Trump's most vile comments about veterans confirmed by former Chief of Staff, John Kelly

[AU9377 6,122]

The 73-year-old Kelly told CNN that Trump is “a person that thinks those who defend their country in uniform, or are shot down or seriously wounded in combat, or spend years being tortured as POWs are all ‘suckers’ because ‘there is nothing in it for them.’”

How people can support this man is beyond rational explanation.

 

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2023/10/03/trump-insulted-vets-in-private-former-chief-of-staff-kelly-confirms/

[TexasTiger 14,528]

6 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

The 73-year-old Kelly told CNN that Trump is “a person that thinks those who defend their country in uniform, or are shot down or seriously wounded in combat, or spend years being tortured as POWs are all ‘suckers’ because ‘there is nothing in it for them.’”

How people can support this man is beyond rational explanation.

 

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2023/10/03/trump-insulted-vets-in-private-former-chief-of-staff-kelly-confirms/

Too bad most Republicans don’t really give a damn about veterans, our troops or democratic governance. Before Trump I at least thought they were sincere about those things. Nope. Blind fealty to a godless narcissist. Still stunning to me.

[I_M4_AU 9,069]

 

 

Suddenly after three years, a number of angry former Trump appointees—some on the prompt of potential or real book promotions, or in anger about firings, or their own legal exposure—are replaying all the supposedly atrocious things Trump said in private to them between 2017-21. If, in fact, they are accurate, then by all means they were certainly atrocious things to have said even in private—and should never have been spoken by a president. But what is mysterious about their outrage are three other considerations that we hear nothing about from such now quite public critics:

1) Is there not a difference between atrocious bluster in private and public, methodical weaponization and destruction of our institutions?

Can such critics at least say they deplore the weaponization of the FBI (e.g., the contracting of old Twitter to suppress the news, the admitted lying under oath of its interim director Andrew McCabe, the convenient “amnesia” on 245 occasions of James Comey while under oath, and the bureau’s current fixation with parents at school board meetings, traditional Catholics and pro-life activists)?

Or the corruption of our intelligence officials who were knee-deep in the fraud of “51 former intelligence authorities" who willingly lied, on the prompt of the current secretary of state, about a laptop—deliberately so to influence a presidential debate and election?

Or the entire collusion hoax that was hatched by the Clinton campaign, with help from the FBI, DOJ, and CIA?

Or consider two of our top intelligence officials who lied admittedly under oath, such as Brennan and Clapper? Does not all that pose a danger to democracy?

Or the politicalization of the DOJ that was ready to exempt, save a brave dissenting judge, Hunter Biden and by extension the Biden clan from real legal jeopardy. Was it not wrong in 2020 for retired 4-stars officers to attack in venomous terms and publicly their commander-in-chief? If not so, why then is there a statute at all in the uniform code of military justice prohibiting just that?

2) As far as “dangers to the democracy”, cannot some at least cite the radical changes in voting laws done in key states in 2020 under the guise of Covid, or the infusion of $419 million by Mark Zuckerberg to appropriate the work of registrars and voting officials in key states?

Or the “cabal” and “conspiracy” to ensure the Biden 2020 victory as boasted about in stunning detail by liberal Time writer Molly Ball? Who tried to cancel student loans without a vote of congress, or drained a great deal of the strategic petroleum reserve solely to boost approval before the midterms?

Or the 2016 leftwing effort to pressure the electors not to vote according to their constitutional responsibilities and instead throw the election to Clinton?

Can't they at least cite the 120-days of looting, riot, arson, attacks on law enforcement, and deaths that were largely exempt from punishment—violence that included an attempt to storm the White House grounds to get at a president, and the torching of a police precinct, federal courthouse, and iconic DC church?

Or cannot they deplore the 2015-17 macabre threats to Trump’s person by celebrities (beheading, shooting, stabbing, incineration, blowing up, etc.)?

What actually had Trump done in his first moments in office when DC rioters went berserk during the inauguration and Madonna screamed about blowing up the White House?

