╌>

What Do Conservatives Have Against Democracy?

  
By:  John Russell  •  5 months ago  •  91 comments


What Do Conservatives Have Against Democracy?
Taken as a whole, MAGA conservatives do not believe in the results of elections (unless the MAGA candidate wins). This is by nature anti-democratic small d. 

Leave a comment to auto-join group NEWSMucks

NEWSMucks


I was tempted to title this article "Why Do Conservatives Hate Democracy"?  but decided to give them a tad more leeway to explain themselves. 

"Democracy" , as we understand it in the U.S.,  is our leaders are put in office by a "one man one vote" system of elections. 

In the past 10 years conservatives have turned their back on that concept. There have been recent news reports indicating that the majority of the folks we call "MAGA" will consider the 2024 election illegitimate unless Donald Trump wins. It is baked in their cake that Trump cannot lose a fair election. The stone cold obvious similarity between that belief and the post 2020 election period is unmistakable. There is nothing new under the MAGA sun. 

There are also reports that there will be a litmus test for gaining a position in a second Trump administration - in order to be considered they will have to agree that the 2020 election was stolen. 

Taken as a whole, MAGA conservatives do not believe in the results of elections (unless the MAGA candidate wins). This is by nature anti-democratic small d. 

Trumpsters have been offered time after time the opportunity to state unequivocally what evidence they have that the 2020 election was stolen, and there is nothing. "There was too much mail in voting" is not evidence. The fact that some states changed the timing of their vote counting, due to more mail in voting because of covid, is not evidence. 

Evidence is something that shows that tens of thousands of votes in swing states were counted from people who were not eligible to vote. The evidence of that is utterly non existent. 

We know that Trump hates democracy, and he has dragged a sizable part of the American population into that deranged abyss with him.  


Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
[]
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1  author  JohnRussell    5 months ago
Evidence is something that shows that tens of thousands of votes in swing states were counted from people who were not eligible to vote. The evidence of that is utterly non existent. 
 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1    5 months ago

No sale John.

I'm the biggest Trump supporter alive and you may have noted that I never said the 2020 election was stolen. There was a lot of interference by democrats, but stolen no.

I hope Biden has more than that tomorrow night.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1    5 months ago

'A lot of interference by Democrats'

jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.1.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1    5 months ago

You have said, repeatedly, that it was rigged. 

Do you have any proof of that other than your wishful thinking and desire to correlate with what Trump thinks? 

Mail in voting , absent of proof that people who are not eligible to vote had their votes counted, is NOT evidence of "rigging" or "stealing". 

Over 3 and a half years later Trump is still claiming the election was stolen from him. Not occasionally, but a few times every week. 

Is he mentally ill or are his followers  ? 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.2    5 months ago
You have said, repeatedly, that it was rigged. 

 It is too bad that you would make such an outrageous claim.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
1.1.4  Tacos!  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1    5 months ago
There was a lot of interference by democrats

For example?

 
 
 
goose is back
Junior Guide
1.1.5  goose is back  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.2    5 months ago

You seem to forget the FBI and the CIA actively suppressed the Hunter Biden Laptop.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.6  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tacos! @1.1.4    5 months ago

Didn't they get 51 "former Intelligence" officials to claim the Hunter Laptop looked like Russian disinformation? (Trump talked about it during the debate)

Didn't they get social media to censor the Hunter laptop story?

The FBI had it they knew it was real.

How about a democrat lawyer going around the battleground states and getting those jurisdictions to permit widespread absentee voting?

How about Mark Zuckerberg finding a way for private entities to donate millions of dollars to fund the official government vote-counts in the 2020 elections. Allowing private individuals and companies to fund official election practices may open the door to corruption because many of the Zuckerberg operatives were highly ideological. Eventually, there will be a law against what he did in the 2020 election.

All of the above is election interference. I have never said there was fraud in the 2020 election. If you look back you'll see that I said that once the votes are counted it is silly to look for fraud because it is too late to find it.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
1.1.7  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1    5 months ago

It is not what conservatives have against democracy. I think it's more like what they have against Democrats.😉

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.8  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.1.7    5 months ago

And there is a long list.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
1.1.9  Tacos!  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.6    5 months ago
All of the above is election interference.

