(06-15-2023, 07:41 AM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2023, 06:54 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I have a question for all the Trump supporters out there who, in response to questions about Trump's character, say, "I don't vote for the man, I vote for the policies."
Are there no other Republican candidates out there with better character and the same policies?
DeSantis is the most comparable.. But he doesn't receive my vote unless necessary. I'm sticking with Trump..
For anyone who would like an example of his policies..
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65464667
What did you think of that bill DeSantis signed yesterday for new car dealers?
(06-15-2023, 06:54 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I have a question for all the Trump supporters out there who, in response to questions about Trump's character, say, "I don't vote for the man, I vote for the policies."
Are there no other Republican candidates out there with better character and the same policies?
I've seen you ask this question before. You are missing the obvious. There is no other Republican candidate that Trump supporters see as adequately anti-establishment. They believe the system has been corrupted and controlled by powerful people who use the might of the government to advance their own agenda through undemocratic means. People who support Trump want someone who is going to go to war with entrenched bureaucrats and the elites who control them. Trump is the ONLY person that seemingly attacks the powerful. You can argue that's untrue, but the proof is in the pudding. He is reviled by the establishment, and they are doing everything in their power to stop him. You believe he is hated and persecuted just for his mouth, lying, and incompetence, but you have the EXACT same thing with the current President, except this corrupt, narcissistic, bumbling old fool does the bidding of his masters.... the primary difference between him and Trump.
To answer your question, it's not really Trump's policies, but, rather, his position that corporate interests don't take precedent over the American people. It's not that there is no other candidate that shares Trump's policies. In fact, it could easily be argued that some candidates are more traditionally conservative than Trump. DeSantis comes to mind. He's done a good job in many respects. I think he could make a good President. That said, some of his corporate pushback seems manufactured, and you see the establishment right tripping over themselves to appoint him the next Republican candidate. That innately triggers subconscious impressions that he's not the right guy to stand up to the establishment. What does it matter if we get the conservative version of Bill Clinton? Do we really want these elites to hide behind conservative values for 4 or 8 years while they further entrench themselves in the government? That's been happening for the last 40 years.
We need real change at the top, and going back and forth between the same thing isn't going to stop this ratchet from tightening.
(06-15-2023, 08:58 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2023, 06:54 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I have a question for all the Trump supporters out there who, in response to questions about Trump's character, say, "I don't vote for the man, I vote for the policies."
Are there no other Republican candidates out there with better character and the same policies?
I've seen you ask this question before. You are missing the obvious. There is no other Republican candidate that Trump supporters see as adequately anti-establishment. They believe the system has been corrupted and controlled by powerful people who use the might of the government to advance their own agenda through undemocratic means. People who support Trump want someone who is going to go to war with entrenched bureaucrats and the elites who control them. Trump is the ONLY person that seemingly attacks the powerful. You can argue that's untrue, but the proof is in the pudding. He is reviled by the establishment, and they are doing everything in their power to stop him. You believe he is hated and persecuted just for his mouth, lying, and incompetence, but you have the EXACT same thing with the current President, except this corrupt, narcissistic, bumbling old fool does the bidding of his masters.... the primary difference between him and Trump.
To answer your question, it's not really Trump's policies, but, rather, his position that corporate interests don't take precedent over the American people. It's not that there is no other candidate that shares Trump's policies. In fact, it could easily be argued that some candidates are more traditionally conservative than Trump. DeSantis comes to mind. He's done a good job in many respects. I think he could make a good President. That said, some of his corporate pushback seems manufactured, and you see the establishment right tripping over themselves to appoint him the next Republican candidate. That innately triggers subconscious impressions that he's not the right guy to stand up to the establishment. What does it matter if we get the conservative version of Bill Clinton? Do we really want these elites to hide behind conservative values for 4 or 8 years while they further entrench themselves in the government? That's been happening for the last 40 years.
We need real change at the top, and going back and forth between the same thing isn't going to stop this ratchet from tightening.
I think this is very well said and in theory completely correct.
Lobbying is completely out of control, regulation is captured, and rents are being extracted from ordinary consumers in many sectors of the economy.
It would be nice to have someone who is not relying on corporate lobbyist funds, and no other candidate in either party comes closer to that than Trump. Though some of the minor candidates are his equal.
The problem as you know is Trump just cares about himself. He is unable to build a team around himself and unable to form or execute any vision beyond winning a news cycle. He has undermined and fired everyone who has ever worked for him, and almost all of those people are against him now. Bob Barr isn't running for anything and doesn't need any corporate lobbyist money. He is speaking against Trump today simply because he knows Trump will never get out of his own way long enough to achieve anything as a leader.
