top 94 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 157 points 3 months ago (5 children)

The claim that people would like him if he was not a republican is one of the stupider pieces of cope they’ve come up with. They also like to use the stupid “TDS“ thing to claim that people just hate Trump arbitrarily, as if we can’t list 50 different horrible things he’s done and things about him that make him completely unfit for the office.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    It's not just cope. It's that these people are so surrealistically stupid and lack all sense of curiosity that many legitimately don't know a fucking thing about the guy they voted to be the most powerful figure on the planet. So they think we must be acting unreasonable to hate him so much.

    I mean a common phrase among them leading up to 2016 was "he'll run it like a business" because they were entirely unaware that the dipshit has driven every business venture he's ever attempted into the ground except for real estate because a monkey could be successful at real estate if it inherits a bunch of its daddy's money and real estate.

    They don't even know who he is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago

    I've said for a long time that the primary means of American education is advertising. He was advertised as a competent businessman on TV, and so that's what a lot of Americans believe. The guy's a walking advertisement. A flim-flam man.

    He wins because he's the best at lying in a country that prizes lying for money as the best skill set one can possess.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    If anything, Biden Derangement Syndrome was absolutely a thing. MAGAts were so incredibly panicked about Biden when he was an entirely milquetoast, middle-of-the road Democrat. Do even they argue that Trump is just another Republican? I can’t see how anyone could.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    They act that way any time a Democrat is president. They're terrified the Dem will do a good job and leave a good legacy and positive reputation, so they pretty much flip out. They did it over Clinton - spread and amplified all sorts of rumors then investigated him for years until they finally found something to impeach him for. And then, Obama, obviously. Trump himself is still freaking the fuck out about Obama and it's been a decade since he was in office.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 116 points 3 months ago (10 children)

    These brainless morons really think this shit is team sports. JFC.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    For them, it is. So they assume it is for everyone.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    See also them using phrases like "believing in science". I don't have to believe in it, it's repeatable. Stop projecting your dumb worldview.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 3 months ago

    Whenever someone brings up "believing in science" remind them that science isn’t a matter of belief, it's a matter of understanding. The world is the way it is whether you "believe" in it or not. The world is the way it is whether you understand it or not, and life is a lot easier when you understand the world around you.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago

    True.

    Because they are willing to dig in their heels and reject evidence that doesn't fit their worldview, they assume that science-minded people are the same. They don't understand how "receive new data" and "refine or revise hypothesis" are important parts of the process. If they incorporated those steps, their belief system would implode.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    You can not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that God exists.

    Issac Newton saw an apple fall and then dropped other objects to prove the existence of gravity.

    God = belief.

    Science = evidence.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 23 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    This is the key point. It's why "every accusation is a confession" works so often. They are accusing others of the things they themselves are doing, because they assume everyone is doing it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago

    The Democratic Party has its Gavin Newsoms and Joe Manchins and Michael Bloombergs and Anthony Weiners aplenty.

    No shortage of Democrats on the Lolita Express. No shortage of liberal billionaires hungry for another war in the Middle East, another trillion dollar data center spend on public land, or another Bay of Pigs on Cuba.

    None of Trump's politics are unique to Trump. We've got shitty little fascists crawling all over the country, from the bluest cities of Washington and Minnesota to the reddest oil fields of Texas and Wyoming. If anything, the latest wave of Silicon Valley "Network State" fucks have been more concentrated in liberal districts. And their money has produced a wave of horrifyingly bad liberal politicians who are as much responsible for the Obama->Trump party slump as any QAnon club.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago*

    It's easier on their hamster brains that way. Means they don't have to worry about doing any homework.

    Ironically, when it comes to actual sports, they'll get on some Good Willing Hunting shit and go ultra deep into player stats and coaching strategies. Probably the only time I've ever heard one not sound like a complete idiot.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 40 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    If he were a DEMOCRAT I would FORGIVE all the Blatant Corruption and CHILD RAPING!