First, I don’t see how. Without some kind of direct evidence that the process or results were altered, all we have is opinion and politically inspired dogma.

Second, many things can influence an election, and there’s nothing legally wrong with that unless the methods used are criminal (see: Trump’s New York trial.)

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.10  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tacos! @1.1.9    5 months ago
Without some kind of direct evidence that the process or results were altered,

Then I guess Trump was unfairly convicted.

Thank you, sir.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
1.1.11  Tacos!  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.10    5 months ago
Then I guess Trump was unfairly convicted.

No, you misunderstand the case. He was factually guilty of falsifying business records. It was a felony because he did so in the attempt to interfere with the election through unlawful means - either by violating state tax law, federal tax law, and/or state election law. The fact that he was unsuccessful in changing the outcome of the election is not relevant. If he had been successful, that would have likely been an additional charge.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
1.1.12  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.8    5 months ago

There most certainly is.

 
 
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
2  Hallux    5 months ago

Democracy? Who needs a damned democracy when a 'benevolent' plutocrat is available.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  Hallux @2    5 months ago

Who?

 
 
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
2.1.1  Hallux  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1    5 months ago

Kelly Loeffler ... ? (smirk)

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  Hallux @2.1.1    5 months ago

Call me dumb but who is she? I know...I could google it

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  Hallux @2.1.1    5 months ago
Loeffler aligned with President Donald Trump in her time in the Senate, touting a "100 percent Trump voting record" during her campaigns. [3] [4] After the November 2020 election, Loeffler and Perdue claimed without evidence that there had been unspecified failures in the 2020 U.S. presidential election, and called for the resignation of Georgia secretary of state Brad Raffensperger , who rejected the accusations. She later supported a lawsuit by Trump allies seeking to overturn the election results, [5] and also announced her intention to object to the certification of the Electoral College results in Congress. [6] After the attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021 , Loeffler announced that she would withdraw her objection to the certification of the electoral votes and later voted to certify.

I vaguely remember her

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
3  JBB    5 months ago

Despite our numerated founding principles MAGA believe our founders intended for dominant white males to own everything and rule over all!

original

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
4  Ozzwald    5 months ago
What Do Conservatives Have Against Democracy?

Easy.  It gets in the way of them imposing their beliefs on everyone else.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5  author  JohnRussell    5 months ago

Trump is currently telling people that he cannot lose this election because he is "ahead in every poll". 

Hmm, that is not true, but even if it were , it is June, and he is ahead a point or so. 

But without doubt there are millions of braindead cultists who think he is exactly correct, and are planning accordingly.  And people think we are not in trouble ? 

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
5.1  Gsquared  replied to  JohnRussell @5    5 months ago
Trump is currently telling people that he cannot lose this election because he is "ahead in every poll".

That's what he said last time, too.

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
6  George    5 months ago

I'm not sure if this article is hypocrisy of the highest order, or simple projection. Which party is trying to ban people from ballots? Which party is trying to keep third party candidates off the ballot. it sure isn't conservatives.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  George @6    5 months ago

Can Donald Trump lose the 2024 election unless it was stolen from him?  Yes or no. 

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
6.1.1  George  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1    5 months ago

Absolutely!!! he can lose it as completely as he lost the last election. It wasn't stolen, it wasn't rigged, it was simply won by a more likeable candidate.

Now that we have covered your deflection attempt, who is trying to destroy democracy by removing choices from the ballot?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.1.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to  George @6.1.1    5 months ago
Now that we have covered your deflection attempt, who is trying to destroy democracy by removing choices from the ballot?

I wrote the article, I cannot deflect from it. 

The attempt by a few to remove Trump from state ballots has nothing to do with what I wrote. 

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
6.1.3  George  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.2    5 months ago

The attempt by democrats to remove not just trump but 3rd party candidate undermining democracy. 

