Our Soverign Emperor, Lord Donald John Trump, President of these United States

NSA

Brotherhood
Admin
Mar 13, 2011
25,493
377
83
Southern California
www.fighting118th.com
#1
Figured we need to move on from Election Day (I know, I know, popular vote, crying, safe spaces, etc).

We can use this thread to discuss politics etc, and of course:

Donald from House Trump, First of his name, King of the Americas and the White Men, Lord of the Fifty States, and Protector of the Flag.


:trollface:
 

G.I.*EDDIE

gobbles a LOT of cock
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
43,433
423
83
S.E. Mich :(
#3
I didn't think Piers Morgan was Right-wing, wasn't he always anti-gun and all that?
I don't know which way he leans, but I bet the reaction to Trumps win is doing more damage than good to the left.

Nobody rioted when Obama won, twice – though feelings ran just as high against him from those who voted for the other side.
I wonder if that's true. I doubt that it isn't, but if there were protests and rioting, MSM wouldn't show it. "Look! Everyone loves our Dem POTUS!". You'd have to dig deep to find it. Then again, maybe they would show it. "Look at these racists!"

‘Winning isn’t everything, but wanting to win is.’

That’s Trump’s life mantra too. It’s why he’s now heading to the White House, and also why he may now surprise people and turn out to be a rather effective president.
Very good point.
 

NSA

Brotherhood
Admin
Mar 13, 2011
25,493
377
83
Southern California
www.fighting118th.com
#5
I know there was picketing and general complaining by the Right after his first win at least. The "Obama=Osama" stuff, the "he's really a MUSLIM!" and of course the whole birth certificate controversy was all over the place. There were also big league protests against Obamacare and the like in a lot of places. The press wasted no time in calling these out, if I recall correctly.

The big difference was it wasn't 'riots' or disturbances like you're seeing now. Different tactics probably. Neither are proving to be effective.. I mean what's the point?

I don't think the Right was as whiny as the Left last time, but I am sure there was a pretty big circle jerk about how terribad Obama would be among them too. Hell, we probably did it here too (wait, we weren't around in 2008.. Obama is older than us!). Hindsight and memberberries are weird things.
 

NSA

Brotherhood
Admin
Mar 13, 2011
25,493
377
83
Southern California
www.fighting118th.com
#6
And now for something completely different..



Trump team planning 'victory tour' of states he won - POLITICO

President-elect Donald Trump will be embarking on a “victory tourâ€￾ to the states he carried, a campaign aide told reporters Thursday.

The tour will bring Trump “obviously to the states that we won and the swing states we flipped over,â€￾ Gigicos said.

Trump carried 30 states.
While I think this is cool.. has it been done before? It FEELS a little Hitler-esque.. with the pomp and circumstance for states he carried.. but I dunno. It also feels a little like WINNING. (We're gonna win so much we'll be sick of winning!)
 

G.I.*EDDIE

gobbles a LOT of cock
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
43,433
423
83
S.E. Mich :(
#7
He should consider the states that he also very VERY closely almost won. His supporters there would probably enjoy it.

And while I too think it's cool (and a bit hilarious), I think rubbing his balls in the faces of the whiny losers might just stir up the feels enough to get them rallying extra hard for 2020...if one of them doesn't assassinate him before then. He needs a Pope-mobile bad.
 

ThunderDan19

Here Comes the Boom!!!
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
7,948
407
83
44
VA
#9
Screw the administration transplants, lobbyists and ghetto dwellers that kept VA blue. I'd love have gotten a chance to shake hands with the man, the myth, the legend... :trollface:
 

K-Tiger

All solutions are final.
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
31,130
173
63
#11

NSA

Brotherhood
Admin
Mar 13, 2011
25,493
377
83
Southern California
www.fighting118th.com
#12
Ok, here's a great example of.. just media nonsense, and leftist responses.

Bit of a long post, but follow along (yes, Eddie, it involves reading):

An article was posted on Business Insider (whatever that is). The article was about ANOTHER article that was posted on The Hollywood Reporter (THR).

Here is the Business Insider article:

Steve Bannon on Darth Vader, Satan - Business Insider

And key point they focus on:

"Darkness is good," Bannon told the publication.

He added: "Dick Cheney, Darth Vader, Satan. That's power. It only helps us when they get it wrong. When they're blind to who we are and what we're doing."
Okay, well.. sure.That seems like he's saying Darkness is awesome, being dark is good. He likes being Cheney/Vader/Satan (what bedfellows!). What an ass he is! WOW! Outrage! He's evil! What's wrong with you voters??

