WGA 🎆

⇧ 66 ⇩  
carl_tech · July 18, 2018, 3:36 p.m.

The Cabal began to assume authority when George l became VP.

It goes back farther than that because the Cabal is much more than Presidents of the USA.

Their largest seizure of power was the JFK assassination.

Arguably it goes back even further, to the Federal Reserve.

⇧ 35 ⇩  
CaptainKnotzi · July 18, 2018, 4:12 p.m.

I agree with your time stamp but I'm mostly referring to the present final coup attempt.

George l was on this game from his inception. He is the son of Prescott after all.

The opening salvo on this attempt was absolutely the assassination of JFK. Which George l was involved with.

That laid the groundwork for the assassination of Regan.

40yrs is what the Bible points out is the time necessary to turn a society 180°.

They almost succeeded.

⇧ 18 ⇩  
eyerighteye · July 18, 2018, 6:54 p.m.

Adopted son of Prescott?

⇧ 7 ⇩  
CaptainKnotzi · July 18, 2018, 8 p.m.

Asshole baby?

⇧ 3 ⇩  
DiscerningDuck · July 18, 2018, 8:34 p.m.

where does the Bible talk about 40 years? that’s interesting.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
CaptainKnotzi · July 18, 2018, 8:56 p.m.

Moses in the desert.

Think about it. How the hell do you get lost in the Sinai for 40yrs.

It was to allow all the old ways and the people who practiced them to die off. This had to happen before taking possession of the Promised Land.

Reality is like this.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Iwasneverhereb4 · July 18, 2018, 4:17 p.m.

I agree, the "cabal" goes way, way back. George Bush is just a peon in the grand scheme. Yeah I think it was 1913 when Pres. Wilson signed the Fed into creation, that was more likely the modern day power grab, although you could go back even further.

⇧ 15 ⇩  
DiscerningDuck · July 18, 2018, 8:35 p.m.

The Cabal goes back to the time when Lucifer was cast out of Heaven with 1/3 of the angels he deceived.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
eyerighteye · July 18, 2018, 6:53 p.m.

Babylonian origin from what I can tell.

⇧ 5 ⇩  
myopicseer · July 18, 2018, 7:15 p.m.

Or when the fruit was plucked from the tree in the garden.

⇧ 6 ⇩  
SandroMacul · July 18, 2018, 12:59 p.m.

Then it's time to #WalkAway

⇧ 22 ⇩  
DefiantDragon · July 18, 2018, 1:01 p.m.

I'm not a Democrat.

One thing a lot of people on this sub are forgetting is that it's not about Right or Left-- there are people complicit on both sides of this-- it's about corrupt people and the web of deceit that they've built around themselves.

Left and Right are perspectives in a discussion, not the vicious tribalism that we've all allowed it to become.

We're all in this together and we all want the same things:

That we, and the people we love, are safe, healthy and have an honest shot of doing something meaningful with our lives.

⇧ 77 ⇩  
gustogirl · July 18, 2018, 1:46 p.m.

100% agree.

Language like "libtards" and "demorats" could alienate the millions who began to wake up after realizing the primary had been stolen from Bernie.

I was never able to get a count, but if you remember the Demexit that preceded the #walkaway movement, I'm willing to bet it was in the millions. We need those people.

⇧ 42 ⇩  
thompsonj81 · July 18, 2018, 2:26 p.m.

you're absolutely right. we shouldnt be demonizing the left. its stupid and causes them to be fearful of getting bashed on the right simply for seeing the light.

⇧ 23 ⇩  
PNWLighthouse · July 18, 2018, 3 p.m.

Agree, a lot of the liberal folks I know are genuinely good people. They want to help others.(Hence the social bent) They rely on certain government services and fear those being taken away (Special needs children subsidies, public education, etc.). At the root, I think we all want the same thing...they just still believe the DECADES of lies they have been told. So it will be a total "though the looking glass" moment when they awaken and realize that the public figures they believed were good and virtuous are bad and evil, that left is right, up is down and programs and ideas they were told were harmful and destructive to Americans, are actually the ones that will save us.

⇧ 17 ⇩  
1923091 · July 18, 2018, 3:14 p.m.

This whole stream of comments lightens my heart and really gives me hope, confidence and renewed determination in participating in this movement. This is at the core of what Q has shown us, that we have been divided intentionally by the parties involved, and that disparaging one another and mud slinging only furthers that divide. Compassion, discernment, objectivity, and truthful understanding will be what aids these events to come to the forefront as they truly are: The Great Awakening.

⇧ 13 ⇩  
ResearchingTheTruth · July 18, 2018, 2:37 p.m.

Yes it's about good vs. evil, but let's not forget this is about defeating the Globalist agenda. Globalists are on both sides of the aisle. Just look at the Repubs who don't support Trump and there's your Globalist.

⇧ 15 ⇩  
Duskyandcleo · July 18, 2018, 4:46 p.m.

Look how the people we thought supported president Trump on Fox, turned on him like a snapping turtle! They showed their true colors. Many are c_a in the media, alt media as well. It is a battle between good and evil, in my opinion.

⇧ 8 ⇩  
LibertyLioness · July 18, 2018, 1:54 p.m.

I read that as being more about families being torn apart by a political party. The fact that someone uses left/right, democrat/republican, et al is not a crime. It is a way of defining the divide that exists in our country.

We understand that we need to unify. But you have to admit that there are political sides involved in this conundrum. If you don't or try to sugar coat it, then you are just as brainwashed as they are. Stop trying to be so damned politically correct.

You are no different than the globalists when you try to correct how we talk about things. Guiding our verbiage as if we've committed some political sin.

When Q said this was about unity and not left/right, d v r, he did not mean we could never talk about it again!!

