Donald Trump - MAGAtwat news and discussion

[maomao]

I can't believe there are that many that did that, possibly those who were voting over Gaza and Israel. But even those have proven their stupidity. There are many crying all over the place now at what they did, believing the bullshit he spouted. Apparently there have been loads of searches about how to retract their votes. Now that proves their stupidity, thinking that could be a thing. Any one thinking that the madman would do anything to help the situation there, were definitely stupid. Just take a look around at the remorse. FAFO as they say. Very stupid. And of course the results were very close, even though the cunt keeps lying that it was a landslide.

A survey has proven their stupidity. Farron's got the details. Let's not forget the conman even stated how much he loves the uneducated. Just do a search online to see dozens of examples of their idiocy.

Spoiler

Well I was on the fence but now you've posted eight and a half minutes of some hysterical liberal talking shit I'm convinced lol.

 

[danny la rouge]

It kinda does if it never actually happened.

There is not, in your view, a single person in a country of over 300 million, a single person who voted Biden last time and Trump this time? And therefore you refuse to consider what “stupidity” is in the case of someone who votes a way you don’t approve of?

 

[kabbes]

Maybe this is all just an incredibly elaborate and clever piece of performance art. Because it has certainly given me empathy and insight into why people might want to vote Trump just out of distaste for liberal sneering.

 

[danny la rouge]

Farron's got the details.

Who?

Let’s be honest here. The Trump victory, while I expected it, was depressing. I certainly felt annoyed at those who voted for him. But if the analysis is that they’re just stupid, well we may as well give up. Stupidly can’t be cured. So that’s that then. We’re doomed. Sucks to be us.

 

[Rompipalle]

I don't think Trump supporters are stupid. Well some of them must be, but in the main I think they voted Trump because he claims to be hard on immigration, strong for the economy, to stop wars and prevent USA getting embroiled in new wars. He didn't offer a large change to healthcare which for those in work and able to pay the subs is probably desirable (if stupid looking from a UK perspective) and because some of them just couldn't see a female President in the White House. It would have been the first time.

Finally I think they voted Trump because he didn't take their votes for granted and instead campaigned so much he was often doing three rallies to Harris's one and these never ending rallies also generated news items which produced more publicity. If the UK is anything to go by he would have gotten massive daily US TV coverage.

He also lies, constantly.

Voting for someone who wouldn't recognise the truth if it came up and smacked him in the chops, is not a terribly wise thing to do.

I'm sure this will elicit howls of protest along the lines of "But all politicians lie" - and to some extent that is the case - although I think sometimes they lie when the're under fire or placed in a difficult or unwary situation and are required to say something, which then may turn out to be nonsense. Trump, on the other hand, lies as often as he exhales - and frankly, even when confronted with the evidence of his own lies, his immediate response is to lie some more.

Trump was always going to be doing more rallies than Harris - for the simple reason that he was the Republican nominee/candidate for longer and because he was holding rallies before he even WAS the candidate, so I'm not sure that it's much of a measure of anything.

He just loves the sound of his own voice and believes everyone else should hear it endlessly whether they want to or not. He rarely has anything meaningful or insightful to say - it's just rabble-rousing claptrap and he doesn't actually mean a word of it.

 

[breadandcircuse]

Well I was on the fence but now you've posted eight and a half minutes of some hysterical liberal talking shit I'm convinced lol.

Excellent. You have seen the light.

 

[danny la rouge]

He also lies, constantly.

Voting for someone who wouldn't recognise the truth if it came up and smacked him in the chops, is not a terribly wise thing to do.

I'm sure this will elicit howls of protest along the lines of "But all politicians lie" - and to some extent that is the case - although I think sometimes they lie when the're under fire or placed in a difficult or unwary situation and are required to say something, which then may turn out to be nonsense. Trump, on the other hand, lies as often as he exhales - and frankly, even when confronted with the evidence of his own lies, his immediate response is to lie some more.

Trump was always going to be doing more rallies than Harris - for the simple reason that he was the Republican nominee/candidate for longer and because he was holding rallies before he even WAS the candidate, so I'm not sure that it's much of a measure of anything.

He just loves the sound of his own voice and believes everyone else should hear it endlessly whether they want to or not. He rarely has anything meaningful or insightful to say - it's just rabble-rousing claptrap and he doesn't actually mean a word of it.

We’re all on-side with “Trump is many kinds of bad”. That’s agreed.

 

[JimW]

Thiel will have him killed soon to get Vance in, the deliberately failed attempts on the campaign trail were just part of the scene-setting.

 

[breadandcircuse]

I don't think Trump supporters are stupid. Well some of them must be, but in the main I think they voted Trump because he claims to be hard on immigration, strong for the economy, to stop wars and prevent USA getting embroiled in new wars. He didn't offer a large change to healthcare which for those in work and able to pay the subs is probably desirable (if stupid looking from a UK perspective) and because some of them just couldn't see a female President in the White House. It would have been the first time.

