President Donald Trump's United States of America

[Admiral Beez]

Not sure what he means by this.. that Melania statement definitely was NOT a reset, unless he thinks her covering up her ties to the Epstein sex work was a reset....

View attachment 727914

Melania is very sharp. She knew Donald was using the war to divert from the Epstein files and decided to bring it back to the forefront.

Just FYI, after you post you can click edit and grab the corner to shrink the image to a reasonable size.

 

[Mihairokov]

Interesting timing for Melania to make an announcement to deny that she personally had ties with Epstein. Especially when the general public has shifted their focus away from the investigations for a while.

Melania Trump denies ties to Jeffrey Epstein and urges hearing for survivors

She called rumours that Epstein introduced her to Donald Trump "mean-spirited attempts to defame my reputation".

www.bbc.com

They're trying to get ahead of something. I think the joke going around online was that Israel was going to start pushing the Epstein narrative again now that the US has a ceasefire with Iran.

 

[PinkLucy]

There's a book coming out in the UK regarding Andrew that has some Melania bits in it -- it could be that. Other rumours abound -- someone from "back in the day" has some tea to spill, Melania is leaving the sinking ship, whatever

It's all rather silly in the face of the evidence already out there

 

[PinkLucy]

Because that's how you lose elections, activate moderates and undecideds to either stay home or vote GOP, and eventually end up in as a fringe backwater, like the federal NDP.

The two sentences that doomed Kamala Harris’s campaign

Donald Trump effectively weaponised five-year-old remarks about tax-funded sex change surgeries for prison inmates

www.thetimes.com

Middle of the road Americans don't care about diversity, equity or alphabet (is that now MMIWG2SLGBTQQIA+?) issues, but about jobs, social/economic mobility, homelessness, crime and safety, affordability, housing, accessible/affordable/quality healthcare and education, income disparity, safe borders and immigration reform, fare taxation (closing loopholes for billionaires), and (for some) environmental protections, freedom of the press, privacy protections, and public transit. None of these are what most perceive as SJW issues, but instead focus on the pocketbook and safety. That's where the Dems need to fight.

I know a lot of "middle of the road" Americans who absolutely do care about diversity and human rights at the same time as caring about the economy, crime and other issues. Often all of these issues are interconnected and a decent standard of living for all can be better achieved through less racial disparity, safety for everyone, and more.

 

[Full Metal Junkie]

Er...why is this unfortunate? More of this please

Okay, I'll try to explain the best I can, even though @Admiral Beez already alluded to key points.

Let's take a step back and look at Canadian politics. Pierre Poilievre has a likeability problem, I hope no one tries to deny that. Many people go as far as to call him a d!ck. After his election loss a year ago, CBC was interviewing people at the Union Station regarding their thoughts on the election outcome. The word I personally remember people reciting the most about PP is "divisive". And I think him being divisive is just a more polite way of saying just how big of a d!ck he is.

What does that have to do with social justice warriors, you ask? Well, the reason PP is so divisive is that he is a culture warrior on the far right side. As in, his whole shtick is being the anti-woke champion. Some people on the right love him for it, the woke left hates him for it, but the majority of people in the middle look at this culture war and they are tired of this nonsense. They don't like seeing PP turning the social discourse into "us vs. them" culture war. This is what they refer to when they say he is divisive.

Now to my point. And this may be a hard pill to swallow for some people here. The woke social justice warriors are just as divisive as Pierre Poilievre. They just bat for the other team. Anyone involved in culture war fights is just as unlikeable as Pierre Poilievre, no matter which side of the barricades they are on. The entire culture war has become toxic on both sides of the debate.

So yeah, if you are a progressive politician but also embrace the woke SJW issues as part of your politics, you become a lot less electable, than if you were just a progressive.

There is a reason many people refer to Trump's NFL ads as the most effective campaign spending of that election cycle: it really resonated with the general public.
“Kamala is for they/them. President Trump is for you.”
You may not agree with the sentiment of the ad. But you have to agree that it hits hard. And for regular in the middle folks who are tired of the constant culture war stuff, it said all they needed to hear.

Personally, I sympathize with the causes that SJWs try to achieve. However, I strongly believe that the way in which they go about trying to enact these changes is counterproductive to their cause. SJWs are their own worst enemy. You can't force culture war stuff down people's throats and expect them to enjoy it.