(06-14-2023, 10:51 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (06-14-2023, 09:06 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]Lol. You are so full of [BLEEP]. You invite the verbal [BLEEP] whoopings you get by your behavior so don't even try to guilt trip anyone around here. If you can't take what you dish out then leave. You won't be missed.
I have been nice to you. I have never said anything mean about you as a person.
I have never told you what I really think of you. The life you have led is remarkable in many ways but it should have taught you things that you clearly don't know.
There's your real online identity coming out.
(06-15-2023, 09:16 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (06-14-2023, 10:51 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I have been nice to you. I have never said anything mean about you as a person.
I have never told you what I really think of you. The life you have led is remarkable in many ways but it should have taught you things that you clearly don't know.
There's your real online identity coming out.
And what's that? A person who makes negative personal comments? Everyone does that, but I'm more reluctant to do it than others here. And that's a good thing.
(06-15-2023, 09:42 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2023, 09:16 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]There's your real online identity coming out.
And what's that? A person who makes negative personal comments? Everyone does that, but I'm more reluctant to do it than others here. And that's a good thing.
That of a nitpicking navel gazer inebriated on his own hubris. Even this second sentence is you patting yourself on the back for how wonderful you are compared to the rest of these louts. You don't "say" negative things (according to you anyway), but it's clear that behind the keyboard you certainly feel them.
(06-15-2023, 11:02 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2023, 09:42 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]And what's that? A person who makes negative personal comments? Everyone does that, but I'm more reluctant to do it than others here. And that's a good thing.
That of a nitpicking navel gazer inebriated on his own hubris. Even this second sentence is you patting yourself on the back for how wonderful you are compared to the rest of these louts. You don't "say" negative things (according to you anyway), but it's clear that behind the keyboard you certainly feel them.
And you'd criticize me if I was more open about the disdain I sometimes feel for some of you. "Mike's always making it about himself." Your hate for me is irrational and will always find another reason until you let go of it. Does hating me make you feel better? Why continue?
Can someone start an ‘Everything Mikesez’ thread? Please?
Jesus Christ…
(06-15-2023, 11:19 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Can someone start an ‘Everything Mikesez’ thread? Please?
Jesus Christ…
It stops when y'all stop. I only defend myself. Other than that my comments are only about the politics and the politicians, not any of you personally. You guys just can't take someone saying "you're wrong about this political thing" without taking it as a personal attack.
Grow up. All of you except L2L and Marty need to grow the [BLEEP] up.
And where the [BLEEP] is your decency? You're going to just let FSG Winger and Americus beat up on me and say I deserve it and not ask them to at the very least get back on topic? It's not that I can't take it, I can, but blame them for their [BLEEP] before you come after me for God's [BLEEP] sake. You deserve a politics forum that's about politics. We all do. [BLEEP] do something about it. Speak up to everybody, don't just pile on me.
(06-13-2023, 09:08 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ] (06-13-2023, 08:28 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]That's pure bull [BLEEP].
Obama was on the record saying similar stuff... in 2002. "I am not against all war. I am against dumb wars." 2002! Yet "they" let Obama be President, twice, and have never tried to lock him up.
There are multiple reasons that multiple arms of multiple governments are trying to punish Trump. But speaking out against the war in Iraq, not one of them.
I just don't care what you have to say.. What you say is completely irrelevant and unheralded. You're a contrarian, you've even admitted to it. That makes your comment and opinion inconsequential and meaningless..
This is the post where it went off the rails.
My post was on topic and Winger went personal in reply.
Real moderation is needed.
For mod's sake, please.
(06-15-2023, 11:34 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (06-13-2023, 09:08 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]I just don't care what you have to say.. What you say is completely irrelevant and unheralded. You're a contrarian, you've even admitted to it. That makes your comment and opinion inconsequential and meaningless..
This is the post where it went off the rails.
My post was on topic and Winger went personal in reply.
Real moderation is needed.
For mod's sake, please.
I said my peace and moved on.. You're the one that can't get over it. Maybe try growing thicker skin and you won't get so triggered all the time. If you're going to make most of the topics about yourself, you're going to catch flack. Sometimes the last word, isn't always the best word.
(06-15-2023, 11:46 AM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2023, 11:34 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]This is the post where it went off the rails.
My post was on topic and Winger went personal in reply.
Real moderation is needed.
For mod's sake, please.
