The Trump Presidency 2.0

Just to button up the last OuTrAgE and ‘threat to democracy’- no, Trump isn’t seeking a third term even though he trolled you into believing it with a tweet. Anyone seeing a pattern? No?

Shout to @AWP and his Rubio assessment- Prez names him as a possible frontrunner in ‘28.

 
amlove21 said:
Agree. Huge cost savings and a reset to the system.
Click to expand...

Kind of in the same vein, kind of not, but listening to a podcast about the Philippine-American War I saw a parallel. One tactic A. MacArthur used was to offer guerilla leaders amnesty. Lay down your arms, tell your guys to do the same, and you get a clean slate. Some of the most notorious guerillas were even given governorships. The US gave them an out and that insurrection disappeared almost overnight.

I don't recall us doing this in Iraq or Afghanistan though maybe we did.

How many illegal Cubans came here and we embraced them? Some of those folks are more American than modern Americans.

Punt the illegals and give them a path back, we need to overhaul some of our legal policies anyway. The party that does this wins that demographic for years to come and history has proven this time and time again. Strong, firm measures but with a legal path forward pays dividends for the gaining country. The unchecked violence and economic drain in Europe are classic results of unlimited immigration policies.
 
AWP said:
Kind of in the same vein, kind of not, but listening to a podcast about the Philippine-American War I saw a parallel. One tactic A. MacArthur used was to offer guerilla leaders amnesty. Lay down your arms, tell your guys to do the same, and you get a clean slate. Some of the most notorious guerillas were even given governorships. The US gave them an out and that insurrection disappeared almost overnight.

I don't recall us doing this in Iraq or Afghanistan though maybe we did.

How many illegal Cubans came here and we embraced them? Some of those folks are more American than modern Americans.

Punt the illegals and give them a path back, we need to overhaul some of our legal policies anyway. The party that does this wins that demographic for years to come and history has proven this time and time again. Strong, firm measures but with a legal path forward pays dividends for the gaining country. The unchecked violence and economic drain in Europe are classic results of unlimited immigration policies.
Click to expand...
I am totally on board with this. It satisfies people like me (totally voted for mass deportations and an overhaul of the immigration system) and also satisfies people that want a path to citizenship that doesn't take 15 years. The people it leaves in the middle- people that don't want anyone deported and also want those people to be citizens- make for good content. Cause smooth brain.

To your bolded, there was a clip of an African immigrant absolutely flaming the most dangerous demographic in America right now, the middle aged privileged white liberal woman. It was awesome. Let me try and find it. Basically he was just shaming her at a protest for saying America is trash and needs to be overhauled completely, Trump is a fascist, the standard fare.

His main point was, "What's your goal? You want America destroyed? You can't build anything. You don't want to create- what happens when you get your goal? I have Africa to go back to if America fails- where are you going to go? Africa won't be nice to you. Europe is overrun by immigrants. Somalis having grenade fights in Sweden. What is your point?"

Of course, she had no answer.
 
amlove21 said:
This is what happens when a democrat moves towards the center- the penalty for apostasy is death.

Liberals who rallied behind Fetterman post-stroke in 2022 turn on pro-Israel senator after NY Magazine report

No wonder Dem polling remains at an all time low, and continues to dig. People are over it.
Click to expand...
Nothing new for American politics, unfortunately.
Republicans have treated "RINOs" like this for about as long as I've been aware of politics, so no suprise to me when dems do the same. The vitriol kicks up a notch every few years as social media becomes every more ubiquitous.

"DINO" just doesn't have the same sort of pizzazz though.
 
Cookie_ said:
Nothing new for American politics, unfortunately.
Republicans have treated "RINOs" like this for about as long as I've been aware of politics, so no suprise to me when dems do the same. The vitriol kicks up a notch every few years as social media becomes every more ubiquitous.

"DINO" just doesn't have the same sort of pizzazz though.
Click to expand...
DINO is objectively cooler.

So... here are some examples of what I am talking about. You're saying this has always been this way, for decades (assuming), and the only reason we are aware of it is... social media gives us more access to the information?

