Author Topic: Changes under Trump 2.0  (Read 188610 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

L33Tg33k

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 5984
  • Rep: 862
  • F.A.P. - Forever Alone Party
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #750 on: March 15, 2025, 05:28:27 PM »
President Musk is coming after the post office. DeJoy quit with a final fuck you to all the employees by sucking Elmo’s little dick. Possibly 10,000 will be fired when we’re already short staffed. Cool.
Before you say the music sucked, have you considered shutting the fuck up?

TastyBurrito

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 3199
  • Rep: 951
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #751 on: March 15, 2025, 06:32:23 PM »
President Musk is coming after the post office. DeJoy quit with a final fuck you to all the employees by sucking Elmo’s little dick. Possibly 10,000 will be fired when we’re already short staffed. Cool.

And the excuse will be “the mail is unreliable, so we must switch to one day, in-person voting.”

Then watch Democrat heavy areas only get one or two polling locations to service populations of 1,000,000 and more.

Top-Heavy Hookjaw

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 98
  • Rep: 25
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #752 on: March 15, 2025, 07:52:33 PM »

TheLurper

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 4165
  • Rep: 962
  • Bronze Topic Start Bronze Topic Start : Start a topic with over 1,000 replies.

Quote from: ChuckRamone
I love when people bring up world hunger. It makes everything meaningless.
"That guy is double parked."
"Who cares? There are people starving to death! Besides, how does that affect you? Does it lessen the joy of parking?

backside_frontside

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 2011
  • Rep: -380
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #754 on: March 16, 2025, 09:10:40 AM »
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
I was listening to toe rogans with the Andrew Schultz guy and he was saying you guys need somebody to come in and change the democrat party like trump came in and completely changed the Republican and what it means to be one

Makes sense to me cuz you guys are suckin rn I just wanna see everyone do their best
[close]
They had one, his name is Bernie Sanders, and the Dems knee-capped him because it was Hillary’s turn
[close]


I am very pro-Bernie, but I still find it weird that people were shocked the DNC didn’t embrace Bernie.  He’s not a democrat, he’s not in the party, he’s never fundraised or done anything for them, so why do people think the DNC would embrace him over someone who’s been at the top of the leadership for 2 decades, especially after she unexpectedly got pushed aside in 08 (and by extension 2012) when Obama became undeniable.

I don’t disagree with you but I’m just saying the best populist candidate the Dems had was Bernie. Sadly, it doesn’t look like there is another to fill his place and if there is, the Dems will manage to bungle that one too. It sucks

Atiba Applebum

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 20726
  • Rep: 528
  • Slap’s Resident Jeron Wilson!
  • Bronze Topic Start Bronze Topic Start : Start a topic with over 1,000 replies.
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #755 on: March 16, 2025, 09:31:10 AM »
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
I was listening to toe rogans with the Andrew Schultz guy and he was saying you guys need somebody to come in and change the democrat party like trump came in and completely changed the Republican and what it means to be one

Makes sense to me cuz you guys are suckin rn I just wanna see everyone do their best
[close]
They had one, his name is Bernie Sanders, and the Dems knee-capped him because it was Hillary’s turn
[close]


I am very pro-Bernie, but I still find it weird that people were shocked the DNC didn’t embrace Bernie.  He’s not a democrat, he’s not in the party, he’s never fundraised or done anything for them, so why do people think the DNC would embrace him over someone who’s been at the top of the leadership for 2 decades, especially after she unexpectedly got pushed aside in 08 (and by extension 2012) when Obama became undeniable.
[close]

I don’t disagree with you but I’m just saying the best populist candidate the Dems had was Bernie. Sadly, it doesn’t look like there is another to fill his place and if there is, the Dems will manage to bungle that one too. It sucks