Democrats ramp up efforts to block RFK Jr. from appearing on ballots across the nation (msn.com)

So why do democrats hate democracy John?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.1.4  author  JohnRussell  replied to  George @6.1.3    5 months ago

Anyone who wants to can vote for RFK Jr. 

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
6.1.6  George  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.5    5 months ago

[]

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
6.1.7  arkpdx  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1    5 months ago

2024 election has not been held yet. Being that I am psychotic and not psychic, I cannot answer your question at this time. 

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
6.1.8  cjcold  replied to  George @6.1.1    5 months ago

Who is trying everything they can to split the democrat vote?

I and others see through this tactic.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
6.2  Tacos!  replied to  George @6    5 months ago

The conservative strategy is usually to make it harder for people to vote.

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
7  Gsquared    5 months ago
What Do Conservatives Have Against Democracy?

1.  It's contrary to their natural authoritarian instincts.

2.  They don't always win.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
7.2  Ronin2  replied to  Gsquared @7    5 months ago

Who were the election deniers before Trump.

Al Gore, John Kerry, and Hillary Clinton. Every last one of them Democrats.

This is annoying because Mr. Biden owes his presidency to an election denier. In 2020 his faltering presidential primary campaign was rescued by the endorsement of Rep.   James Clyburn   (D., S.C.).

This powerful South Carolina politico was one of 31 Democratic House members who voted on Jan. 6, 2005, to object to awarding Ohio’s electoral votes to President   George W. Bush, despite Mr. Bush winning the Buckeye State by 118,601 votes. Flipping Ohio would have made   John Kerry   president by a 271-266 Electoral College vote.

On the House floor in 2005, the ranking Judiciary Committee Democrat, Rep.   John Conyers   (D., Mich.),   presented the case   for awarding Ohio to the Democrats, claiming “electronic machines transferred” votes from Mr. Kerry to Mr. Bush, creating situations with “significantly more votes than voters in some precincts, significantly less ballots than voters in other precincts, and voters casting more than one ballot.” He even asserted that a voting-machine company “reprogrammed the computer by remote dial-up” in a way that altered the outcome. Sound familiar?

Four years earlier, the   Hillary Clinton   campaign and leading Democrats refused to acknowledge the outcome of the 2016 election, by claiming Donald Trump was not a legitimate president. These actions, while certainly not as dramatic or as immediately damaging as the events leading to Jan. 6 (and today), helped bring us to our current situation.

“He lost the election and he was put into office because the Russians interfered on his behalf,”   ex-President Jimmy Carter said in 2019 , continuing to deny Trump’s victory three years after the election.

“He knows he’s an illegitimate president,” said   Clinton , also three years later. She repeated this sentiment in 2020, telling The Atlantic the election “was not on the level,” and again when   she called Trump’s win illegitimate . She   piled on to this by saying , “You can run the best campaign, you can even become the nominee, and you can have the election stolen from you,” clearly referring to how she saw her 2016 campaign.

Congressman and civil rights icon   John Lewis went even further   in 2017, saying: “I don’t see Trump as a legitimate president. … I think the Russians participated in helping this man get elected.”

Of course,   Russia   did   meddle in the election   via Facebook ads and cyberattacks, among other things, but as the Senate Intelligence Committee’s investigation of Russian interference concluded, there was   no “evidence that vote tallies were manipulated.”

The uncomfortable reality is that Trump became president because 62 million Americans elected him. Denying this helped lead us to today, where a 2016 Economist/YouGov poll found that half of Clinton voters thought a   foreign power   tampered with voting results, while over 50%, and at times as much as 75%, of Republicans said they think   Joe Biden   was fraudulently elected, according to a Washington Post analysis.

Hillary even told Joe not to concede in 2020 if he lost.

Hillary Clinton is predicting Donald Trump’s reelection effort will be a messy affair, and the former Democratic candidate has some advice for Joe Biden: If the race is close, don’t concede.

Speaking with Jennifer Palmieri for Showtime’s “The Circus,” Clinton said Trump would likely try to take the election by going after absentee voting. She emphasized that even a small margin of votes can have major consequences, harking back to her experience winning the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes and still losing in the Electoral College.