What had he done in his first few days that prompted ex-Pentagon lawyer Rosa Brooks to write in Foreign Policy (“3 Ways to Get Rid of President Trump Before 2020”) an outline of how to destroy his presidency before it started by either the 25th Amendment, impeachment—or a military coup (cf. also the later August 2020 pre-election letter of retired officers Nagl and Yingling, calling on Gen. Milley to intervene following the election with the 82nd Airborne to remove Trump from office). What had he done in his first few months in office in earn 58 House members voting to impeach him?

3) Who injured the country and the lives of its people more, the 4-years of Donald Trump or the 2.5 years of Joe Biden?

Who engineered the exempt crossing of 8-million illegal entrants that will have repercussions for decades? Who has been largely silent about nearly 100,000 annual fentanyl deaths and the direct role of an open border in them?

Who engineered the disastrous and deadly flight from Kabul, timed for the narcissistic public stunt of a cheap 20th-anniversary triumph celebration of 9/11—according to The Washington Post?

Who called the accidental killing of 10 civilians during the Kabul mess a “righteous strike”, or phoned his PLA counterpart to warn about his own commander in chief, or unlawfully hijacked the chain of command?

Who spiked fuel prices, interest rates, and inflation that have caused untold misery to millions of Americans? Who is silent about the destruction of the criminal code in our major cities that has helped unleash an unprecedented crime wave?

That list of current catastrophes that go unnoticed could be expanded. So yes, if these recent accusations about crude and cruel Trump private conversations are true, then let us all deplore what Donald Trump said in private to his closest aides and appointees.

But let us also consider that those who voice these expressions of outrage seem to stay silent about the concrete damage to our institutions and country that was neither rhetorical nor spontaneous—but all too real and planned.

[auburnatl1 6,307]

44 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

 

 

Suddenly after three years, a number of angry former Trump appointees—some on the prompt of potential or real book promotions, or in anger about firings, or their own legal exposure—are replaying all the supposedly atrocious things Trump said in private to them between 2017-21. If, in fact, they are accurate, then by all means they were certainly atrocious things to have said even in private—and should never have been spoken by a president. But what is mysterious about their outrage are three other considerations that we hear nothing about from such now quite public critics:

1) Is there not a difference between atrocious bluster in private and public, methodical weaponization and destruction of our institutions?

Can such critics at least say they deplore the weaponization of the FBI (e.g., the contracting of old Twitter to suppress the news, the admitted lying under oath of its interim director Andrew McCabe, the convenient “amnesia” on 245 occasions of James Comey while under oath, and the bureau’s current fixation with parents at school board meetings, traditional Catholics and pro-life activists)?

Or the corruption of our intelligence officials who were knee-deep in the fraud of “51 former intelligence authorities" who willingly lied, on the prompt of the current secretary of state, about a laptop—deliberately so to influence a presidential debate and election?

Or the entire collusion hoax that was hatched by the Clinton campaign, with help from the FBI, DOJ, and CIA?

Or consider two of our top intelligence officials who lied admittedly under oath, such as Brennan and Clapper? Does not all that pose a danger to democracy?

Or the politicalization of the DOJ that was ready to exempt, save a brave dissenting judge, Hunter Biden and by extension the Biden clan from real legal jeopardy. Was it not wrong in 2020 for retired 4-stars officers to attack in venomous terms and publicly their commander-in-chief? If not so, why then is there a statute at all in the uniform code of military justice prohibiting just that?

2) As far as “dangers to the democracy”, cannot some at least cite the radical changes in voting laws done in key states in 2020 under the guise of Covid, or the infusion of $419 million by Mark Zuckerberg to appropriate the work of registrars and voting officials in key states?

Or the “cabal” and “conspiracy” to ensure the Biden 2020 victory as boasted about in stunning detail by liberal Time writer Molly Ball? Who tried to cancel student loans without a vote of congress, or drained a great deal of the strategic petroleum reserve solely to boost approval before the midterms?

Or the 2016 leftwing effort to pressure the electors not to vote according to their constitutional responsibilities and instead throw the election to Clinton?

Can't they at least cite the 120-days of looting, riot, arson, attacks on law enforcement, and deaths that were largely exempt from punishment—violence that included an attempt to storm the White House grounds to get at a president, and the torching of a police precinct, federal courthouse, and iconic DC church?

Or cannot they deplore the 2015-17 macabre threats to Trump’s person by celebrities (beheading, shooting, stabbing, incineration, blowing up, etc.)?