    -This is how REPUBLICANS are!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    Political brain rot is believing people dislike Trump solely because he's a Republican.

    That's the fundamental problem with American politics. Too many people treat it like team sports: I have to defend my side no matter what.

    No, you don't.

    You don't owe a political party your loyalty. Parties are tools, not identities. If your own side does something wrong, or even something you consider objectively immoral, you should be willing to say so. Blind partisanship isn't a virtue; it's the abandonment of independent judgment.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 36 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (17 children)

    His party affiliation has nothing to do with it.Trump has always been a POS human being full stop.

  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 3 months ago* (14 children)

    For you. I see Dems constantly glazing Obama. Who, while not as bad as trump, was pretty fucking bad in a "it's like Bush never left" kind of way. Affiliation is all that matters to a stunning number of people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    “it’s like Bush never left”

    What's that based on?

    And saying he's "not as bad as Trump" is a ludicrous understatement.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    What's that based on?

    He ordered almost 600 drone strikes in 7 different countries, hitting weddings schools and hospitals and killing scores of civilians. He renewed the patriot act, escalated the domestic spying program, maintained the CIA black site torture program, and persecuted the whistleblowers that told us about them. That's what "hope and change" looks like apparently. And the Dems went completely silent. "No blood for oil" turned into "awww he's charasmatic and plays basketball <3"

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (11 children)
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (10 children)

    I'm pointing out blind partisanism isn't exclusive to one party. Pretending that it is exclusive to one party is an example of blind partisanism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (9 children)

    Uh ya no. What you're doing is the most typical argument tactic maga/repubs employ. Oh what about that guy that one time that isn't in power anymore more, he did a thing so its fine for us to do this now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (8 children)

    It's the same exact "it's ok when my guy does it" attitude that led to trump. This isn't a Republican problem. It's an American problem. We're not going to solve it by only focusing on half of the people doing it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    But yet here you are, what about Obama glazing. He's not president. He's not running again. Sure some people still glaze, most people don't give or shit or know alot of what he did. We legit just turned the entire world against the US and swept a pedo ring under the rug. So wattaboutism the glazing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (6 children)

    So we should ignore half the people putting party above policy and pretend that this is only a Republican phenomenon. Surely that's the way to fix it. Ok blue maga.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    I never said such. I said youre a hypocrite. I said you're playing whataboutism, then you took a step back, and you went what about, what about, what about. Let summarize for you

    You "WHATTTABOUT OBAMA GETIN GLAZED? ME, "WHATABOUTISM ISNT" YOU "OH SO WERE SUPPOSED TO JUST PRETEND DEMS ARE PURE"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (4 children)

    What I said was "Dems aren't immune to this behavior, and here's an example that proves it". You are inadvertantly providing another example.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)

    Must be easy having such a narrow view of the world, only able to comprehend criticizing one group at a time. You'd make a good maga.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    Okay, you really don't get it. The same shit that caused your whattabout Obama drone striking, is the same shit that allows trump to get away with all this shit. It's not whattabout its the same shit, abuse of powers, too much leniency and power for that position. You keep trying to divide that problem, into a team game. If you wanna play whattabout, whattabout which president didn't commit a warcrime? You'd have to go back like 50 years.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    You're making it a team game. I'm saying that both teams do awful shit that their bases ignore, and this is a problem inherent to the system and the way psychology works. You're turning it into a team game by chastising me for criticizing the "wrong team".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 34 points 3 months ago* (5 children)

    If he ran for president as a democrat he would not have been elected because he would not have made it through the primary process.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago*

    How the Hillary Clinton campaign deliberately “elevated” Donald Trump with its “pied piper” strategy

    He only made it through the Republican primary because the Democrats helped him through it.

    The punchline of the last decade has been how neoliberals and reactionaries within the liberal party laid the foundation for a Permanent Republican Majority. Even now, they're more interested in beating back an insurgent popular progressive movement than ousting fascists in their own backyards.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    A different take: If he was a Democrat, would he have the same opinions? If he existed as current, he would not be a democrat, but maybe his experiences were caused him to develop in other directions.

