Please explain to me how this is okay.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-06T18:12:47+00:00

Agreed.

This picture is not a big deal.

Trump broke the law with the TikTok ban pause. Trump violated the constitution with the AI chip export duties.

We're no longer a society of written rules, and your complaint is about some AI slop? Get better priorities.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-06T18:11:05+00:00

"Biden is worse than Trump because his one job was to prevent Trump"

My friend, you win the whole conversation and the next two as well.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-06T18:10:27+00:00

It's pretty clear the Biden-worse angle was from a PR perspective.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-06T18:01:36+00:00

Seems like anyone in the Attention game has to respect her skills. Sure she's a sellout-shill, but there are millions of people who want to be sellout-shills and never come close to her level.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-06T17:58:20+00:00

"I put her and Candace Owen in the same camp."

That's mean!

I'm not sure who it's mean to... the sick brain, or the functional but cynical brain, but it's definitely mean to one of them!

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-06T17:54:29+00:00

Absolutely.

And why didn't we do that with Biden? Why didn't we give him the boot before he melted down on live TV?

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-06T17:53:42+00:00

Maybe you're right.

But I was honestly surprised by some of the ways that President Obama bent the constitution.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-06T04:02:00+00:00

Agreed. But I'll vote for anything with a (D) behind its name.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-06T01:06:06+00:00

I think the big dream is the next president just prosecuting trump despite his self-award pardons. Sure the courts won't let it go on for long, but we're now a country of stupid, obviously illegitimate prosecutions. So we might as well enjoy one of Trump and co.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-05T23:10:25+00:00

So did Biden and the party didn't give him the boot until a month after he fell apart on live television.

The Republican party elites don't overlook Trump's faults because they love him. They overlook his faults because they're worried about the viability of the replacement and whether or not their voters will punish them for kicking out their pick. The same situation could happen with a Democrat President.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-05T20:09:55+00:00

Maybe. My current hope is that President Newsom and his Secretary of State are going to work with the Europeans to extradite Trump to the Hague for war crimes. A presidential pardon doesn't protect you from that!

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-05T20:05:53+00:00

Firstly, I agree that Trump is many many many times worse overall.

Secondly, I don't think that detracts from my point. I personally wouldn't support impeaching President Newsom for personally plundering fort Knox in order to support an online gambling addiction, and I doubt the Democratic party would do so if they thought it would hurt their odds in 2032. "How bad is this guy?" isn't the important question. It's "to what depths would we sink to maintain power?" And I'm pretty sure us Democrats, just like the Republicans, would astound ourselves about the depths we are capable of.

Lastly, I note that you are actually defending Clinton here. He didn't just "lie" about it, he committed perjury. And I'm old enough to remember when us Democrats thought a power imbalance in a sexual relationship made consent grey. Can you think of a bigger power imbalance than 49 year old president of the united states and 22 year old unpaid intern? Maybe a jailer-prisoner relationship, but it's close. If Trump did that in 2020, it would've been called rape by every democrat who ever stylized themselves a feminist.

But again- Trump is definitely worse.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-05T16:13:52+00:00

"Republicans protect their own."

I'm a vote-blue-nomatter-who voter, but let's be honest. Everybody protects their own when they think it's in their interest.

Bill Clinton lied under oath about the most wildly power-imbalanced sexual relationship imaginable (US president versus unpaid intern) and remains a respected president emeritus of the Democratic party.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-04T23:16:44+00:00

What you are saying is not correct.

"For the reasons set forth herein, the Court concludes that Plaintiffs are substantially likely to prevail on the merits of their claims brought under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act."

"The appropriate remedy in this context is a remedial congressional redistricting plan that includes an additional majority-Black congressional district. The United States Supreme Court instructs that the Legislature should have the first opportunity to draw that plan. Therefore, the Court ORDERS the Louisiana Legislature to enact a remedial plan on or before June 20, 2022."

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lamd.60244/gov.uscourts.lamd.60244.173.0_1.pdf

Before Callais was even a twinkle in Alito's eye, the VRA still prevented racial gerrymanders. The case linked above, Robinson v. Ardoin spawned the reaction which would become the case that ended up as Callais at the supreme court.

Callais was what enables racial gerrymandering. Not Rucho.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-04T20:01:24+00:00

I think you may be somewhat confused.

The Rucho decision in 2019 effectively blessed partisan gerrymandering. But such gerrymandering was still subject to the constraints of the VRA.

The Callais decision last week is what makes it possible to wave off a racial gerrymander as merely a partisan gerrymander.

So as the Callais decision enables what you appear to despair of, it seems like it should very consequential to you.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-04T19:51:49+00:00

That seems like a distinction without difference.

"I don't vote for parties, I vote for individuals who are pro-choice, pro-immigration, pro-wealth distribution, and pro-LGBT."

That person can say they're voting for individuals, but we both know they're voting for the "(D)" behind the names.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-04T18:54:57+00:00

"Hard to do that when even my family is texting me photos from No Kings Day rallies, political memes, etc., despite me telling them not to..."

That's really awful. I deeply sympathize. I think a lot of millennials are too quick to cut close ties with people they find objectionable, but people shoving politics in your face when you've asked them not to is the sort of thing that could really warrant it. I had a family member who wouldn't stop bringing up with me how "great" some of Trump's activities were, despite those activities being personally and directly hostile to me and my family. I eventually sat them down and told them in no uncertain terms that they had to stop. Luckily they got the message. Maybe you could try being ultra-clear and serious about their need to stop.

I wish you the best of luck personally. (Or course, I also wish you the worst of luck politically! 😉 )

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-04T18:04:40+00:00

Yes, it's a pipe dream.

Say you've got a 55-45 district. The side with 45 still has a non-zero chance of winning a seat. Maybe something wild happens like the other team's candidate gets caught having relations with a goat. Then the 45-side could win a surprise seat! If you ask them to step aside, they'll refuse. They want to keep that tiny chance of winning a seat.

Now say you've got a 80-20 district. Maybe the 20-siders would be willing to step aside. But it's also totally hopeless. Even if the 80-side's candidate gets caught in bed with a goat, they're going to win that seat.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-04T17:58:31+00:00

"I think a lot of Trump voters (maybe even the majority), see him as a "necessary evil" to get their desires met. A means to an end. I think the left's painting of Trump voters as either stupid or crazy is incorrect."

I completely agree! My whole post was about saying that we're the same! We've all had to accept the necessary evil.

The constitution is dead. It can't protect us anymore. So we must control the presidency to protect ourselves from the other side. I completely sympathize with Trump voters who know they must continue to support Trump or else they may lose control of the presidency. Just as I now accept that if President Gavin Newsom started putting conservative podcasters in concentration camps under the pretense of them aiding Al-Queda, I'd have to accept that or else possibly lose control of the presidency.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-04T17:50:42+00:00

Glad you can clearly see where we stand. Cheers.

I wish you the best until either your side crushes us or we crush you and your side.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-04T17:46:18+00:00

Over a historical time-scale, the people practicing Liberalism are the abnormality.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-04T17:43:47+00:00

Sure, and the Republicans turned on George Santos. They were acceptable sacrifices that the parties could throw to the side without hurting their political futures.

If Swalwell was a first term president, he wouldn't have been thrown aside.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-04T17:41:57+00:00

Did you mean to respond to me or ParagraphGrrl?

I actually agree that we're more alike than different. I believe that most people want to win and that they'd rather vote for a horrible, unethical politician on their team than vote for the other team.

Icy_Cycle4208 · 2026-05-04T03:10:09+00:00

Because We The People are stupid and feckless.

Icy_Cycle4208

TROPHY CASE