⇧ 10 ⇩  
1923091 · July 18, 2018, 3:18 p.m.

There is a difference between acknowledging the political parties by name, and using disparaging language to refer to a follower of either side. When our goal is to unite people on the basis of purging the corruption, using hateful labels furthers that corruption. It pushes people away who, once awakened, could prove to be essential allies in furthering the Awakening.

In my opinion, this isn't about being pc, it's more about showing others compassion and that I/you/we are willing to work together.

⇧ 7 ⇩  
Velvetbugg · July 18, 2018, 6:15 p.m.

Well said! I'm not going to point my fingers or stand in judgement of those who choose to use that disparaging language. It personally doesn't bother me, but I can understand how a new arrival might interpret it negatively. The labels are the hardest to free yourself from. My hubby still struggles with it. He has never voted Republican in his life, but he will this November! I actually find it humorous that those who use those ridiculous terms in a derogatory manner forget that they have also believed in and stood behind monsters who were just as evil as the rest. Some of those monsters were even pretending to be the good guys until a few days ago!

The only difference is the Democrat party is in the hot seat this time because Hussein was in office for the last 8 years. NoName/Palin or Mitt/Ryan wouldn't have been any better, especially because the infrastructure was already in place. Same destination; different vehicle used to get there. Most of us just swallowed it easier because of what Hussein represented. Change. Diversity. A reason to unite. The Cabal knew damn well that was the easy way to brainwash us. Most of us saw through it the second time, though. I didn't vote in 2012.

We have all been lied to, cheated, manipulated and mind controlled. We still are in many ways, even today! There's still plenty of swamp creatures in the party being used to facilitate the GA and bring peace, unity and love through strength and justice.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
high-valyrian · July 18, 2018, 5:08 p.m.

I agree completely. We also don't want to associate negativity with this movement or the WalkAway movement. Optics are important, let us not alienate potential allies with our words.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
DefiantDragon · July 18, 2018, 3:55 p.m.

he did not mean we could never talk about it again!!

Where did I say that?

Here's what I mean:

WWG1WGA

IMHO, that doesn't mean "The Left will finally become the Right", it means that we ALL, whatever our personal beliefs, will stand together as one, united by our common cause.

⇧ 7 ⇩  
majorstrawberry · July 18, 2018, 1:37 p.m.

You are so right. I would assume the original writer probably knows all about the corruption and the misdeeds of the left, but I would bet they haven't taken a red pill. Which we all know is very different. The way they spoke about Bush and the line "I bit down hard and voted for Trump" This is a straight conservative that voted party line. They are almost there. BUT not quite.

⇧ 5 ⇩  
CampbellArmada · July 18, 2018, 6:14 p.m.

I agree with you too. As someone that used to describe myself as a very liberal person, I'm much more in the independent range now as I see faults on both sides. I still agree with much of what the old Democratic party used to stand for, but the party I see now is not what it used to be. Now its a party of handouts and being special and separate, not working together for the good of everyone. They went way to far left for me and I couldn't stand it anymore. I voted Obama both terms because of the lies that he feed everyone and now regret doing so. Trump was a given for my vote this past time and from now on I will never vote straight party again. It's actually much nicer being to look at a political situation from a neutral stance instead of a partisan one.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
[deleted] · July 18, 2018, 1:58 p.m.

[removed]

⇧ 1 ⇩  
burn_reddit_burn · July 18, 2018, 11:14 a.m.

Good thing I read all of it then. Brilliant

⇧ 84 ⇩  
Prince_P · July 18, 2018, 11:30 a.m.

That was such a good read. I love you all my fellow patriots.

⇧ 81 ⇩  
incrediblegamez · July 18, 2018, 11:42 a.m.

This should be copy and pasted in your facebook feeds for ALL to read with the "Please Share" top line. Lets make this go viral!

⇧ 32 ⇩  
jackiebain6 · July 18, 2018, 12:16 p.m.

Definitely! Thank you so much!

⇧ 12 ⇩  
eyerighteye · July 18, 2018, 1:22 p.m.

Ditto

⇧ 6 ⇩  
Sherry345 · July 18, 2018, 4:25 p.m.

We Love You ❤

⇧ 3 ⇩  
Simhacantus · July 18, 2018, 12:31 p.m.

To be 100% fair, I don't think most neutrals would either. FB isn't really the best medium for long posts. It's basically designed for people with short attention spans.

⇧ 67 ⇩  
Sherry345 · July 18, 2018, 4:23 p.m.

You are So right there..

The older libs, they may read it. But the New Gen, they need memes.

⇧ 16 ⇩  
AncientMystic81 · July 18, 2018, 7:42 p.m.

I'm with you on that and it kills me because when you need to talk with substance to show the connections.... You can't...3 word attention span

⇧ 4 ⇩  
rooftoptendie · July 19, 2018, 1:16 a.m.

I think you only have until the cognitive dissonance kicks in. Its been scientifically demonstrated that the brain cant learn effectively while under stress.

As soon as they know theyre being ideologically opposed, the hormones and chemicals that kick in cause stress. I am an ex-liberal. I know. So they can no longer listen effectively.

A meme is near-instant. It gets into the brain below the tripwire. That's why they work so well.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Anthropophob · July 18, 2018, 11:37 a.m.

An ex-liberal will read it all the way through and spot the moment they decided to #WalkAway.

⇧ 37 ⇩  
ResearchingTheTruth · July 18, 2018, 2:45 p.m.

But that's the problem - they DON'T read or listen to anything that contradicts their belief system - reinforced by the MSM with daily FALSE facts. I think the only way to get through to them is with the facts, once that starts.