My internal debate is always whether a politician should be president or run for senate.   Mayor Pete is apparently eschewing a senate seat for a preS run in 28 which I think is silly.   Bernie was someone I thought was more effective in the senate and didn’t see him being particularly effective in the executive branch unless he started ruling by EO which no one previously had really tried (though the charge was levied against Obama), but everyday since, I just wish we had given it a try at least and seen how republicans would have treated him in the media and how he would have combatted that especially since he wasn’t seen as a blood enemy of the gop like the Clinton’s were.   

sexualhelon

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 1954
  • Rep: 129
  • I'm an ardent supporter of futile causes.
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #756 on: March 16, 2025, 09:50:07 AM »
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
I was listening to toe rogans with the Andrew Schultz guy and he was saying you guys need somebody to come in and change the democrat party like trump came in and completely changed the Republican and what it means to be one

Makes sense to me cuz you guys are suckin rn I just wanna see everyone do their best
[close]
They had one, his name is Bernie Sanders, and the Dems knee-capped him because it was Hillary’s turn
[close]


I am very pro-Bernie, but I still find it weird that people were shocked the DNC didn’t embrace Bernie.  He’s not a democrat, he’s not in the party, he’s never fundraised or done anything for them, so why do people think the DNC would embrace him over someone who’s been at the top of the leadership for 2 decades, especially after she unexpectedly got pushed aside in 08 (and by extension 2012) when Obama became undeniable.
[close]


I don’t disagree with you but I’m just saying the best populist candidate the Dems had was Bernie. Sadly, it doesn’t look like there is another to fill his place and if there is, the Dems will manage to bungle that one too. It sucks
[close]


My internal debate is always whether a politician should be president or run for senate.   Mayor Pete is apparently eschewing a senate seat for a preS run in 28 which I think is silly.   Bernie was someone I thought was more effective in the senate and didn’t see him being particularly effective in the executive branch unless he started ruling by EO which no one previously had really tried (though the charge was levied against Obama), but everyday since, I just wish we had given it a try at least and seen how republicans would have treated him in the media and how he would have combatted that especially since he wasn’t seen as a blood enemy of the gop like the Clinton’s were.

I'm a Bernie fan, happy that he's still being vocal about things now. I will say that he was kind of a pushover during that DNC scandal. The email leaks had allegations of bias against his presidential campaign that contradicted the DNC leaderships publicly stated neutrality. DNC operatives openly derided his campaign and were trying to advance Clinton's. There were some other allegations on how they were colluding against him. It was a bummer to see how he seemed like a pushover and just dropped out, supported Hilary. Not sure what he really could have done.

I don't remember for certain but it seems like he wasn't as vocal for a while after that? And also pretty quiet during the Biden presidency? It's not like the core issues have changed but it certainly seems like they should have been going harder to prevent this from happening when they had Biden in office.

Willie

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 4140
  • Rep: 454
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #757 on: March 16, 2025, 12:09:06 PM »
The idea of Mayor Pete being the next presidential candidate is batshit stupid and if he himself doesn’t perceive that I have a lot less respect for him.

This might be shallow and glib but the next Democratic presidential candidate should be a handsome, straight, male. Possibly Latino. Possibly George Clooney. Only a woman if extremely hot.

It’s basically a high school student council election and democrats need to treat it thusly.

Mongo Lloyd

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 2414
  • Rep: -270
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #758 on: March 16, 2025, 12:11:30 PM »
No thanks to Pete, that guy is literally a corporate plant. He’s basically been groomed by the establishment.

Atiba Applebum

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 20726
  • Rep: 528
  • Slap’s Resident Jeron Wilson!
  • Bronze Topic Start Bronze Topic Start : Start a topic with over 1,000 replies.
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #759 on: March 16, 2025, 12:21:27 PM »
The idea of Mayor Pete being the next presidential candidate is batshit stupid and if he himself doesn’t perceive that I have a lot less respect for him.

This might be shallow and glib but the next Democratic presidential candidate should be a handsome, straight, male. Possibly Latino. Possibly George Clooney. Only a woman if extremely hot.