What actually had Trump done in his first moments in office when DC rioters went berserk during the inauguration and Madonna screamed about blowing up the White House?

What had he done in his first few days that prompted ex-Pentagon lawyer Rosa Brooks to write in Foreign Policy (“3 Ways to Get Rid of President Trump Before 2020”) an outline of how to destroy his presidency before it started by either the 25th Amendment, impeachment—or a military coup (cf. also the later August 2020 pre-election letter of retired officers Nagl and Yingling, calling on Gen. Milley to intervene following the election with the 82nd Airborne to remove Trump from office). What had he done in his first few months in office in earn 58 House members voting to impeach him?

3) Who injured the country and the lives of its people more, the 4-years of Donald Trump or the 2.5 years of Joe Biden?

Who engineered the exempt crossing of 8-million illegal entrants that will have repercussions for decades? Who has been largely silent about nearly 100,000 annual fentanyl deaths and the direct role of an open border in them?

Who engineered the disastrous and deadly flight from Kabul, timed for the narcissistic public stunt of a cheap 20th-anniversary triumph celebration of 9/11—according to The Washington Post?

Who called the accidental killing of 10 civilians during the Kabul mess a “righteous strike”, or phoned his PLA counterpart to warn about his own commander in chief, or unlawfully hijacked the chain of command?

Who spiked fuel prices, interest rates, and inflation that have caused untold misery to millions of Americans? Who is silent about the destruction of the criminal code in our major cities that has helped unleash an unprecedented crime wave?

That list of current catastrophes that go unnoticed could be expanded. So yes, if these recent accusations about crude and cruel Trump private conversations are true, then let us all deplore what Donald Trump said in private to his closest aides and appointees.

But let us also consider that those who voice these expressions of outrage seem to stay silent about the concrete damage to our institutions and country that was neither rhetorical nor spontaneous—but all too real and planned.

At a pure policy level I probably agreed with the trump admin more than bidens. Which isn’t saying much (ie he was a historic disaster on the deficit). But candidly trump isn’t about policy.  People need to really think and stop rationalizing. As was said before - he literally deplores those that make up his own base. He’s an obvious manipulator that believes in nothing, everything is conspiracy, and is dangerous in ways we can’t even see yet (plus he’ll be in revenge mode).  This is a very very dark guy. Those that vote for trump will own the consequences. And should be smart enough to know better.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

I still cannot believe that John Kelly took his career of service and duty to the COUNTRY and,,, flushed it down the toilet for a single, self serving individual.

Just another case of honor and integrity taking a backseat to blind ambition.

[AU9377 6,122]

54 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

 

 

Suddenly after three years, a number of angry former Trump appointees—some on the prompt of potential or real book promotions, or in anger about firings, or their own legal exposure—are replaying all the supposedly atrocious things Trump said in private to them between 2017-21. If, in fact, they are accurate, then by all means they were certainly atrocious things to have said even in private—and should never have been spoken by a president. But what is mysterious about their outrage are three other considerations that we hear nothing about from such now quite public critics:

1) Is there not a difference between atrocious bluster in private and public, methodical weaponization and destruction of our institutions?

Can such critics at least say they deplore the weaponization of the FBI (e.g., the contracting of old Twitter to suppress the news, the admitted lying under oath of its interim director Andrew McCabe, the convenient “amnesia” on 245 occasions of James Comey while under oath, and the bureau’s current fixation with parents at school board meetings, traditional Catholics and pro-life activists)?

Or the corruption of our intelligence officials who were knee-deep in the fraud of “51 former intelligence authorities" who willingly lied, on the prompt of the current secretary of state, about a laptop—deliberately so to influence a presidential debate and election?

Or the entire collusion hoax that was hatched by the Clinton campaign, with help from the FBI, DOJ, and CIA?

Or consider two of our top intelligence officials who lied admittedly under oath, such as Brennan and Clapper? Does not all that pose a danger to democracy?

Or the politicalization of the DOJ that was ready to exempt, save a brave dissenting judge, Hunter Biden and by extension the Biden clan from real legal jeopardy. Was it not wrong in 2020 for retired 4-stars officers to attack in venomous terms and publicly their commander-in-chief? If not so, why then is there a statute at all in the uniform code of military justice prohibiting just that?