Okay, well.. I wonders to myself, "Self, wonder what the original article says?" So I spend 30 seconds looking it up:

Steve Bannon Trump Tower Interview: Trump's Strategist Plots "New Political Movement" | Hollywood Reporter

First off, the quote is question is presented completely differently:

The liberal firewall against Trump was, most of all, the belief that the Republican contender was too disorganized, outlandish, outré and lacking in nuance to run a proper political campaign. That view was only confirmed when Bannon, editor of the outlandish and outré Breitbart News Network, took over the campaign in August. Now Bannon is arguably the most powerful person on the new White House team, embodying more than anyone the liberals’ awful existential pain and fury: How did someone so wrong — not just wrong, but inappropriate, unfit and “loathsome,â€￾ according to The New York Times — get it so spot-on right?

In this dark day for Democrats, Bannon has become the blackest hole.

“Darkness is good,â€￾ says Bannon, who amid the suits surrounding him at Trump Tower, looks like a graduate student in his T-shirt, open button-down and tatty blue blazer — albeit a 62-year-old graduate student. “Dick Cheney. Darth Vader. Satan. That’s power. It only helps us when they—“ I believe by “theyâ€￾ he means liberals and the media, already promoting calls for his ouster “—get it wrong. When they’re blind to who we are and what we’re doing.â€￾
In context.. this tells me he likes that liberals are constantly overreacting and comparing him to Cheney/Vader/Satan because they're conferring power to him, without him needing to do anything. They're reinforcing everything he says. They also focus so much on the stupid Cheney/Vader/Satan/Evil narrative that they don't bother to look at what he's actually saying/doing, which allowed them to win the Presidency from right under the medias noses.

Read the whole article if you have time, it's a good read, and sounds really positive if they can pull it off (debatable).

Now, for the liberal reaction.. check out this thread on a forum I visit:

Bannon likes being compared to "Dick Cheney, Darth Vader, Satan" - NeoGAF

Ignore the first post, as it's been edited for clarity. The first page was discussing the Business Insider article only. Their reactions are clearly exactly the same as liberals at large have been having for a while now. It's an article talking about how he loves liberals overreacting to stupid shit.. and they're overreacting to stupid shit! It's mind blowing.
 

G.I.*EDDIE

gobbles a LOT of cock
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
43,433
423
83
S.E. Mich :(
#13
I mean, clearly they are in it for the clicks, but there's also an agenda. They continually twist things to support their agenda (what helped Trump win...astonishingly, people saw through it.), but what the agenda is, I'm not entirely sure. I think I get it. Is the media (most of the media) bent on a dem controlled government? If so, why? I've been reading this a lot in articles lately...

anti-Semitic and racially charged
Honestly, the only place I read that is the accusations. I never actually see anything supporting it, just conjecture. Twisting things or taking things out of context to support the narrative, but in truth, there's nothing there.

And then you have Soros funding all of these BLM "protests" and anti-Trump protests. Busing people en mass to cause a ruckus. WTH is going on?? They keep feeding people lies, and it's working! What is being attempted to be accomplished? What is the goal?

I don't know. I don't know how to make heads or tails of all this craziness. I don't know how to put it all together. It's all so maddening to me. Me is dumb. Me rambling.
 

ThunderDan19

Here Comes the Boom!!!
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
7,948
407
83
44
VA
#14
Context has no place in the leftist message, and when your "income" (read: welfare) source is big government, you have every reason to believe someone who threatens that is an evil overlord, or even the devil himself.

Therefore, particularly since the Donald has repeatedly beaten and embarrassed big media throughout his ascent, you can expect them to do everything within their (now diminished) power to present him and everyone associated with him as the evil empire, now and forever more.

Good thing nobody watches the evening news anymore.
 

nacho

"Big Guns"
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
7,694
259
83
On the river...
www.teletraanone.com
#16
I don't know. I don't know how to make heads or tails of all this craziness. I don't know how to put it all together. It's all so maddening to me. Me is dumb. Me rambling.
Me too. But to be fair, I just finished watching Ex Machina. One should never watch an introspective naval-gazing movie about what it means to be human and then think about politics... my brain is doing somersaults...

:explode:
 

ThunderDan19

Here Comes the Boom!!!
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
7,948
407
83
44
VA
#20
Looked up VA's results. Totally swung by all the transplants around DC. Let's hope VA goes Trump next go round after those turkeys fly home to NY, CA, IL and all those other blue states.
 

G.I.*EDDIE

gobbles a LOT of cock
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
43,433
423
83
S.E. Mich :(
#21
An older (March) article, but still good.

https://christophercantwell.com/2016/03/12/trump-hasnt-called-for-violence-but-he-should/

For the right, the implication is even more startling. We can surely live without the left, but the left surely cannot live without us. Reality detached, welfare dependent criminal apologists cannot form a functioning society. They need a productive host for their parasitism, and to deny them that host is the equivalent of denying them oxygen. They will do as they have always done – resort to violence for their very survival – and you frankly have to be an idiot to believe anything else. They will never let us separate from them peacefully, because they would all die in our absence.
 

