The obstructionists are only listening to what Donald Trump wants, instead of serving the people they represent.
Don't vote for any of these cowards!
Alternative :
White House rejects Trump comments encouraging Russia to attack NATO states not paying bills
From the other place. All the shit says.
says he would encourage to attack allies who pay too little
Remarks by former president and presumptive 2024 nominee described as by the
Every day, something new.
How much more does this ghastly moron have to do to persuade Americans not to vote for him
Republican Party, under the leadership of Former US President Donald Trump, appears to be embracing a stance of disengagement
Trump Questions Absence of Nikki Haleys Husband on Campaign
Age, mental capacity dominate US campaign trail after report questions Bidens memory
Trump says he warned NATO ally: Spend more on defence or Russia can 'do whatever the hell they want'
Donald Trump says that, as president, he warned NATO allies that he "would encourage" Russia "to do whatever the hell they want" to countries that are "delinquent" as he ramped up his attacks on foreign aid and longstanding international alliances.
Seeking a second presidency as the Republicans presumptive 2024 White House nominee, Donald Trump has said he would encourage Russia to attack any of the USs NATO allies whom he considers to have not met their financial obligations.
took the battle 4 the 2 s home turf Saturday & the former governor was up 4 the fight
The former president hurled personal attacks Haley throughout an afternoon rally at in , most notably questioning the whereabouts of her husband, Maj. , who is serving an active duty deployment in the for the South Carolina
"Take over surrounding countries" doesn't really capture what Trump says will happen if he wins.
This is what Russia did when they invaded Bucha, Ukraine. Dozens of civilians tortured, raped, murdered. So far, Russian soldiers have stolen nearly 20,000 Ukrainian children and shipped them to Russia.
Today, Trump said he *wants* Putin to do this to our NATO allies.
Trump says there wouldn't be wars if he were president. I believe that may be true.
By abandoning our allies, trump would allow and encourage imperialistic powers like Russia and China to take over surrounding countries. Without the U.S. to defend them, these small countries would be forced to surrender. (See Ukraine.)
A not very nice globalism, run by oligarchs.
Recent gaffes underscore the unenviable challenge facing Joe Biden's aides, who know every verbal slip can exacerbate the biggest liability the president faces voters worrying hes not up to the task.
Donald Trump says he would encourage Russia to attack Nato countries who dont pay bills
Gift Article Trump Insinuates Haleys Husband National Guardsmen Deployed to Africa to Escape Her
What happened to her husband Where is he Mr. Trump said to a crowd in Conway, S.C. Hes gone.
He then paused, before adding suggestively: He knew. He knew.
ONCE A TRAITOR, ALWAYS A TRAITOR
Raw Story is reporting this from a Donald Trump rally today (Saturday).
The former president in one instance at the rally said, "One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, Well, sir, if we don't pay and we're attacked by Russia, will you protect us I said.. No I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want."
'Music to Putin's ears': Experts fact check Trump's rally lies and missteps
David McAfee
February 10, 2024 5:36PM ET
Donald Trump can't find enough opportunities to take the part of dictator Putin and Russia Russia Russia, while finding fights with European democracy allies.
:
:::
Hecklers should start going to his rallies in large numbers. He cannot handle it. And eventually he'll stop doing his rallies
Trust it, the more unpleasant it is for him the less he enjoys it the less he'll want to do it.
Trump Has A Second Severe Cognitive Episode In Less Than 24 Hours
O contra-ataque da Casa Branca sobre a idade de Biden
Confira!
If is allowed back in the , we will spend the next decade+ trying to restore the rule of law. He will have no incentive to leave, and every reason to use every power he has, and doesn't have to remain in control until his dying breath. And then he will appoint one of his children to succeed him, and rule in perpetuity. It will literally be the end of the American Republic.
So, if I understand this correctly, it is perfectly okay to help elect a sociopathic narcissist for president, whose party includes a very large number of people who despise Arab Americans, whose party - right now - singles out Israel as THE country to give foreign aid, whose party looks to support Israel's war effort without conditions, the people of Gaza be damned, and whose party has a very large number of members who want to deport Palestinians. No problem with any of this.
It's Joe Biden that's the problem.
Right
:
:::
on : Where's her husband Oh, he's away. He's away! What happened to her husband What happened to her husband Where is he He's gone.
Here's your answer, sshl, courtesy of 's :
Maj. is a commissioned officer with the and is currently deployed with the 218th in the .
Republicans who become histrionic over Joe Biden's verbal missteps are enormous hypocrites. Trump's bizarre comments are all in recent memory. But many people have forgotten about George W. Bush.
The GOP hasn't had a coherent president this century.
