Excuse me, but that is a lie.
This Trump is an incontinent, racist, sexist, child raping, cheating, drooling, gurgling, selfish, fat butted, super old, makeup wearing, death threats sending, potato headed, pampered whining 5 year old kid with low iq and an immense inheritance that he never worked for and never will, his daddy’s minions will see to that. He’s the epitome of those needlessly burning money elites that his feet-licking plebes hate so much.
That’s what he is.
And for the life of me, why the actual flying fuck those ultra right-wingers are yapping for this crawling dung heap is way beyond my comprehension.Edit: Oh and he’s also a traitorous criminal. That too.
don’t forget the small hands
And the 🍄dick
Indeed, I am quite likely falling short of many things here. Pussy grabbing, tax evading, selling state secrets, you name it he probably has done it.
He’s also the next president, don’t forget that part
It’s more than Fox News, my source inside the MAGAsphere informs me most people rarely watch it anymore.
It’s about NYT and WaPo, NBC, CBS, et. al., who constantly couch everything in bland “normal” terms for various reasons - none of which outweigh the fact that the GQP has nominated a traitorous, rapist fraud for President.
And they should stop getting a pass on that shit.
They’re all the same people. Like the same owners, and the same wants. Profits over people. News stopped being about information when advertising took the wheel.
The Internet blew up the division in the 4th estate. There is only profit and attention economy now.
Fox News is too liberal for the true believers; Newsmax at least.
remember guys, january 6th was a peaceful protest, there was no violence, all of the footage of people fighting with police and breaking things doesn’t count as violence, because we ignore it.
There was no trespassing going on, because nobody broke down several layers of barricades, and broke into the capitol in order to “storm the capitol” that never happened, all the footage of that happening is definitely not something that exists at all.
all of the fake electors with their fake and fraudulent votes that were sent to the capitol and not admitted into the building because they weren’t legitimate electors were just government plants, clearly, the footage of them isn’t real. It doesn’t exist.
this has been your yearly PSA about the fact that anybody saying ANYTHING about jan 6th should search jan 6th on youtube. Or archive.org I would also highly recommend everyone go watch infowars coverage of the event, there is a very slimy and rather humorous change of tone as they realize it’s not going to work and that the plan is backfiring.
IF it did happen it was antifa anyway.
nah, it was clearly FBI operatives, as reported by the google whistleblower, who also happens to believe in every conspiracy ever.
(fun fact, most people that believe in one conspiracy, believe in other conspiracies.)
Repub Congress on Jan. 6th: [cowering in terror, fleeing for their lives]
Repub Congress today: just a rowdy tour, what is the big deal?
im not sure if this is cognitive dissonance or just denial of reality, but it’s definitely something.
remember guys, january 6th was a peaceful protest, there was no violence, all of the footage of people fighting with police and breaking things doesn’t count as violence, because we ignore it.
I was told that the J6ers were double-super-secret Far Left Antifa who wanted to make Trump look bad.
yeah, something like that, now please don’t ask me what conspiracies i believe in, the answer is all of them.
“And so, I will spend every waking hour ensuring he’s #1 in the news cycle, then act surprised when he wins again!”
That just means that the ‘national media’ that promotes him, just isn’t actual media but fox entertainment. It’s nothing more then a clown and pony show to brainwash inbreds
It’s more that the media is not equipped to deal with Trump.
They’ve always depended on balance for credibility, and that doesn’t work when one side is blatantly disingenuous. The media will still try to appear balanced, and even that’s not enough because accurate reporting of someone like Trump comes off as accusatory because he’s just that corrupt and incompetent.
The result is that the media attention whitewashes and minimizes his transgressions and inflates his opponents’ in an attempt to appear balanced. It also gives his odious ideas oxygen and thusly the appearance of approval and credibility.
That’s why the current Democratic strategy of mocking him and calling him “weird” is working, because it’s explicitly not normalizing his behaviour or giving his message a platform.
They’ve had decades to adapt to Republicans being blatantly disingenuous. At what point does it stop being “not equipped to deal with” and does it start being “chooses not to deal with”?
Private media are owned by shareholders that want as many unfair advantages as possible. They want to be slightly left of center to appeal to the “reasonable centrist” crowd, but they want the center to be as far to the right as possible so their taxes are low and their assets unregulated. Moreover, they want the presidential election to be as close to 50-50 as possible so both candidates are desperate for bribe money and and willing to pay further favors.
If the Democrats win by a landslide, what is next? What is the new political center, and what does that mean for the stock market? Even in the face of fascism, corporations and shareholders keep playing both sides, because if Volkswagen and BMW and Ford and Siemens and Kodak and IBM and Bayer and the Associated Press and Hugo Boss and Fanta/Coca-Cola and all the unnamed German millionaires that hid their cash and pillaged Jewish artifacts in Switzerland and politely surrendered to the western forces made it through being Nazis with a profit, why expect worse from Trump?
Where is the political meme?
We wanna do this again?
Well cause all US media outlets are full of bull shit and only care about their bottom line, views and $$$
The first beast
Since when does the US have national media. Isn’t it all private companies?
Im guessing it means media companies broadcasting nationally instead of just in local states.
I mean… we know WHY they are. I think that’s the real conversation people need to have
Manufacture of consent
Methinks it’s that fear of pointing at Trump and hitting all of his supporters. Nay?
Partially, yah I’d agree. But more to the point, it undermines the role of a free press in the health of a republic. Capitalism has neutered the free press through profit & loss instead of governmental restrictions on content.
This crap is out there y’all
There are maybe one or two tha pretend to so as to avoid any legal issues that his criminalminded attornies might dream up
He can be both, hopefully he won’t be elected again, but he was elected once and it isn’t completely inprobable that he gets elected again.
He can be both
So you think a traitorous person can be a legitimate candidate?
as far as democracy goes, if people want to elect a hitler, they elect a hitler.
Valid sentence, yes.
I’d still like an answer though.
The answer is yes, if the peoples want to destroy democracy
I’d still like an answer though.
in a pure democracy, you can elect anybody. The US is currently trying to debate whether or not you can elect someone like trump or not, but it seems like the answer is yes mostly because of stalling. We have also had cases of people putting themselves on the ballot from prison/jail which does happen.
This shit’s weird, it’s never happened before and we don’t know what to do about it lol.
Unfortunately, the US is not a pure democracy. It’s not even a democracy, arguably.
Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic-Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism.
The point here is that democratic nations can have imposed reasonable limits on who is and who isn’t a legitimate candidate. Arnold Schwarzenegger wasn’t a legitimate candidate, because he wasn’t born in the US.
The Constitution lists only three qualifications for the Presidency — the President must be at least 35 years of age, be a natural born citizen, and must have lived in the United States for at least 14 years.
Other countries have different requirements. Usually there’s a bit more, but still vague, like “be of good standing” or something like that.
well yeah, it’s a democratic republic, it’s in the name, dunno if you ever noticed in between bouts of staring ICJ proceedings and human rights group watches.
also curious how i never referred to the US as a pure democracy, and even gave an example counter to that, but apparently your dumbass forgot to block my account. That or you like stalking me.
You said
in a pure democracy, you can elect anybody
Just one comment above this.
Here:
And we clearly were discussing the US. And whether a treasonous person would be a legitimate choice for president.
I’ve no idea what the rest of your comment means. How could I be stalking you if you replied to my comment? And why would I be stalking some random?
Edit also a “democratic Republic” is a democracy, and that study specifically says there’s no evidence of democracy, but a ton for oligarchy
