Donald Trump

[SebastianBlue]

I'm not sure some people can grasp that by not liking him twice as much their vote against him isn't any more significant. He is absolutely a symptom of 'silly American politics'. Trump is not the issue, he's just a savvy opportunist adept at mobilising rw fears. Trump is not the problem, the problem is that a huge chunk of the US electorate think he's a good idea.
Like the oxygen, heat, fuel fire triangle you need to take something away to put the fire out. I think the 'trump triangle' consists of right wing ideas, economic hard times, liberal hatred outrage (to create polarisation and a sense of persecution). Imho take any one of those away and trump goes away - good luck trying to stamp out rw ideas/resentments and fix the blue collar economy.

I try not to engage with you, for obvious reasons, but I just wanted to say this is an incredibly ignorant and naive take on American politics and the dangers of Trump/Vance and the MAGA movement specifically, even for you. To try to act as if Trump/Vance or MAGA is not an existential threat to what is left of American democracy, and is merely a symptom of “silly American politics” at this point is just laughably simplistic. They can be both a symptom and an existential threat—these are not mutually exclusive attributes.

Most of your comments are of the sort you regularly hear from first year university political economy students. And that is being generous.

I and many others have already spoken at length as to why, so I am not going to do it again. But your insistence of posting this nonsense, followed by “well, I don’t know much about [insert the subject you were just assertively commenting on] but…” responses to people calling it out belies the fact that you know very well you are most often merely wumming and for someone reason are never dealt with accordingly.

 

[Phil1]

I try not to engage with you, for obvious reasons, but I just wanted to say this is an incredibly ignorant and naive take on American politics and the dangers of Trump/Vance and the MAGA movement specifically, even for you. To try to act as if Trump/Vance or MAGA is not an existential threat to what is left of American democracy, and is merely a symptom of “silly American politics” at this point is just laughably simplistic. They can be both a symptom and an existential threat—these are not mutually exclusive attributes.

Most of your comments are of the sort you regularly hear from first year university political economy students. And that is being generous.

I and many others have already spoken at length as to why, so I am not going to do it again. But your insistence of posting this nonsense, followed by “well, I don’t know much about [insert the subject you were just assertively commenting on] but…” responses to people calling it out belies the fact that you know very well you are most often merely wumming and for someone reason are never dealt with accordingly.

You really shouldn’t engage, mate.
He’s got his MO and it’s not changed for a few years.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

I try not to engage with you, for obvious reasons, but I just wanted to say this is an incredibly ignorant and naive take on American politics and the dangers of Trump/Vance and the MAGA movement specifically, even for you. To try to act as if Trump/Vance or MAGA is not an existential threat to what is left of American democracy, and is merely a symptom of “silly American politics” at this point is just laughably simplistic. They can be both a symptom and an existential threat—these are not mutually exclusive attributes.

Most of your comments are of the sort you regularly hear from first year university political economy students. And that is being generous.

I and many others have already spoken at length as to why, so I am not going to do it again. But your insistence of posting this nonsense, followed by “well, I don’t know much about [insert the subject you were just assertively commenting on] but…” responses to people calling it out belies the fact that you know very well you are most often merely wumming and for someone reason are never dealt with accordingly.

Yeah, I get that a lot. I think we probably disagree on trump but you've run out of anything but insults. Again, you confuse me wumming with you getting a bit wound up - not the same thing. You should probably report my post if it upsets you for a sane reason, pop me on ignore, take it to PM's, or just get over yourself.

 

[SebastianBlue]

You really shouldn’t engage, mate.
He’s got his MO and it’s not changed for a few years.

“People take me and themselves too seriously and spend far too much time in these political threads on a football forum, I am not wumming, they just need to grow up”, he posts, for the eighth time that week, across four political threads, after having half of the posts over the last week in one of them removed by the mods for getting in to a feud with yet another poster, for the third time in as many weeks.

I am fairly sure that if we did an analysis of the user post rate across the top ten most engaged political threads MSC would be among the most prolific.

 

[Phil1]

“People take me and themselves too seriously and spend far too much time in these political threads on a football forum, I am not wumming, they just need to grow up”, he posts, for the eighth time that week, across four political threads, after having half of the posts over the last week in one of them removed by the mods for getting in to a feud with yet another poster, for the third time in as many weeks.

You’ve just got bite the bullet and scroll past his posts. It’s tempting to engage due to what he usually writes but you’ve just got to keep it in the back of your head he probably doesn’t believe half of what he’s saying, it just gives him the engagement he requires.
Takes all sorts I suppose.

Always good for a cheeky like from him though.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

“People take me and themselves too seriously and spend far too much time in these political threads on a football forum, I am not wumming, they just need to grow up”, he posts, for the eighth time that week, across four political threads, after having half of the posts over the last week in one of them removed by the mods for getting in to a feud with yet another poster, for the third time in as many weeks.

I am fairly sure that if we did an analysis of the user post rate across the top ten most engaged political threads MSC would be among the most prolific.

Would that be slightly obsessive/ weird though?

 

[SebastianBlue]

Would that be slightly obsessive/ weird though?

Your behaviour in the threads?

Yes, I agree, it is. Surprised you have had such an epiphany, though.

But I support your self-discovery!

 

[Maintainin]

Did you, uh, actually read the article?

Not in its entirety if i'm being totally honest, so may have initially jumped the gun (pun) a tad when re-posting what had come up in my newsfeed as i were doing many things at same time. (rare due diligence slip)

Clarity wasn't as clear within the vid post than article as i lumped em together.

"This incident did not impact the safety of former President Trump or attendees of the event," the department said in a statement.

In a joint statement, the U.S. Attorney's Office, Secret Service, and FBI said that the incident "did not impact protective operations and former President Trump was not in any danger."

 

[stonerblue]

But some seem to think he and Vance aren’t really a threat to what is left of democracy (both in America and elsewhere) and forceful denouncing and opposing them is just “silly American politics”.


Donald Trump is ramping up his rhetoric depicting his political rivals and critics as criminals, while dropping a long trail of suggestions that he favors outlawing political speech that he deems misleading or challenges his claims to power.

In a speech Friday in Aurora, Colorado, the Republican presidential nominee blasted the immigration system and lobbed a rhetorical grenade at his Democratic rival, Vice President Kamala Harris.

“She’s a criminal. She’s a criminal,” said Trump, who was convicted of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in his New York hush money trial. “She really is, if you think about it.”

It’s a pattern of messaging that has long been part of Trump’s stump speeches but has escalated significantly in his 2024 candidacy. In the final stretch to the Nov. 5 election, the former president has developed a tendency to claim that speech he disapproves of is illegal, even if it is protected by the First Amendment.

A questionable cut of a “60 Minutes” Harris interview? “Totally illegal,” Trump wrote on X, saying it makes Harris look better and that CBS should have its broadcast license revoked.

Donald Trump is increasingly calling speech he doesn’t like “illegal.”

The Harris campaign editing headlines in paid Google ads? “Totally Illegal,” he wrote, vowing that Google “will pay a big price” for it.

'Totally illegal': Trump escalates rhetoric on outlawing political dissent and criticism

“This is out of the autocratic playbook. As autocrats consolidate their power once they’re in office, anything that threatens their power ... becomes illegal,” historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat said.

www.nbcnews.com

He's a ****.

 

[SebastianBlue]

He's a ****.

A very dangerous ****.