Plus, Trump already did the job, and many voters will be happy with what they saw back then.

Finally I think they voted Trump because he didn't take their votes for granted and instead campaigned so much he was often doing three rallies to Harris's one and these never ending rallies also generated news items which produced more publicity. If the UK is anything to go by he would have gotten massive daily US TV coverage.

He's a narcissist, so has to have attention on himself at all times. He may have done loads of rallies, but many of them weren't full, and people were leaving. He has been doing them for so long, as announcing his candidacy so early was to evade prison. If you compare them with Kamala's, she had many more attendees than he did at hers, which is one of the reasons his win is so suspicious.

 

[Rompipalle]

We’re all on-side with “Trump is many kinds of bad”. That’s agreed.

But choosing to vote for a known, pathological liar is not indicative of being terribly bright.

Admittedly, if there are two candidates, neither of whom was deemed to be optimal, I'm not sure why choosing the one who is the bigger liar (and a convicted criminal into the bargain) could be interpreted as being the better option for the good of the country as a whole.

 

[danny la rouge]

But choosing to vote for a known, pathological liar is not indicative of being terribly bright.

Everything you know about Trump Republicans knew about Harris.

 

[weltweit]

He also lies, constantly.

Remember Boris?

Voting for someone who wouldn't recognise the truth if it came up and smacked him in the chops, is not a terribly wise thing to do.

Trump lies about all sorts of things, and in the last election he was often fact checked, it didn't make much difference because he already made loads of statements since that one.

In UK, if you are a company, you have to tell the truth in your advertising. This requirement is not extended to political parties. They have no requirement to tell the truth. How many millions paid to EU every week on the Tory battlebus?

Trump was always going to be doing more rallies than Harris - for the simple reason that he was the Republican nominee/candidate for longer and because he was holding rallies before he even WAS the candidate, so I'm not sure that it's much of a measure of anything.

No, Trump was doing three battleground rallies per day when Harris was just doing one. It was on the news, Harris is holding a rally in xyz, Trump is holding rallies in ABC, XYZ and GHR .. in the same time period.

He just loves the sound of his own voice and believes everyone else should hear it endlessly whether they want to or not. He rarely has anything meaningful or insightful to say - it's just rabble-rousing claptrap and he doesn't actually mean a word of it.

He is a politician, and as the election result shows, not to be underestimated.

 

[breadandcircuse]

Everything you know about Trump Republicans knew about Harris.

Really? When did she become a felon? When did she steal top secret documents and hide them? When was she found guilty of sexual abuse? When did she incite an insurrection?

 

[weltweit]

He's a narcissist, so has to have attention on himself at all times. He may have done loads of rallies, but many of them weren't full, and people were leaving. He has been doing them for so long, as announcing his candidacy so early was to evade prison. If you compare them with Kamala's, she had many more attendees than he did at hers, which is one of the reasons his win is so suspicious.

He won the election, the only poll that counts. Harris lost the election. There is nothing suspicious about it.

 

[Wilf]

This might be a helpful time to remind people that there is an

Essential Trump/Alt-Right Ridicule Thread

Best thing is to point and laugh at them innit really. They won't be around too long. Less than 4 years hopefully. And the subsequent government will simply tear to pieces all these stupid Executive Orders. Anyway I thought this was funny, and would encourage folk to add as many trump memes as...

www.urban75.net

If people can keep ridicule-based posts to that one and try to make sure that posts on this one have a little bit more content in, that might help reduce the friction a little?

I'm not into thread policing, 'schooling' even more so, but this is a good suggestion. If you want to focus on insults* and jokes, use the derision thread, leaving this thread for a combination of news, discussion and links to pieces of analysis. That sounds like a a rather high minded and even pompous distinction - probably is - but as other posters have said, that's pretty much the tradition and value of urban politics threads.

* Notwithstanding the points made about ageist and disablist comments.

 

[danny la rouge]

Really? When did she become a felon? When did she steal top secret documents and hide them? When was she found guilty of sexual abuse? When did she incite an insurrection?

You aren’t reading what I said. I didn’t say I knew that or believed it. I said Republicans knew it. They knew it with certainty. Plus she they knew she was a Marxist. A criminal and a Marxist.

 

[Orang Utan]

But choosing to vote for a known, pathological liar is not indicative of being terribly bright.

Admittedly, if there are two candidates, neither of whom was deemed to be optimal, I'm not sure why choosing the one who is the bigger liar (and a convicted criminal into the bargain) could be interpreted as being the better option for the good of the country as a whole.

I suspect plenty of people who hate Trump would vote for someone equally unpleasant if they represented the ‘left’ instead of the Republican right.

 

[breadandcircuse]

You aren’t reading what I said. I didn’t say I knew that or believed it. I said Republicans knew it. They knew it with certainty. Plus she they knew she was a Marxist. A criminal and a Marxist.