ThunderDan19

Here Comes the Boom!!!
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
7,948
407
83
44
VA
#22
So far pretty satisfied with Trump's cabinet picks. Lots of former military there (diametrically opposite of the Obama crew), so that should help balance things out for a while. Hopefully less politics and more actual progress (see what I did there? :D).

Word is also that he is whittling down his Supreme Court Justice nominee, and hopes to have that person queued up and ready, come inauguration day.

So crazy that President The Donald seems to already have more things in motion before even taking office than President Golf Pro has done in his entire second term...

As it stands right now, it seems that Congress (confirmations) may be the only thing to slow things down in the first year of the MAGA era...
 

NSA

Brotherhood
Admin
Mar 13, 2011
25,493
377
83
Southern California
www.fighting118th.com
#23
Yeah, it's interesting. Some of the picks I don't really get (Rick Perry?), but others seem solid.

It'll be interesting to see what the first 100 days are like. If anything gets done, or it's Washington BS as usual.

Also, this is hilarious:

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0z0iuWh3sek[/ame]

Yeah, cause all those celebrities going ALL-IN for Clinton really worked the first time.. I love at the end they all go on how they "stand with you" (unless you vote for Trump).
 

NSA

Brotherhood
Admin
Mar 13, 2011
25,493
377
83
Southern California
www.fighting118th.com
#25
There was a good video going around at election time about the how's and why's of the electoral college.. oh damn it let me look for it.

*Please imagine time passing as I Google it*
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
*Now imagine me having a EUREKA(!) moment as I find it*

Here you go! It is pretty good I think. It was made in 2015, so it should be bereft of "today" politics.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6s7jB6-GoU[/ame]
 

G.I.*EDDIE

gobbles a LOT of cock
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
43,433
423
83
S.E. Mich :(
#26
While very informative, I've never seen it spelled out as simply and as eye opening as that graphic. Yeah, she says the same thing at one point, but it doesn't look as drastic. That little bit of blue having as much say as the HUGE amount of grey...wow. The big cities would always decide. And considering that big cities are mostly dem...

Whats funny is that no doubt the democrats know that. I'm surprised they haven't tried to toss out the electoral college long ago.
 

ThunderDan19

Here Comes the Boom!!!
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
7,948
407
83
44
VA
#27
Yeah, it's interesting. Some of the picks I don't really get (Rick Perry?), but others seem solid.

It'll be interesting to see what the first 100 days are like. If anything gets done, or it's Washington BS as usual.

Also, this is hilarious:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0z0iuWh3sek

Yeah, cause all those celebrities going ALL-IN for Clinton really worked the first time.. I love at the end they all go on how they "stand with you" (unless you vote for Trump).
I think Perry was picked as yet another poke in the eye for the mainstreamers, and because The Donald has a really sick sense of humor. Energy is the department that Perry stumbled over during the primary debate back in '08 (trying to say that he was going to reduce/close it down along with two other departments) that the media jumped on and pretty much got him laughed out of the campaign. Irony...

Also, a bunch of B-listers (at best) trying to talk the electoral college into forcing a Constitutional crisis followed by a voting in of "any other Republican" by the House of Representatives? What could possibly go wrong? And who is paying them to attach themselves to such a desperately pathetic video? :wtf:
 

NSA

Brotherhood
Admin
Mar 13, 2011
25,493
377
83
Southern California
www.fighting118th.com
#28
Yeah, but then it gets into the debate between what's more important.. the territory or the people? Are large states will small populations more or less important than areas with large populations?

I dunno, neither way seems fair to give them preference. I mean I'm sure there are farms in middle america with the sqf of whole towns. Should that be represented more than the people living in cities?

I think the electoral college works well in keeping things in check and balanced.
 

G.I.*EDDIE

gobbles a LOT of cock
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
43,433
423
83
S.E. Mich :(
#29
I think Perry was picked as yet another poke in the eye for the mainstreamers, and because The Donald has a really sick sense of humor. Energy is the department that Perry stumbled over during the primary debate back in '08 (trying to say that he was going to reduce/close it down along with two other departments) that the media jumped on and pretty much got him laughed out of the campaign. Irony...

Also, a bunch of B-listers (at best) trying to talk the electoral college into forcing a Constitutional crisis followed by a voting in of "any other Republican" by the House of Representatives? What could possibly go wrong? And who is paying them to attach themselves to such a desperately pathetic video? :wtf:
The same guy that has been paying for disruption for who knows how long?