*smh*
The is actually informing the world that he's a , telegraphing to his Master, , that he will stand by and do nothing as invades
Wait wait...
actually said "you gotta pay your bill"
Donald Trump
*shaking my head again*
Haley hopes to boost election bid with attacks on Trumps and Bidens ages
Senator Murphy explains why the border bill died in the Senate, really well!
Alternative :
AI firm considers banning creation of political images for 2024 elections (AI)
Trump campaign sees boost after boost amid bad week for Biden
just tipped off that something big is coming and hes scared of it
A very confused, cognitively declining
Donald Trump Vows to Reverse Bidens Gun Restrictions
AI and misinformation: whats ahead for social media as the US election looms
Donald TrumpWell, that's a new term, for me.
Alternative :
Trump should really lose both of these. The best argument his lawyer made was the idea that states can't add requirements for office, but that was a tortured interpretation.
Alternative :
Former President Donald Trump Vows to Reverse Bidens Gun Restrictions
You know my day job is actually working in Bioinformatics. I have an extensive background in Science, Mathematics, Philosophy, and Logic, and I read peer-reviewed research on Epidemiology on the daily. The amount of leftist misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda on Mastodon is disturbing. What is even more disturbing is the cynical justification and the moral relativism. The justification is typically because that person is evil. Yes, the misinformation on the right is out of control, too however, I am not on Twitter or Reddit. The social media platforms I use lean left therefore, the content I personally come in contact with tends to be left-leaning.
I thought about replying under posts. That post can be found . However, I have started to come to the conclusion that people who make posts like this are seeking to stir up controversy, provoke people, and regardless of the validity of the argument, will criticize people for being in their replies. They can read this post or not, and I do not have to deal with the headache. I just find it funny its a white person.
For example, politics is normative. Not all metaphysical propositions are normative. Positive statements are descriptive and not prescriptive. An example of a normative and political statement is people should not be LGBTQ, or people should treat LGBTQ people equally. An example of a positivist, descriptive, and empirical statement is that a person is LGBTQ. A measurement is well, a measurement. There is nothing political about that. It only becomes political when we attach a normative statement to it that is predicated on how it should or ought to be, where that implicitly implies good or bad or interest.
Existence in itself isnt political. Existence becomes political when we prescribe whether that thing should or shouldnt exist. My existence as a queer, black person isnt inherently political. It only becomes political when people attach prescriptive and normative qualifiers to my existence. You can avoid that by simply describing me without a normative attitude. Anyone who believes that would thus have to conclude that reality isnt well real.
I believe people should not be racists however, people are racists. So, how normative, moral, and, yes, political prescription is in conflict with reality. The political aspect of normative statements becomes manifest when we consider how to make that normative statement reality. We do this by creating and enforcing laws that are attached to interests and standing who is harmed by those behaviors and what behaviors we dont want in the future.
As I pointed out, when we say people ought not be racists, and we commit ourselves to that future, we still see racist people therefore, there is a metaphysical disconnect between reality and how we believe reality should be. If we say that everything is political, we implicitly say that everything is contingent on our interests, experiences, and perception regardless of the reality of the situation.
Political statements are extensions of normative statements however, politics connotes power dynamics. So, saying that peoples existence is inherently a political issue is to ascribe power dynamics into this. I just find it interesting that white people seem to be incapable of acknowledging. Saying that a person is queer has a different connotation than this person is queer and here are my attitudes about how people should speak about, act, treat, or exist within a power dynamic.
Honestly, conversations with white people have become really unpleasant because they seem not to be able to have conversations outside an implicit power dynamic. Attitudes whether you like or dislike something, denote aspects of normative statements. When people post things, many people will give their attitudes on that reply however, that further connotes a power dynamic and a qualitative spectrum of good and bad.
Many white people are incapable of having any discussion without some tacit acknowledgment of a power structure. You know, people can simply exist without a political or normative justification on why they should exist. Essentially, is expressing a negative attitude about the existence of things without a political context however, people shouldnt need a political context to exist. Those are both political statements however, objectively, normative qualifiers are not necessary for the existence of things. Things exist if there is a measurable instance of that class of entities where the measurable properties are not contingent on normative statements, ergo political conversations regarding existence are superfluous. That believes it is necessary is so disturbing. Its disturbing that the default is people just cant exist in a space.
You can make existence not political by simply describing it without anything that connotes should. Specifically, you can move discussions out of the political space by making it purely descriptive and not persuasive. Politics connotes power dynamics, so objecting to politics not being prioritized is essentially objecting to moving conversations out of a framework that constantly enforces power dynamics. The people who have the most to say about this are white people, which points to problems within their cultures.
