The Next President is...

[bfargin]

It appears that Tulsi is just maturing and gaining wisdom as she ages. The left’s ideology is shown hollow and without foundation as you gain wisdom and experience. When you abandon any absolute truth, there is nothing left…it becomes all about feelings. I’m glad she’s continuing to grow.

I like her and would guess that we’d agree on things and disagree on things, just like any two people would. I’d take her as a leader over most anybody else in current political leadership in our country.

[HeloDude]

3 hours ago, FourFans130 said:

Ok, I'll admit I don't agree with many of her positions.  If I'm honest, I've NEVER found an actual electable politician that I agree with on most topics.  Of all the options out there, she seems intelligent, articulate, clearly hasn't had a stroke, is willing to discuss difficult topics without equivocating on terms, and seems willing to compromise where it's necessary.  That list would eliminate most of our current politicians.  Hell, she stood up to 3 hours getting asked hard(ish) questions by Jocko.  That's got to count for something.  Imagine Biden, Pelosi, Fetterman or AOC doing that.  Is she my favorite?  Nope.  But I'd take her and Dan Crenshaw in a heartbeat over the asshats we currently have in power.

Who would you prefer?

 

Well, let’s see…I would prefer someone who:

1. Doesn’t want to ban AR-15s and similar type sporting rifles

2.  Doesn’t want to require backgound checks for private sales…and essentially then creating a registry

3. Didn’t support Bernie Sanders

4. Didn’t endorse Joe Biden

5. Doesn’t support ending cash bail

6. Doesn’t support raising the federal min wage to $15/hr (pre-covid btw)

7. Doesn’t support forcing businesses to provide for family paid sick leave, etc

8. Doesn’t support “free” college…ie forcing taxpayers to pay someone else’s tuition 

9. Doesn’t want forced closure of existing nuclear power plants 

10. Doesn’t support “Medicare for all”

…I can go on, if you’d like?

As for who I would support…ummm, a lot of people over her.  Rand Paul?  Ron DeSantis? Chris Sununu?  Nikki Haley?

[FourFans]

9 hours ago, HeloDude said:

Well, let’s see…I would prefer someone who:

1. Doesn’t want to ban AR-15s and similar type sporting rifles

2.  Doesn’t want to require backgound checks for private sales…and essentially then creating a registry

3. Didn’t support Bernie Sanders

4. Didn’t endorse Joe Biden

5. Doesn’t support ending cash bail

6. Doesn’t support raising the federal min wage to $15/hr (pre-covid btw)

7. Doesn’t support forcing businesses to provide for family paid sick leave, etc

8. Doesn’t support “free” college…ie forcing taxpayers to pay someone else’s tuition 

9. Doesn’t want forced closure of existing nuclear power plants 

10. Doesn’t support “Medicare for all”

…I can go on, if you’d like?

As for who I would support…ummm, a lot of people over her.  Rand Paul?  Ron DeSantis? Chris Sununu?  Nikki Haley?

I'm guessing you didn't listen to the podcast. 

Yes, I'd like those guys as well.  I seriously hope Trump doesn't get the RNC's nomination so a rational adult with a concept of humility can run instead.  But I digress.  Gabbard clearly doesn't fit in any red or blue box.  Important to me personally: Listening to her speak her opinions in a long form setting it's obvious, she's not a tyrant.  Sure, I'd prefer a more conservative leader.  But she actually learns and is willing to change her opinions on topics.  If she's willing to grow and evolve, I think she deserves the benefit of the doubt.  Where she used to stand is not where she's standing now. 

What's more, I'm willing to bet that she has a rational reason for each of her positions.  Like an ACTUAL rational, thought out reason.  Political figures like that today are few and far between.  I'll gladly take an 'opponent' like that instead of Fetterman, Biden, or Pelosi any day.  We as conservatives are going to have to realize that finding common ground to move forward as a nation first requires us choose NOT to die on EVERY SINGLE HILL in the political landscape.  It requires persuasion and compromise.  (yes there are hills to die on, such as transing kids, and teaching CRT to the military, vaccine mandates, etc... but I didn't see any of those big ticket items on your list, but then, everyone's list is different)

I specifically hope to see the Democrat party lean more like Gabbard, and the Republican party lean more like Crenshaw.  Going hard over Left or Right only leads to tyranny.  Yes, the Left is going absolutely nuts right now in our country, but people forget that the Right can do that just as bad.  The 50's red scare was very much a product of the political Right, and it led to horrific tyranny of a sort in our country.  I'm a history nerd, and I see a lot of parallels in the Right's media narrative leaning that way right now.  It's not healthy.