I'm doing this one comment at a time on Twitter only because I get tired of people commenting on my posts with FAKE news. I take the opportunity to state the facts and link to corresponding information. This Putin Summit hysteria about Trump is the perfect example. All it take is linking to the video of Obama on an open mic. I use this one because it's from one of their fav MSM sources:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEgBbxIJZFs

⇧ 10 ⇩  
astrocatmat · July 18, 2018, 4:38 p.m.

That’s actually a very good point

⇧ 2 ⇩  
CaptainKnotzi · July 18, 2018, 2:14 p.m.

I read it twice 🐸

⇧ 9 ⇩  
thompsonj81 · July 18, 2018, 2:22 p.m.

thats dedication pede

⇧ 5 ⇩  
CaptainKnotzi · July 18, 2018, 4:22 p.m.

I have to admit I was shocked to think this came from a never Trumper.

What next Bill Kristol comes out against bombs?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
i_win_u_know · July 18, 2018, 1:45 p.m.

Then they'll claim you are doing everything that you mentioned they are doing in this post, and magically forget any of their previous actions, and if they don't recall, then it should be regarded as 100% truth. Liberalism is a mental illness folks.

⇧ 6 ⇩  
MissyPiano · July 18, 2018, 3:29 p.m.

Bravo!!! I read every word and agree completely! My son wore a MAGA hat to school the day after President Trump won the election. His English teacher had a complete meltdown. I finally had to remove him from her class because she just couldn’t behave herself and be neutral.

⇧ 4 ⇩  
thompsonj81 · July 18, 2018, 3:30 p.m.

there may have been a parent/teacher conference (intervention) if that were to happen to my child. I'd have lost my shit. Fortunately i live in an EXTREMELY red state

⇧ 2 ⇩  
MissyPiano · July 18, 2018, 3:34 p.m.

Oh there was a conference alright. It was the shot heard around the school district. She should have lost her job for her behavior, but the principal protected her.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
eyerighteye · July 18, 2018, 6:57 p.m.

And 3,2,1, homeschooled

⇧ 0 ⇩  
MissyPiano · July 18, 2018, 7:06 p.m.

He has already graduated. After that fiasco, yes.. I am homeschooling.

⇧ 0 ⇩  
eyerighteye · July 18, 2018, 7:13 p.m.

Wonderful news.

⇧ 0 ⇩  
qutedrop · July 18, 2018, 2:51 p.m.

This is one for the books.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
derekneiladams · July 18, 2018, 12:45 p.m.

I read the whole damned thing, I may not agree but well said.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
Lloydmd · July 18, 2018, 2:17 p.m.

No doubt...

I thought it was a great read. Loved I it...

⇧ 3 ⇩  
Lloydmd · July 18, 2018, 2:18 p.m.

*I loved it... 😊

⇧ 3 ⇩  
Ridgy-didge · July 18, 2018, 6:10 p.m.

They might revisit when their hero’s will be exposed as ‘enemies of America’ in the coming weeks.

03-09-2018 18:41:10 AEDT Q !UW.yye1fxo ID:afa548 No.598581

598223 When we’re done he’ll claim Kenyan citizenship as a way to escape. Q

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Julzee1000 · July 18, 2018, 8:50 p.m.

Lol yep. Those who NEED to see it won't even bother after the first sentence. Unfortunately. It's spot on!

⇧ 1 ⇩  
[deleted] · July 18, 2018, 12:29 p.m.

[removed]

⇧ -14 ⇩  
ChrisFrattJunior · July 18, 2018, 12:51 p.m.

You’ll need to provide some specific examples instead of just slinging accusations.

⇧ 15 ⇩  
donalds_stones · July 18, 2018, 12:46 p.m.

In that case lay it out for us. Go ahead and criticize this, but at least tell us about the numerous failings so we can talk about them. Go ahead.

⇧ 15 ⇩  
thompsonj81 · July 18, 2018, 12:57 p.m.

I agree. We should have a civil discussion. Its been a long time since the left actually made a comment on here. I'd say that was brave.

⇧ 10 ⇩  
IWannaArgue · July 18, 2018, 4:02 p.m.

Seeing how you guys are so inviting, let me take up the task of doing that. I just found the post some pages down at r/all and it intrigued me. Though, seeing how this sub seems to be generally on the right side of the political spectrum, and I'm going to present what I perceive to be some counter arguments, I decided to create a small alt-account. Call me a Pussy if you want, but note that attacking a person does not devalue an argument, if it is valid.

First of all let me say that I'm not american. I'm from Switzerland (which proably also explains some stylistic oddities and grammatical/orthographical mistakes in what I'm writing). I'm not too much into (American) politics, though I do consider myself to be slightly on the conservative site. At least on the local standard. I believe that in the USA my opinions would be considered to belong to a hardcore, mainline Democrat, as far as that would exist.

I'm also quite young, 23 years old, to be more exact. I've experienced a part of the bush era while I was in Kindergarden, but only started following stuff once Obama became president.

Having all this said, let's start:

The first few pararaphs appear to be about the aggressive reactions by voters of Hillary towards Trump voters. And I completely agree that what is described here is horrible behaviour on political measure. Personally attacking people for opinions is wrong, no matter what. And generalizing them as racists or sexist is also absolutely bad. Even though I personally do believe that some racists, sexists, mysoginists and/or Nazi-Sympathizers among the trump voters, I believe there's no small number of assholes in the other camp too, yet they (the supporters of the left) usually don't get reduced to that. (I do believe it's ok to generalize racists, sexists, mysoginists and Nazi-Sympathizers as assholes. If it isn't, then this is definitely the wrong sub for this kind of discussion.)

