The Charlie Kirk Thread

A week or so ago, VP Vance made a comment (that was widely misquoted) that a wise pollster told him that the problem with midterm elections for almost every sitting president was that midterm voters tend to be the angry people and MAGA voters are happy with the Trump Administration, so they don’t have that angry driver to get out and vote in the 2026 midterm.

Well, this assassination provides exactly what the Trump Administration was looking for — a martyr to inflame their supporters to act by voting. I am not saying they are happy this happened to Kirk or engineered it or something — I am just saying this is a terrible political “gift” they will whole-heartedly exploit.

@Ramrouser is getting dragged by some for saying 9/10 will be the 9/11 for a lot of young conservatives but I think that may not be hyperbole — and I think conservative politicians will absolutely feed that fire. At least in the social media under 30 MAGAsphere, Kirk is an immensely popular and influential figure. He could be a powerful martyr for millions of young men and conservative young women.

The eventual power of his martyrdom will depend on the extend to which it reaches outside dedicated MAGA Men and I to the broader population. As a purely crass political matter, that makes it vitally important to Trump, Vance and those who will use his martyrdom for their own purposes to whitewash and nice Kirk’s views — simplify his often extreme rhetoric to be anodyne support for traditional family values, patriotism, being a good Christian Dad and free speech advocate.

I doubt that Trump will mention that Kirk was a vocal supporter of releasing the Epstein Files — mentioning that will be considered in bad taste or something. Bringing up Kirk’s radical statements about gun rights and LGBTQ rights to exist and women’s rights outside a traditional motherhood role subject to the husband’s control will be treated as disrespect for the dead to sanitize Kirk’s martyrdom.

How dare you speak ill of the dead — even if you are quoting his own recorded words — will be a well worn cudgel.

The playbook is well worn for political martyrdom. Martyrdom is political sainthood.
 
BillOfRights said:
FFS

Have you noticed any change in the way Americans talk to and about their fellow Americans since, oh, say 2015? Who has the biggest megaphone and nonexistent filter when talking about people with whom he disagrees?

You can't be this ignorant. Are you a garden variety troll, or do you try out your material on us before posting on xitter?
Click to expand...
zen lives in delulu land.
 
rodoheel said:
Maybe not, but you have been free to accuse others on this board of advocating violence (then disappearing when asked to provide proof). Would you like to retract those posts?
Click to expand...
It's self evident. Super, for example, routinely states that conservatives need to pay a price when Dems return to power. I ask him what price: seizure of property, re education camps or death? I've never received an answer.
 
Ramrouser said:
Wow.
Click to expand...
A trans person could reasonably claim self-defense. That wouldn't be a legal defense as it clearly doesn't meet legal standards, but it would be a moral defense.

When you take away peoples' health care -- care they rely on and need to continue to live -- that's an act of violence. That it is (dubiously) cloaked in law doesn't make it any more acceptable. And if you act violently toward a million people, there's a decent chance that a few of them might return the favor in kind.

Charlie Kirk is not a victim. Charlie Kirk was killed by his own hand. He received the fate that he has not only wished upon others but has helped create.
 
bassydude77 said:
I started a separate thread with this question and no one was interested, so I thought I'd drop it here (I didn't take the hint)

Given the recent statement from Mark Kelly regarding both sides tamping down heated rhetoric, I was curious who on the left (with a significant audience) would be similar to Stephen Miller, Charlie Kirk, President Trump, Jessie Waters, etc.

Is calling some actions and members of the current administration fascists the same as as talking about Dems as enemies of the state?

What are examples of boths sides inflammatory rhetoric (again from someone with an actual audience, not some rando on TikTok).
Click to expand...
I have to admit, I don’t watch a lot of cable news tv, nor do I follow TikTok, twitter, BlueSky, IG, or watch a lot of podcasts, or listen to them, nor do I watch a lot of political YouTube clips… so I truly have no idea if there is a Left leaning public person (with a significant following) that spews the inflammatory rhetoric of a Trump or the antipode to Stephen Miller. BTW, those are the only two mentioned that I know what they’ve said and believe.

I also have to admit, I really didn’t know who Charlie Kirk was or did. I had “heard the name” before, but that’s about it. And I just assumed he was just another right-wing whacko. But other than that, I was totally clueless about this guy. Obviously I’m reading more and more about him last night and today.

But now that I do know about him… I’ll repeat your question: Who on the left would be his equivalent? If there is one… and if there is, I’m guessing his security detail just doubled this AM.
 
rodoheel said:
I have pushed back, in multiple threads, on the "slippery slope towards Nazi Germany" thing and continue to believe that there are a number of factors that make it unlikely that it happens. But, I mean, we have also had posted on this thread a conservative commentator on Twitter advocating that the Trump admin use this incident the way that Hitler used the Reichstag Fire. Following on the heels of all the Trump admin's other authoritarian posturing and actions. So I think you can understand why some people are concerned about that.
Click to expand...
Say the end result isn’t the US looking like Nazi Germany. we just end up with MAGA deciding they know what’s best for all of us and from now on we are a MAGA country. No more elections or due process. It’s a national emergency after all. That’s what these nuts like Ram want . Total rule by MAGA and their GOD/King Trump.
That’s still a pretty slippery slope that ends in disaster . But these right wing assholes will never admit this is where we are headed because it would impede the process.
 