I'd enjoy listening to Gabbard and Crenshaw debate all those topics you listed.  I'll have to see if they've podcasted together.

Edited December 2, 2022 by FourFans130

[Prozac]

8 hours ago, FourFans130 said:

I specifically hope to see the Democrat party lean more like Gabbard, and the Republican party lean more like Crenshaw. 

Note that both of those individuals served. We most definitely need more of that. Amazing what you can do when you realize you have some common goals even if you disagree on how to get there. 

[filthy_liar]

To those that criticize Musk, fair. I wouldn't name my kid that either.  But the problem with Musk is that he understands disruption better than anyone else on earth except maybe Bezos.  He knew exactly what he was doing when he bought twtr.  He knew the challenges, he knew the landscape, and if you look at what he's done in other sectors, he knows what he has to do to overcome all of the obstacles that are in his way.  Just like he knew how to convince LA that he wanted to "dig a hole in the ground."  In friggin LA.  And love or hate the guy, he worked his ass off to keep tesla going in 2008.  He has vision and he has a work ethic, and he produces. That's pretty American.  We'll see what happens.  I'd bet on Musk.

BTW - electric cars suck.  When one of them (or a gas engine car) can drive me completely from A to B autonomously then we'll talk.  I mean literally and legally drive me from A to B autonomously.  Hyped up garbage to this point.  I'll keep my gas guzzler for now.  

[ClearedHot]

On 12/1/2022 at 12:22 AM, arg said:

The fact that this administration said they are keeping an eye on twitter should scare the shit out of you.

After what Elon released last night (with more to follow today), how could anyone ever trust the government again?  The First Amendment is first for a reason.  Freedom of speech, one of our most basic rights attacked by our own government and political parties.

[lloyd christmas]

I get really irritated with the “election denier” claims that are made against people by the media.  It’s the end of democracy blah blah blah.  Their defense is always to go on the offense.  It was absolutely crystal clear during that election cycle that there was interference going on.  And it wasn’t the Russians on behalf of Trump like we were told for years and years.  The election was rigged by social media, the mainstream media, the Democrat Party and 3 letter agencies of the government.  Trump was crushed by the machine while Biden was propped up.  All while suppressing Hunter’s shenanigans and business dealings.  It’s all going to start coming out starting with what Musk is doing with Twitter.  

And it’s not like we got anything good out of it.  This administration is an absolute train wreck.

[Biff_T]

They are trying really hard to turn this into a one party country.  They (most dems) are truly a mindless cult.  There are mindless cult Republicans as well but they don't have the same voice as the Dems.  

I don't like either party.  They're all full of shit.   I used to just vote for who's beliefs were the "most" in line with mine.  But as the days pass, I find my ✔️ marks going to the Republicans more and more.   The Democratic party is not longer alive.   It should change its name.   

I really hope we can remove corruption from the US government but we all know how history books reflect the opposite.  Too many idiots to change this country.  

Look at CA.  We voted for the status quo.  We complain about how it sucks here and vote for the same fxcking idiots who led us here.  LA county put your masks back on!!!!

[ClearedHot]

As the Twitter files finally see the light of day it is more and more obvious that Big Tech, the DNC and the FBI changed the outcome of the election...and they continue to shape the social media narrative.  January 6th was horrific, a stain on American democracy, but what happened during the election was in fact a stolen election.  I don't use those words lightly and I would never want to give Trump more hate to spew to the masses but recent polls about the laptop show that had the voters known the truth about the laptop the outcome would have been different.

Several studies and reports have concluded that if the Laptop information had not been suppressed and been actually  reported to most voters, Trump would have had 311 Electoral College votes.