Democrats, she said, should be ready to fight if the results come back too close to call.

“Joe Biden should not concede under any circumstances because I think this is going to drag out, and eventually I do believe he will win if we don’t give an inch and if we are as focused and relentless as the other side is,” Clinton said in an excerpt posted Tuesday.
So please take care of your own damn house first and rein in the Democrats.
Also, Trump is a former Democrat- and he acts just like them.
 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
7.3  Sean Treacy  replied to  Gsquared @7    5 months ago

It's contrary to their natural authoritarian instinct

what a stupid comment,  where to even start given the lefts outrage over the court granting jury trials to defendants  and limiting the power of unelected bureaucrats from imposing laws on their own say so,   But how anyone could claim that given laptop censorship campaign mounted by the Democratic Party in conjunction with media corporations and intelligence officials, to suppress information from voters is beyond me,.  After the Kim jong  Like Biden worship campaign crediting him with all sorts of abilities he clearly doesn’t have, it can only be projectio. 

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
7.3.2  Gsquared  replied to  Sean Treacy @7.3    5 months ago

Comment 7.3 above is without question one of the most idiotic, and least coherent, comments anyone has posted on here in a very long time.  Not only does it read like bilious and demented ravings, it is completely truth deprived.  The best that can be said for it is that it's a feeble attempt to replicate Neo-Fascist propaganda.  How pathetic.

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
7.3.3  Gsquared  replied to  Texan1211 @7.3.1    5 months ago

Comment 7.3.1 is ignorant drivel matching Comment 7.3.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
7.3.4  Sparty On  replied to  Gsquared @7.3.3    5 months ago

Comment 7.3.3 displays an outrageous and egregious level of denial.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
7.3.7  Sparty On  replied to  Texan1211 @7.3.5    5 months ago

Let’s see, we could add factitious, pernicious, pretentious…… 

 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
7.4  Sparty On  replied to  Gsquared @7    5 months ago
1.  It's contrary to their natural authoritarian instincts. 2.  They don't always win.

The projection is strong in your comment.

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
7.4.1  Gsquared  replied to  Sparty On @7.4    5 months ago

Your comment is provably counterfactual and a manifestation of obviously very deep confusion.  Put simply, it's ridiculous. Sad, very sad.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
7.4.2  Sparty On  replied to  Gsquared @7.4.1    5 months ago

Proof?    Lets see it.    Otherwise your comment is useless conjecture.     Which would be ….. really sad.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
8  Greg Jones    5 months ago

As usual, Dems show that they are preparing to lose, and lose bigly.

When Trump wins reelection, the left will say it was rigged, or Russia had something to do with it, or millions of voters were duped or stupid, etc., etc., just like in 2016. The first thing they will do is call for his impeachment.  We've heard it all before numerous times and it gets boring as hell

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Guide
8.1  MrFrost  replied to  Greg Jones @8    5 months ago
When Trump wins reelection, the left will say it was rigged

Sure Greg, just like in 2020? LOL 

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
9  Nerm_L    5 months ago

Meh ... Typical liberal screed.  

You know, majority rule is about the majority being responsible for everything.  Democracy is much, much more than 'one pronoun, one vote'.  Democracy is about more than just electing scapegoats to excuse the shirkers.  Sitting back and expecting institutions to take care of you is NOT democracy.  Expecting a college to give you a degree and a happy life is not democracy.  Expecting cops to risk their lives to keep you safe is not democracy.  In a democracy those who fight to protect you must be protected by you; there's no conscientious objectors in a democracy.  

Democracy means you are the police, you are the soldier, you are the doctor, you are the nurse, you are the teacher, you are the priest ...  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
9.1  Tessylo  replied to  Nerm_L @9    5 months ago

What???????????????????????????????

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
9.2  afrayedknot  replied to  Nerm_L @9    5 months ago

“…there's no conscientious objectors in a democracy.”

That is simply ridiculous.

Through civil discourse and knowing that we could do better has been the historical engine that encourages positive change. That is the difference between an autocracy and democracy.

We all have a voice, as is guaranteed, and that includes those voices that challenge us to be better. 

