Transcript
Reporters, I beg you: When voters claim they have doubts about Trump’s personality but support “his policies,” ask one simple question:
Which policies?
The stammering will be more interesting than anything they have to say.
Unfortunately it’s easy to say border and the mistaken belief that Republicans are good for the economy/inflation.
But it’s still funny to see so many stammer.
Speaking of the border, what kind of cognitive dissonance is going on with Republicans right now when 1) Trump built a big, beautiful wall to keep immigrants out and 2) There’s a crisis at the border due to all the immigrants flooding into the country.
Did Trump not build the wall? Was the wall not effective?
That’s just the thing, he didn’t build the wall. He spent 4 years talking about it and didn’t even start. That’s all it ever was: a bunch of hot air. Now I don’t really hear much talk about walls anymore, probably because his base has the memory of a goldfish and can’t recall any talking points Fox didn’t provide them with that week. Now it’s inflation that is the issue the wedge into every conversation, and honestly I’m not entirely sure they know anything about it besides “that’s when prices go up”. Like there’s a dial in the oval office that controls it and Biden cranked it up just to be a dick. It would funny if not for the coup a few years back.
He did build some of it though. Just part of that happened to blow over in a stiff wind and the remainder has proven remarkably vulnerable to sawzalls.
You forgot how it’s easy and convenient to climb, you can even clip a rope ladder on it for children and old people
Although you might want a tetanus shot…
I have had conversations with people who thought that Trump built the wall but that Biden “welded it open.” I wish I were kidding.
They support his stance on immigration, abortion, the war on Christmas/Christians, wokeness, communism, trans people, antifa, and whatever other bogeymen they’ve heard about on Fox or OANN. They don’t care about actual policy, they just care that he’s “their guy.”
To be fair, he has a tough stance on immigration, and he’s a good bet to beat the liberals if you feel strongly against the open border policy the left is espousing. There’s plenty of other woke nonsense that could inspire someone to oppose the libs at all costs.
I’m not a Trumper; I’m a moderate liberal that’s tired of losing because of idiotic identity politics and the righteous brigading that alienates anyone who doesn’t fall in lockstep.
Re-evaluate your news sources, ‘Open border policy’ is a scary phrase right biased publications created themselves and are calling any border policy that doesn’t involve the wall being completed. The left isn’t calling for that, It’s a strawman for people that don’t know the actual border policies.
Could you explain to me what woke even means?
I’m actually generally in favor of open borders, and the Democrat Party position is way far from that. And even though I’m in favor, I don’t think we should jump to it right away, just increase immigration quotas and simplify the work visa system. Basically, if you can prove you can earn your own way, you can come and work.
Democrats want a path toward a visa for people who are already here. Many of those people didn’t come by choice, they were brought by their parents, and they have more connections here than where they have citizenship.
Republicans want to be tough on immigration because there’s this idea that it’s somehow related to drug crime. That’s stupid, but there it is.
I think immigrants add a ton of value to our economy and generally make our country great, and I want more of it. Democrats and Republicans want to maintain what we have, they just have different methods of going about it.
Obama and Biden have both deported more illegal immigrants in a single term than Trump did in his one term. Biden has shattered the record for most deportations ever.
Sorry, what was that about border security again? Trump has a “tough stance”? Seems like he can’t back it up with anything other than fake promises for a wall that won’t do shit anyway.
Honestly can’t tell if this is bait or if you actually think that.
The MAGA crew are all talking about woke identity politics issues because those are the ones conservative media have decided to play up as potential wedge issues.
Dem politicians don’t want to have to spend their time defending the humanity of trans kids. Also, the electorate as a whole seems not to care that much about trans issues one way or the other.
Conservative media seems to be making the bet that they can slice off pieces of the democratic coalition (example: religiously conservative POC) by making it seem like these are huge issues that define the war for the soul of the country.
I guess I’d agree the correct path isn’t diving further into issues like that and instead focusing on economic issues, if that’s your point. But Dems have generally been doing a pretty good job of that already?
obvious troll is obvious, get a better hobby.
They will say “The economy” with literally 0 understanding of the long-term effects of his economic policies, permanent tax cuts for corps, permanent tax cuts for the very wealthy, “tax cuts” for everyone else if you disregard the removed write offs and credits that also “sunset” (what a nice word) just after when he believed his term would have ended before losing.
Whenever someone is vague, ask them what specifically about “the economy” (or whatever vague answer they gave) they like.
The problem wasn’t the tax cuts, but that they also increased spending. If you’re going to cut taxes, you also need to cut spending.
