Trump BACKTRACKS On Guarantee To End Ukraine War!

[familydog]

Yeah, it's going to be interesting to see what these orange d1ck-polishers will come up with in response.

"I don't understand why these Trump supporters won't agree with me."

[Philhelm]

Objectively speaking, I don't think a cost-benefit analysis would bear that out.

You are far more likely to die in a car accident on your way to and from your polling place than you are to have your vote make a difference, and given that the difference in outcome offers so little benefit for one candidate versus another, sitting at home is probably the better option.

The choice is between a candidate whose base is mostly friendly to a lot of libertarian ideas or a candidate whose base wants you dead. It's hard not to see the difference.

[acptulsa]

The choice is between a candidate whose base is mostly friendly to a lot of libertarian ideas or a candidate whose base wants you dead. It's hard not to see the difference.

There isn't any, because those two particular candidates have both already proven they want to devalue the currency until we're all in the poorhouse and fill our veins with poison.

I suppose being amongst the suckers I like the best would be some consolation for the fix we're all in, but I'd rather go lone wolf now and more lone wolf later. No offense.

[PAF]

The choice is between a candidate whose base is mostly friendly to a lot of libertarian ideas or a candidate whose base wants you dead. It's hard not to see the difference.

I disagree with republicans as much as I do democrats, so for me it's quite difficult impossible to see the difference.

To vote for a person who ran up $8+ Trillion in debt, started a brand new federal agency OWS, called Massie a third-rate grandstander because he wanted congress to vote on the record, makes absolutely no sense at all. All that would do is show the brainwashed tv watchers and tptb my consent, which I absolutely will not do.

But hey, I won't stop anybody from sleeping at night, if they feel that they must play the game.

[Invisible Man]

The choice is between a candidate whose base is mostly friendly to a lot of libertarian ideas or a candidate whose base wants you dead. It's hard not to see the difference.

I don't see that friendliness to libertarian ideas among either major candidate's base that you see. And voters aren't voting for the candidates' bases anyway. They vote for the candidates themselves.

[Snowball]

Don't bring facts into the two minutes of hate.

There are rumors in Russia that Tucker brought a message from Trump with him for Putin.
I will pm you.

[vita3]

“To vote for a person who ran up $8+ Trillion in debt, started a brand new federal agency OWS, called Massie a third-rate grandstander because he wanted congress to vote on the record, makes absolutely no sense at all.”

It’s much worse. He tweeted Massie should be kicked out of Republican Party, because he just wanted standard Congressional accountability

[PAF]

“To vote for a person who ran up $8+ Trillion in debt, started a brand new federal agency OWS, called Massie a third-rate grandstander because he wanted congress to vote on the record, makes absolutely no sense at all.”

It’s much worse. He tweeted Massie should be kicked out of Republican Party, because he just wanted standard Congressional accountability

It's even that much worse than that:

Had a democrat president made that threat, every republican would have objected. But because Trump made that threat, and if Trump had the means [he actually tried] to replace Massie with a neocon, republicans outside of Massie's district would not have given it a second thought.

[Voluntarist]

So why should we vote?

Take a deep breath, and wait patiently for everyone else to catch up.

[Mordan]

Don't expect critical thinking from the sexually obsessed TDS crowd.

there is a sad drop of truth to your first adverb.

There are also clearly democrat operatives on this forum, masquerading as libertarians.

[Mordan]

The choice is between a candidate whose base is mostly friendly to a lot of libertarian ideas or a candidate whose base wants you dead. It's hard not to see the difference.

the choice between an autocratic party whose primaries are crooked and a party where a guy like Trump can get nominated.

enough said. At least Rand has a chance in the GOP.. But he would need fair general elections which we do not have. The people that count the vote decide the outcome today.

[acptulsa]

the choice between an autocratic party whose primaries are crooked and a party where a guy like Trump can get nominated.

Somebody wasn't in Miami in '12.

[PAF]

Somebody wasn't in Miami Tampa in '12.

You were there too?

[nobody's_hero]

I think Trump was better on foreign policy, And that's no small thing. On the other hand, he gave us the COVID lockdowns and associated spending, and that's no small thing either.

Maybe after Trump we can get a president who is better on both.

Right now, we have a president who is bad on both.

It's like algebraic equations. You just take out the common variables on both sides and what you're left with is the difference.

2a + y + 3 = 6x + y + 8

"y" is the garbage COVID policies. Both Biden and Trump suck. So, just remove "y" from both sides in this equation and weigh the difference.

