President Donald Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
it is a terrible policy. you'd think that no bad hombres would attend the games given this policy. only good hombres will attend. so 'success' rate will be 0%
libtards will rejoice because it 'proves' bad hombres aren't as prevalent as suggested.
'Libturds' is more politically correct though.
Remember how enraged people were that you needed to show vaccination cards to get into things?
What a time that was
I felt empowered having a vaccination card. It was like being a superhero; I could go places and do things that other folks couldn't do.
(Virtually none of my friends got the jab.)
Obama became known as the 'Deporter in Chief.'
And 'Kids in Cages' also started under Obama
Both parties were all-in on the 'Patriot Act'
The beat goes on...
the current Trump border czar psychopath was appointed by Obama and given awards by Obama and got a glowing write up in Wapo years ago for his prowess in deporting people.
Dems support this ****. the partisan Dems on this forum are just so ignorant that it is astounding. Trump is the bad cop ofc. but the good cop has the same goals and the same results and most importantly they work in tandem.
just like in the Gaza genocide the Dems think they can wipe the stink off. nope, this is the result of your leaders. my leaders even as I did vote for Biden in 2020. I just learn.
This is the Trump thread; did DT convert to Mormonism or something?
To answer your question: my take on Joseph Smith is that he was a false prophet.
Fair enough, it was too random of a question and I shouldn't of asked it. I read a book on him today and he is quite the character, not in a good way.
Rococo,Thoughts on Mamdani?All his socialist ideas seem like imminent disaster. But I kind of want to see him get elected and enact some of his policy objectives anyways, because:a) It will be entertaining if nothing elseb) Things going predictably poorly could be a wakeup call for a lot of people who have no historical understanding of how poorly real socialism works in the r
Didn't b) just happen on the opposite coast with unmitigated urban disasters caused by radical leftist choices of not prosecuting car theft and shoplifting? Which caused a shift to the center? Doesn't seem like they ever learn anything if examples of their preferred policies failing spectacularly aren't considered if they are from other american places.
Btw rent control has failed miserably something like 50+ times already
Not an epistemology because it's about morality not factual Truth.
But yes when it is about morality I find it to be a very good heuristic to use the opinion of people that have proven to me to be deeply immoral about x, even to gauge the morality of y.
I think we already had this conversation recently btw.
Fair enough, it was too random of a question and I shouldn't of asked it. I read a book on him today and he is quite the character, not in a good way.
Joseph Smith was certainly a fascinating character. Like most cult leaders, he was extremely charismatic and persuasive. (Maybe that's why your question belonged in this thread after all :p)
Didn't b) just happen on the opposite coast with unmitigated urban disasters caused by radical leftist choices of not prosecuting car theft and shoplifting? Which caused a shift to the center? Doesn't seem like they ever learn anything if examples of their preferred policies failing spectacularly aren't considered if they are from other american places.Btw rent control has fail
The Left certainly has the 'magic touch.' For example, they managed to take one of the most beautiful and prosperous cities in the world (San Francisco), and practically turn it into a third-world cesspool.
To be fair, San Francisco is still a wonderful place to live if you live in a gated community and have a net worth of over 3M. (Like Nancy Pelosi, for example)
That hastened americas dominance but it would have happened before too long in ny case, with their oil reserves and vast areas of cheap arable land.
That hastened americas dominance but it would have happened before too long in ny case, with their oil reserves and vast areas of cheap arable land.
Which southern american countries had as well?
Some historians found the (at the time unprecedented in all of history) absurd massacres of the american civil war spearheaded weapon making and military-linked industrialization giving the USA a path to worldwide dominance. And the civil war used tools americans had previously develoepd to massacre natives.
In some sense forever wars were just a continuance of the civil war, but against of foreigners.
The unique penchant for extreme violence of USA citizens allowed for world domination.
Lincoln didn't only fight the civil war. He fought the apache, navajo, yavapai, dakota sioux wars as well.