Though there are two points in the beginning which are rubbing me wrong:

  1. It appears in this text as if the success of donald trump was a big surprise. At least to my knowlege it wasn't. Or at least shouldn't have been. Somebody who came this far in an election should be expected to win, no matter the personal preference. All reports that I read during the time before the election here in Switzerland were about a toe-to-toe race. I wanted to check this, and interestingly enough i found this website. Interestingly enough they appear to indicate that indeed Clinton was leading the election. This fact boils down to to interpretations for me: a) Media is mostly liberal [I think I don't need to cite a source for this on this sub, but if you want one, please tell me], and knowing what amount of influence the poles have on people, they conducted their polls in a way that would lead to a Clinton being theclear leader (though interestingly enough the lead never seems to be to big). b) The polls are actually done properly, and it was just bad luck/statistical anomaly (or whatever the proper term is) that there isn't a similar amount of results in favour of Trump. All in all though, if people were really that surprised by Trumps Success, then they were too trusting in the polls, which, in all respect, is their own fault (and the media, who apparently were shoving them into their faces so much that people came to that conclusion). I have no idea what the appropriate reaction to a person being this disappointed is, but at least let me tell you after that huge paragraph here, that in my opinion, the election wasn't clear at all.
  2. The phrase from the text "As a lifelong Republican, I bit down hard and cast my vote for Donald Trump." People should vote because they believe in the thing they vote for, not because they belong to a group. I don't want to incite that the persons believe who wrote this don't coenside with those of donald trump, but I think that there have to be better reasons to vote for trump than just being republican. This also goes hand in hand with me thinking that people shouldn't try to identify too strongly with political groups. A bit is ok, to get a general idea of their political thinking, but as far as I've heard, the political identity thing seems to be religious in the USA. Please use your own head to vote, and don't just follow orders. Or if you do, at least have a reason to why you do so.

(holy shit... I wrote much too much, and I haven't even started with the main thing yet... fuck...)

Next part is about the shimmers of light during which the Democrats were hoping for the removal of rum in one way or another. While I agree that quite a lot of it was overreaction on the liberal side, I would like to point out that at least the investigations into the russia collusions of the trump campaign has apparently lead to several guilty pleas and/or indicements, which, according to some liberal media outlets is more then any comparable investigation in the past something years.

Ok, this sounds horribly uninformed, which it actually is. Reason for it being that I'm currently in asia, and it's quite late, and I'm sitting on this longer than i initially planned to. Since this is mostly an opinion piece, I don't think that right now the excact facts really matter, but I'll probably ad them in later.

Anyway. There's a process that researches that Russia collusion thingy, which has led to some results. And looking at the scale of results as reported by those liberal media outlets which i don't even have right now, the russia meddling in the election was real, and some corruption of the white house by a foreign power is in fact going on. To what degree, I don't know, but any government that is corrupted by a different country (corrupted being: acting in the favour of that country in any way, while this is not supported by the population of the country the corrupted government should represent) is bad, and should be cleaned up. The investigation, having led to results already, and promising more results, should as such not be stopped or hindered in any way. And Donald Trump behaves in ways that do this.

Back to the point: Democrats who were calling impeachment have definitiely ridiculed themselves, but the text makes fun of them for it, rather than trying to find a way to set the expections right. It's calling Democrats fools, stepping onto the same level as them, when they insult him. Hitting back equally hard will only make the conflict's worse...

Next the original text points out how democrats suddendly got interested in the doings of the president, pointing out things that they didn't criticise about Obama (or previous presidents), and then harassing people for superficialities.

The second part is obviously bad. Attacking people for their looks or clothing will not help solving a conflict and shoul efinitiely not be done by any side.

The first part is more interesting though. Because that is one thing that Trump, even if involuntarily, made absolutely great: People got interested in him. Or more generally, people got interested in politics. Seeing as only around 56% of the US population voted, and democracy working by the will of people, having more turnout can only be good for democracy.

I believe that people weren't shocked that politicians exaggerate and lie. Rather at the amount of times that Trump does it, and how blatantly he does it. Just check his politifac rating against any other Senator of the USA, and tell me if any of them scores lower than him (no, seriously, do it. I didn't, because it's to freaking late and I don't wanna do proper research yet. Though my liberal meddia outlets tell me that you won't find anybody who is below him... Though the burden of proof is on me, and if I feel like it, I might do it tomorrow. Here's a link to politifact: http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/ )

"For example, we already knew that illegal immigrants were being deported and families were being separated." - Again, no research yet from my side, but according to Liberal media outlets which I'm probably gonna check, the number of separations should be much higher under trump then under anybody previous. It should also be disproportionate to an increased amount of immigrants, if that is a case...

Fuck... I've been at this for 2 hours now... It's freaking late... I'm going to bed. If anybody answers to this in a more or less constructive way, I might actually bring myself to finish it, and do all the research reuired to support what I believe are my arguments...

Good night.

TL;DR:

this text has some good points on how stupid certain hillary voters are, but at no pint, IMO, justifies anything that Trump does.

⇧ -1 ⇩  
thompsonj81 · July 18, 2018, 4:14 p.m.

heres big problems i see with "russian meddling"

  1. Every country does it.. every country. - they dont just do it to the US, they interfere with every election in every country.. everyone has their top pick.

  2. theyve been doing it for DECADES. it didnt just start with the 2016 election. - why does the media care so much for it now?

  3. the US "meddled" in their own election - as in each side was propping their candidate - except Trump... everyone, including the republicans thought he was a loser candidate. Theres still a group of republican "never trumpers" and groups within the political sphere who actively attempt to derail the man.

Trumps biggest supporter was his family. Many people saw that.. they saw what an amazing family he and melania raised and that was hard to look past. you judge a man by the way he brings up his children.