    If Trump espoused democratic values, and was for things like universal healthcare, higher wages, privacy and personal autonomy, hadn't been a sex pest, wasn't a grifter and on and on and on... then no, I might not despise him.

    Not that Jason above was in any way being sincere in the question.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    He was a democrat and I'm fairly sure that beyond being manipulated through his dementia, he has not changed any of his beliefs or values on becoming a republican.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    No to throw around the 'in name only' epithet, but was he a democrat? or was that convenient label at the time? As a self-serving pig, he would chose the label that got him the most attention.

    Disregarding the "left" vs "liberal" vs "democrat" disambiguation, since it doesn't really matter in US politics at this moment, I'd suggest, when discussing "leadership", that a Democratic person wants what is best for society as a whole while the current flavor of Republican wants what is best for the wealthy class.

    I can't think of a Mr. Trump example where he advocated for the working class without it being a transparent grift.

    My point, though, is not "do I hate trump?" but instead a thought experiment of "what if trump was actually a Democrat?" If he was a wealthy-ish person advocating for the lower classes to get aid, reduce wealth inequality, improve climate management and various other "democratic" values, then yes, I would support him.

    Current trump can get fucked regardless of his label.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 59 points 3 months ago (8 children)

    Pennsylvania has a Democrat ogre, and we seem to have no problem saying, "fuck Fetterman"

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    Well tbf, he got a stroke and basically that's how he turned conservative

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Wasn't there an interview from like the 80s were he said if he ran for president he would run repub cause they were idiots and he could trick them easily?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Pennsylvania has a Democrat ogre

    Two, really. Fetterman's the one that keeps showing up on reactionary news media to talk shit. But Shapiro's been taking his own turn as an avowed Zionist, a corporate sleaze, and a reactionary fearmonger whenever he's had the opportunity.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Turns out people who are fine with Nazis don't even allow for the possibility of principles existing.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 32 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I tend to not like felon rapist pedophiles regardless of their political affiliation.

    And the Democrat party pretty regulartly ousts members with scandals that dwarf in comparison to Trump's DAILY scandals.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago*

    Remember when Al Fra ken had to resign for giving too much tongue on a kiss and for screwing up his hover hands when posing for photos?

    Remember when Howard Dean's career was ended over making a weird screech in a victory speech?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 37 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    What a silly question. Nobody likes Democrats.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 26 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    I will never understand why some people will go online with their real name and photo and discuss any highly controversial topics, much less politics.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 3 months ago (4 children)
    1. It puts legitimacy behind their statements. You are no longer discussing with an internet no-name weirdo, the person you are writing with has a name and face.
    2. They weild authority in the field or bear respect assigned to them and are thus using it...or simply used to writing under their name due to that.
    3. They're one of "I have nothing to hide" folks. And I don't mean surveilence apologists - I mean folk who have such weirdly strong ego (without being egoists. At least most of the time) that their belief in who they are is unshakeable. They tend to rawdog the world.

    Some combination of the three above is most common in my perspective.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    A long time ago, when I was dating a woman who worked at Planned Parenthood, I ran afoul of a Scott Roeder supporter. I'm glad he never knew my name and what I looked like. I think my statements to him were legitimate and authoritative enough with out putting my loved ones in danger.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago*

    So, I am not an american and had to look the guy up. First of all, wtf. Second of all, wtf (but about your situation).