Report: Soros, Big Liberal Donors Meeting with Dems on Stopping Trump | Fox News Insider
 

ThunderDan19

Here Comes the Boom!!!
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
7,948
407
83
44
VA
#32
Heh, my question about who's paying them was pretty much rhetorical. Soros is well known, despite his efforts to not be.

If it were really about being fair, voting would go back much closer to the way it was originally intended – by land owning, tax paying citizens (at that time, primarily the male head of household) only.

Now, before any bleeding heart whiners jump all over that, let me bring it up to today’s standard.

Voting should be by money earning, tax paying (fully documented by voter ID as issued by IRS) US citizens only. If you don’t have any skin in the game (i.e. an income in the past year as proven with documentation from the IRS), you do not vote. No minimum income, except that you have to have made enough to be required to pay taxes on it (that would also preclude anyone with enough deductions/losses to not have paid taxes in the past year). I won’t go as far as to say you’d need to own property/land, because that doesn’t necessarily make sense in the modern economy. But anyone who lives only off the government’s generosity with other people’s taxpayer money would not vote, with a few exceptions.

Here are the exceptions:

Disabled – if someone has been determined to be legitimately disabled and cannot work, they get a pass, with a caveat – they must pass the citizenship test (knowledge of US civics) that immigrants take to become US citizens and show documentation of such at the polling place or with their absentee ballot. That would prove that they have enough intelligence/understanding of our system to be fit to vote.

In process – if someone is fully documented as being in the active legal process of naturalization, and having passed the citizenship test, they can move into the category of a de facto US citizen, still additionally requiring they have proof of income and taxation.

Age (more of a non-exception) – if you earn enough money to be taxed, you can vote at any age.

Did I miss anything?
 

NSA

Brotherhood
Admin
Mar 13, 2011
25,493
377
83
Southern California
www.fighting118th.com
#33
Every time I see something like that encouraging voting, I think, you guys do know that you could be encouraging the opposition to go out and vote, right?
Yeah.. watching them.. it's like.. could you be more crass? They're basically making the point to the other half of Americans on why Clinton and her supporters were terrible in the first place.
 

Contraband

Controlled Substance
Mar 26, 2014
2,143
11
38
#34
I was reading a few online articles about Trump,and these anti Trump people are a special kind of stupid! I've never seen a group of people so dilutional in my life! A lot of them are failing to accept that the election is over,and Trump won! They say "he might just be our next president" and "if they don't reverse this" may be? If? Seriously?!?! Dude IS the next president of the United States! He did win,and there will be no reversing shit!

Anyone see the people in California wanting to succeed from the union? :trollface: I dare them to try! don't talk about it,be about it!! do it after Trump takes office!! I wanna see tanks rolling through the streets,and national guard tear gassing those pussies! This is the law&order president you're dealing with! Not the pussy Obama! It didn't work out for the south,and we had an army!!
 

G.I.*EDDIE

gobbles a LOT of cock
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
43,433
423
83
S.E. Mich :(
#35
I can agree with that, Dan. Not entirely sure about the age thing, though. There'd have to be some kind of test to gauge maturity. Or maybe just an IQ test?

I don't know. I think my suggestions just excluded myself. :trollface:
 

ThunderDan19

Here Comes the Boom!!!
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
7,948
407
83
44
VA
#36
Like I said though, you have to be smart, valuable and dedicated enough to earn enough to pay taxes. That should keep the pool reasonably intelligent.
 

G.I.*EDDIE

gobbles a LOT of cock
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
43,433
423
83
S.E. Mich :(
#38
For the betterment of the world and it's future, I suggest an IQ test pre-puberty...before breeding can occur. If you are below the humanity average, you are spayed an neutered.

Too harsh?
 

NSA

Brotherhood
Admin
Mar 13, 2011
25,493
377
83
Southern California
www.fighting118th.com
#39
I mean, I'd be curious to see what the exact scientific correlation is between parent IQ and child IQ.

There are always stories of super successful people who "came from nothing". I wonder if their parents were just poor with bad luck, or poor and stupid?

Some genes are recessive and may not flower with every generation, but you'd be consigning potentially helpful people to never exist with those kinds of rules.
 

G.I.*EDDIE

gobbles a LOT of cock
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
43,433
423
83
S.E. Mich :(
#40
High IQ is mostly genetic. And yeah, they aren't all always winners, but the system weeds out the ones that aren't. The smart kids eventually breed. The dumb ones, sorry, get a dog.

Is there a movie along these lines? I'd love to see one. Though I'm sure it'd be slanted negatively.