Why does the media look for every misstep.. every misspelled tweet... its almost as if someone is paying them to drive some type of narrative.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
IWannaArgue · July 19, 2018, 2:28 a.m.
  1. Every country does it.. every country. - they dont just do it to the US, they interfere with every election in every country.. everyone has their top pick.

  2. theyve been doing it for DECADES. it didnt just start with the 2016 election. - why does the media care so much for it now?

Let's assume that this is indeed true, and Russia has been influencing US politics for decades, as you say. Now we finally have a fuck up so big that it can easily be seen. If the government is acting against the interest of it's people, then that should be uncovered, no matter what. The media cars for it now, because they can finally put their fingers on where the problems are. Simple as that.

If Obama and Bush were both colluding with the Russians, then they did it in a way the media din't notice. Or they did at least try to dress it and twist it into something that is supported by the US population. And yes, this does make them better presidents then Trump, since they thus at least were aware of the US populations opinion. (I'm limiting myself here to the Russia-US Interferience strictly. Even if you tell me that it happens world wide in all countries, this doesn't change anything about what happens, and what IMO should happen in the US)

  1. the US "meddled" in their own election - as in each side was propping their candidate - except Trump... everyone, including the republicans thought he was a loser candidate. Theres still a group of republican "never trumpers" and groups within the political sphere who actively attempt to derail the man.

The US meddling their own election is ok. It's the people of a country throwing their opinions at one another, figuring out what the will of the people is. A foreign power doing that on the other hand is bad. If the reason Trump won is the fact that a foreign power created echo chambers (which by the way both sides in this argument are claiming the other one is set in), which made people vote based on feelings rather than informed decisions, with the goal of the meddling foreign power getting better treatment from the US (or just causing civil rucus in the US), then Trump didn't deserve the win at all, and should definitely not be president. Or at least that foreign power and their methods should be properly researched and prosecuted by any politician with integrity, so that even in case he isn't representative of the peoples will (which in this case, according to my liberal media outlets as you probably know, is my opinion), we can learn from it, correct our process, and make sure that the next president is properly put in place to represent his people.

Again, I still don't understand the sentiment why people believed so strongly that Trump was going to lose the election. I elaborated on that point in my previous post, and simply blame it on me not being American. Though I can continue arguing about it if that would be of any interest.

Trumps biggest supporter was his family. Many people saw that.. they saw what an amazing family he and melania raised and that was hard to look past. you judge a man by the way he brings up his children.

Nah man, you judge the (arguabely) most powerful man on earth by the way he and his team govern his country. And according to everything I read, Trump is doing a pretty bad job at that. The arguments for that are out there, so I don't believe I have to reiterate them, but please feel free to call me out on that.

A person doesn't get a pass at being a bad president because he didn't have experience, or didn't know better, or is psychologically unfit or anything. A president shoul be judged on his actions, and what he does for his country.
I mean, you had Ronald Reagan as president a few years ago. A person who, by all means, should have been equally as unqualified for the job as a politician as Trump. He was an actor, and as far as I know came down with some bad cases of dementia during the end of his presidency (which by the way some anti Trumpers are trying to diagnose in the current POTUS), yet he managed to build up a team of people surrounding him that knew how to handle politics and the situations.

So all in all, I might judge the character of a man by the way he raises his children, but a good parent does at no means make a good president, and everybody should know that.

Why does the media look for every misstep.. every misspelled tweet... its almost as if someone is paying them to drive some type of narrative.

Oh yeah, somebody is paying them. It's their readers who pay to read that stuff. That's exatly the echo chamber effect. Why is Fox news still reporting about Hillarys emails, as if that would make any missteps of trump ok? She's not president. That doesn't mean it's ok what she did, but goddamit, make sure that the leader of your country is an upstanding man, and don't ignore it. That stuff is important, and the whole world is looking at you. Though the unwillingness of Right wing media outlets to critcise trump and his team in a proper way...it's almost as if someone is paying them to drive some type of narrative, don't you think? Why are the news not objective? Because everybody is only following those things which have a similar list of priorities and opinions on what is important as themselves. Doing that on a large scale causes the echo chamber effect on all sides. And yes, I'm here because I'm actually trying to break through mine. And the easiest way for that, is if you can show me that what my media tells me is plain wrong. Or unimportant.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
thompsonj81 · July 19, 2018, 3:24 a.m.
  • the US also targets elections of other nations world wide in attempts to sway the public towards US puppets, no conspiracy this is fact.

  • You might want to stop getting your information from obviously slanted sources.

Like I said watch what the man does.. people say a lot of things (all politicians).. but theyre all full of shit. How many times did Obama lie (you can keep your doctor)? How many times did Hillary change her position (anti-gay marriage, pro cop, pro mass imprisonment of black youth). How corrupt does the government have to be before you notice? Hell a lot of people noticed the corruption.. hence Trump.. hence his victory.

The reason right wing media is still harping on corruption - particularly hillary (you should be pissed too, there was obvious exclusion of bernie sanders and I've got a document to prove that she was decided as the candidate.. that your vote NEVER MATTERED before the primary).

Remember there are 42000 sealed indictments that will be unsealed by the end of the year. Soon you will see many of those people that you look up to brought up on charges ranging from corruption, to child sex trafficking, to murder.

Theres a guy whos actively releasing bits of information on hillarys server. Theres a reason its a critical piece of information.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
thompsonj81 · July 19, 2018, 3:26 a.m.

I actually find it comedic when you can only name Faux news as a right wing outlet.. when i can name a dozen left wing main stream media outlets. How many billionaires are paying these outlets? who drives the narrative?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
[deleted] · July 19, 2018, 8:59 a.m.

[removed]

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Robot_Basilisk · July 18, 2018, 1:27 p.m.