Leave the democrats? You're a russian catspaw, regardless of your service.
Stray from the party lines on foreign wars? Get your house burned down.
Come from the single most connected family to the democrats in America, leave the party to fight for health of kids? Years of character assassinations.
Align yourself with the right after being celebrated by the entire left wing? Become the target of nationwide domestic terror attacks.
And of course... if you're a democrat that was loved by the entire gelatinous blob that is the democrat/media machine for decades, leave the party and then run for President as a republican- you're literally Hitler and they'll try to blow your head off on CNN live TV.

And the right will... uh, make some memes and get real mad on podcasts, I guess?

The last R-D switch of any consequence in the last 20 years was Charlie Crist in Florida, where he eventually got smoked by DeSantis and left politics. There was barely a ripple on the right. So how is this "always been this way"?
 
Soon as I hear/ see someone call another a RINO or DINO, I tune them out. It's the cheapest put down/ slur/ whatever to use in politics. Total, no effort retort.

I guess political parties don't evolve?
 
AWP said:
Soon as I hear/ see someone call another a RINO or DINO, I tune them out. It's the cheapest put down/ slur/ whatever to use in politics. Total, no effort retort.

I guess political parties don't evolve?
Click to expand...
The whole "RINO" thing isn't really even a thing on the right anymore. Not in any serious way, anyway. Yes, I know dorks still use it yes it's a term blah blah blah. It doesn't have the sting on the right anymore and anytime I see someone use it, I connect them to the boomer/doomer dork part of the party.

The larger messaging that the party wants you to take on is a "wide tent MAGA movement" that will live on after Trump. That's the party line, exactly the opposite of calling everyone you don't like a RINO establishment shill. It's passe.
 
AWP said:
Soon as I hear/ see someone call another a RINO or DINO, I tune them out. It's the cheapest put down/ slur/ whatever to use in politics. Total, no effort retort.

I guess political parties don't evolve?
Click to expand...
Tangentally related to the discussion. Fram it however you'd like- the left and right are light years apart in how they deal with issues internally.

 
amlove21 said:
DINO is objectively cooler.

So... here are some examples of what I am talking about. You're saying this has always been this way, for decades (assuming), and the only reason we are aware of it is... social media gives us more access to the information?

Leave the democrats? You're a russian catspaw, regardless of your service.
Stray from the party lines on foreign wars? Get your house burned down.
Come from the single most connected family to the democrats in America, leave the party to fight for health of kids? Years of character assassinations.
Align yourself with the right after being celebrated by the entire left wing? Become the target of nationwide domestic terror attacks.
And of course... if you're a democrat that was loved by the entire gelatinous blob that is the democrat/media machine for decades, leave the party and then run for President as a republican- you're literally Hitler and they'll try to blow your head off on CNN live TV.

And the right will... uh, make some memes and get real mad on podcasts, I guess?

The last R-D switch of any consequence in the last 20 years was Charlie Crist in Florida, where he eventually got smoked by DeSantis and left politics. There was barely a ripple on the right. So how is this "always been this way"?
Click to expand...

I don't have time to link things, so forgive me if I'm not as detailed as your are.

The first thing time I saw "RINO" was in 2008 when McCain refused to call Obama a secret Muslim. It pops up pretty commonly even now, though it's pretty accurate to say it's only "Boomers" that really use it now. It was pretty commonly used for anybody who opposed Trump during his 1st term/second run, but aside from the Cheneys not so common anymore.

amlove21 said:
The larger messaging that the party wants you to take on is a "wide tent MAGA movement" that will live on after Trump. That's the party line, exactly the opposite of calling everyone you don't like a RINO establishment shill. It's passe.
Click to expand...

Good point, MAGA is a big tent.

If you're Republican but not MAGA, what is that? Are they still part of the party, or are "RINOs"?

That's not a "gotcha" question or anything, interested in your perspective on it.
 
Cookie_ said:
Good point, MAGA is a big tent.

If you're Republican but not MAGA, what is that? Are they still part of the party, or are "RINOs"?

That's not a "gotcha" question or anything, interested in your perspective on it.
Click to expand...
My initial thought is that MAGA is really just believing in the perceived "ideals" of Trump.