 

[Towered]

Okay, I'll try to explain the best I can, even though @Admiral Beez already alluded to key points.

Let's take a step back and look at Canadian politics. Pierre Poilievre has a likeability problem, I hope no one tries to deny that. Many people go as far as to call him a d!ck. After his election loss a year ago, CBC was interviewing people at the Union Station regarding their thoughts on the election outcome. The word I personally remember people reciting the most about PP is "divisive". And I think him being divisive is just a more polite way of saying just how big of a d!ck he is.

What does that have to do with social justice warriors, you ask? Well, the reason PP is so divisive is that he is a culture warrior on the far right side. As in, his whole shtick is being the anti-woke champion. Some people on the right love him for it, the woke left hates him for it, but the majority of people in the middle look at this culture war and they are tired of this nonsense. They don't like seeing PP turning the social discourse into "us vs. them" culture war. This is what they refer to when they say he is divisive.

Now to my point. And this may be a hard pill to swallow for some people here. The woke social justice warriors are just as divisive as Pierre Poilievre. They just bat for the other team. Anyone involved in culture war fights is just as unlikeable as Pierre Poilievre, no matter which side of the barricades they are on. The entire culture war has become toxic on both sides of the debate.

So yeah, if you are a progressive politician but also embrace the woke SJW issues as part of your politics, you become a lot less electable, than if you were just a progressive.

There is a reason many people refer to Trump's NFL ads as the most effective campaign spending of that election cycle: it really resonated with the general public.
“Kamala is for they/them. President Trump is for you.”
You may not agree with the sentiment of the ad. But you have to agree that it hits hard. And for regular in the middle folks who are tired of the constant culture war stuff, it said all they needed to hear.

Personally, I sympathize with the causes that SJWs try to achieve. However, I strongly believe that the way in which they go about trying to enact these changes is counterproductive to their cause. SJWs are their own worst enemy. You can't force culture war stuff down people's throats and expect them to enjoy it.

Perfectly said, and that's also the secret sauce in Carney's likeability and success. He doesn't pander to either the woke or anti-woke nutcases. He's been note perfect.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Perfectly said, and that's also the secret sauce in Carney's likeability and success. He doesn't pander to either the woke or anti-woke nutcases. He's been note perfect.

I have no idea of what Carney thinks about progressive, woke and SJW issues. And that's how I like it. Just run the country and economy.

If someone doesn't like how they're being portrayed or treated, they can go to the HRC and courts (unless the NWC stops you).

 

[picard102]

He doesn't pander to either the woke or anti-woke nutcases. He's been note perfect.

He brought in a so-con into the party. I think we know where he stands, and it's not a perfect note.

 

[T3G]

He brought in a so-con into the party. I think we know where he stands, and it's not a perfect note.

I'm fascinated by the depiction of him as being somehow contrary to conservative ideals. Dude's a neolib banker. If he has any issues with conservative ideology, then I'm a fruit fly.

The LPC are conservatives for people too scared of the social burden of being seen as conservatives.

 

[Northern Light]

I know a lot of "middle of the road" Americans who absolutely do care about diversity and human rights at the same time as caring about the economy, crime and other issues. Often all of these issues are interconnected and a decent standard of living for all can be better achieved through less racial disparity, safety for everyone, and more.

I agree with the sentiment, I think the issue is the marketing.

If, as example, one visible minority under performs the average for high school graduation, one, I would hope, doesn't believe that's related to genetics. Nor is it likely related to racism at any scale, where teaching faculties are often representative of their communities (not to say there are not isolated issues of discrimination) .

But generally, you can trace the under performance to level of education received by a parent, to learning disabilities going undiagnosed or untreated, to second language barriers, and a big part of the gap has been tied to summer breaks. The latter for children from affluent homes is often spent at high quality camps (space camp, art camp, overnight wilderness camp etc., along with world travel, museums , theme parks and more. While those from lower income households are often latch-keyed and limited to watching TV. or gaming.

Everyone should agree on the virtue of closing a performance gap, and ensuring equal opportunity. Fill that gap with affordable/free specialty camps regardless of income, or priced on a sliding scale, for everyone, and you should get a large level of support without too much division. Articulate the same as a program exclusively open to one minority group and you'll draw lots of blowback, as there are other low income families being excluded.