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
9.2.1  Nerm_L  replied to  afrayedknot @9.2    5 months ago
Through civil discourse and knowing that we could do better has been the historical engine that encourages positive change. That is the difference between an autocracy and democracy.

It's not a binary choice; democracy or autocracy.  That's why we are a republic.  A representative republic means that one person's vote must represent more than oneself because we do not all have a voice.

The claims of democracy only provides an excuse for the winners to deny the losers a voice.  Democracy has never been about equality or freedom.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
9.2.2  Tessylo  replied to  Nerm_L @9.2.1    5 months ago

What?????????????????????????????????????

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
9.2.3  afrayedknot  replied to  Nerm_L @9.2.1    5 months ago

“Democracy has never been about equality or freedom.”

Not sure of the reference material used to form such a response, but rest assured it is more reactionary and less historically accurate. Words can always be parsed, but the reality remains.

Can we be better? Of course. But to diminish the importance and promise of our foundation is to make an argument built on shifting sands. 

 
 
 
arkpdx
Professor Quiet
10  arkpdx    5 months ago

2024 election has not been held yet. Being that I am psychotic and not psychic, I cannot answer your question at this time. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
11  Sparty On    5 months ago

I love it when folks who have never served this country one second in their life, question the patriotism of those who have.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
11.1  JBB  replied to  Sparty On @11    5 months ago

President Biden has over forty years of honorable service to America...

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
11.1.1  Sparty On  replied to  JBB @11.1    5 months ago

Honorable is debatable but he’s been a politician going on 52 years.    In your opinion, what years did he not serve honorably?

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
11.2  afrayedknot  replied to  Sparty On @11    5 months ago

And conversely, it is just wrong to question the patriotism of those that have not served in the military.

Having worn a uniform, while certainly noble, does not by itself a better American make. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
11.2.1  Sparty On  replied to  afrayedknot @11.2    5 months ago
And conversely, it is just wrong to question the patriotism of those that have not served in the military.

A unneeded deflection as I agree if no other cause present to do so.

Having worn a uniform, while certainly noble, does not by itself a better American make.

Service other than self is one of the most noble pursuits one can take and clearly makes America better than if one does nothing.    So I guess what I’m saying is … i disagree.

Completely

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
11.2.2  afrayedknot  replied to  Sparty On @11.2.1    5 months ago

“Service…”

There are many, many ways to serve your community and your country outside of the military.

To make it a somehow lesser form of patriotism is to discount all the positive things that occur by the second in making us better. And by and large, those gladly giving of their time, energy, and money do so with gratitude and don’t feel a need to wear it on their sleeve. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
11.2.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  afrayedknot @11.2.2    5 months ago

Hmmm....there's a certain faction around here that they don't care if you wore a uniform if you're even slightly left of center.

My patriotism has been questioned even tho I served in the military

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
11.2.4  afrayedknot  replied to  Trout Giggles @11.2.3    5 months ago

“My patriotism has been questioned even tho I served in the military”

It is that disconnect that is most confusing. To serve in the military is to understand one does so to allow all of us, all of us, to live in a country where freedom reigns. Even if that means we don’t always agree. To think anything else is to diminish their service and becomes self-serving. 

And thank you, Trout…and you too, Sparty, and all those unnamed for your service. 

 
 
 
Igknorantzruls
Sophomore Quiet
11.2.5  Igknorantzruls  replied to  Sparty On @11.2.1    5 months ago
 Service other than self is one of the most noble pursuits one can take and clearly makes America better than if one does nothing.    So I guess what I’m saying is … i disagree. Complete

Sparty, I thank U for your Service, but that does NOT make one more p[atriotic than another.

Especially when you arte constantly left defending the most unpatriotic POS this country has ever elected, cause 45 is one heaping giant serving of a bullshit spreading Jive turkey LIAR, that we, as in US, aint deserving, of heavy pants on fire 'man/boy' who has maid this country dire and not a fan/boy, as prefer AC, and Trump fckd over many, many there as well, plus, asz we heard about when Trump was in court, his fat ass does smell.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
11.2.6  Trout Giggles  replied to  afrayedknot @11.2.4    5 months ago

You are worth it

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
11.2.7  afrayedknot  replied to  Trout Giggles @11.2.6    5 months ago

And I do my best to do my tiny part to make things just a little bit better, and to honor the sacrifices of all those who made it possible…family, teachers, friends, and service members. 