2) As far as “dangers to the democracy”, cannot some at least cite the radical changes in voting laws done in key states in 2020 under the guise of Covid, or the infusion of $419 million by Mark Zuckerberg to appropriate the work of registrars and voting officials in key states?

Or the “cabal” and “conspiracy” to ensure the Biden 2020 victory as boasted about in stunning detail by liberal Time writer Molly Ball? Who tried to cancel student loans without a vote of congress, or drained a great deal of the strategic petroleum reserve solely to boost approval before the midterms?

Or the 2016 leftwing effort to pressure the electors not to vote according to their constitutional responsibilities and instead throw the election to Clinton?

Can't they at least cite the 120-days of looting, riot, arson, attacks on law enforcement, and deaths that were largely exempt from punishment—violence that included an attempt to storm the White House grounds to get at a president, and the torching of a police precinct, federal courthouse, and iconic DC church?

Or cannot they deplore the 2015-17 macabre threats to Trump’s person by celebrities (beheading, shooting, stabbing, incineration, blowing up, etc.)?

What actually had Trump done in his first moments in office when DC rioters went berserk during the inauguration and Madonna screamed about blowing up the White House?

What had he done in his first few days that prompted ex-Pentagon lawyer Rosa Brooks to write in Foreign Policy (“3 Ways to Get Rid of President Trump Before 2020”) an outline of how to destroy his presidency before it started by either the 25th Amendment, impeachment—or a military coup (cf. also the later August 2020 pre-election letter of retired officers Nagl and Yingling, calling on Gen. Milley to intervene following the election with the 82nd Airborne to remove Trump from office). What had he done in his first few months in office in earn 58 House members voting to impeach him?

3) Who injured the country and the lives of its people more, the 4-years of Donald Trump or the 2.5 years of Joe Biden?

Who engineered the exempt crossing of 8-million illegal entrants that will have repercussions for decades? Who has been largely silent about nearly 100,000 annual fentanyl deaths and the direct role of an open border in them?

Who engineered the disastrous and deadly flight from Kabul, timed for the narcissistic public stunt of a cheap 20th-anniversary triumph celebration of 9/11—according to The Washington Post?

Who called the accidental killing of 10 civilians during the Kabul mess a “righteous strike”, or phoned his PLA counterpart to warn about his own commander in chief, or unlawfully hijacked the chain of command?

Who spiked fuel prices, interest rates, and inflation that have caused untold misery to millions of Americans? Who is silent about the destruction of the criminal code in our major cities that has helped unleash an unprecedented crime wave?

That list of current catastrophes that go unnoticed could be expanded. So yes, if these recent accusations about crude and cruel Trump private conversations are true, then let us all deplore what Donald Trump said in private to his closest aides and appointees.

But let us also consider that those who voice these expressions of outrage seem to stay silent about the concrete damage to our institutions and country that was neither rhetorical nor spontaneous—but all too real and planned.

This is nothing more than unrelated and half truth (at best) attempt to excuse or rationalize the actions of a self centered entitled coward that enjoys the support of a cult following.  How many respected decorated U.S. Generals have to warn that the man is unfit before half the Republican party decides they should listen?  Instead of considering the warnings of those closest to the man, the cult throws them to the side and assualts their character, while ignoring the character of the man they worship.

[auburnatl1 6,307]

1 minute ago, AU9377 said:

This is nothing more than unrelated and half truth (at best) attempt to excuse or rationalize the actions of a self centered entitled coward that enjoys the support of a cult following.  How many respected decorated U.S. Generals have to warn that the man is unfit before half the Republican party decides they should listen?  Instead of considering the warnings of those closest to the man, the cult throws them to the side and assualts their character, while ignoring the character of the man they worship.

Many magas are evangelicals (which really hurts my head) but speaking in their language - Trump is 666 kinda stuff.  Literally - I encourage a book of Revelations revisit. I apologize for the shock comment - but wake up.  This is a situation where human nature gets self-destructive creepy.

