Crunchy MAGA: The New Right of the 2020s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As for the vaccine, you’re darn right that was a tipping point. Some of us don’t want government telling us what to do with our bodies. It’s weird how that’s completely understood when it comes to abortion but not when it comes to vaccines. Biden lied to us and said the vaccines were necessary to reduce deadliness of COVID and its spread and more people caught COVID and died of COVID during his administration than during the Trump administration

The vaccines did reduce the deadliness of COVID and reduce its spread you nitwit.

Did not reduce spread. Pfizer never tested whether they prevented transmission.

The vaccine reduces the replication of the virus, therefore it reduces the ability to spread. Now STFU.

So vaxxed can spread it to vaxxed, just not as much? Wow, what a “vaccine”! And that’s why CDC changed the definition of vaccine.

It can spread but if one has been inoculated, then it won't necessarily be fatal or even present as more than a cold. That is sort of the point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As for the vaccine, you’re darn right that was a tipping point. Some of us don’t want government telling us what to do with our bodies. It’s weird how that’s completely understood when it comes to abortion but not when it comes to vaccines. Biden lied to us and said the vaccines were necessary to reduce deadliness of COVID and its spread and more people caught COVID and died of COVID during his administration than during the Trump administration

The vaccines did reduce the deadliness of COVID and reduce its spread you nitwit.

Why did more people die of COVID during the first year of the Biden administration and why were vaccinated dying more than unvaccinated if the vaccine reduces deadliness and spread ?

The people who dies were disproprotionately in red states and unvaccinated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Your post was interesting OP. But one statement caught my eye.

“If you love nature, the environment, health, animals so much, why would you vote for the political party that wants to destroy so much of it?”


You are wrong. Republicans don’t want to destroy the environment. Just because we don’t buy into the green new deal, or believe in giving massive subsidies to EV companies and EV owners, or don’t believe in abandoning fossil fuels for energy sources that are far less reliable and efficient and more expensive in the long run, this doesn’t mean we don’t value the environment and want to protect it.

dp.. drilling for oil is counter to an environmentalist's position. Rs don't believe climate change is man made, hence, why they continue to drill drill drill and support carbon emitting ICE over EVs.

The type of person that OP described is very much a "pull yourself by your bootstrap" libertarian who wants to live off the land, but they don't seem to understand that the land and water and air would be polluted if we let Rs have their way in terms of regulations, or lack thereof.

I'm not a progressive liberal, but I think we need some regulation to protect our environment for the future, not to mention our food supply.

As for jobs, real capitalism means that corporations should be allowed to offshore their jobs. Trump and MAGA don't agree with that, and that is why they are not real Rs; they are populists. People complain about inflation, but if we manufactured everything, and also wanted these workers to have a living wage, the prices of goods and services would go through the roof.

Ask Trump if he thinks corporations should be regulated in terms of pricing and wages, because that is the only way to increase wages and control the cost of goods.

The US has the biggest gap in wages between executives and employees, which is causing the inequity that we see in our society. Ask Trump if we should regulate closing that gap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Your post was interesting OP. But one statement caught my eye.

“If you love nature, the environment, health, animals so much, why would you vote for the political party that wants to destroy so much of it?”


You are wrong. Republicans don’t want to destroy the environment. Just because we don’t buy into the green new deal, or believe in giving massive subsidies to EV companies and EV owners, or don’t believe in abandoning fossil fuels for energy sources that are far less reliable and efficient and more expensive in the long run, this doesn’t mean we don’t value the environment and want to protect it.

Then why sell of rights to exploit protected areas and undo protections for rivers, seas and other ecologically critical areas? Why promote energy sources based on burning carbon when there are alternatives?

Trump offered massive relief for oil companies if they donated a billion dollars to his campaign. Each of us pay for that with the air we breath and water we drink and Trump and the oil executives get rich.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As for the vaccine, you’re darn right that was a tipping point. Some of us don’t want government telling us what to do with our bodies. It’s weird how that’s completely understood when it comes to abortion but not when it comes to vaccines. Biden lied to us and said the vaccines were necessary to reduce deadliness of COVID and its spread and more people caught COVID and died of COVID during his administration than during the Trump administration

The vaccines did reduce the deadliness of COVID and reduce its spread you nitwit.

Did not reduce spread. Pfizer never tested whether they prevented transmission.

The vaccine reduces the replication of the virus, therefore it reduces the ability to spread. Now STFU.

So vaxxed can spread it to vaxxed, just not as much? Wow, what a “vaccine”! And that’s why CDC changed the definition of vaccine.

It can spread but if one has been inoculated, then it won't necessarily be fatal or even present as more than a cold. That is sort of the point.