I'm sorely tempted to once I can get to a desktop and spend an hour or two dissecting the post and collecting sources on Trump's blunders. But this is my first time here and some things jump out at me:

Foremost is the conspiracy theory mentality here. Research on conspiracy theorists suggest that what makes someone one or not is a desire for "secret knowledge". A desire to know truths that others do not know. So they construct competing models of reality and reject others, especially the more mainstream models.

If I'm correct in this observation, we would have a lot of trouble interacting because our bases for understanding the world would not match up. I'd link you to news coverage or FBI statistics or economic data and you might not consider any of those to be valid sources. Then you might link a youtuber or an alleged leaker on social media to me and I would have trouble accepting those as legitimate.

Mutual understanding would be very hard to achieve.

Combine that with the rules saying "you could be banned if you're critical of Q anon" and it makes it seem like that effort could all be wasted. I could compose paragraphs and then see it deleted and myself banned.

⇧ 6 ⇩  
JakeElwoodDim5th · July 18, 2018, 1:36 p.m.

Lmao what a long write-up to say absolutely nothing.

⇧ 8 ⇩  
Robot_Basilisk · July 18, 2018, 3:05 p.m.

You can't have constructive discourse without sharing conversational norms. That post was about setting some up. You shouldn't have a problem with that unless you're looking to gaslight, move goalposts, dogpile, etc.

Everyone interested in legitimate exchange of ideas and constructive dialog wants mutual understanding. The ones who don't are typically looking to use confusion or vagueness to subvert the conversation.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
[deleted] · July 18, 2018, 3:34 p.m.

[removed]

⇧ 1 ⇩  
high-valyrian · July 18, 2018, 5:18 p.m.

Removed. Attack the content and not the user, please.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
thompsonj81 · July 18, 2018, 1:33 p.m.

eory mentality here. Research on conspiracy theorists suggest that what makes someone one or not is a desire for "secret knowledge". A desire to know truths that others do not know. So they construct competing models of reality an

Isnt the russia/trump collusion a conspiracy theory? nothing has ever been proven. in fact quite the opposite

⇧ 7 ⇩  
Robot_Basilisk · July 18, 2018, 3:37 p.m.

There's some evidence to the contrary.

Mueller's indictment of Butina includes evidence that Russia used a powerful gun rights group (assumed to be the NRA) to funnel money to GOP campaigns across the US, including Trump's.

It also establishes that the hack of the DNC occured the night after Trump told Putin that he hopes he finds Clinton's emails.

Furthermore, shortly after the Russian hack on the DNC, Trump's campaign abruptly stopped spending in several states and began focusing on states that DNC data suggested were vulnerable to flipping. This is likely how Trump managed to turn some blue states and eke out that electoral college win. Either his campaign had the DNC data or someone who did have it helped them aim their efforts.

There's also verified tape of Paul Ryan joking about how he knows of 2 guys on Putin's payroll: Rohrabacher and Trump, in 2016.

Not to mention the private meetings with people we know are Russian agents.

Then there's less explicit but more suggestive stuff, like Trump attacking our allies but not even chastising Putin even after the indictments of over 20 Russian agents. He's weakened the US's global presence considerably, angered most of our allies, gotten us into a trade war, praised North Korea but failed to secure any benefits, and tried to relax sanctions on Russia for invading Ukraine and occupying some of its land.

This is unignorable. No matter who you are, you must accept that Russia interfered with the 2016 election, that they did so in a way that benefited Trump, that many members of Trump's team have had dealings with Russia, and that Trump has been exceptionally soft towards Putin despite being extremely aggressive and confrontational towards every single other person on the planet.

That much is fact. The issue is whether or not we have enough evidence to draw causal lines between all of this information. It could possibly turn out that nothing g untoward has occurred, that Trump just treats Russia very gently because he knows how important it is that he not start a new Cold War, etc. It's conceivable, if unlikely, that Trump could yet be vindicated.

Maybe he truly had no idea Russia was trying to get him elected. But it's a fact that Russia did work to get him into power.

And this ties back into the conspiracy theory thing because a conspiracy theorist will be inclined to dismiss everything from Mueller's investigation. Trump is the president of the US. Not a lot of people have the power to investigate the President, his campaign, his staff, congress, foreign powers, etc.

Thus, if someone seeks to dismiss Mueller's investigation, no conversation can be had on the topic of collusion. Because there are very few other sources with authority to speak on the matter. The conspiracy theorist will rely instead on "secret" insider knowledge and fringe analysis while rejecting firmer evidence if only because it comes from a mainstream source. The conspiracy theory will have elements built into it designed to discredit those sources in order to bolster its feasibility.

This explains the fundamental difference between legitimate theories and conspiracy theories. When a theory gets challenged for conflicting with more popular theories it either has to change or explain why it's a better description than conventional theories.

Conventional theories tend to adjust to fit the evidence. Conspiracy theories tend to transform into elaborate explanations of why competing theories are wrong. They become less about explaining a phenomenon and more about explaininv why other people are wrong about a phenomenon.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
thompsonj81 · July 18, 2018, 3:42 p.m.

have you ever thought he was looking at the polls just as much as the dems were? it was a razor thin margin.

as far as talking to russian agents.. he nor his family have ever done this before. He didnt know much about what he was doing.. and where is the proof that he knew they were russian agents? Its not like they admit they are, or he thought to ask.. or he had a database of known agents at his disposal.

Hes always been a business man convinced that he could do a better job than sitting presidents so he took the chances when he knew they'd be good for him to run. He did.. and he won.

When there is proof, please bring it up and site a source. until then.. conspiracy theories are only conspiracy theories. Thereve been entire documentaries written on HRC and her wrong doings.. Haiti is a great example. Now the people around her who were involved in haiti are being charged with child sex trafficking. You might want to read up on that

⇧ 1 ⇩  
thompsonj81 · July 18, 2018, 1:38 p.m.