Thereby proving their lies and stupidity.

 

[danny la rouge]

Thereby proving their lies and stupidity.

Which is what they think of Harris voters.

How did you cope with Brexit?

 

[Elpenor]

Surely the Trump is a bad guy message has reached saturation point

If you aren’t anti Trump by now then you’ll never be and you’re probably going to vote for him

Trump as enough American voters in the key areas will have issues voting for women and particularly women of colour

Also while I’m trying to avoid coverage on the whole as both options are ultimately a disaster (though in different ways and to different degrees) the impression I get is Harris is stalling and has little to offer other than not being Trump, conversely there can be no element of America that hasn’t reached a verdict on Trump - so if you don’t hate him by now you will never hate him and you’d probably vote for him

While quoting myself is perhaps a bit self-referential, as we are discussing why Americans voted for Trump here are some thoughts I had on the topic from a few other Trump threads a while ago. It looks like I omitted to label the Trump voters as thick or idiots, which I can only apologise for.

It also seems I was wrong in my first post about the “Trump is a bad guy message” being oversaturated, sincere thanks due to those posters who’ve taken it upon themselves to remind us of this fact over the last few pages. How ever did we manage without you?

 

[breadandcircuse]

Which is what they think of Harris voters.

How did you cope with Brexit?

But we're dealing in facts here. They refuse to believe them, and prefer to lie constantly, and live in their bubble of unreality.

What's the comment about Brexit got to do with Trump's cult being stupid? I voted Remain, so what's your point?

 

[Monte]

There is not, in your view, a single person in a country of over 300 million, a single person who voted Biden last time and Trump this time? And therefore you refuse to consider what “stupidity” is in the case of someone who votes a way you don’t approve of?

There's no need to argue in extreme.
I said 'significant numbers'.

 

[danny la rouge]

But we're dealing in facts here. They refuse to believe them, and prefer to lie constantly, and live in their bubble of unreality.

My point is that you have the facts you have before you because you’re not a Republican.

What's the comment about Brexit got to do with Trump's cult being stupid? I voted Remain, so what's your point?

The point is that two fairly evenly split constituencies thought the other stupid. Do you remember? It was awful. For years.

 

[danny la rouge]

There's no need to argue in extreme.
I said 'significant numbers'.

I didn’t, though. I said:

Were people who voted Biden last time but Trump this time stupid this year but clever four years ago? If they vote Democrat next time (assuming there is a next time) will they be clever again? If so, what does “stupid” mean beyond “have disappointed me”?

I made no estimation of numbers. It did not play any part in my argument.

 

[Wilf]

So they voted for Trump?

He is my problem with this, I can't see how this is anything other than calling the stupid but a bit phrased a but nicer. Frankly I could cope with being called stupid easier than this "poor thing just doesn't understand" approach. Voting for Trump is a stupid thing to do and those that did it are stupid* but they are not so stupid as to not understand what to they voted for, they know full well what they voted for. The stupidity is in thinking it won't come back and bite them, it is thinking that somehow it will help them get ahead. The problem with Trump voters isn't that there stupid, it's that fundamentally they are just unpleasant human beings.



Who are also stupid


*It might be better to say irrational, I have also heard them called not serious which might have some merit.

I just don't think people vote by evaluating the candidates and the policies they offer. There's an element of that and there's 'the economy stupid', but we are also in an era of populism. People vote from a certain position, the place where their experiences of life have put them. What, from that position, they think about the various elites and whether they perceive them to be on their side. Trump knows that and manipulates it to his advantage. The Democrats offer Taylor Seift.

 

[emanymton]

Were people who voted Biden last time but Trump this time stupid this year but clever four years ago? If they vote Democrat next time (assuming there is a next time) will they be clever again? If so, what does “stupid” mean beyond “have disappointed me”?

Well the primary reason those that did that are giving is they like RFK...

 

[Wilf]

So what happened in 2020? Did those US voters who switched to Trump in 24 have a breif cognetive uplift, before slumping back to their usual state?

Exactly the line I use when responding to 'look at the stupids' analysis. I mean, fucking hell, the average British IQ must have been off the charts in 1945!

 

[Monte]

I didn’t, though. I said:

Were people who voted Biden last time but Trump this time stupid this year but clever four years ago? If they vote Democrat next time (assuming there is a next time) will they be clever again? If so, what does “stupid” mean beyond “have disappointed me”?

I made no estimation of numbers. It did not play any part in my argument.

Until you started talking about 'a single voter'.

 

[danny la rouge]

Until you started talking about 'a single voter'.

Have you considered addressing the point I was making, or is it all going to be head of a pin stuff until I get bored?

 

[magneze]

When given two choices and one is the status quo and you don't want that then voting for the other thing might be what you do. The other is don't vote, but lots of people see that as, rightly or wrongly, you don't care either way.