    But at the end of the day, some people just don't compute statements without face attached to them. :| Nonetheless, staying safe is a priority. Wtf.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago

    There's really no guarantee that people are using their real name and photo in most cases. People tying their presence to their work or something is different, but I generally never assume I'm talking to the person being presented to me. Some people also just don't care, don't realize there could be consequences, or they signed up when the internet was a different place (thinking twitter would be more like Facebook or MySpace where it might make some sense to use your real name).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 25 points 3 months ago (8 children)

    If he ran as a Democrat, I'd have never voted for the Democrats again, because they would have stood up and said Trump was acceptable.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    Aw my two favorite things. "bOtH SiDeS": Congratulations, you found a way to insert that where it absolutely made no sense. Then we have "I kNoW ExAcTlY hOw AlL pOsSiBlE tImElInEs WoUlD hAvE gOnE!!1"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (4 children)

    How is this "BoTh SiDeS", I fully recognize the Dems are better than the Republicans, and one of the reasons is the Democrats would never have accepted Trump.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (3 children)

    Well tbh your comment sounded like you thought Democrats would do the same as Republicans or worse. It's possible I missed something subtle but I read it again and that's how it still reads to me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)

    No I said IF Trump ran as a Democrat and was successful in becoming the presidential nominee, I wouldn't vote for Democrats, because IN THAT SPECIFIC INSTANCE they would have proven to be worse than Republicans

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 3 months ago

    he is despicable at the atomic level

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago

    Some MAGoo said he wanted Trump and not miserable Republicans In Name Only.

    Obviously, the MAGoo hadn't noticed that Trump was a Dem for years, except when he tried to run for President on the Reform Party ticket

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 3 months ago

    Trump has a long and public history of being a piece of shit.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    I thought he was playing a character before he ran for president in 2016. Like I never watched The Apprentice, but I saw ads for it and I figured he was just playing an exaggerated asshole clown of a boss.

    If Trump had run and won as a democrat in 2016, I probably would have intensely disliked him like I did Biden and HRC, but not hated him like I do now because the democratic party would have steered him in very different ways than the GOP has.

    I largely now hate his voters and hope they suffer far more than I hate Trump. Nothing but antipathy for them.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago*

    I never watched The Apprentice, but I saw ads for it and I figured he was just playing an exaggerated asshole clown of a boss.

    Believe it or not, I always took it as the opposite. The first time Trump wanted to run he was laughed out of the primary. He had a long history as a narcissistic con man to anyone in the northeast and there’s no way he’d be elected. The entire point of “The Apprentice” was to rebuild his image.

    Maybe some people took it as playing an exaggerated asshole clown of a boss, but he was toned down from reality. His narcissism was toned down, he acted mostly morally, less of an asshole, he appeared to know something about business. They even played down his need to plaster his name in gold everywhere. His entire image was much more palatable than the previous two decades of headlines

    Unfortunately it succeeded

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago

    Above all else, Donald Trump is a useful idiot. More powerful people have been using him for a lot longer than he's been president.

    He'll go along with whatever, as long as he gets attention/money. He's crass, so if he was a Democrat president, he'd still be an asshole, but he would have gone along with the liberal policies.

    But it would never happen because Democrats are held to a higher standard and, as an idiot, the only way he can make himself stand out is through bigotry, which doesn't fly for liberal voters. DEFINITELY flies for conservatives though.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago*

    Although I disagree with most of his politics, that's not the reason I dislike him.

    I would never support a pedophile even if they were able to achieve all my political ideals, to me that's just a non-starter and I wish more people felt the same way. At this point the evidence and proven court cases are undeniable.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago

    Of course we would. But also, this joke of a person would've never won as a Democrat. He chose Republicans because he knew he'd have a better shot with them.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    How is this a shitpost in any kind of way

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    i think we lemmites should do our due diligence and start shitposting on c/politics

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Does this count as a shitpost? I mean it’s about a piece of shit, but I’m not sure it’s the same thing.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    Don't be a partisan hack. Politics isn't rooting for a sport team, nor a rock concert. Don't follow a leader because they are charismatic or likeable. Instead, support policies that reflect your values. Do not follow a person. If someone presents a policy that you support, or multiple policies that you support, embrace the policy for being great. Not the person. People are not superheroes.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 3 months ago

    Quick reminder that a significant chunk of the MAGA base that isn’t wildly misinformed love him for exactly the reasons you just mentioned. Republican vitriol loves that he spews hated. They delight in how his policies make the right people hurt.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    41 comments in c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world view that post