Trump's reputation will age like fine wine

[Bradskii]

Nah. It's only Monday.

Ah, but we get a head start over here in the Kindom of Australia (a little later than I normally experience as I've just driven 4,600 kms from east coast to west).

In passing, back in the 80's when my wife and I had been in Australia for 2 or 3 years we decided to become citizens. I then discovered we had to swear to God my allegiance to the queen. Well, that wasn't going to happen on both counts, so we had to wait three years until they omitted Liz from the pledge and made God an optional extra.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

It's what..Tuesday? But that is already up for most fatuous post of the week.

It's Monday night here...although I realize, your King, Charles the Third, would say "It's Chewsday innit?"

That aside, my point still stands...if someone's going to get on here and pearl clutch about how "there should be no kings!" like another poster did, shouldn't they start with the king (from another country) that's still technically their sovereign?

If it needs pointing out that it's racist (as apparently I need to do to you), then yes, there's a problem.

It doesn't need pointing out because it's not.

Merely capitalizing on a comedic opportunity that involves a cultural difference doesn't always have to be equated with "racism".
(Guys like Mel Brooks made a career out of it)


If a congressmen voted in favor of policy that prioritized Scottish/Irish migrants, and their political opponent photoshopped them in a kilt and sporran, would anyone be throwing a fit right now?

 

[Bradskii]

That aside, my point still stands...if someone's going to get on here and pearl clutch about how "there should be no kings!" like another poster did, shouldn't they start with the king (from another country) that's still technically their sovereign?

It's still fatuous. And I won't insult your intelligence by explaining why.

It doesn't need pointing out because it's not.

Oh dear...

 

[Hans Blaster]

It's Monday night here...although I realize, your King, Charles the Third, would say "It's Chewsday innit?"

That aside, my point still stands...if someone's going to get on here and pearl clutch about how "there should be no kings!" like another poster did, shouldn't they start with the king (from another country) that's still technically their sovereign?

Kings are useless twits.

It doesn't need pointing out because it's not.

Merely capitalizing on a comedic opportunity that involves a cultural difference doesn't always have to be equated with "racism".
(Guys like Mel Brooks made a career out of it)

Donald Trump ain't Mel Brooks.

If a congressmen voted in favor of policy that prioritized Scottish/Irish migrants, and their political opponent photoshopped them in a kilt and sporran, would anyone be throwing a fit right now?

Your twisted analogy won't divert from the racist nature of the post you are referring to. As to the Scots-Irish, they and the English have been favored over the rest of us in this country from the beginning.

 

[A2SG]

Your twisted analogy won't divert from the racist nature of the post you are referring to. As to the Scots-Irish, they and the English have been favored over the rest of us in this country from the beginning.

Not entirely....

-- A2SG, some people always need someone to look down on.....

 

[Hans Blaster]

Not entirely....

View attachment 371862

-- A2SG, some people always need someone to look down on.....

The Scots-Irish aren't really Irish (don't stone me if you happen to be one). They were lowland Scots who settled in Ireland for a generation or two before moving to the American colonies. They settled primarily along the spine of the Appalachians.

 

[A2SG]

The Scots-Irish aren't really Irish (don't stone me if you happen to be one). They were lowland Scots who settled in Ireland for a generation or two before moving to the American colonies. They settled primarily along the spine of the Appalachians.

For some reason, I'm reminded of a bit by Emo Phillips:

Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, "Don't do it!" He said, "Nobody loves me." I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?"​

​

He said, "Yes." I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?" He said, "A Christian." I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me, too! What franchise?" He said, "Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?" He said, "Northern Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"​

​

He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region." I said, "Me, too!"​

​

Northern Conservative†Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912." I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over.​

-- A2SG, not sure what made me think of that....

 

[eclipsenow]

Democracy is the 'tyranny of the majority, and we'll forum-shop to challenge it in a friendly appeals court to get our way' when they lose.

That's not it at all.

They're worried Trump is greasing the wheels (firing 'disloyal' staff, changing out the Admirals and Generals, etc) and pushing the country, bit by bit, away from Democracy.