Thank you for the kindest words imaginable. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
11.2.8  Trout Giggles  replied to  afrayedknot @11.2.7    5 months ago

I read that somwhere. Someone asked a veteran what she says when someone thanks her for her service, she says  you're worth it.

You're welcom

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
11.2.9  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Trout Giggles @11.2.8    5 months ago

That's awesome.........

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
11.2.10  Trout Giggles  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @11.2.9    5 months ago

It is. So I stole it. lol

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
11.2.11  Sparty On  replied to  Igknorantzruls @11.2.5    5 months ago
Sparty, I thank U for your Service, but that does NOT make one more p[atriotic than another.

I never said it did  but questioning a Vets patriotism based simply on who they vote is asinine.

Especially when you arte constantly left defending the most unpatriotic POS this country has ever elected, cause 45 is one heaping giant serving of a bullshit spreading Jive turkey LIAR, that we, as in US, aint deserving, of heavy pants on fire 'man/boy' who has maid this country dire and not a fan/boy, as prefer AC, and 

Yawn ….. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
11.2.13  Sparty On  replied to  Texan1211 @11.2.12    5 months ago

Yes, the hate is strong in these ones.     Look no further than comments made here for reams of empirical data

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
11.2.14  Tacos!  replied to  Trout Giggles @11.2.3    5 months ago
My patriotism has been questioned even tho I served in the military

I’m not a fan of questioning anyone’s patriotism (or religious faith). I’m pretty sure that’s a personal attack, every time.

However, wearing a uniform is no guarantee of patriotism. People join the military for many reasons aside from patriotism. For many, it’s just a job, or a path to college or some other career.

Conversely, many people who never join the military are very patriotic and find other ways to serve. Neither of these choices makes one a better person - or American - than the other.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
11.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  Sparty On @11    5 months ago

Yeah...how about that?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
11.4  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Sparty On @11    5 months ago

Beyond a shadow of a doubt, there are people who served their country in the military who are now working to disrupt our democracy, the ex military who participated in J6 are one but not the only example. 

Are those people "patriotic" simply on the basis of having served in the military? 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
11.4.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  JohnRussell @11.4    5 months ago
there are people who served their country in the military who are now working to disrupt our democracy,

They didn't understand the words of the oath they took or they didn;t pay attention in Problems of Democracy class

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
11.4.2  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @11.4    5 months ago

Your fail here is the width of the brush you’re painting with.    I won’t bore you by pointing the same is true of many who never served.

Your anti military tenor is noted though.    Good job!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
11.4.3  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Sparty On @11.4.2    5 months ago
Your anti military tenor is noted though.    Good job!

LOL. I havent said one word that is anti military. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
11.4.4  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @11.4.3    5 months ago

Opinions do vary …. Greatly in this case.

Greatly

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
12  Tacos!    5 months ago

Meh, you have to acknowledge that people in both parties complain that shenanigans of some type caused them or their allies to lose an election. I’m not sure anyone does it as relentlessly as Trump, but there is actually plenty of baseless complaining to go around.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
13  Trout Giggles    5 months ago

oh, yeah. I remember the 2016 election. I felt sure some tomfoolery was afoot. That was my anger speaking. I accepted the results....eventually

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
13.1  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @13    5 months ago

When I heard I wanted to cry but didn't.  Moved on pretty quickly though I felt the same way about the tomfoolery

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
14  Sean Treacy    5 months ago

This from the Perry that spent years insisting an 80 year old man was as sharp as he ever was and insisted that voters disbelieve their eyes and ears until it all came crashing down when the president struggled to form  complete sentences on a debate stage.  Just the latest of their many campaigns to gaslight the American people that have been exposed. 

 
 

Who is online

Kavika
Jack_TX
GregTx


645 visitors