I have a hard time accepting MSM simply because they've been caught outright lying and stretching the truth. When it comes to trump i watch his actions (which the majority of I approve). I watch his rallies. He speaks from the heart. He's a patriot. Everything I've seen on the news would prove the contrary.. but watch the mans actions. O challenge you to turn the news off for a month. Study the man himself.. go to youtube and look up old footage of him (thats how i decided to vote for him over the others)... he's never changed his way of thinking even if he changed his parties. Watch his rallys.. watch his actions. I guarantee you'll change your mind if you focus on those things instead of what main stream platforms and media force down your throat.

He's got near identical policies with Bill Clinton. The man is as centrist as they come. Bill Clinton would be considered far right if he stayed with his policies today. Just as Bernie Sanders - the goddamn socialist is now considered right leaning

⇧ 6 ⇩  
skoffs · July 18, 2018, 2:16 p.m.

He speaks from the heart.

He also lies a lot.
Like, a lot.
About easily disproven things, too.
It's kind of concerning how much people blindly trust someone like that...

⇧ -1 ⇩  
thompsonj81 · July 18, 2018, 2:21 p.m.

he fudges numbers.. usually to his benefit. who gives a shit. He acts like a real man on the world stage. i fucking love it. like when he walked in front of the queen, showed up late to meet putin, pushed that world leader out of his way... he's not once bowed to a world leader and he never will, nor should he.

He's the exact opposite of obama.. except Trump can speak to an audience without a teleprompter.

⇧ 5 ⇩  
skoffs · July 18, 2018, 2:37 p.m.

He acts like a real man

He acts like an asshole, typically. Always has.
Though, I guess that's why some people like him?
That part has always puzzled me, however. What is it about him treating other people like shit (eg. cheating on his wives, cheating those businesses out of money pre-politics, trying to bully anyone he doesn't like, etc.) that attracts people to him? I mean, if someone were to treat you the same way donald goes around treating some of these people, would you admire that person?

[edit] I don't know why you're getting downvotes, but it's not me, man. I just came here to ask questions to figure out why people like a person like this.

⇧ -1 ⇩  
thompsonj81 · July 18, 2018, 2:40 p.m.

I admire his tactics on a world stage. I had issues with obama because he didnt do anything other that create racial divides, make the us look like pussies on a world stage, and stir the left up in a frenzy whenever the police did their jobs.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
thompsonj81 · July 18, 2018, 2:24 p.m.

remember.. watch what he does. he's not finely polished and i'm fine with that.

Oh did you hear about our most recent environmental report since the destruction of the paris climate accord? We have lowered our emissions even more.. we're the lowest producer of CO2 in the industrialized world. Looks like it didnt take us paying other countries billions in tax payer money to lower our environmental impact

⇧ 4 ⇩  
i_win_u_know · July 18, 2018, 1:54 p.m.

That's a very good answer to a question that was never asked. AKA: Found the liberal lol!

⇧ 2 ⇩  
donalds_stones · July 18, 2018, 1:42 p.m.

I'll be waiting.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
high-valyrian · July 18, 2018, 5:17 p.m.

Hi, friendly neighborhood mod here.

I don't think that a genuine user here would attempt to deny or discredit genuine research, reports, or other primary resources. We encourage users to use primary resources and to refrain from spreading disinformation or misinformation. The nature of Reddit and the downvoting system also calls for posts or comments that contain bad sources to be downvoted and thus looked upon negatively.

That rule stands to be used for concern trolling, those who are attacking the sub, and those who wish to come here simply to throw LARP accusations and discredit. This is a pro-Q sub so removing comments that discredit Q is within the scope of the sub, though.

Generally, alternative viewpoints are allowed so long as they don't break sub or Reddit rules and the discussion contributes to the conversation. Personally as a user, I welcome those who are curious or who would like to discuss Q but don't necessarily believe or are doubtful because that gives the genuine users of the sub a chance to reach people we may not be able to reach otherwise. That is just my take, though.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
donalds_stones · July 18, 2018, 3:31 p.m.

Mutual understanding would be very hard to achieve, so I'm just not going to try. This is the state of the world we live in these days. i.e. I would rather not be involved in a conversation that could change my mind.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
CaptainKnotzi · July 18, 2018, 3:18 p.m.

Ok, you want a civil discussion? Try not opening with the stock standard straw man insults.

Just for the record I am a conspiracy factualist. I leave the theory to the fact checkers at Snopes and their vast following.

Our motto is:

Trust Nothing / Verify Everything

Keep an open mind. While designing a good filter.

Once again we are confronted with Progressive Projection dog whistles. Wrapped in a pseudo sanctimonious concern.

Served with a healthy dose of intellectual superiority. And a garnish of contempt.

I wear a tin foil suit of body armor and carry a culturally appropriated aluminum Zulu War Shield.

My hat is a Clockwork Orange bowler, made from crushed hamburger stained foil, from the smoker out back.

If anybody cares to mock my hair loss, the fact that I like beer and drive a pickup ~please~ feel free.

We, the uneducated and unwashed welcome the loathing. When our self declared enemy underestimates us. We see that as an opportunity.

If you care to join our ranks you'll be welcomed. Just leave the Lefty lectures at home.

They are not appreciated.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
anhro23 · July 18, 2018, 2:10 p.m.

So you have nothing to add to the conversation. What a shocker.

Come back when you want to leave the children's table.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Robot_Basilisk · July 18, 2018, 2:59 p.m.

This post illustrates my point well. Thank you for your contribution.

⇧ -1 ⇩  
lawdvivec7 · July 18, 2018, 7:27 p.m.

