Congratulations America - you got the president you deserve

(Q) said:
In the wake of the oncoming fascist regime, authoritarianism and cruelty of that which will be the Trump administration, few if any will be ok. Trump will easily plunge us into ww3 with his arrogance and stupidity of which most world leaders are all well aware.
Click to expand...
It’s up to you buddy.
I’m looking forward to the Trumpian era.
If he does what he says he will do. Say goodbye to Demorats for at least 2 terms.
So please stay woke and Trump Deranged. Hopefully the Demorats will keep that on their party, and secure 3 of even 4 terms.
Keep up the good work.
Before they wake and realise why they lost this election.
 
Advocating that another member commit suicide is dangerous and entirely inappropriate. Do not do this again.
Trek said:
Who cares!
You can cry all you like.
He’s President now and all that stuff merely helped him win in a landslide.
Thanks to all of them.
I hope he appeals that e jean caroll case just for kix.
Click to expand...

Wow.

Please kill yourself. You are an idiot. You are remarkably, astonishingly ignorant. I have zero doubt that you contribute absolute nothing of worth to this world--you only take. You are utterly and completely worthless garbage.

So, again, please kill yourself.
 
parmalee said:
Wow.

Please kill yourself. You are an idiot. You are remarkably, astonishingly ignorant. I have zero doubt that you contribute absolute nothing of worth to this world--you only take. You are utterly and completely worthless garbage.

So, again, please kill yourself.
Click to expand...
That’s exactly why Demorats lost the election on such a grand scale.
Now you have lefty women and lefty men sterilising themselves because The Donald won.
You’re all completely deranged. :O
Thank you for your mindset.
It changed the world.
 
Trek said:
That’s exactly why Demorats lost the election on such a grand scale.
Click to expand...
Kamala Harris: 74,451,919 votes (48.4%)
Donald Trump: 76,932,623 votes (50.0%)

Hardly a "grand scale". How fucking ignorant can you be? Do you even bother keeping yourself informed about anything whatsoever?
 
Trek said:
I have that guy on ignore
Click to expand...
Fine. Then how about answering these questions from me:

1. Do you believe that people, where there is sufficient evidence to prosecute them of crimes, should be prosecuted?
2. Do you believe that anyone has the right to hinder efforts to return documents to the US government that either at best do not belong to that individual but to the government, or at worst contain classified information that would put the US at risk were that information to be revealed to people without the necessary clearance?
3. Do you believe that someone who plotted to overturn an election through falsification of elector certificates should be held accountable for those criminal activities?
4. Do you believe that someone who fraudulently misstated their declarations of net worth so as to benefit from preferential terms in the market (whether or not they actually received them), something against the state's law - should be prosecuted appropriately by said state?
5. Do you believe that someone who is deemed "more likely than not" to have committed sexual assault should not, in some way, be punished for their actions?
6. Do you believe that someone who is deemed "more likely than not" to have defamed someone should not be similarly punished for those actions?
7. Do you believe that anyone, acting in their private capacity, is somehow above the law?
8. Do you believe that someone campaigning to be President is somehow above the law?

A simple "yes" or "no" will suffice.
 
Re: claims that people are sterilizing themselves due to post-election pessimism. That would seem to call for some kind of supporting citation.

Not that wild claims, mutual accusations of insanity, and suicide advice can't make for an amusing thread. But a little factual support would be welcome, too.
 
Trek said:
It’s up to you buddy.
I’m looking forward to the Trumpian era.
Click to expand...
Ah, so you're looking forward to the higher prices, lack of healthcare and lower standards of education, for starters.
Trek said:
If he does what he says he will do. Say goodbye to Demorats for at least 2 terms.
and secure 3 of even 4 terms.
Click to expand...
You appear to admire criminals, sexual predators, grifters and sociopaths controlling your life. Law, order and justice are things to avoid.
 
President Trump gained support in 49 states and the District of Columbia over 2020 — the biggest party gain since 1992.

President Trump had the best Republican showing among 18-29-year-olds since 2004, among Black voters since 1976, and among Hispanic voters since at least 1972.

President Trump aided House Republicans in their best popular vote showing since 1928.

It was a resounding victory — a shift that highlights President Trump's connection with American voters and the trust he has earned by fighting for them. It's why, beginning on Day One, President Trump will be better positioned than ever to begin undoing the damage of the past four years and delivering results for the American people.
The Great American Comeback begins on January 20, 2025.
Get over it!
 
(Q) said:
Ah, so you're looking forward to the higher prices, lack of healthcare and lower standards of education, for starters.