[I_M4_AU 9,069]

23 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

At a pure policy level I probably agreed with the trump admin more than bidens. Which isn’t saying much (ie he was a historic disaster on the deficit). But candidly trump isn’t about policy.  People need to really think and stop rationalizing. As was said before - he literally deplores those that make up his own base. He’s an obvious manipulator that believes in nothing, everything is conspiracy, and is dangerous in ways we can’t even see yet (plus he’ll be in revenge mode).  This is a very very dark guy. Those that vote for trump will own the consequences. And should be smart enough to know better.

This is a big part of why I believe he won’t win the general election because he is driven by revenge and not what is good for the country.  The question is will the primary voters realize this.

[I_M4_AU 9,069]

17 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

This is nothing more than unrelated and half truth (at best) attempt to excuse or rationalize the actions of a self centered entitled coward that enjoys the support of a cult following.  How many respected decorated U.S. Generals have to warn that the man is unfit before half the Republican party decides they should listen?  Instead of considering the warnings of those closest to the man, the cult throws them to the side and assualts their character, while ignoring the character of the man they worship.

You must have missed this part:

”But let us also consider that those who voice these expressions of outrage seem to stay silent about the concrete damage to our institutions and country that was neither rhetorical nor spontaneous—but all too real and planned.”

You fit this to a “T”.

[homersapien 12,328]

2 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

....He’s an obvious manipulator that believes in nothing, everything is conspiracy, and is dangerous in ways we can’t even see yet (plus he’ll be in revenge mode).  This is a very very dark guy. Those that vote for trump will own the consequences. And should be smart enough to know better.

But if Trump is reelected, the country and democracy will pay the consequences.

(And has Victor Davis Hansen always been that crazy? )

Edited October 4, 2023 by homersapien

[AU9377 6,122]

2 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

Many magas are evangelicals (which really hurts my head) but speaking in their language - Trump is 666 kinda stuff.  Literally - I encourage a book of Revelations revisit. I apologize for the shock comment - but wake up.  This is a situation where human nature gets self-destructive creepy.

You are not wrong....

[AU9377 6,122]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

You must have missed this part:

”But let us also consider that those who voice these expressions of outrage seem to stay silent about the concrete damage to our institutions and country that was neither rhetorical nor spontaneous—but all too real and planned.”

You fit this to a “T”.

There is one camp that has undertaken the mantra of wanting to destroy our institutions.  They want this not out of desire to correct some out of control bureaucracy, but simply because those institutions refuse to cater to their demands. 

[Gowebb11 10,042]

There are basically three sets of perspectives on Trump by now:

Those of us who recognized how bat crap crazy, immoral, and dangerous he is

Those who know that but are more interested on whataboutism than admitting it

The equally crazy, unhinged, and dangerous people like Marjorie Taylor Green who adore his lunacy and immorality and have adopted him as their cult Leader. For them he can commit any evil deed or say any terrible thing and still be worshipped by them.  
 

His disdain for veterans is just another example of how unfit he is to be a leader at any level much less President. But it may happen (again)

Edited October 4, 2023 by Gowebb11

[alanevans 290]

4 hours ago, AU9377 said:

This is nothing more than unrelated and half truth (at best) attempt to excuse or rationalize the actions of a self centered entitled coward that enjoys the support of a cult following.  How many respected decorated U.S. Generals have to warn that the man is unfit before half the Republican party decides they should listen?  Instead of considering the warnings of those closest to the man, the cult throws them to the side and assualts their character, while ignoring the character of the man they worship.

What do you expect? Consider the source!

(primary and secondary)

[TexasTiger 14,528]

5 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

 

 

Suddenly after three years, a number of angry former Trump appointees—some on the prompt of potential or real book promotions, or in anger about firings, or their own legal exposure—are replaying all the supposedly atrocious things Trump said in private to them between 2017-21. If, in fact, they are accurate, then by all means they were certainly atrocious things to have said even in private—and should never have been spoken by a president. But what is mysterious about their outrage are three other considerations that we hear nothing about from such now quite public critics:

1) Is there not a difference between atrocious bluster in private and public, methodical weaponization and destruction of our institutions?

Can such critics at least say they deplore the weaponization of the FBI (e.g., the contracting of old Twitter to suppress the news, the admitted lying under oath of its interim director Andrew McCabe, the convenient “amnesia” on 245 occasions of James Comey while under oath, and the bureau’s current fixation with parents at school board meetings, traditional Catholics and pro-life activists)?