 

 

Others polls are also very telling:

1.  79% say ‘truthful’ coverage of Hunter Biden’s laptop would have changed 2020 election.

2.  A similar percentage also said they’re convinced that information on the computer is real, with just 11% saying they thought it was “created by Russia,” according to the survey conducted by the New Jersey-based Technometrica Institute of Policy and Politics.

3.  The poll found 65% of voters believe it is “likely” President Biden was consulted about — and potentially even profited from — his son’s foreign deals. By contrast, 28% say it’s unlikely Biden was involved in Hunter’s business dealings at all.

And before we put all the blame on Big Tech lets not forget the FBI was weaponized to change the outcome of an American Presidential election.  "Zuckerberg tells Rogan FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship"

 

[Day Man]

time to ignore the constitution i guess

 

[FLEA]

What platform did he post this from? Is this his weird Twitter substitute? 

[KWings06j]

14 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

 The First Amendment is first for a reason.

Actually it's not. The first amendment was the third in the original proposed Bill of Rights. The first two were not ratified at the time.

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transcript

Edited December 4, 2022 by KWings06j

[Guardian]

Your argument is stupid. Actually it’s not because stuff that wasn’t accepted might have been? Troll

[Day Man]

1 hour ago, FLEA said:

What platform did he post this from? Is this his weird Twitter substitute? 

"truth social"

[ClearedHot]

10 hours ago, Day Man said:

time to ignore the constitution i guess

 

Kinda of like when Hillary continued to refuse to accept the results of the election.

 

[Prozac]

4 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Kinda of like when Hillary continued to refuse to accept the results of the election.

 

I must’ve missed it in there: Where’s the part where she advocated suspension of the constitution, encouraged her supporters to storm the capitol, and suggest hanging the VP? C’mon man, yeah Hillary sucks (or maybe doesn’t….have to ask Bill), but Trump is objectively on another level of awful. While I disagree with a lot of the tone & hyperbole you insist on constantly posting about the Biden admin, I can understand why you don’t like him. So support a better conservative candidate rather than tacitly defend Cheetos for brains with “whatabout” arguments. 

[Guardian]

Do you live next to a power plant?

[ClearedHot]

1 hour ago, Prozac said:

I must’ve missed it in there: Where’s the part where she advocated suspension of the constitution, encouraged her supporters to storm the capitol, and suggest hanging the VP? C’mon man, yeah Hillary sucks (or maybe doesn’t….have to ask Bill), but Trump is objectively on another level of awful. While I disagree with a lot of the tone & hyperbole you insist on constantly posting about the Biden admin, I can understand why you don’t like him. So support a better conservative candidate rather than tacitly defend Cheetos for brains with “whatabout” arguments. 

When the other candidate continues to question the legitimacy of the election, I would say that is more than hyperbole.  When did Trump say storm the capital, please show me that.  Now if you want to fault him for his comments about the VP, for saying "stop the steal", or for not being a leader and stepping forward sooner to stop what was happening I completely agree, but when you fabricate facts you lose all credibility.   "I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard." 

AGAIN, I've said i don't support Trump, and as I predicted he would use the Twitter files to concoct another lunatic rant which includes suspending the Constitution.  Here is what I simply don't understand, if all the warriors on this forum swore an oath to the Constitution how can you be so nonchalant about the possibility that an American Presidential Election was influenced and likely tampered with by a big tech company, and that elements of the FBI played a part in that.  Do you hate the Orange man that much that you will simply turn a blind eye? 

For the 1000th time I want Trump to go away, but I want justice and the integrity of our system more than anything.

[Boomer6]

2 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Here is what I simply don't understand, if all the warriors on this forum swore an oath to the Constitution how can you be so nonchalant about the possibility that an American Presidential Election was influenced and likely tampered with by a big tech company, and that elements of the FBI played a part in that.  Do you hate the Orange man that much that you will simply turn a blind eye? 

For the 1000th time I want Trump to go away, but I want justice and the integrity of our system more than anything.

Simple, their guy won. What’s the harm in a little help from social media companies if it prevented DJT from remaining in office. It’s all okay because it was done to “preserve” democracy. 