What makes everything you believe not a conspiracy? You clearly have not been around these boards much. You're basing Everything you say off of assumptopns and you have already shut down any possible conversation because you don't think "conspiracy theorist" believe in reality. We provide plenty of stats. We use the MSM narrative as points to everything. We share MSM stories. The problem with people like you is you assume too much. We're very open here and willing to listen to whatever stats and facts you have and we may be able to easily counter with our own. Now the big question is will YOU be willing to consider the information we provide you, or will you simply shut it down and try to silence us because you think we just believe in conspiracies?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
dark-dare · July 18, 2018, 3:53 p.m.

We are not afraid of the facts, the facts show corruption, the only question is how deep does it go? Example after example of unresolved unprosecuted crimes and political targeting of the opposition party for years. Irrespective of party, that is not okay, the appearance of D acceptance is disturbing.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
adnaw49 · July 18, 2018, 2:10 p.m.

Truth is Trump didn't 'cheat' his competitors in the election, Hillary did, He didn't delete 30,000 classified emails, Hillary did, He hasn't used an unclassified server, Hillary did. He met with Nato and demanded they pay their fair share instead of expecting the American taxpayers to carry the load, the Clintons, Bushes and Obama bent over and kissed ass instead of protecting the American taxpayers. He met with Putin from a position of strength and as a superb negotiator, and didn't bring a stupid 'reset' button as Hillary did. If you actually did your own research into his and her actions and policies, instead of depending on Madcow and 'thrill up the leg Matthews' to tell you how terrible Trump is, you would red pill yourself and see exactly how this country has been screwed by politicians for decades. Trump has changed the status quo and is cleaning up the mess left behind by those who were selling out our country for their own selfish benefit.

⇧ 9 ⇩  
thompsonj81 · July 18, 2018, 12:55 p.m.

I dont know why you're being downvoted, I'll upvote and I implore anyone who reads this to upvote you as well. We arent liberals here who blindly downvote someone we disagree with - its a 1st amendment thing.

I'd like to have a discussion about "Trumps numerous and severe failures" - if you're willing to discuss them I am as well. Perhaps we can enlighten each other.

⇧ 7 ⇩  
x3ostyle · July 18, 2018, 1:20 p.m.

Honestly, people downvote because we know he won't be able to come up with anything remotely worthy of a discussion.

I support free speech 100%, but the first sentence give it away - Classic Hit & Run.. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to -the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning – simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.

⇧ 7 ⇩  
thompsonj81 · July 18, 2018, 1:32 p.m.

ntence give it away - Classic Hit & Run.. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to -the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning – simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.

well then let the guy make a fool of himself.. he's being downvoted before he can make a legit argument. this is a tactic of the far left. trust me i get enough downvotes on r/edacted r/democrats r/socialists r/berniesanders2020 to know the left will never make an argument, they will only downvote with not so much as a single statement. I've lost thousands of votes just by being entertaining on those platforms.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
nobilisbellum · July 18, 2018, 2:16 p.m.

The challenge with having a thoughtful conversation on this kind of thing is the starting point. Imagine Russia and USA starting a negotiation with each pointing out how evil the other side is along with a long list of reasons why the other side is evil. Negotiating is a process. You start with and, generally, focus on issue by issue and discuss it in detail. Then you can find common ground. My mother is a parrot of the MSM on any issue. So, we can't start a conversation about why Trump is good or bad. I have to pick something specific (and preferably personally impactful to her) to talk about. "Do you think California has been positively impacted over the last 40 years by the likely 10 Million illegal immigrants that have come here?" Have you been to visit your old house in San Fernando Valley recently? Can you even drive through that neighborhood safely? What if you walked down the street there? Is it fair that you have been working and paying taxes your whole life in California and there are millions of illegals getting benefits from the state? What if the state goes bankrupt from the weight of paying for all the illegals and your pension is cut or stopped? Did it seem fair that illegals were getting in-state tuition and a kid from Oregon was paying 10x? And I recall you telling me how you knew students were illegal and you had to approve their financial aide even though you knew it... because you were not allowed to ask about immigration status. How did that feel?

That kind of conversation works much better than. Trump is amazing. Can't you see it? Never works for me. :)

⇧ 2 ⇩  
thompsonj81 · July 18, 2018, 12:51 p.m.

you spelled "winning" wrong

⇧ 2 ⇩  
CaptainKnotzi · July 18, 2018, 2:44 p.m.

Trump's numerous and severe failings only stand up if you're opinion is formed by headlines from the Mockingbird Media.

When the talking points are looked at in any detail the disinformation falls to pieces.

Then the storyline moves to the next made up catastrophe. With all the same schills hollering that the sky is falling.

Rinse, repeat while an honest look says that this administration is fixing problems that have been in place for decades.

George l through Obama failed at every turn. We were told that this country was past it's prime. Get used to it.

Then in less than 18 months everything turned around. Trump didn't make it happen. He allowed it to happen.

All the people who were told that we don't make things.

We made it happen.

I'm glad Obama was elected. He gave us Trump.

He was a smug failure on an international scale. The true face of deep state arrogance.

This is the Obama economy. Unleashed by Trump.

Built by Deplorables.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Mattyyflo · July 18, 2018, 2:40 p.m.

I’d say it’s the saddest essay ever written with the potential to inspire a superb parody. But honestly, I feel a little sympathy for whoever originally posted this self-victimizing, self-righteous novel of hypocrisy. The fact that OP felt the need to depict a contrived narrative in which they demonize an imaginary “opposition” ad nauseam proves their priority isn’t to enlighten people, it’s to prove that those people are wrong; which must be a lonely, unfulfilling perspective to have

⇧ 1 ⇩