Or the corruption of our intelligence officials who were knee-deep in the fraud of “51 former intelligence authorities" who willingly lied, on the prompt of the current secretary of state, about a laptop—deliberately so to influence a presidential debate and election?

Or the entire collusion hoax that was hatched by the Clinton campaign, with help from the FBI, DOJ, and CIA?

Or consider two of our top intelligence officials who lied admittedly under oath, such as Brennan and Clapper? Does not all that pose a danger to democracy?

Or the politicalization of the DOJ that was ready to exempt, save a brave dissenting judge, Hunter Biden and by extension the Biden clan from real legal jeopardy. Was it not wrong in 2020 for retired 4-stars officers to attack in venomous terms and publicly their commander-in-chief? If not so, why then is there a statute at all in the uniform code of military justice prohibiting just that?

2) As far as “dangers to the democracy”, cannot some at least cite the radical changes in voting laws done in key states in 2020 under the guise of Covid, or the infusion of $419 million by Mark Zuckerberg to appropriate the work of registrars and voting officials in key states?

Or the “cabal” and “conspiracy” to ensure the Biden 2020 victory as boasted about in stunning detail by liberal Time writer Molly Ball? Who tried to cancel student loans without a vote of congress, or drained a great deal of the strategic petroleum reserve solely to boost approval before the midterms?

Or the 2016 leftwing effort to pressure the electors not to vote according to their constitutional responsibilities and instead throw the election to Clinton?

Can't they at least cite the 120-days of looting, riot, arson, attacks on law enforcement, and deaths that were largely exempt from punishment—violence that included an attempt to storm the White House grounds to get at a president, and the torching of a police precinct, federal courthouse, and iconic DC church?

Or cannot they deplore the 2015-17 macabre threats to Trump’s person by celebrities (beheading, shooting, stabbing, incineration, blowing up, etc.)?

What actually had Trump done in his first moments in office when DC rioters went berserk during the inauguration and Madonna screamed about blowing up the White House?

What had he done in his first few days that prompted ex-Pentagon lawyer Rosa Brooks to write in Foreign Policy (“3 Ways to Get Rid of President Trump Before 2020”) an outline of how to destroy his presidency before it started by either the 25th Amendment, impeachment—or a military coup (cf. also the later August 2020 pre-election letter of retired officers Nagl and Yingling, calling on Gen. Milley to intervene following the election with the 82nd Airborne to remove Trump from office). What had he done in his first few months in office in earn 58 House members voting to impeach him?

3) Who injured the country and the lives of its people more, the 4-years of Donald Trump or the 2.5 years of Joe Biden?

Who engineered the exempt crossing of 8-million illegal entrants that will have repercussions for decades? Who has been largely silent about nearly 100,000 annual fentanyl deaths and the direct role of an open border in them?

Who engineered the disastrous and deadly flight from Kabul, timed for the narcissistic public stunt of a cheap 20th-anniversary triumph celebration of 9/11—according to The Washington Post?

Who called the accidental killing of 10 civilians during the Kabul mess a “righteous strike”, or phoned his PLA counterpart to warn about his own commander in chief, or unlawfully hijacked the chain of command?

Who spiked fuel prices, interest rates, and inflation that have caused untold misery to millions of Americans? Who is silent about the destruction of the criminal code in our major cities that has helped unleash an unprecedented crime wave?

That list of current catastrophes that go unnoticed could be expanded. So yes, if these recent accusations about crude and cruel Trump private conversations are true, then let us all deplore what Donald Trump said in private to his closest aides and appointees.

But let us also consider that those who voice these expressions of outrage seem to stay silent about the concrete damage to our institutions and country that was neither rhetorical nor spontaneous—but all too real and planned.

Here’s how you’re Trump’s buddy. You can’t stand to let any criticism of him just stand on it’s on. You have to diminish it somehow, usually through deflection.

[I_M4_AU 9,069]

2 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Here’s how you’re Trump’s buddy. You can’t stand to let any criticism of him just stand on it’s on. You have to diminish it somehow, usually through deflection.