It’s basically a high school student council election and democrats need to treat it thusly.


Gavin Newsom says hi

pugmaster

  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 4480
  • Rep: 2426
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #760 on: March 16, 2025, 06:37:17 PM »
Jon Stewart and The Rock.

There is no way in hell they would lose.
Never forget:
Rusty_Berrings, 360 frip, Yapple Dapple, Bubblegum Tate, Marc Johnson

fakie nollie

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 3403
  • Rep: 1358
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #761 on: March 16, 2025, 06:48:55 PM »
J-Rock, with J-ROC as campaign manager. Knowhatimsayin’

backside_frontside

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 2011
  • Rep: -380
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #762 on: March 16, 2025, 07:02:07 PM »
Expand Quote
The idea of Mayor Pete being the next presidential candidate is batshit stupid and if he himself doesn’t perceive that I have a lot less respect for him.

This might be shallow and glib but the next Democratic presidential candidate should be a handsome, straight, male. Possibly Latino. Possibly George Clooney. Only a woman if extremely hot.

It’s basically a high school student council election and democrats need to treat it thusly.
[close]


Gavin Newsom says hi
He's the definition of the coastal elite Dem

Atiba Applebum

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 20726
  • Rep: 528
  • Slap’s Resident Jeron Wilson!
  • Bronze Topic Start Bronze Topic Start : Start a topic with over 1,000 replies.
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #763 on: March 16, 2025, 07:24:23 PM »
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
The idea of Mayor Pete being the next presidential candidate is batshit stupid and if he himself doesn’t perceive that I have a lot less respect for him.

This might be shallow and glib but the next Democratic presidential candidate should be a handsome, straight, male. Possibly Latino. Possibly George Clooney. Only a woman if extremely hot.

It’s basically a high school student council election and democrats need to treat it thusly.
[close]


Gavin Newsom says hi
[close]
He's the definition of the coastal elite Dem

I was saying him in response to:  Handsome, straight white male

I thought favorably of him before this podcasting mishegoss, but he has been no stranger with going on Fox and debating the Right and coming out looking good.   I’m sure if he had any real boogeymen in his past, Kim Guilfoyle would have said something by now. 

But he also feels like going back to the late 00s model of a politician - you got Romney in my Obama, you got Obama in my Romney - which isn’t ideal.   But who even knows what America looks like in 2028 to decide who emcompasses the fix needed

Mr. Pickles

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
  • Rep: 84
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #764 on: March 16, 2025, 08:11:25 PM »
It’s cute that you guys think we’re ever having national elections again.

Sedition

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 2495
  • Rep: 1510
  • Fuck the revoltion. Bring on the apocalypse.
  • Bronze Topic Start Bronze Topic Start : Start a topic with over 1,000 replies.
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #765 on: March 16, 2025, 08:45:43 PM »
I love these stories. We need more of them.


He voted for Trump. Now his wife sits in an ICE detention center.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2025/03/16/mass-deportation-ice-detains-non-criminals/82304354007/
"When life goes bad, make it go wronger"  -Gerwer

Billy Bitchcakes

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 2548
  • Rep: 713
  • Q U I T E S T Y L I S H
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #766 on: March 17, 2025, 08:05:09 AM »
I mean it's funny but I'd rather there was justice against the people doing the deporting personally

Willie

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 4140
  • Rep: 454
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #767 on: March 17, 2025, 08:35:14 AM »
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
The idea of Mayor Pete being the next presidential candidate is batshit stupid and if he himself doesn’t perceive that I have a lot less respect for him.

This might be shallow and glib but the next Democratic presidential candidate should be a handsome, straight, male. Possibly Latino. Possibly George Clooney. Only a woman if extremely hot.

It’s basically a high school student council election and democrats need to treat it thusly.
[close]


Gavin Newsom says hi
[close]
He's the definition of the coastal elite Dem
[close]

I was saying him in response to:  Handsome, straight white male

I thought favorably of him before this podcasting mishegoss, but he has been no stranger with going on Fox and debating the Right and coming out looking good.   I’m sure if he had any real boogeymen in his past, Kim Guilfoyle would have said something by now. 