To say it a different way, political issues are always biased. Science aims to be objective, so if everything including scientific issues is political, then that means science is not objective. It is an odd form of science denialism that asserts science is part of a political agenda where there is tacit approval. I work in science, and I read peer-reviewed articles on the daily however, if you dont understand the nuances, you will honestly be fooled into thinking objectivity isnt real and cynical approaches are justified by the immoral behavior of the people on the other side.
Its disturbing Politics is how resources and powers should be allocated. It is not only resources, powers, for it is things like rights, too. A basic guiding idea that America is founded on is that we all give up a bit of our freedoms so that everyones fundamental rights are protected. Its limited to society, and political conversations converge on moral discussions. I can pick up a rock and describe the properties of the rock by measuring aspects of it. That is neither a political conversation nor a normative conversation. Its an empirical, objective measurement, i.e., a statement.
I have to say I am disappointed but not surprised. Machiavellian white people are going to be Machiavellian white people I am especially disappointed in the scientists trafficking misinformation. This is a bizarre form of science denialism via false connections, minimally.
Because I have a feeling that people will fill in the negative space with insane things such as claiming that I am supporting Donald Trump I want to clarify: I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat. Technically, I am an anarchist, and my political perspective is that the United States government is intrinsically corrupt, racist, and beyond redemption. The United States was literally created from genocide and slavery. Such a country is beyond redemption. I dont like white people.
As I said aforementioned, theres a tacit idea in society that we give up bits of our freedoms so that everyones freedoms are protected. I have lost more rights as a queer, black person in the last 8 years than I have gained. While I am grateful for the right to marry my husband, I am left feeling that the legality of our marriage is in constant jeopardy. If the federal government is not holding up its end of the deal, and the purpose of its existence is to care for the welfare and rights of its citizensall its citizenswhy do we even have a government Im a logical person. A way to show that the United States can eventually get to a point where everyone is equal is via topology. Racism is part of the topology of the United States, so just as we can demonstrate transforming a mug into a doughnut, we should be able to show how to transform the United States with all its isms and implicit fascism into something less awful. I cant demonstrate that, so I am starting to believe that progressives are wrong.
Because of my metaphysical beliefs, I spend a lot of time creating really weird simulations to logically test philosophical concepts. I cant logically show how the United States gets from slavery and genocide to a progressive country where everyones rights are protected topologically via a homomorphism. Aspirational goals are asymptote, and they just describe incremental changes however, as we are clearly seeing, those incremental changes are easily undone. At the end of the day, I am an empiricist and a mathematician, so I am persuaded by proof. I see no proof that the United States will get any better therefore, I dont believe it should exist. At all. Hence why I am an anarchist and am not persuaded by which geriatric white man is in the Oval Office. As my husband likes to say, Ugh! Just throw the whole thing away! I am really big on purifying through fire.
There is a positive correlation between prosocial, altruistic behavior, and human fitness, and a negative correlation between Machiavellian, corrupt, immoral behavior, and human fitness. To put it simply, a country that doesnt protect the rights of all its citizens is likely to collapse, which is what we are seeing. The chaos we are witnessing in our politics is a symptom of a country built on blood.
Technically, I am pretty radical, but I have the good sense not to express it openly on the Internet. By radical, I mean that marginalized groups should not have to beg for rights, and we should use more direct means to get the point across. I shouldnt have to add this caveat, but if I dont, an unhinged leftist may start accusing me of being white. Im not kidding
The conversations between my husband and me concerning our feelings about Trump and Biden would probably scare the hell out of most normal people. I believe social media is a surveillance and influence machine, so I dont broadcast my intimate thoughts online. Im finding that because of that, more and more unhinged people are filling the negative space with insane things because I dont trust any political institution, group, or organization in the United States. I wonder why I distrust any governing body. Hmmm
#ActivityPub #anarchist #anarchy #Biden #BlueSky #Democrat #Democrats #disinformation #DonaldTrump #fediverse #JoeBiden #LGBTQ #liberal #liberals #libs #Mastodon #misinformation #Philosophy #political #politics #progressive #progressives #propaganda #racism #rant #rants #Reddit #Republican #Republicans #science #socialMedia #Threads #Trump #Twitter #uspol
Donald Trump has been judged to be an by a trier of fact - the .
This underpins his ineligibility under the 14th Amendment.
Trump got 46% of the vote in 2020.
If he maintains that vote in , 74.2+ million voters will be disenfranchised by voting for an ineligible candidate.
He must be removed from the ballot.
Donald Trump amassed another win at a Republican caucus held Thursday in the U.S. Virgin Islands, where officials flouted several GOP party rules, including holding the contest earlier than allowed.