[ViperMan]

Watched this a bunch, and I've yet to hear him call for a riot, coup, or insurrection. Now, it's some Dem's turn to post the part where he does. I'll wait.

[Prozac]

4 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

When the other candidate continues to question the legitimacy of the election, I would say that is more than hyperbole.  When did Trump say storm the capital, please show me that.  Now if you want to fault him for his comments about the VP, for saying "stop the steal", or for not being a leader and stepping forward sooner to stop what was happening I completely agree, but when you fabricate facts you lose all credibility.   "I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard." 

AGAIN, I've said i don't support Trump, and as I predicted he would use the Twitter files to concoct another lunatic rant which includes suspending the Constitution.  Here is what I simply don't understand, if all the warriors on this forum swore an oath to the Constitution how can you be so nonchalant about the possibility that an American Presidential Election was influenced and likely tampered with by a big tech company, and that elements of the FBI played a part in that.  Do you hate the Orange man that much that you will simply turn a blind eye? 

For the 1000th time I want Trump to go away, but I want justice and the integrity of our system more than anything.

Still not buying the whole “media is stacked against us” argument. The problem with today’s conservatives is that they’ve decided the only way to win is to make sure their voters are perennially pissed off enough to show up at the polls. They prefer to fight boogeymen vs come up with a coherent platform. The media hates us, immigrants are taking your jobs and murdering you, Hillary’s emails, Hunter’s laptop, Slick Willy’s Oval Office hummer, CRT, pronouns, and on, and on, and on. Don’t you guys ever get tired of yelling at the TV? You know which Republican candidates reliably get independent and even Democratic voters to turn out for them? The ones who can actually articulate the policies they support vs just shitting on the other side to rile up the MAGA hats. Guys like Brian Kemp will win you elections because they can convince voters of all stripes that their way is better & they do it without continually insulting liberals or debasing themselves in the name of culture wars. Spend less time whining about your nephew’s man-bun or Rachel Maddow’s Adam’s apple and more time supporting good candidates & you might be surprised. And yes, I fully acknowledge that most of what I just said can be just as easily levied at Democrats. I wish there were better D candidates too. I just happen to lean on the side of thinking that the Ds have been slightly less bad than the Rs lately. The bar is low. It shouldn’t take too much effort to raise it. 

[nsplayr]

4 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Here is what I simply don't understand, if all the warriors on this forum swore an oath to the Constitution how can you be so nonchalant about the possibility that an American Presidential Election was influenced and likely tampered with by a big tech company, and that elements of the FBI played a part in that.  Do you hate the Orange man that much that you will simply turn a blind eye?

Because we disagree on the facts of what happened, just like many on the right do with Russian election interference in 2016.

State actors, parties, corporate interests, lobbying groups, etc. have always influenced American elections...it's what you do in a democracy! Ideally you limit foreign interference almost entirely and you try to keep domestic political wrangling to a manageable level and within understood and reasonable rules. Good people can disagree what those are, e.g. dark money, campaign finance reform, fairness doctrine, foreign ownership of media companies, etc.

Tech companies and especially social media companies do hold a lot of power over the collective conversation, not unlike traditional media. There should be standards of acceptable conduct, I totally agree on that. Is what Twitter did a gross violation of standards of acceptable conduct? I'm not nearly as sure as you are.

The Hunter laptop story was widely reported and available freely and openly to anyone who cared to type www.nypost.com into their browser windows. The government in no way suppressed The New York Post or banned people from reading their reporting, reposting it, talking about it, or developing their own stories based on their reporting. Look at China especially or Iran or Russia for examples of true state repression of information, it's many orders of magnitude different than what you see here or in other Western capitalist democratic societies.

Both campaigns in 2020 made requests to social media companies (legacy media companies) when they believed stories published about their candidate were misleading, unfair or false. Sometimes the media and tech companies put out corrections or disclaimers or retractions and sometimes they did not. I do not agree that "the Twitter files" is some smoking gun bombshell. This story about Hunter and his laptop has been around now for more than two years, and no made-up GOP polling (e.g. MRC) should convince you that the story has more legs than it has received in the open information environment. Their "polling methodology" of saying that oh if only people had known about this story (faints back onto a strategically placed couch), Trump would have gotten 300+ EVs is incredibly laughable. We don't need to speculate about a past event, it happened! We know the results for real, not just for make-believe!