But he also feels like going back to the late 00s model of a politician - you got Romney in my Obama, you got Obama in my Romney - which isn’t ideal.   But who even knows what America looks like in 2028 to decide who emcompasses the fix needed

I like Newsome and think he’s good on his feet during interviews and debates but he definitely fits the “coastal elite” mold to a T and carries too much California baggage.

So yeah, someone of that ilk but maybe from a red or purple state, possibly a veteran or from business/medicine, and who could plausibly change engine oil or do manual labor. Is that too much to ask?!?

Atiba Applebum

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 20726
  • Rep: 528
  • Slap’s Resident Jeron Wilson!
  • Bronze Topic Start Bronze Topic Start : Start a topic with over 1,000 replies.
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #768 on: March 17, 2025, 09:11:24 AM »
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
The idea of Mayor Pete being the next presidential candidate is batshit stupid and if he himself doesn’t perceive that I have a lot less respect for him.

This might be shallow and glib but the next Democratic presidential candidate should be a handsome, straight, male. Possibly Latino. Possibly George Clooney. Only a woman if extremely hot.

It’s basically a high school student council election and democrats need to treat it thusly.
[close]


Gavin Newsom says hi
[close]
He's the definition of the coastal elite Dem
[close]

I was saying him in response to:  Handsome, straight white male

I thought favorably of him before this podcasting mishegoss, but he has been no stranger with going on Fox and debating the Right and coming out looking good.   I’m sure if he had any real boogeymen in his past, Kim Guilfoyle would have said something by now. 

But he also feels like going back to the late 00s model of a politician - you got Romney in my Obama, you got Obama in my Romney - which isn’t ideal.   But who even knows what America looks like in 2028 to decide who emcompasses the fix needed
[close]

I like Newsome and think he’s good on his feet during interviews and debates but he definitely fits the “coastal elite” mold to a T and carries too much California baggage.

So yeah, someone of that ilk but maybe from a red or purple state, possibly a veteran or from business/medicine, and who could plausibly change engine oil or do manual labor. Is that too much to ask?!?


So straight Mayor Pete without corp baggage

Just learned he never tailors his suits to be more of an “Everyman”

DaleSr

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 4270
  • Rep: 1364
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #769 on: March 21, 2025, 10:25:07 PM »
Pritzker should be one to watch, but none of that matters with the current crisis and extraordinary renditions happening all over.

I, John Brown, am now quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away but with blood. I had, as I now think, vainly flattered myself that without very much bloodshed it might be done.


Zane forever

Painted Baby

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 5956
  • Rep: 1835
  • They're trying to build a prison
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #770 on: March 23, 2025, 01:07:46 PM »
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
The idea of Mayor Pete being the next presidential candidate is batshit stupid and if he himself doesn’t perceive that I have a lot less respect for him.

This might be shallow and glib but the next Democratic presidential candidate should be a handsome, straight, male. Possibly Latino. Possibly George Clooney. Only a woman if extremely hot.

It’s basically a high school student council election and democrats need to treat it thusly.
[close]


Gavin Newsom says hi
[close]
He's the definition of the coastal elite Dem
[close]

I was saying him in response to:  Handsome, straight white male

I thought favorably of him before this podcasting mishegoss, but he has been no stranger with going on Fox and debating the Right and coming out looking good.   I’m sure if he had any real boogeymen in his past, Kim Guilfoyle would have said something by now. 

But he also feels like going back to the late 00s model of a politician - you got Romney in my Obama, you got Obama in my Romney - which isn’t ideal.   But who even knows what America looks like in 2028 to decide who emcompasses the fix needed
[close]

I like Newsome and think he’s good on his feet during interviews and debates but he definitely fits the “coastal elite” mold to a T and carries too much California baggage.