Within the "deals" of the Trump train of thought, I believe there lies A LOT of ambiguity, but some core characteristics are:
1) Anti-Orthodox. The established norms are not held sacrosanct.
2) American Nationalist. The MAGA sphere involves both Civic and Ethnic Nationalists.
3) Capitalist. This involves both traditional and Neo-Capitalists.

-I would say all Republicans are Capitalists or Neo-Capitalists. So that checks off that box.

-Most are Nationalists, tho some have some globalists tendencies due to their own self-interests, which begins the slippery slope into RINO land. One thing is for sure, there are approximately zero communists or anarchists in the MAGA-verse.

-Orthodoxy seems to be the biggest point of contention, as a lot of Conservative minded individuals are...well...conservative. They don't tend to like change for changes sake. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." The perceived "moral high ground" is a great example of the David Frenche's of the world trying to hold on to an old vestige or what the Republican party used to be.

To continue on the Orthodoxy topic, I think you could also divide MAGA vs. non-MAGA Republicans on whether or not they prioritize results vs. principle. MAGA REALLY likes to win. How they achieve that is far less important than actually winning. It's very Machiavellian by nature. Those who are more ok with losing as long as they "played the right way" tend to avoid being under the MAGA umbrella. They exist, but I think that's a critical divide that really separates the wheat from the chaff.

TLDR: I think the vast majority of Republicans who resist Trump and would self-separate from the MAGA label tend to be more tethered to how the US has been. DC may be a swamp, but hey...like Shrek..."it's my swamp."
-Mitch McConnell (probably)

What you will find in MAGA are:
1) Isolationists and Hawks
2) Free Trade and Protectionists
3) Racists and the "color-blind"
4) Rich and Poor
5) Small government and Big government
6) religious and non-religious
7) Young and Old

MAGA is really like nothing we've seen before and I do think it is the dawning of a new age, both domestically and globally.
 
Cookie_ said:
I don't have time to link things, so forgive me if I'm not as detailed as your are.

The first thing time I saw "RINO" was in 2008 when McCain refused to call Obama a secret Muslim. It pops up pretty commonly even now, though it's pretty accurate to say it's only "Boomers" that really use it now. It was pretty commonly used for anybody who opposed Trump during his 1st term/second run, but aside from the Cheneys not so common anymore.



Good point, MAGA is a big tent.

If you're Republican but not MAGA, what is that? Are they still part of the party, or are "RINOs"?

That's not a "gotcha" question or anything, interested in your perspective on it.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's really just sort of fallen out of favor. It can still be useful to describe someone in shorthand, like if you said "This person is a RINO," I would get exactly what you mean. The zeitgeist just used it too much, and everyone sort of moved on, I guess? I am not sure if there is even a replacement word for it. If you have an R next to your name but fail to meet the morality test de rigueur- poof. You're a RINO. Which is SUPER weird, because depending on what person from what faction or what allegiance is leveling the claim, it's a moving target. Which naturally transitions into...

...your bolded. It is a great question, and useful for explanation. I knew it wasn't a gotcha. I'll try to be as concise as possible. This is just my read of the tribes.

- There are rank and file folks, usually skews a bit older, that are just "republicans". Standard boiler plate republican values, the tropes. Watches Fox News, thinks Tucker was too edgy but liked his bowtie, live and let live crowd. Squishy on issues that true conservatives value. Would get called RINO. Brian Fitzpatrick is one of these people. Votes juuuuuust this side of democrat. Like a 35% freedom score.

- TrumpWorldMAGA is an entirely different animal. These folks "follow the plan", think DJT is a savior, he can do no wrong, COVFEFE meant something real, 7d chess. Watch only Bongino (RIP), Jesse Waters is the only good Fox Guy left, Newsmaxx. Uses the word "Libtard" unironically. MTG. Matt Gaetz. Just 100% Trump loyalists. I think people think Nancy Mace fits here, but I think she actually fits in the last category, but she popped into mind. Put a pin in it.

- Normal MAGA want to MAGA, but these are the majority of folks that have evolved past the first category but cant deal with the fringe TWMAGA folks. Normal MAGA would have been republicans that we would have actually called hard-line conservatives before the evolution of TWMAGA and the Trump phenomenon. Would call the rank and file republicans squishy RINOs. Anna Paulina Luna, Byron Donalds, Jim Jordan... MAGA. They go hard here and there but don't rise to retarded level, but the party is MAGA at this point, and if you want to be anywhere near relevant, you gotta be MAGA.