(That was my first attempt to explain how to measure candidates using mathematics. I apologize, and it won't happen again. Also please don't try to solve that equation because I'm not sure it's solvable, and I'm very rusty on high-school algebra)

[Occam's Banana]

2a + y + 3 = 6x + y + 8

[...]

(That was my first attempt to explain how to measure candidates using mathematics. I apologize, and it won't happen again. Also please don't try to solve that equation because I'm not sure it's solvable, and I'm very rusty on high-school algebra)

Challenge accepted. (It's not really that much of a challenge, though.)

The equation can be reduced to:

a = 3x + 5/2

It is only "unsolvable" in the sense that there are infinite solutions, rather than one just one. For example:

...

x = -1 ⇒ a = -1/2

x = -1/2 ⇒ a = 1

x = 0 ⇒ a = 5/2

x = 1/2 ⇒ a = 4

x = 1 ⇒ a = 11/2

...

[acptulsa]

It's like algebraic equations. You just take out the common variables on both sides and what you're left with is the difference.

"Both." Not "all", just "both".

In 1860 the nation was staring civil war in the face, and told the Whig Party to go to hell. Guess the population had more on the ball back then. The people weren't all, like, oh, we don't have permission to vote for that third Republican Party.

We are $#@!ed. Bend down and kiss what little is left of this nation goodbye.

[nobody's_hero]

"Both." Not "all", just "both".

In 1860 the nation was staring civil war in the face, and told the Whig Party to go to hell. Guess the population had more on the ball back then. The people weren't all, like, oh, we don't have permission to vote for that third Republican Party.

We are $#@!ed. Bend down and kiss what little is left of this nation goodbye.

I mean, once the Republican party supplanted the Whig party as one of the two major parties (and the Whig party just, imploded), it was still 'both' and has remained so until this day. Apparently, the American people will never allow themselves to have a densely populated field of parties to choose from. If one arises, another one goes extinct, and you're back where you started.

It would be nice if we could choose between the lesser of 3 evils, or 4 evils, or maybe even 5 evils. That would be exciting. I'm using Occam to solve the equations in that scenario.

[acptulsa]

I mean, once the Republican party supplanted the Whig party as one of the two major parties (and the Whig party just, imploded), it was still 'both' and has remained so until this day. Apparently, the American people will never allow themselves to have a densely populated field of parties to choose from.

Okay.

So why were they allowed to replace one if it got too crappy, and why aren't we?

They voted for Someone Else. And they got him. Nobody asked permission to do it.

[nobody's_hero]

Okay.

So why were they allowed to replace one if it got too crappy, and why aren't we?

Do you think it's easier to reach that point with or without Trump?

(If he's as bad as you say he is, then it should be just a matter of time before we get that 3rd party (to replace the 2nd party and therefore become the new 2nd party, but I digress). If he's not as bad as you say he is, well, now we've got to admit that, yes, indeed he was actually better than Biden, and that our claims that there was 'no difference between the two' were hyperbolic)

[acptulsa]

Do you think it's easier to reach that point with or without Trump?

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

He is the GOP at this point. He's the elephant incarnate. Are you asking me if anyone can wreck the party faster? Are you asking me if there's a better vehicle Billy Kristol can pretend to hate while he rides his wave all the way to a position in The New Red Flavored National Socialism?

[nobody's_hero]

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

He is the GOP at this point. He's the elephant incarnate. Are you asking me if anyone can wreck the party faster? Are you asking me if there's a better vehicle Billy Kristol can pretend to hate while he rides his wave all the way to a position in The New Red Flavored National Socialism?

So, imagine we're in the 1840's-50's, which "Whigs" are going to leave the GOP and form the "republican" party?

Will it be the neocon wing of the Bill Kristol variety? Good, been trying to run them out of the party for ages.

Will it be the Trumpers? Will we get a MAGA party out of this? Lesser of 3 evils now? Well, it's progress.

Those options sound exciting and chaotic, and I'm not opposed to it at all. (though it is kind of sad that the unabashedly authoritarian Democratic party will still be at full strength, maybe Kucinich can kick up some dirt and form an exodus of his own https://signalcleveland.org/dennis-k...ith-his-party/).

[acptulsa]

Why not do it to the DNC instead by electing a Kennedy? The only major party you're willing to cut the heart out of is the one that's you think is doing a marginally better job? Destruction begins at home?

If you want to straighten out your own kid, you don't do it by shooting him. You might be able to scare him straight by shooting the bad influence he has gotten way too involved with, though.

You love Trump so much you're willing to pass up a chance to divide and conquer liberals just to listen to him talk mean about them while he once again gives them everything their little black hearts desire?