As history podcaster Dan Carlin asks - "Would you be happy if Kamala had these new powers and USED them!?"

This is a FASCINATING centuries wide perspective on the current Executive powers available to the President. From Abraham Lincoln on the role of the President to today - check it out! Listen to it while driving or doing the dishes. It's worth it.

Common Sense 324 – What’s Good for the Goose – Dan Carlin

www.dancarlin.com

 

[eclipsenow]

Wait, if the concept of a King is abhorrent... remind me again, who's technically the sovereign over Australia?

If ONLY Trump were "King" over America in the modern, nerfed Westminster sense of the word - your country might have a chance.

But he's a President who wants to be "King" or is that Emperor? With the power creep of the last 50 years has access to various 'emergency powers' that have not all been tested, some of them potentially combining in unanticipated and concerning ways.

I hope your courts can stand up to him. Otherwise, America might lose her way, as Rome did after Julius as it abandoned the old Senate and became an Empire with an Emperor.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

We have high-level political scientists in Australia discussing how bad it is for a nation to see their leader go and prostrate themselves before Trump in the golden throne room, kissing the ring lest they make daddy angry.

Then as a result of "No Kings" day Trump puts up a video of himself as Tom Cruise (with a Crown) in a Maverick jet dropping poo all over the protestors? JD Vance puts up a video of Trump drawing a royal sword on a throne, and his staff bending the knee and touching the floor before him reverentially?

This administration is a cartoon of itself - a walking blustering narcissistic joke.

Because THIS is how a real President posts!

1. KING MAVERICK DROPS POO on CITIZENS​

Because he's the mostest Presidential Personage Ever! In a bigly way!

View attachment 371847

2. POPE TRUMP​

Because ranting about how he'd make a great Pope when Trump is the first convicted Felon President - with ambiguity over what's exactly in the Epstein files - is a dignified and statesman like way to behave!

View attachment 371848

3. RACIST TRUMP​

Because - racism sells to a certain base!
View attachment 371849

4. INSURRECTIONIST TRUMP!​

"If you don't fight like hell you're not going to have a country!"
View attachment 371850

5. CORRUPT TRUMP​

Australian ABC 4 Corners. Watch all 45 minutes. That's just the TIP of the iceberg of how Australian's view this narcissistic entitled grifter! Try watching the 4 Corners specials on Trump's insurrection and electioneering tactics!

Let alone threatening NATO, Zelenskyy, and even democracy itself.
Q: Should the American President defend the Constitution?
Trump: I dunno


THAT is how the world sees Trump!
THAT is how history will see these terrible embarrassing years.

Sounds like you are trying to reconcile the notorious flop that was the "No Kings Rally 2.0." Basically it was seen no differently than a large scale group of liberals shooting water guns at a picture of Trump to vent their frustrations without actually accomplishing anything.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

If ONLY Trump were "King" over America in the modern, nerfed Westminster sense of the word - your country might have a chance.

But he's a President who wants to be "King" or is that Emperor? With the power creep of the last 50 years has access to various 'emergency powers' that have not all been tested, some of them potentially combining in unanticipated and concerning ways.

I hope your courts can stand up to him. Otherwise, America might lose her way, as Rome did after Julius as it abandoned the old Senate and became an Empire with an Emperor.

The country made it through the FDR presidency...
(He issued over 3000 executive orders, setup internment camps, and blatantly tried to pack the courts)

I think we'll be just fine.

 

[DaisyDay]

Can you offer any evidence this is a real post by Trump? Doing some searching, I'm seeing people post images, but never any links to where he posted it. Now, it's possible it was posted but deleted, but if so there is normally archives one can access of them.

Other things that are suspicious about this image: If I look on Truth Social, there is a little icon next to the checkmark showing he is part of "Truth+ Premium" that is missing from the above. It also lacks the "ReTruths", "Likes", and date of posting that should appear at the bottom--and there seems to be too much of a blank space at the bottom of the image to believe that it just didn't copy that part. These are signs of a faked image. That combined with the apparent inability to show evidence he ever posted it leads me to conclude this is most likely a fake image.

