RFK jr to announce ban on all vaccines until he understands what they are

  • Thread starter Thread starter evrheel
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 249
  • Views: 7K
  • Off-Topic 
gtyellowjacket said:
I thought the first term was going to be a mess based on all the people he hired and the left's collective freak out on about half of them. The first term wasn't some shining example of good government but it also wasn't the end of democracy.
Click to expand...
Yeah, let's just spot check a few of these.

SecDef:
Trump 1 - Mattis, then Esper
Trump 2 - Hegseth

FBI Director:
Trump 1 - Comey, then Wray
Trump 2 - Patel

DNI:
Trump 1 - Coats, then Ratcliffe
Trump 2 - Gabbard

HHS:
Trump 1 - Price
Trump 2 - RFK

I won't even list AG because we fortunately avoided the Gaetz clusterfuck, and while Bondi isn't great, she's at least reasonably qualified for the job.

The point is, this is NOT the first term. Trump told us repeatedly it would not be the first term all over again, and everything he's done since the election has confirmed that. We're in a whole new world of kleptocracy and loyalty to person over country now.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
I thought the first term was going to be a mess based on all the people he hired and the left's collective freak out on about half of them. The first term wasn't some shining example of good government but it also wasn't the end of democracy.
Click to expand...
I agree. He only tried his absolute best to end democracy, he just wasn’t able to do it.
Does trying to end democracy count for anything, or do you have to succeed in illegally overturning a free and fair election before we find fault?
 
Last edited:
ChileG said:
I agree. He only tried his absolute best to end democracy, he just wasn’t able to do it.
Does trying to end democracy count for anything, or do you have to succeed in illegally overturning a free and fair election before we find fault?
Click to expand...
Don't you think the President of the United States could have done more to end democracy?

Certainly other presidents of Democracies have done quite a bit more with varying degrees of success. I don't think Trump tried his very best because despite the chicken little statements from the Democrats, he didn't want to end Democracy.

And don't think Democrats are special. We heard some of the same democracy is in danger from Republicans when Obama was in the top job. It's nonsense.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
Don't you think the President of the United States could have done more to end democracy?

Certainly other presidents of Democracies have done quite a bit more with varying degrees of success. I don't think Trump tried his very best because despite the chicken little statements from the Democrats, he didn't want to end Democracy.

And don't think Democrats are special. We heard some of the same democracy is in danger from Republicans when Obama was in the top job. It's nonsense.
Click to expand...
Okay, let me put it another way that perhaps you can agree with…
Trump did everything he could to overturn a free and fair election. If he had succeeded it would have done tremendous if not irreparable damage to our democracy.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
I thought the first term was going to be a mess based on all the people he hired and the left's collective freak out on about half of them. The first term wasn't some shining example of good government but it also wasn't the end of democracy.
Click to expand...
jfc, dude.

the fact that "the end of democracy" (barely) didn't occur, so its all fine and dandy to you is such a laughably low bar. its just shameless nonsense.

and i know that this has been explained to you on this board 38954329 times over the last several months, but the people staffing his first administration were levels higher in quality than the army of unqualified, rogue, criminal loyalists that he's appointing this go-round.
 
ChileG said:
Okay, let me put it another way that perhaps you can agree with…
Trump did everything he could to overturn a free and fair election. If he had succeeded it would have done tremendous if not irreparable damage to our democracy.
Click to expand...

He really didn't do everything he could to overturn a free and fair election. Think about it a different way. If you were the president of the United States, what things might you have tried to end a fair election?

For me, I might have arrested opposition officials or declared martial law and not allowed any certification vote to take place. If I had all the powers of the president of the United States at my fingertips, I certainly wouldn't use some covert code to rally a bunch of civilians to maybe somehow, some way delay a certification vote.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
He really didn't do everything he could to overturn a free and fair election. Think about it a different way. If you were the president of the United States, what things might you have tried to end a fair election?

For me, I might have arrested opposition officials or declared martial law and not allowed any certification vote to take place. If I had all the powers of the president of the United States at my fingertips, I certainly wouldn't use some covert code to rally a bunch of civilians to maybe somehow, some way delay a certification vote.
Click to expand...
So you agree that Trump did in fact try through multiple avenues to overturn a free and fair election.
I mean, to me this is really, really bad. And certainly fits the bill of the “chicken littles” who warned us that he would not cede power willingly (as in, the way every other president has done in our history).
I mean, maybe that doesn’t mean that much to you, but what Trump did after the 2020 election was worse than anything I imagined he might do. And that he didn’t do “everything in his power” to stop democracy doesn’t mean he isn’t a danger to it (in my opinion).

Edit: and this doesn’t even touch upon his illegal scheme to have Zelenskyy fabricate evidence against Biden so he could win the election.
Or his wish to have protestors shot, which would have been another way to harm our democracy.
I’m sure I am forgetting others.
To compare democrats who warned us about Trump versus Republicans who warned us about Obama is a tremendous reach (imo).
 
gtyellowjacket said:
He really didn't do everything he could to overturn a free and fair election. Think about it a different way. If you were the president of the United States, what things might you have tried to end a fair election?

For me, I might have arrested opposition officials or declared martial law and not allowed any certification vote to take place. If I had all the powers of the president of the United States at my fingertips, I certainly wouldn't use some covert code to rally a bunch of civilians to maybe somehow, some way delay a certification vote.
Click to expand...
He may well have considered or even discussed these possibilities but knew he couldn’t get others to play along with it.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
He really didn't do everything he could to overturn a free and fair election. Think about it a different way. If you were the president of the United States, what things might you have tried to end a fair election?