Same for those who were not inoculated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:yes, it's the wellness culture to alt right pipeline that so many of these people fell into. Now a lot of them are backing RFK

Who is being backed by the same people backing Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As for the vaccine, you’re darn right that was a tipping point. Some of us don’t want government telling us what to do with our bodies. It’s weird how that’s completely understood when it comes to abortion but not when it comes to vaccines. Biden lied to us and said the vaccines were necessary to reduce deadliness of COVID and its spread and more people caught COVID and died of COVID during his administration than during the Trump administration

The only people who had mandated shots were federal employees and military. Everyone else was optional. No one told you what you could or could not do where the COVID shot was concerned.

That’s not really true. Many employers had vaccine requirements.

Then get a different job. That isn't on the government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know people like this too. One of my friends might be a little surprised how much she misses government if it stops working, given her personal situation, which I won't get into.

The Democrats completely sold out back in 1992. Ross Perot has been proven right, as goofy as the man was.

But really, the USA couldn't possibly maintain the 50s and 60s economic position, which was because of the resolution of WWII. We won. Big time. So did the USSR, but they took so much more damage and economic communism kinda sucks.

However, the Democrats sold out and created this neoliberal mess. So here we are. It's just too late.

Uh, I think you mean neocon mess.

If the US had wanted to get back to the 1950's and 60's prosperity, then it needed a tax regime to match, but the Reaganites demolished that opportunity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your post was interesting OP. But one statement caught my eye.

“If you love nature, the environment, health, animals so much, why would you vote for the political party that wants to destroy so much of it?”


You are wrong. Republicans don’t want to destroy the environment. Just because we don’t buy into the green new deal, or believe in giving massive subsidies to EV companies and EV owners, or don’t believe in abandoning fossil fuels for energy sources that are far less reliable and efficient and more expensive in the long run, this doesn’t mean we don’t value the environment and want to protect it.

dp.. drilling for oil is counter to an environmentalist's position. Rs don't believe climate change is man made, hence, why they continue to drill drill drill and support carbon emitting ICE over EVs.

The type of person that OP described is very much a "pull yourself by your bootstrap" libertarian who wants to live off the land, but they don't seem to understand that the land and water and air would be polluted if we let Rs have their way in terms of regulations, or lack thereof.

I'm not a progressive liberal, but I think we need some regulation to protect our environment for the future, not to mention our food supply.

As for jobs, real capitalism means that corporations should be allowed to offshore their jobs. Trump and MAGA don't agree with that, and that is why they are not real Rs; they are populists. People complain about inflation, but if we manufactured everything, and also wanted these workers to have a living wage, the prices of goods and services would go through the roof.

Ask Trump if he thinks corporations should be regulated in terms of pricing and wages, because that is the only way to increase wages and control the cost of goods.

The US has the biggest gap in wages between executives and employees, which is causing the inequity that we see in our society. Ask Trump if we should regulate closing that gap.

They are "populists" but are being funded by the billionaires and big corporations. Guess what they will want? Tax cuts and grow their own wealth. Guess who pays for it? All the "little people"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As for the vaccine, you’re darn right that was a tipping point. Some of us don’t want government telling us what to do with our bodies. It’s weird how that’s completely understood when it comes to abortion but not when it comes to vaccines. Biden lied to us and said the vaccines were necessary to reduce deadliness of COVID and its spread and more people caught COVID and died of COVID during his administration than during the Trump administration

The vaccines did reduce the deadliness of COVID and reduce its spread you nitwit.

Did not reduce spread. Pfizer never tested whether they prevented transmission.

The vaccine reduces the replication of the virus, therefore it reduces the ability to spread. Now STFU.

So vaxxed can spread it to vaxxed, just not as much? Wow, what a “vaccine”! And that’s why CDC changed the definition of vaccine.

It can spread but if one has been inoculated, then it won't necessarily be fatal or even present as more than a cold. That is sort of the point.

Same for those who were not inoculated.

at lower rates of spread for those who had/have been vaccinated

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like your friend has lots in common with disillusioned Democrats like myself. We are far left progressive but are tired of the failures and empty promises of the Dem Party .

Much like the Reagan Democrats, the Trump Democrats are real. We are here and we are anti war and pro American labor not for cheap illegal migrant exploitation/labor or outsourcing . Donald Trump is a one man walking and talking labor Union and anti war activist for America and that’s just enough for some of us progressives to make him better than Biden or Hillary

LOL, rEaL. Wait till your organic strawberries cost $12 because there are no migrant workers. Wait till Trump adds more tariffs and you can’t afford basic necessities. And, wait till your husband is injured on the job because there are no safety measures because corps want you to keep buying, so they squeeze workers and safety measures. Think tainted Chinese baby formula. They can’t cut wages, so they use cardboard and fillers.