You appear to admire criminals, sexual predators, grifters and sociopaths controlling your life. Law, order and justice are things to avoid.
Click to expand...
You appear to be Trump Deranged.
 
parmalee said:
Fine. Then how about answering these questions from me:

1. Do you believe that people, where there is sufficient evidence to prosecute them of crimes, should be prosecuted?
2. Do you believe that anyone has the right to hinder efforts to return documents to the US government that either at best do not belong to that individual but to the government, or at worst contain classified information that would put the US at risk were that information to be revealed to people without the necessary clearance?
3. Do you believe that someone who plotted to overturn an election through falsification of elector certificates should be held accountable for those criminal activities?
4. Do you believe that someone who fraudulently misstated their declarations of net worth so as to benefit from preferential terms in the market (whether or not they actually received them), something against the state's law - should be prosecuted appropriately by said state?
5. Do you believe that someone who is deemed "more likely than not" to have committed sexual assault should not, in some way, be punished for their actions?
6. Do you believe that someone who is deemed "more likely than not" to have defamed someone should not be similarly punished for those actions?
7. Do you believe that anyone, acting in their private capacity, is somehow above the law?
8. Do you believe that someone campaigning to be President is somehow above the law?

A simple "yes" or "no" will suffice.
Click to expand...
Nah!
You’re a nasty guy.
You accuse me of being a rapist, and you want me to kill myself.
Get some help with your derangement.
 
Trek said:
Nah!
You’re a nasty guy.
You accuse me of being a rapist, and you want me to kill myself.
Get some help with your derangement.
Click to expand...
You are a rape supporter; consequently, there is a very strong probability that you are a sexual assailant, as well.

You should kill yourself. You have absolutely no value to anyone or anything in this world. I'm a pragmatist.
 
Trek said:
I hope he appeals that e jean caroll case just for kix.
Click to expand...
Out of interest, Trek, I'm curious as to how you rationalise your enthusiastic support of a rapist with the good Christian values you presumably pay lip service to. (Or is your god belief more of an abstract idea than something to live by?)
 
parmalee said:
Fine. Then how about answering these questions from me:

1. Do you believe that people, where there is sufficient evidence to prosecute them of crimes, should be prosecuted?
2. Do you believe that anyone has the right to hinder efforts to return documents to the US government that either at best do not belong to that individual but to the government, or at worst contain classified information that would put the US at risk were that information to be revealed to people without the necessary clearance?
3. Do you believe that someone who plotted to overturn an election through falsification of elector certificates should be held accountable for those criminal activities?
4. Do you believe that someone who fraudulently misstated their declarations of net worth so as to benefit from preferential terms in the market (whether or not they actually received them), something against the state's law - should be prosecuted appropriately by said state?
5. Do you believe that someone who is deemed "more likely than not" to have committed sexual assault should not, in some way, be punished for their actions?
6. Do you believe that someone who is deemed "more likely than not" to have defamed someone should not be similarly punished for those actions?
7. Do you believe that anyone, acting in their private capacity, is somehow above the law?
8. Do you believe that someone campaigning to be President is somehow above the law?

A simple "yes" or "no" will suffice.
Click to expand...
Trek will not answer these questions.

Trek is clearly trying to bait you and some others in this thread. And it seems he is succeeding. Don't feed the troll.

The real-world effects of Trump 2.0 will soon become apparent and will start hitting many of the people who voted for him so enthusiastically. Let them gloat now. It's highly likely they will soon find themselves beleaguered by buyer's remorse.
 
Moderator note: parmalee has been warned for insulting another member and, more importantly, for suggesting that somebody here ought to commit suicide. This is highly inappropriate and breaches our site posting guidelines in a number of different ways.

I get it that many people have strong feelings about the US election outcome. But if you can't discuss it without getting inappropriately personal and insulting, this is a topic you might be better off avoiding.
 
James R said:
Out of interest, Trek, I'm curious as to how you rationalise your enthusiastic support of a rapist with the good Christian values you presumably pay lip service to. (Or is your god belief more of an abstract idea than something to live by?)
Click to expand...
I'm not supporting Trek or Trump but IMO the constant reply to every question about Trump about him being a "rapist" is a little off base and isn't the strongest argument.

There are plenty of reasons to prefer someone else over Trump and it's true in the past, all of the charges and convictions would be enough to do any politician in. Nixon did far less. However it is what it is.

Trump wasn't convicted of "rape". If what he did would be called "rape" in some other jurisdiction, that's kind of beside the point as well. Maybe an unwanted kiss is called "rape" somewhere but so what? Trump was convicted of doing more than that but he wasn't convicted of putting his "member" in her.

To put it in perspective, Clinton was in similar hot water and he still got elected and I'm guessing you preferred him at the time over the Republican (I may be wrong). In the days of Jack Kennedy we just wouldn't have the graphic details.