So yeah, someone of that ilk but maybe from a red or purple state, possibly a veteran or from business/medicine, and who could plausibly change engine oil or do manual labor. Is that too much to ask?!?
[close]


So straight Mayor Pete without corp baggage

Just learned he never tailors his suits to be more of an “Everyman”
No need with such a rockin bod

AOC turned 35 this year and split the ticket in her district. Bernie is out here actively passing the torch with that tour. I think she's gonna primary Schumer and then ride that to the White House. I've thought she'd likely run since the day after election day and nothing that has happened has changed my take. I would love a DNC takeover and I think things are bad enough to let that happen. I'm like Charlie Brown with the football on this though so my take is probably worhtless.

Blockwork

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 63
  • Rep: -133
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #771 on: March 23, 2025, 02:34:24 PM »
You guys need an outsider, preferably not a politician

Blockwork

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 63
  • Rep: -133
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #772 on: March 23, 2025, 02:37:59 PM »
You guys got no one I wanna vote for president except Bernie or yang

Like you guys are so bad, I, a social security, Medicaid, and food stamp recipient didn't vote D for president. I did for local judges and libertarian where I could but not president.

TheLurper

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 4165
  • Rep: 962
  • Bronze Topic Start Bronze Topic Start : Start a topic with over 1,000 replies.
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #773 on: March 23, 2025, 03:14:02 PM »
I'll bite as I'm curious where this goes, you rely on the government for immediate support and you voted libertarian? Why would you vote for those who want to take the government away from you and want you to either sink or swim on your own?

As someone--supposedly--receiving the support libertarians want to see discontinued, what is the rationale on this vote? How does your support of Bernie who wants to see business regulated and the social safety net expanded intermix with those who want to see little to no regulation and no social safety net? Honestly curious, what do you see that I do not?

"We should eliminate the entire social welfare system. This includes eliminating food stamps, subsidized housing, and all the rest. Individuals who are unable to fully support themselves and their families through the job market must, once again, learn to rely on supportive family, church, community, or private charity to bridge the gap."
--Libertarian Party of Indiana

Quote from: ChuckRamone
I love when people bring up world hunger. It makes everything meaningless.
"That guy is double parked."
"Who cares? There are people starving to death! Besides, how does that affect you? Does it lessen the joy of parking?

Atiba Applebum

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 20726
  • Rep: 528
  • Slap’s Resident Jeron Wilson!
  • Bronze Topic Start Bronze Topic Start : Start a topic with over 1,000 replies.
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #774 on: March 23, 2025, 03:17:21 PM »
You guys need an outsider, preferably not a politician

Gee, those types work out well

Blockwork

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 63
  • Rep: -133
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #775 on: March 23, 2025, 03:22:02 PM »
I'll bite as I'm curious where this goes, you rely on the government for immediate support and you voted libertarian? Why would you vote for those who want to take the government away from you and want you to either sink or swim on your own?

As someone--supposedly--receiving the support libertarians want to see discontinued, what is the rationale on this vote? How does your support of Bernie who wants to see business regulated and the social safety net expanded intermix with those who want to see little to no regulation and no social safety net? Honestly curious, what do you see that I do not?

"We should eliminate the entire social welfare system. This includes eliminating food stamps, subsidized housing, and all the rest. Individuals who are unable to fully support themselves and their families through the job market must, once again, learn to rely on supportive family, church, community, or private charity to bridge the gap."
--Libertarian Party of Indiana
Well if we had a libertarian society I would have no problem making money and providing for myself. I'm in this life for myself, if social security is available I will use it, I like it, if you wanna abolish it and have a libertarian society well I'm up for that too

I'm not stuck in one political mindset, we can run whatever and I'll figure it out for myself

Painted Baby

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 5956
  • Rep: 1835
  • They're trying to build a prison
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #776 on: March 23, 2025, 03:31:36 PM »
Expand Quote
I'll bite as I'm curious where this goes, you rely on the government for immediate support and you voted libertarian? Why would you vote for those who want to take the government away from you and want you to either sink or swim on your own?