While I put very little trust into AI results, when searching on Google (for "I'm not incompitent" and "Trump") Google's AI did tell me:

"President Donald Trump did not say "I'm not incompitent". The statement and its misspelling have been circulated widely in recent months on social media, especially Facebook, appearing in meme-like posts that attribute the quote to him. There is no official record of him making this specific statement."

Again, I put very little trust in what AI spouts at me without verification, but it tracks with what I've found, or more accurately not found, so far.

Archived truth social: https://archive.ph/87K7p

Snopes - rating true: Trump posted AI video of him poop-bombing protesters?

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5563504-speaker-johnson-trump-no-kings-ai-video/

 

[comana]

Sounds like you are trying to reconcile the notorious flop that was the "No Kings Rally 2.0." Basically it was seen no differently than a large scale group of liberals shooting water guns at a picture of Trump to vent their frustrations without actually accomplishing anything.

It doesn’t matter if you think it was a flop. You weren’t the intended audience.

 

[JSRG]

Archived truth social: https://archive.ph/87K7p

Snopes - rating true: Trump posted AI video of him poop-bombing protesters?

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5563504-speaker-johnson-trump-no-kings-ai-video/

None of those were what was being discussed.

 

[rambot]

But they'd already turned on him prior to him endorsing Trump for 2024.

If you recall, that happened more around 2020-2021. He became persona non grata in the more liberal circles after his criticism of the covid vaccine stuff.

I recall he's a fan of rfk right? And he stated his intention to vote for Trump in 2020 and endorsed him thr day before the election.

Honestly I'm not sure I'm seeing rhe narrative you're trying to pigeon hole a bit.

 

[eclipsenow]

Sounds like you are trying to reconcile the notorious flop that was the "No Kings Rally 2.0." Basically it was seen no differently than a large scale group of liberals shooting water guns at a picture of Trump to vent their frustrations without actually accomplishing anything.

When was there a pro-Trump rally of 7 million people? Or a rally for any cause approaching that size?

It was a peaceful, laudable, sometimes whimsical and even comical protest.

Just like MAGA protests!

Oh ... wait ...

 

[DaisyDay]

None of those were what was being discussed.

Did you read the links? All of them were about the same thing which was being discussed.

Post #75

Because THIS is how a real President posts!

1. KING MAVERICK DROPS POO on CITIZENS​

Because he's the mostest Presidential Personage Ever! In a bigly way!

Your response in post #76 says:

Can you offer any evidence this is a real post by Trump? Doing some searching, I'm seeing people post images, but never any links to where he posted it. Now, it's possible it was posted but deleted, but if so there is normally archives one can access of them.

Which I directly quoted before giving evidence that Trump did actually post it. All the links in my post #92 indicate that poor Donald actually did post this. Or were you merely disputing the last image of @eclipsenow posted?

 

[JSRG]

Did you read the links? All of them were about the same thing which was being discussed.

Post #75


Your response in post #76 says:


Which I directly quoted before giving evidence that Trump did actually post it. All the links in my post #92 indicate that poor Donald actually did post this. Or were you merely disputing the last image of @eclipsenow posted?

I was only responding to the issue of a single image, which is why I cut out the rest of the post aside from that image. This was the one I was talking about:

It was specifically regarding this image that was in eclipsenow's post that I was taking issue with in my response where I said it looked to me like it was fake and gave my reasons for that belief. Eclipsenow said it seemed I was correct and edited the post to remove that image.

 

[eclipsenow]

I was only responding to the issue of a single image, which is why I cut out the rest of the post aside from that image. This was the one I was talking about:

View attachment 371933

It was specifically regarding this image that was in eclipsenow's post that I was taking issue with in my response where I said it looked to me like it was fake and gave my reasons for that belief. Eclipsenow said it seemed I was correct and edited the post to remove that image.

Sorry all! This is all my fault. I confused the thread by editing my post and deleting that image.

( I hate it when I repost something fraudulent because I value truth, and because it looks like I'm an easy sucker for fake news. It affects any credibility I might have with my debating partners! )

My bad! Now I've got to go and put it back in and explain in that post.