For me, I might have arrested opposition officials or declared martial law and not allowed any certification vote to take place. If I had all the powers of the president of the United States at my fingertips, I certainly wouldn't use some covert code to rally a bunch of civilians to maybe somehow, some way delay a certification vote.
Click to expand...
again, this has been explained to you repeatedly.

he didn't have enough support amongst his own admin / party to go around attempting to extrajudicially arrest opposition officials or declare martial law. even his dumb ass understood that taking those really extreme and illegal steps likely would've resulted in his own arrest

but he likely will have the support he needs this time with his admin 100% staffed by loyalists, the GOP even more in lockstep with his every whim than ever before and a supreme court that gave him immunity to do whatever he wants.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
He really didn't do everything he could to overturn a free and fair election. Think about it a different way. If you were the president of the United States, what things might you have tried to end a fair election?
Click to expand...
Nobody said he was bright, just craven and mendacious..
 
hedge said:
Nobody said he was bright, just craven and mendacious..
Click to expand...
So he was dumb 4 years ago but now he is crafty enough to overturn our democracy? I just can't see how this time is going to be all that different.

I'm predicting multiple gaffs making us the laughingstock of the world again, a natural disaster response that he whiffs, and one signature achievement that he gets done for his biggest donors, probably tariffs. I'm also predicting 4 years of talking heads and keyboard warriors claiming the sky is falling every time he makes a large or small mistake, a really good night for Democrats in 2 years, and a transition of power in 4 years, probably to a Democrat.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
So he was dumb 4 years ago but now he is crafty enough to overturn our democracy? I just can't see how this time is going to be all that different.

I'm predicting multiple gaffs making us the laughingstock of the world again, a natural disaster response that he whiffs, and one signature achievement that he gets done for his biggest donors, probably tariffs. I'm also predicting 4 years of talking heads and keyboard warriors claiming the sky is falling every time he makes a large or small mistake, a really good night for Democrats in 2 years, and a transition of power in 4 years, probably to a Democrat.
Click to expand...
You are probably right. It is the same argument that HeelYeah makes.

But the downside of you being wrong is much, much worse than the downside of the board majority being wrong.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
So he was dumb 4 years ago but now he is crafty enough to overturn our democracy? I just can't see how this time is going to be all that different.

I'm predicting multiple gaffs making us the laughingstock of the world again, a natural disaster response that he whiffs, and one signature achievement that he gets done for his biggest donors, probably tariffs. I'm also predicting 4 years of talking heads and keyboard warriors claiming the sky is falling every time he makes a large or small mistake, a really good night for Democrats in 2 years, and a transition of power in 4 years, probably to a Democrat.
Click to expand...
He has always been crafty - that is not mutually exclusive with not being very intelligent.

There is clear evidence out there that there was substantial action taken in the first administration to provide guardrails against his worst impulses by people with the power to do just that.

There is also clear evidence that he acknowledges that happened and will be explicitly appointing people who won't take on that role.

Now I cannot say what he will try to do and whether he will succeed in doing those things, but it I think it is indisputable that there will be substantially fewer checks on his worst impulses and the risks of him doing something catastrophically bad for the county will be substantially higher.

The question is how much risk are you comfortable with? Does a 2% chance that he could do something that substantially impairs our democracy allow you to sleep at night? 6%? 8%? 15%? Events with enormous consequences have to be taken seriously even if their relative risk is on the low side.
 
roostra said:
He has always been crafty - that is not mutually exclusive with not being very intelligent.

There is clear evidence out there that there was substantial action taken in the first administration to provide guardrails against his worst impulses by people with the power to do just that.

There is also clear evidence that he acknowledges that happened and will be explicitly appointing people who won't take on that role.

Now I cannot say what he will try to do and whether he will succeed in doing those things, but it I think it is indisputable that there will be substantially fewer checks on his worst impulses and the risks of him doing something catastrophically bad for the county will be substantially higher.

The question is how much risk are you comfortable with? Does a 2% chance that he could do something that substantially impairs our democracy allow you to sleep at night? 6%? 8%? 15%? Events with enormous consequences have to be taken seriously even if their relative risk is on the low side.
Click to expand...
I’d say the distrust he sewed into our election process alone already substantially weakened our democracy.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
He really didn't do everything he could to overturn a free and fair election. Think about it a different way. If you were the president of the United States, what things might you have tried to end a fair election?

For me, I might have arrested opposition officials or declared martial law and not allowed any certification vote to take place. If I had all the powers of the president of the United States at my fingertips, I certainly wouldn't use some covert code to rally a bunch of civilians to maybe somehow, some way delay a certification vote.
Click to expand...
1. They weren't trying to delay the certification vote. They were seeking to displace it. The goal was to cast the EVs into doubt, so that they would be rejected, so then the election would be sent to the House where Trump would win. It absolutely was a plan to steal the election. Stop minimizing that.

2. Trump wanted to appoint Jeff Clark to do exactly what you said you might do. Clark wanted to confiscate voting machines so they could put out some bullshit report to justify a federal intervention in Trump's favor. When it was suggested to him that there would be massive protests, he responded that they could deal with that militarily. Literally saying, "that's what the Insurrection Act is for."

When the DOJ officials told Clark to pound sand, Clark told Trump and Trump wanted to appoint him acting AG. And the only reason he didn't was that every other lawyer in the general vicinity said they would resign if that was the case.

So what you're saying a president who wanted to carry out a coup would do, was attempted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top