[Anonymous]

what proportion of the Democrat messaging this cycle is bashing Trump, as opposed to substance?

From reading DCUM the ratio is about 99:1, and in real life, it is probably not too different.

They have literally nothing to say, AND a candidate who is a disaster, so all they can do is smear and fear monger about the other guy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread already confirms what I have suspected for a long time. Bernie and Trump supporters are the same people. They hate what America is and want it to be something else and they don’t care what it becomes as long as it screws the establishment.

America was not piloted by an unaccountable administrative state being flooded with millions of people from incompatible cultures until relatively recently. I love America and I want to turn the ship around before it is lost forever.

???? The southern border has been an issue since Reagan was president. On several instances, there was a chance at a legislative fix and at every turn, the GOP spurned it, including this spring.

I don’t dispute any of that. Reagan is within living memory of many people, hence, relatively recent. Both parties have been awful about this issue since 1965.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know people like this too. One of my friends might be a little surprised how much she misses government if it stops working, given her personal situation, which I won't get into.

The Democrats completely sold out back in 1992. Ross Perot has been proven right, as goofy as the man was.

But really, the USA couldn't possibly maintain the 50s and 60s economic position, which was because of the resolution of WWII. We won. Big time. So did the USSR, but they took so much more damage and economic communism kinda sucks.

However, the Democrats sold out and created this neoliberal mess. So here we are. It's just too late.

Uh, I think you mean neocon mess.

If the US had wanted to get back to the 1950's and 60's prosperity, then it needed a tax regime to match, but the Reaganites demolished that opportunity.

Yup. That's true. Reaganism took the mess created by the 70s economic shocks and turned the US into a more unequal society. But in 1992, the Democrats capitulated to win an election. And they came up with their own version--neoliberalism with welfare reform. Oh and NAFTA. And here we are.

I don't expect anything from Reagan. But the gerontocracy that sold out in the 1990s is mostly still there! Is there any reason to think they would excite the average voter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your post was interesting OP. But one statement caught my eye.

“If you love nature, the environment, health, animals so much, why would you vote for the political party that wants to destroy so much of it?”


You are wrong. Republicans don’t want to destroy the environment. Just because we don’t buy into the green new deal, or believe in giving massive subsidies to EV companies and EV owners, or don’t believe in abandoning fossil fuels for energy sources that are far less reliable and efficient and more expensive in the long run, this doesn’t mean we don’t value the environment and want to protect it.

dp.. drilling for oil is counter to an environmentalist's position. Rs don't believe climate change is man made, hence, why they continue to drill drill drill and support carbon emitting ICE over EVs.

The type of person that OP described is very much a "pull yourself by your bootstrap" libertarian who wants to live off the land, but they don't seem to understand that the land and water and air would be polluted if we let Rs have their way in terms of regulations, or lack thereof.

I'm not a progressive liberal, but I think we need some regulation to protect our environment for the future, not to mention our food supply.

As for jobs, real capitalism means that corporations should be allowed to offshore their jobs. Trump and MAGA don't agree with that, and that is why they are not real Rs; they are populists. People complain about inflation, but if we manufactured everything, and also wanted these workers to have a living wage, the prices of goods and services would go through the roof.

Ask Trump if he thinks corporations should be regulated in terms of pricing and wages, because that is the only way to increase wages and control the cost of goods.

The US has the biggest gap in wages between executives and employees, which is causing the inequity that we see in our society. Ask Trump if we should regulate closing that gap.

They are "populists" but are being funded by the billionaires and big corporations. Guess what they will want? Tax cuts and grow their own wealth. Guess who pays for it? All the "little people"

This is the dichotomy. MAGAs think that Trump is on their side, and not the side of corporations, but almost every policy he supports helps the corporations: from tax cuts to getting rid of regulations. When he gave corporations those tax cuts, all of those CEOs told the Trump administration that they were not going to hire more Americans with those tax cuts. I started a thread on here when this was happening that those corporations would use the tax cuts to buy back stocks, and I was right. I've worked in the corporate world for decades, and saw this happen over and over.

Corporations aren't in it for the little guys. They are there to make money, and if you give them tax cut and remove regulations, they are not going to help the little guy. They will enrich themselves. Some MAGA on here said that was fine, because a strong stock market would benefit everyone (not really given the wealthiest 10% own 93% of the stock market). So, I guess some of the MAGA are fine with corporations enriching the 1% as long as the rest of us get some crumbs, and the poorest get nothing, certainly not a wage increase, but they'd be hit harder under a Trump admin because MAGA want to kill all types of social welfare programs.