- MAHA is really interesting- it's every based chick in the country that isn't a liberal white woman werido in the age group of 35-65. They all coalesced to sort of align with Normal MAGA and were a huge reason Trump won the last election. I just mention them because of their big space in the overall architecture at the moment. That alliance is crazy.

- And then there are conservatives. These are closest to like, old school Liberals. Not what that word means today, but like Rand Paul, Thomas Massie sort of folks that don't align well to any of the above enough to get lumped in those groups. Too averse to using military for everything, not supportive of big government, totally willing to vote on the actual principles as opposed to party lines. There just aren't a lot of them. The antonytm to these folks on the left would be Ro Khanna. Ro is essentially the bizarro version of Rand Paul. It's weird. I think Nany Mace best fits here as well- high freedom score, firebrand without being retarded.

So, anyway, that's my opinion. The folks that come over from the other side of the fence (Jillian Michaels and Dave Rubin are great examples) usually end up in the Normal MAGA camp, very rarely do they go full on TWMAGA (although Antonio Brown 100% did, thanks CTE).
 
757 said:
My initial thought is that MAGA is really just believing in the perceived "ideals" of Trump.

Within the "deals" of the Trump train of thought, I believe there lies A LOT of ambiguity, but some core characteristics are:
1) Anti-Orthodox. The established norms are not held sacrosanct.
2) American Nationalist. The MAGA sphere involves both Civic and Ethnic Nationalists.
3) Capitalist. This involves both traditional and Neo-Capitalists.

-I would say all Republicans are Capitalists or Neo-Capitalists. So that checks off that box.

-Most are Nationalists, tho some have some globalists tendencies due to their own self-interests, which begins the slippery slope into RINO land. One thing is for sure, there are approximately zero communists or anarchists in the MAGA-verse.

-Orthodoxy seems to be the biggest point of contention, as a lot of Conservative minded individuals are...well...conservative. They don't tend to like change for changes sake. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." The perceived "moral high ground" is a great example of the David Frenche's of the world trying to hold on to an old vestige or what the Republican party used to be.

To continue on the Orthodoxy topic, I think you could also divide MAGA vs. non-MAGA Republicans on whether or not they prioritize results vs. principle. MAGA REALLY likes to win. How they achieve that is far less important than actually winning. It's very Machiavellian by nature. Those who are more ok with losing as long as they "played the right way" tend to avoid being under the MAGA umbrella. They exist, but I think that's a critical divide that really separates the wheat from the chaff.

TLDR: I think the vast majority of Republicans who resist Trump and would self-separate from the MAGA label tend to be more tethered to how the US has been. DC may be a swamp, but hey...like Shrek..."it's my swamp."
-Mitch McConnell (probably)

What you will find in MAGA are:
1) Isolationists and Hawks
2) Free Trade and Protectionists
3) Racists and the "color-blind"
4) Rich and Poor
5) Small government and Big government
6) religious and non-religious
7) Young and Old

MAGA is really like nothing we've seen before and I do think it is the dawning of a new age, both domestically and globally.
Click to expand...
This was great.

@Cookie_ take his post, combine it with my post and poof- that's probably the most comprehensive "what exactly is MAGA" post on these pages.

Again, Great job there @757
 

Similar threads

Box
The Shocking Truth Behind “Dogs Playing Poker”: A Government Conspiracy to Create Superspy Canines
Replies
3
Views
791
Box
Box
A
THE SHERIFF IS A MONDAY!!!!!
Replies
1
Views
316
RackMaster
RackMaster
RackMaster
The Canadian Armed Forces announces the creation of the Paramedic and Combat Medic Occupations
Replies
2
Views
1K
RackMaster
RackMaster
Ooh-Rah
How a Top Secret SEAL Team 6 Mission Into North Korea Fell Apart
Replies
12
Views
3K
Ooh-Rah
Ooh-Rah
A
Bergdahl 2.0
2
Replies
29
Views
3K
Totentanz
Totentanz
Back
Top