The reason we never win is, they've stuffed our very thoughts in a box, and some of us can no longer think outside of it. Kennedy is a Democrat. Let's destroy that crappy assed party. He honestly couldn't be any worse than Trump already was anyway, so he obviously won't be worse than Biden.

[nobody's_hero]

Why not do it to the DNC instead and elect a Kennedy? The only major party you're willing to cut the heart out of is the one that's you think is doing a marginally better job? Destruction begins at home?

If you want to straighten out your own kid, you don't do it by shooting him. You might be able to scare him straight by shooting the bad influence he has gotten way too involved with, though.

You love Trump so much you're willing to pass up a chance to divide and conquer liberals just to listen to him talk mean about them while he once again gives them everything their little black hearts desire?

Democrats are a lost cause man. I've been saying this for ages. And they're not going to change until they're willing to (no matter how much we try to wish a revolution into existence). The only meaningful debates over where this country is headed are happening on the Right (and it's been that way since Ron Paul established a foothold for opposing viewpoints in 2008).

Your suggestion (not mine), is that we need a new party. I'm saying that the best chance for you to get that, rests on a candidate you hate.

The only question is, who is going to be standing beside you in that new party? If it's the Bill Kristols of the world, you may find the GOP's locks have been changed if you try to come back.

[acptulsa]

Democrats are a lost cause man. I've been saying this for ages. The only meaningful debates over where this country is headed are happening on the right (and it's been that way since Ron Paul established a foothold for opposing viewpoints in 2008).

Your suggestion (not mine), is that we need a new party. I'm saying that the best chance for you to get that, rests on a candidate you hate.

The only question is, who is going to be standing beside you in that new party?

Everything you just said is another in a string of reasons why tens of millions of disaffected lifelong Democrats are ripe for the plucking. All those particular sheep need is a sense that the herd is going the way they honestly want to go. How much do you think it would take to destroy the Democratic Party? Just one failure to present the most popular liberal candidate for the presidency and that ass goes the way of the dodo.

Why do we lose? Because we're so invested in manning up and making a good, honest, forthright frontal attack we can't be bothered to notice their flank is wide $#@!ing open and begging for a sword.

[nobody's_hero]

Everything you just said is another in a string of reasons why tens of millions of disaffected lifelong Democrats are ripe for the plucking.

They need to prove it.

There's a reason I don't go into the ghetto and tell black people my opinions on what they should do to change their situations. I'm white. At the very least, they won't listen to anything I have to say, and at worst, it might be the last thing I ever say.

Likewise, as a conservative, I don't go into the democratic party and tell them what they should do to change their situations. (hence, why I'm not vocal about Kennedy (who I personally still find appealing, despite his unnecessary stance on Israel/Palestine). The Left already thinks he's just some MAGA plant. The best thing any Trump voter with a favorable opinion of Kennedy can do for his campaign is to shut the f'k up)

But if they should ever be ready to change their minds, and it comes from within—a sincere, heart-felt desire to challenge their own beliefs . . . well, hallelujah.

[acptulsa]

Well, you won't ever know it because there's such a thing as censorship. But they exist. And like almost all of their ilk, they're sheep.

All they need is some indication -- some poll numbers, something -- that they wouldn't be out on that limb all alone, and they'll bleat their way down that path.

[TheCount]

The choice is between a candidate whose base is mostly friendly to a lot of libertarian ideas or a candidate whose base wants you dead. It's hard not to see the difference.

Republicans are only friendly to libertarian ideas when they are out of power.

[Philhelm]

Republicans are only friendly to libertarian ideas when they are out of power.

Democrats are never friendly to libertarian ideas (except for unrestricted immigration, but they have different plans for that). Also, there are plenty of registered Republicans who are friendly to libertarian ideas; it's the party itself that is the problem.

[susano]

Well Trump's biggest mistake as president was he ordered a airstrike to kill an Iranian general who fought agaisnt ISIS and other Jihadist Sunni Groups in Syria that alone likely shows he brought in all the wrong people into the white house when it comes to foreign policy.

I so agree with this.

[Philhelm]

the choice between an autocratic party whose primaries are crooked and a party where a guy like Trump can get nominated.

enough said. At least Rand has a chance in the GOP.. But he would need fair general elections which we do not have. The people that count the vote decide the outcome today.

Trump and Ron/Rand Paul share much more common ground than anyone from the Democratic Party. Ron Paul was willing to work with the Republican Party, even if out of necessity, considering he was a party member for decades.