When you have people who know each other, are probably drunk and heavy handed "groping" goes on, it is the crime of inappropriate sexual conduct or whatever the specific wording is. It's not really accurate or appropriate or even a strong argument to keep labeling him as a rapist in every argument as to why he wasn't a good choice, IMO.

I do understand the emotions behind that kind of reply, I'm just suggesting that it isn't particularly logical or the strongest argument.
 
Seattle said:
I'm not supporting Trek or Trump but IMO the constant reply to every question about Trump about him being a "rapist" is a little off base and isn't the strongest argument.
Click to expand...
Are you okay with overlooking Trump's sexual assault/rape? Any moral qualms about voting for a man with that kind of record?
Trump wasn't convicted of "rape". If what he did would be called "rape" in some other jurisdiction, that's kind of beside the point as well. Maybe an unwanted kiss is called "rape" somewhere but so what? Trump was convicted of doing more than that but he wasn't convicted of putting his "member" in her.
Click to expand...
Just so you know...

In many jurisdictions, the definition of "rape" requires the insertion of an object or part of one person's body into an orifice in another person's body. So, insertion of a finger into a vagina is rape. So is inserting a penis into a mouth. So is inserting a pencil into an anus. And so on. (It is not rape if somebody freely gives informed consent to a specific act of this nature.)

By the most commonly used legal definition of "rape", Trump was found in a court of law to have raped E. Jean Carroll, on a balance of probabilities.

The Manhattan law did not use the most common definition of "rape", which is why Trump's conduct was not characterised in that way there.
To put it in perspective, Clinton was in similar hot water and he still got elected ...
Click to expand...
Who did Clinton rape?

If you're thinking of Monica Lewinski, Clinton certainly took advantage of a vulnerable young woman and abused his position of power. But Lewinski, at the relevant times, consented to the sexual activity. Hence, not rape.
In the days of Jack Kennedy we just wouldn't have the graphic details.
Click to expand...
Rape was still rape in the 1960s. Rapists who raped in the 1960s don't get a free pass. I am not, however, aware of JFK raping anybody, either. Are you?
When you have people who know each other, are probably drunk and heavy handed "groping" goes on, it is the crime of inappropriate sexual conduct or whatever the specific wording is.
Click to expand...
The key elements of rape are insertion of an object or body part and a lack of relevant consent.

Being drunk is not an excuse for raping somebody. Being drunk does not mean your rapist gets exonerated.
It's not really accurate or appropriate or even a strong argument to keep labeling him as a rapist in every argument as to why he wasn't a good choice, IMO.
Click to expand...
Does stating a fact about a man raping a woman make you uncomfortable, Seattle? Why?

You seem bizarrely protective of Trump. Why would you look to excuse his sexual crimes?
 
James R said:
Are you okay with overlooking Trump's sexual assault/rape? Any moral qualms about voting for a man with that kind of record?
Click to expand...
I didn't vote for him and the election is over.
James R said:
Just so you know...

In many jurisdictions, the definition of "rape" requires the insertion of an object or part of one person's body into an orifice in another person's body. So, insertion of a finger into a vagina is rape. So is inserting a penis into a mouth. So is inserting a pencil into an anus. And so on. (It is not rape if somebody freely gives informed consent to a specific act of this nature.)

By the most commonly used legal definition of "rape", Trump was found in a court of law to have raped E. Jean Carroll, on a balance of probabilities.

The Manhattan law did not use the most common definition of "rape", which is why Trump's conduct was not characterised in that way there.
Click to expand...
Therefore it's not legally correct to keep calling him a rapist, is it?
James R said:
Who did Clinton rape?

If you're thinking of Monica Lewinski, Clinton certainly took advantage of a vulnerable young woman and abused his position of power. But Lewinski, at the relevant times, consented to the sexual activity. Hence, not rape.

Rape was still rape in the 1960s. Rapists who raped in the 1960s don't get a free pass. I am not, however, aware of JFK raping anybody, either. Are you?

The key elements of rape are insertion of an object or body part and a lack of relevant consent.

Being drunk is not an excuse for raping somebody. Being drunk does not mean your rapist gets exonerated.

Does stating a fact about a man raping a woman make you uncomfortable, Seattle? Why?

You seem bizarrely protective of Trump. Why would you look to excuse his sexual crimes?
Click to expand...
You seem to always turn the tables of why something makes the point that they do. I think my post was pretty self-explanatory. Does nuance make you uncomfortable?
 
James R said:
The real-world effects of Trump 2.0 will soon become apparent and will start hitting many of the people who voted for him so enthusiastically. Let them gloat now. It's highly likely they will soon find themselves beleaguered by buyer's remorse.
Click to expand...
We shall see. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top