Meanwhile giving that massacring untold numbers of natives and southern americans wasn't enough, he also fought a bit against Japan (which attempted the "unacceptable" ban of foreigners again, the admiral Perry visit hadn't sealed the deal yet).
Then like 2 minutes after the civil war had ended the USA were harassing the paiwan in Taiwan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formosa_Ex...
They also went back to kill natives full time
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comanche_c...
Waged war on Korea in 1871 because they really really hated isolationism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta...
Massacred a ton of Cheyennes for the crime of having attempted to go out of their reservation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_C...
Mind this was all within 10-12 years of the civil war lol.
A tad later the USA went to Egypt (because, why not?)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_E...)
And to fight against Germany in the Samoa (because again, why not?)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sam...
And so on and on and on and on.
The entire history of the USA is a long sequence of acts of violence to secure resources, markets, and "export democracy". And it worked, the USA are the most powerful country that ever existed.
Obama became known as the 'Deporter in Chief.'And 'Kids in Cages' also started under ObamaBoth parties were all-in on the 'Patriot Act'The beat goes on...
the current Trump border czar psychopath was appointed by Obama and given awards by Obama and got a glowing write up in Wapo years ago for his prowess in deporting people. Dems support this ****. the partisan Dems on this fo
wtf????
Which southern american countries had as well?Some historians found the (at the time unprecedented in all of history) absurd massacres of the american civil war spearheaded weapon making and military-linked industrialization giving the USA a path to worldwide dominance. And the civil war used tools americans had previously develoepd to massacre natives.In some sense forever war
That’s only one facet of the USA that helped it achieve dominance. You’re conveniently ignoring mass immigration that was a huge boon to its economy, agroculture and culture (and still is despite the efforts of people like you).
I don’t know about the straight out part. AI is a lot nicer, verbally, but he’s obviously using it before deleting the parts that contradict his racist and fascist manifesto.
they managed to take one of the most beautiful and prosperous cities in the world (San Francisco), and practically turn it into a third-world cesspool.
To be fair, San Francisco is still a wonderful place to live if you live in a gated community and have a net worth of over 3M.
The 2 sentences contradict one another. San Francisco and it's suburbs are the richest area in the US. And physically beautiful. There's some nuance like you said. All the good things attract scum. They have a lot of everything.
California had great outcomes compared to many other locations in the US. We should look to them for guidance and model systems based on theirs given the evidence.
The 2 sentences contradict one another. San Francisco and it's suburbs are the richest area in the US. And physically beautiful. There's some nuance like you said. All the good things attract scum. They have a lot of everything.California had great outcomes compared to many other locations in the US. We should look to them for guidance and model systems based on theirs given th
Lol at the bold, normally people do preserve what good things they have by keeping the scum away or kicking it away. S.F. chose not to do that and that's what gets heavy criticism.
That hastened americas dominance but it would have happened before too long in ny case, with their oil reserves and vast areas of cheap arable land.
Maybe, maybe not. Pre WW1 The british empire/commnwealth would have been pretty hard to shift. And Europe dominated in science.
I'd put the airplane as the key threat to british dominance. That is apart from the much bigger threat of bad decisions - I dont see the usa have any edge on avoiding very bad decisions
It was never possible for a small island to run an empire spread across the world indefinitely, maybe not even a large one. Uprisings were inevitable.
It was never possible for a small island to run an empire spread across the world indefinitely, maybe not even a large one. Uprisings were inevitable.
What we know for now, is that it is never possible for anyone to run an empire indefinitely. We have plenty of historical examples of empires breaking down, whether the source, dominant country was large or small, far away or nearby.
The british empire disgregation though is unusual because it gave up a lot of the territory without a fight, voluntarily. Sort of like it "decided" not to be an empire anymore.
Sure. Rome only lasted a millenia or so.
It might have hung on until china took over. Or whi knows how it would have turned out.
Roman empire lasted less than 500 years, unless you are counting the eastern part as the same empire, but doing so would be tantamount of counting the USA as a prosecution of the british empire