I said my peace and moved on.. You're the one that can't get over it. Maybe try growing thicker skin and you won't get so triggered all the time. If you're going to make most of the topics about yourself, you're going to catch flack. Sometimes the last word, isn't always the best word.
Your piece was about me.
My piece was about Trump.
You made it about me.
I was on topic.
You were not.
You were the problem.
Mods? Anyone? Bueller?
My post was number 3,285.. We're now on post number 3,353 and you still can't get over it lololol
Thicker skin dude..
(06-15-2023, 12:11 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]My post was number 3,285.. We're now on post number 3,353 and you still can't get over it lololol
Thicker skin dude..
You can also stop replying at any time. Why is everything on me? Take some responsibility for yourself.
We are nowhere near a banana republic.
Tucker is a free man. So is Alex Jones!
The election was not stolen.
Violent protestors on both sides have gone to jail.
Nonviolent protestors on both sides are free.
(06-15-2023, 12:58 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2023, 12:11 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]My post was number 3,285.. We're now on post number 3,353 and you still can't get over it lololol
Thicker skin dude..
You can also stop replying at any time. Why is everything on me? Take some responsibility for yourself.
We are nowhere near a banana republic.
Tucker is a free man. So is Alex Jones!
The election was not stolen.
Violent protestors on both sides have gone to jail.
Nonviolent protestors on both sides are free.
Einhorn is Finkel. Finkel is Einhorn!
(06-15-2023, 11:16 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2023, 11:02 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]That of a nitpicking navel gazer inebriated on his own hubris. Even this second sentence is you patting yourself on the back for how wonderful you are compared to the rest of these louts. You don't "say" negative things (according to you anyway), but it's clear that behind the keyboard you certainly feel them.
And you'd criticize me if I was more open about the disdain I sometimes feel for some of you. "Mike's always making it about himself." Your hate for me is irrational and will always find another reason until you let go of it. Does hating me make you feel better? Why continue?
Nah, most of us would be fine with you being even a little bit authentic. I don't hate you at all, and no one else does either. Mostly it's about poking holes in an overinflated windbag like I said.
(06-15-2023, 12:08 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2023, 11:46 AM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]I said my peace and moved on.. You're the one that can't get over it. Maybe try growing thicker skin and you won't get so triggered all the time. If you're going to make most of the topics about yourself, you're going to catch flack. Sometimes the last word, isn't always the best word.
Your piece was about me.
My piece was about Trump.
You made it about me.
I was on topic.
You were not.
You were the problem.
Mods? Anyone? Bueller?
You know this forum gets the most miniscule of moderation. It's for tough people so either bail or deal.
(06-15-2023, 01:10 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2023, 11:16 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]And you'd criticize me if I was more open about the disdain I sometimes feel for some of you. "Mike's always making it about himself." Your hate for me is irrational and will always find another reason until you let go of it. Does hating me make you feel better? Why continue?
Nah, most of us would be fine with you being even a little bit authentic. I don't hate you at all, and no one else does either. Mostly it's about poking holes in an overinflated windbag like I said.
(06-15-2023, 12:08 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Your piece was about me.
My piece was about Trump.
You made it about me.
I was on topic.
You were not.
You were the problem.
Mods? Anyone? Bueller?
You know this forum gets the most miniscule of moderation. It's for tough people so either bail or deal.
Just saying, "that's a nitpicking and foolish argument" is how you "poke holes in an overinflated windbag."
It never has to be personal.
There is no excuse.
Attack the argument, not the man.
(06-15-2023, 01:14 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2023, 01:10 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Nah, most of us would be fine with you being even a little bit authentic. I don't hate you at all, and no one else does either. Mostly it's about poking holes in an overinflated windbag like I said.
You know this forum gets the most miniscule of moderation. It's for tough people so either bail or deal.
Just saying, "that's a nitpicking and foolish argument" is how you "poke holes in an overinflated windbag."
It never has to be personal.
There is no excuse.
Attack the argument, not the man.
When the arguments always have the same characteristics then the issue is not the argument but rather the arguer.
(06-15-2023, 01:24 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2023, 01:14 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Just saying, "that's a nitpicking and foolish argument" is how you "poke holes in an overinflated windbag."
It never has to be personal.
There is no excuse.
Attack the argument, not the man.
When the arguments always have the same characteristics then the issue is not the argument but rather the arguer.
No one is making you read them.
![[Image: alrighty-then.gif]](https://media.tenor.com/dlmCqoE2LkMAAAAd/alrighty-then.gif)