The point is to address disadvantages based on income, or recent immigration status, or based on education of the parent (extra homework support after school or on weekends) rather than in a divisive manner.

Even seemingly divisive issues like 'washrooms' can be resolved by unisex, private stalls.

Its possible to be progressive and address real inequities without touching all the 'hot buttons' seemingly for the sake of doing so.

 

[lenaitch]

Okay, I'll try to explain the best I can, even though @Admiral Beez already alluded to key points.

Let's take a step back and look at Canadian politics. Pierre Poilievre has a likeability problem, I hope no one tries to deny that. Many people go as far as to call him a d!ck. After his election loss a year ago, CBC was interviewing people at the Union Station regarding their thoughts on the election outcome. The word I personally remember people reciting the most about PP is "divisive". And I think him being divisive is just a more polite way of saying just how big of a d!ck he is.

What does that have to do with social justice warriors, you ask? Well, the reason PP is so divisive is that he is a culture warrior on the far right side. As in, his whole shtick is being the anti-woke champion. Some people on the right love him for it, the woke left hates him for it, but the majority of people in the middle look at this culture war and they are tired of this nonsense. They don't like seeing PP turning the social discourse into "us vs. them" culture war. This is what they refer to when they say he is divisive.

Now to my point. And this may be a hard pill to swallow for some people here. The woke social justice warriors are just as divisive as Pierre Poilievre. They just bat for the other team. Anyone involved in culture war fights is just as unlikeable as Pierre Poilievre, no matter which side of the barricades they are on. The entire culture war has become toxic on both sides of the debate.

So yeah, if you are a progressive politician but also embrace the woke SJW issues as part of your politics, you become a lot less electable, than if you were just a progressive.

There is a reason many people refer to Trump's NFL ads as the most effective campaign spending of that election cycle: it really resonated with the general public.
“Kamala is for they/them. President Trump is for you.”
You may not agree with the sentiment of the ad. But you have to agree that it hits hard. And for regular in the middle folks who are tired of the constant culture war stuff, it said all they needed to hear.

Personally, I sympathize with the causes that SJWs try to achieve. However, I strongly believe that the way in which they go about trying to enact these changes is counterproductive to their cause. SJWs are their own worst enemy. You can't force culture war stuff down people's throats and expect them to enjoy it.

Another thing to remember is many of the social justice/equity issues that keep many Americans up at night, such as abortion, same sex marriage and even parental leave, are ones we have walked past, fairly successfully' although not all might agree on that.

 

[PinkLucy]

The whole uproar over who is using which toilet is hilarious. I just spent six weeks in Europe where there is often only one public WC that everyone uses. We frequently had a chuckle over the horrors of gender neutrality. But I suspect those that are the most up in arms haven't travelled much. But it does get a lot of air time and makes people talk, so it's a good marketing ploy I guess.

 

[Full Metal Junkie]

Everyone should agree on the virtue of closing a performance gap, and ensuring equal opportunity. Fill that gap with affordable/free specialty camps regardless of income, or priced on a sliding scale, for everyone, and you should get a large level of support without too much division. Articulate the same as a program exclusively open to one minority group and you'll draw lots of blowback, as there are other low income families being excluded.

This is exactly what I mean when I say that you can be a progressive without being divisive. Unfortunately, a lot of SJWs do not understand this.

Another thing to remember is many of the social justice/equity issues that keep many Americans up at night, such as abortion, same sex marriage and even parental leave, are ones we have walked past, fairly successfully' although not all might agree on that.

This is why I always laugh when Americans call someone like Bernie the "radical left". There is nothing radical about his positions in the rest of the civilized world. But American politics are "special" for the lack of a better word.

 

[Mihairokov]

They're trying to get ahead of something. I think the joke going around online was that Israel was going to start pushing the Epstein narrative again now that the US has a ceasefire with Iran.

Rumours are swirling that Melania had a child with someone before she turned 18.

Regardless, it sure feels like we're reaching the end of the line for DJT. Dying, wife is seemingly leaving him, and Israel have him in a vice.

 

[thettctransitfanatic]

Speaking of special.... looks like the Golden Arches of Trump are coming... (no, not you, Mickey D's, get out of the way, Donny stole your thunder!). Hitler sure would be proud!