I think we should increase taxes and cut spending because we’re way over budget. Cut the military budget a bit, increase IRS funding to actually enforce our tax laws (they generally more than pay for themselves), end “use it or lose it” accounting so agencies don’t feel the need to blow their budgets (maybe allow 50% of unused budget to roll over or something), cut subsides to things that don’t need subsidies, etc. In terms of raised taxes, tax stock compensation as income, perhaps with an exclusion for the first $50k or so. There are plenty of other loopholes where revenue can be increased by reducing exclusions.
If you’re going to cut taxes, you also need to cut spending.
That’s almost correct. Tax cuts are spending.
Lol … trying to use logic with devoted MAGA supporters … about the only thing mouth foaming MAGA idiots react to is bright lights, candy and a cattle prod.
We really shouldn’t refer to them as MAGA supporters or MAGAts. They’re Nazis.
Like actual Nazis. Nazis were amazingly stupid. Hitler was widely considered to be a raving moron that riled people up. He had lots of his “friends” killed when they were determined to be a problem to the party. The wealthy supported him because they would make a bunch of money, in a “help me help you” sort of way. When he began losing corporate support, guess what changes he had to enact?
I say screw the attempts to label these traitors anything else other than modern Nazis, and let them get angry and flustered when they can’t name things that aren’t Nazi policies.
When you call them Nazis, watch them suddenly care about political correctness.
There’s a Christian politician here in Norway who is in love with T-rump. During the last election he was interviewed on TV and asked why he supports a man who lies and does other unchristian things. His answer was
“😍 Trump 😍 is 😍 against 😍 abortion 😍 Trump 😍 loves 😍 life 😍”
What a knuckle-dragging knob
His “border policies”, which is their way of saying he doesn’t like brown people.
Come on. The dude can’t even speak in complete sentences let alone have policies.
But that’s his power. With raw charisma and word salad, anyone can hear whatever they want. All you have to do is cope hard enough
Agreed, that and an under abundance of self-reflection. Oh sorry, momentarily forgot another commonality.
How nice of you to say, it’s always nice to have your insight recognized
Been doing this for years. You know they’re just repeating media propaganda, asking about specifics is the way to go.
“What specific policy do you object to. Name one.”
Always met with cricket chirps.
That’ll show em
Sam Harris pointed out that Trump’s stated aims are not that extreme. For example, he wants to improve border security and control immigration. Most people would agree that it’s a valid and practical goal. How it’s done is something we might disagree on but the goal itself is not disagreeable.
He also wanted to overturn election results, has stated he will be a dictator (‘the first day only’), want to jail his political opponents, will likely implement much of project 2025. Even the goal Sam Harris mentioned wasn’t expressed as ‘improve border security’ but rather ‘build a (physical) wall, and have Mexico pay for it’. It
He’s been pretty open about much of the anti-democratic shit he wants to do, but I’m sure if you express some of his goals in a very abstract manner it looks reasonable from a distance
Oh he’s got policies and they are popular. Some of them are totally nuts but the core of it is “American industry first” - his domestic and foreign record reflect this. He’s not big on war, which is a relief, and is big on protectionism (i.e. restrict trade to help local economy). He’s the party of tax breaks for business & favourable trade & strong borders & Christian nationalism & not starting beef internationally
Overall, despite all the drama and racism, at least he’s not a warmonger (like pretty much everyone else). He just did one little local coup/riot. “Boys will be boys” as they say XD hahaha
at least he’s not a warmonger
I guess we’ve forgotten his many suggestions on using nukes on other countries and even hurricanes, and that brief moment where he played “mine is bigger than yours” with North Korea. Totally peaceful guy.
Remember when he was trying like hell to start a war with Iran before COVID took over to dominate the headlines?
Haha he talks trash but didn’t really do anything
“Not starting beef internationally”???
International relations were horrible under Trump, including several near-misses at large-scale war (remember Qasem Soleimani?). Just because he says he doesn’t like war doesn’t mean he wasn’t constantly pushing the US toward it.
Even the US’s relationship with their biggest trade partner Canada came under tension under his presidency, with incredibly harsh aluminum and lumber tariffs.
The thing with Canada is exactly the definition of protectionism that I mentioned. He successfully did not start new wars afaik, and the overall stance is “fuck the world, America #1, peace out or ill nuke you”
You’re right about Canada. I debated whether to include that point, but being Canadian myself, it felt wrong not to mention it.
Saying “peace out or I’ll nuke you” is literally the simplest possible way to start a war. You can’t just walk into a building waving around a gun and expect things not to escalate. We’re lucky things happened to work out the way they did.
There are many people who find this attitude heroic, it’s the isolationist ideal, where instead of America fighting all the wars in the world / being the world police, we instead stay out of it and use our superior weapons to deter others (and secure our own borders)
So that’s what “peace out or Ill nuke you” is meant to convey. I know many peaceniks who agree with this foreign strategy, and find the constant war depressing