As someone--supposedly--receiving the support libertarians want to see discontinued, what is the rationale on this vote? How does your support of Bernie who wants to see business regulated and the social safety net expanded intermix with those who want to see little to no regulation and no social safety net? Honestly curious, what do you see that I do not?

"We should eliminate the entire social welfare system. This includes eliminating food stamps, subsidized housing, and all the rest. Individuals who are unable to fully support themselves and their families through the job market must, once again, learn to rely on supportive family, church, community, or private charity to bridge the gap."
--Libertarian Party of Indiana
[close]
Well if we had a libertarian society I would have no problem making money and providing for myself. I'm in this life for myself, if social security is available I will use it, I like it, if you wanna abolish it and have a libertarian society well I'm up for that too

I'm not stuck in one political mindset, we can run whatever and I'll figure it out for myself
You're either a fraudster or more likely lying your ass off about being a recipient. You don't just fall off a log and get Social Security. It's either you hit retirement age or you hire a lawyer to help expedite your disability claim. If you can make money other ways, you would as it's just above poverty level and you only get it after a long and arduous process. Juice ain't worth the squeeze unless you truly cannot work.

TheLurper

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 4165
  • Rep: 962
  • Bronze Topic Start Bronze Topic Start : Start a topic with over 1,000 replies.
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #777 on: March 23, 2025, 03:47:52 PM »
Expand Quote
I'll bite as I'm curious where this goes, you rely on the government for immediate support and you voted libertarian? Why would you vote for those who want to take the government away from you and want you to either sink or swim on your own?

As someone--supposedly--receiving the support libertarians want to see discontinued, what is the rationale on this vote? How does your support of Bernie who wants to see business regulated and the social safety net expanded intermix with those who want to see little to no regulation and no social safety net? Honestly curious, what do you see that I do not?

"We should eliminate the entire social welfare system. This includes eliminating food stamps, subsidized housing, and all the rest. Individuals who are unable to fully support themselves and their families through the job market must, once again, learn to rely on supportive family, church, community, or private charity to bridge the gap."
--Libertarian Party of Indiana
[close]
Well if we had a libertarian society I would have no problem making money and providing for myself. I'm in this life for myself, if social security is available I will use it, I like it, if you wanna abolish it and have a libertarian society well I'm up for that too

I'm not stuck in one political mindset, we can run whatever and I'll figure it out for myself

Ok, I'll continue to play along in good faith:

1. We still need to discuss the question of why you like Bernie but also support libertarian ideas. Why do you support things that are opposite of one another? I don't see the logic here, but I'm curious what you are seeing that I don't.

2. America is one of the most "classically liberal" (as libertarians like to say) nations in the world, what exactly is preventing you from succeeding today? And, what would change that would allow you to make money and provide for yourself?

If you are struggling now why would you all of the sudden do better in a society that leans even more heavily on the social Darwinist idea of "survival of the fittest"? My first thought is that someone in your position, with no help, is likely to sink further rather than magically develop the skills or network to "succeed."

Quote from: ChuckRamone
I love when people bring up world hunger. It makes everything meaningless.
"That guy is double parked."
"Who cares? There are people starving to death! Besides, how does that affect you? Does it lessen the joy of parking?

Blockwork

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 63
  • Rep: -133
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #778 on: March 23, 2025, 03:53:48 PM »
Drugs lurper, drugs. That is why I like the idea of libertarianism, big ups trump for freeing Ross btw.

And I like Bernie cause I'm fine with socialism like I'm fine with libertarianism, I think you don't understand when I say I'm not locked into one political thought

Blind Fisherman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
  • Rep: 358
Re: Changes under Trump 2.0
« Reply #779 on: March 23, 2025, 04:05:22 PM »
It seems as though you’re not locked into much thought whatsoever.