It’s more like trying to tell the other side of the story.  No one here is going to do it, you guys have posted the most obscene crap with no rebuttals as if it is the only view of him.  It’s not.

[I_M4_AU 9,069]

4 hours ago, AU9377 said:

There is one camp that has undertaken the mantra of wanting to destroy our institutions.  They want this not out of desire to correct some out of control bureaucracy, but simply because those institutions refuse to cater to their demands. 

You are describing the radical left.

[auburnatl1 6,307]

17 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

You are describing the radical left.

The radical left I find dangerous as well. On policy.  On ideas, inaction, or incompetence (ie the border). But again, it is no longer possible to defend trump regarding policy-  there are Republican alternatives to trump that are not morally bankrupt - it’s gone way past that. This is simply a cult and trump is the preacher. And anything that challenges the cult is fake.  Classic. Jim Jones said exactly the same thing 4 decades ago.

Edited October 5, 2023 by auburnatl1

[I_M4_AU 9,069]

1 minute ago, auburnatl1 said:

The radical left I find dangerous as well. On policy.  On ideas, inaction, or incompetence (ie the border). But again, it is no longer possible to defend trump regarding policy-  there are Republican alternatives to trump that are not morally bankrupt - it’s fine past that. This is simply a cult and trump is the preacher. And anything that challenges the cult is fake.  Classic. Jim Jones said exactly the same thing 4 decades ago.

You will find no argument with me here, I am hoping an alternative will capture the nomination and put Trump out to pasture.

[auburnatl1 6,307]

8 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

You will find no argument with me here, I am hoping an alternative will capture the nomination and put Trump out to pasture.

My 2 cents. I am a life long Republican, and I find Trump much more uniquely dangerous than Biden/ Bernie/ Progressivism. Especially if congress provides  balance. Policy can be undone, the kind of permanent divisive damage trump will do can not.

[TexasTiger 14,528]

15 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

My 2 cents. I am a life long Republican, and I find Trump much more uniquely dangerous than Biden/ Bernie/ Progressivism. Especially if congress provides  balance. Policy can be undone, the kind of permanent divisive damage trump will do can not.

Thousand times this. Trump will burn it down with no remorse.

[auburnatl1 6,307]

5 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Thousand times this.

I also think the left has tried to push the country to far, too fast.  Still is. The culture wars, individual rights attacks (guns, masks, shots), the inaction on the border, ect. I do think in many cases the left meant well (in some less so), but democracies (societies) need gentle evolution (fdr needed an end of times Great Depression to enact major change). Baby steps. Go too fast, and you get … this. Immune system militant chaos.  And it could get worse. Again, moderates are the answer for now. I could be wrong, but I’m not. Btw the progressive wonders of the “European model” is about to reap the same thing if they don’t moderate.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2023-09-11/far-right-parties-are-gaining-traction-across-europe?embedded-checkout=true

[TexasTiger 14,528]

26 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

I also think the left has tried to push the country to far, too fast.  Still is. The culture wars, individual rights attacks (guns, masks, shots), the inaction on the border, ect. I do think in many cases the left meant well (in some less so), but democracies (societies) need gentle evolution (fdr needed an end of times Great Depression to enact major change). Baby steps. Go too fast, and you get … this. Immune system militant chaos.  And it could get worse. Again, moderates are the answer for now. I could be wrong, but I’m not. Btw the progressive wonders of the “European model” is about to reap the same thing if they don’t moderate.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2023-09-11/far-right-parties-are-gaining-traction-across-europe?embedded-checkout=true

Masks and shots were not originally left or right. The “European Model” is not the issue. The biggest force driving the right is immigration.

[auburnatl1 6,307]

3 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Masks and shots were not originally left or right. The “European Model” is not the issue. The biggest force driving the right is immigration.

 

6 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Masks and shots were not originally left or right. The “European Model” is not the issue. The biggest force driving the right is immigration.

I agree but it’s more than that. For example

https://ieres.elliott.gwu.edu/project/the-european-far-right-since-covid-19/

[TexasTiger 14,528]

1 hour ago, auburnatl1 said:

 

I agree but it’s more than that. For example

https://ieres.elliott.gwu.edu/project/the-european-far-right-since-covid-19/

What are the primary drivers you see?