The GOP talked quite a bit about Hunter and his laptop at the end of the campaign and Joe Biden still won the 2020 Presidential election. It wasn't the October Surprise some were hoping for and I'm sorry that didn't work out for y'all the way Hillary's emails did - better luck next time.

That's how patriotic Americans who are all working more or less toward the same goals (being a strong, prosperous American nation that is a key leader in a peaceful and cooperative world) can approach this topic. 🇺🇸

[nsplayr]

17 minutes ago, Prozac said:

You know which Republican candidates reliably get independent and even Democratic voters to turn out for them? The ones who can actually articulate the policies they support vs just shitting on the other side to rile up the MAGA hats. Guys like Brian Kemp will win you elections because they can convince voters of all stripes that their way is better & they do it without continually insulting liberals or debasing themselves in the name of culture wars.

💯 to this specifically.

Someone else on here who is right-leaning said their red-lines for supporting a candidate were (sic) "transing teens, CRT in the military, and vaccine mandates." Lol, my man, those are incredibly niche issues if you ask me and really small potatoes in terms of your big-ticket items.

My top policies when looking for Democratic candidates in a primary in particular, and at general election candidates overall, are continued broad & deep economic growth, accelerating the transition to clean American-made energy and related technologies, maintaining the U.S. as a leader in international affairs with both hard & soft power, and making our healthcare system work both better and cheaper for all Americans.

IMHO comparable topics on the right might be keeping taxes & regulations low and streamlined, reforming/limiting immigration and ensuring tight border security, reducing the national debt, and maintaining a strong and generously-funded military.

So much of this culture war BS is just so small and inconsequential compared to the issues above and I can't bring myself to give more than half a shit about any of it. And yes people on the left do it too...needless focus on race over any other topic, trying to push non-mainstream gender and sexual norms on society at large, etc. etc. None of us should be wasting so much of our breathe on this small-ball and I'd happily go back to the days of debating about the tax & spending plans of Mitt Romney vs Barack Obama, which trust me I heavily overindulged in 😅

Edited December 5, 2022 by nsplayr

[RASH]

 to this specifically.
Someone else on here who is right-leaning said their red-lines for supporting a candidate were (sic) "transing teens, CRT in the military, and vaccine mandates." Lol, my man, those are incredibly niche issues if you ask me and really small potatoes in terms of your big-ticket items.
My top policies when looking for Democratic candidates in a primary in particular, and at general election candidates overall, are continued broad & deep economic growth, accelerating the transition to clean American-made energy and related technologies, maintaining the U.S. as a leader in international affairs with both hard & soft power, and making our healthcare system work both better and cheaper for all Americans.
IMHO comparable topics on the right might be keeping taxes & regulations low and streamlined, reforming/limiting immigration and ensuring tight border security, reducing the national debt, and maintaining a strong and generously-funded military.
So much of this culture war BS is just so small and inconsequential compared to the issues above and I can't bring myself to give more than half a shit about any of it. And yes people on the left do it too...needless focus on race over any other topic, trying to push non-mainstream gender and sexual norms on society at large, etc. etc. None of us should be wasting so much of our breathe on this small-ball and I'd happily go back to the days of debating about the tax & spending plans of Mitt Romney vs Barack Obama, which trust me I heavily overindulged in 

When you two are done giving each other a reach-around…


Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network mobile app

[O Face]

1 hour ago, nsplayr said:

My top policies when looking for Democratic candidates in a primary in particular, and at general election candidates overall, are continued broad & deep economic growth, accelerating the transition to clean American-made energy and related technologies, maintaining the U.S. as a leader in international affairs with both hard & soft power, and making our healthcare system work both better and cheaper for all Americans.

You must be exhausted looking for someone, with a (D) after their name, who makes any of those policies a priority.  How do you even mine that information out of a candidate who’s party has been tirelessly combatting the horrific racism of daylight savings time, ensuring their neighbors, in the PTA, are on terrorist watch lists, and isn’t hopelessly perplexed by the complexities of X and Y chromosomes??