Ramrouser said:
It's self evident. Super, for example, routinely states that conservatives need to pay a price when Dems return to power. I ask him what price: seizure of property, re education camps or death? I've never received an answer.
Click to expand...
Yes you did, you piece of shit. Loss of voting power and law licenses. I don't believe in re-education camps or summary executions of ordinary citizens. I do think that Trump should be dropped in the ocean along with his vile family.

I've said it before: when you make it so the law prevents accountability, you shouldn't be surprised when people take the law into their own hands. It is unsustainable for the president to have criminal immunity. If the courts refuse to discipline the would-be dictator, other means are required.
 
Ramrouser said:
I was directly responding to a post regarding the firing of Never Trumper Dowd. I was clearly stating that Conway and Wallace should be fired as well. I suspect you know that since I've never come close to advocating violence in any of my posts.
Click to expand...
"Never Trumpers are the WORST human beings. Hope Conway’s next or Nicole Wallace."

Clearly? You're an attorney?

I don't follow you and I'm not familiar with the entirety of your posting history. I looked at the words you wrote and I sincerely didn't know what you meant.
 
Centerpiece said:
I have to admit, I don’t watch a lot of cable news tv, nor do I follow TikTok, twitter, BlueSky, IG, or watch a lot of podcasts, or listen to them, nor do I watch a lot of political YouTube clips… so I truly have no idea if there is a Left leaning public person (with a significant following) that spews the inflammatory rhetoric of a Trump or the antipode to Stephen Miller. BTW, those are the only two mentioned that I know what they’ve said and believe.

I also have to admit, I really didn’t know who Charlie Kirk was or did. I had “heard the name” before, but that’s about it. And I just assumed he was just another right-wing whacko. But other than that, I was totally clueless about this guy. Obviously I’m reading more and more about him last night and today.

But now that I do know about him… I’ll repeat your question: Who on the left would be his equivalent? If there is one… and if there is, I’m guessing his security detail just doubled this AM.
Click to expand...
there really isn't anyone like him on the left.

the young turks, maybe? they've been at it for almost 25 years, though.....and cenk uygur is not young. anna kasparian is in her late 30's.

they're fairly popular so comparable in that way but they don't constantly espouse hate and wildly divisive rhetoric.
 
Heelsandeers said:
He was apparently hated by far-right extremist groups. Says this twitter account (longer thread on it)

Click to expand...

TPUSA/Kirk had to denounce white supremacy because so many things he said and platformed hinted at white supremacy, other racism and things beloved by white supremacists ("great replacement theory", christian nationalism, misogency, islamaphobia etc). But to not be cancelled entirely (and rejected from universities) he had to say "i'm not racist" and "white supremacists are wrong". Him overtly stating this riled up neo-nazies.
 
Ramrouser said:
It's self evident. Super, for example, routinely states that conservatives need to pay a price when Dems return to power. I ask him what price: seizure of property, re education camps or death? I've never received an answer.
Click to expand...
I'll let super speak for himself, which he has already done. Name a single other poster or single other example of the posts (with a link to the posts) that led you to say things like:

"Guess we're moving towards that civil war y'all have been calling for." [note - this clearly references multiple people supposedly calling for Civil War]

"More respect for the honest posters who admit they're glad he was shot and hoping for more conservative deaths as part of America's second civil war that's been frequently discussed here." [note - this is clearly claiming that multiple posters here are glad Kirk was shot and are "hoping for more conservative deaths as part of America's second civil war"]

Admit these posts are utter despicable bullshit and that you have no evidence of people saying these things or shut your damn mouth about other people supposedly advocating for violence. I still can't believe a lawyer is so willing to throw around utter falsehoods and has not a care in the world for providing evidence to support them.
 
Ramrouser said:
It's self evident. Super, for example, routinely states that conservatives need to pay a price when Dems return to power. I ask him what price: seizure of property, re education camps or death? I've never received an answer.
Click to expand...
so, debatably, one poster. self-evident, my ass.

not "the left" and "this board," like you said yesterday.
 
rodoheel said:
I have pushed back, in multiple threads, on the "slippery slope towards Nazi Germany" thing and continue to believe that there are a number of factors that make it unlikely that it happens. But, I mean, we have also had posted on this thread a conservative commentator on Twitter advocating that the Trump admin use this incident the way that Hitler used the Reichstag Fire. Following on the heels of all the Trump admin's other authoritarian posturing and actions. So I think you can understand why some people are concerned about that.
Click to expand...
What does the opinion of a conservative commentator on Twitter really mean? He/she doesn't represent the party or the direction of the party any more than Nick Fuentes or Mike Lindell.

Not sure what you mean by "authoritarian posturing". Within the last few days, Trump declined to sent the national guard into Chicago because the governor didn't want them there. One would think that a true Hitler-type would care nothing about the Constitution in that situation.
 
WaynetheDrain said:
Charlie Rock is 100% correct about this. He is absolutely right.

Should he have been fired? Absolutely.
Click to expand...
Charlie Rock is an idiot and so is anyone that agrees.

You think that supporting gun rights and acknowledging that those rights are going to be misused, means that Kirk wants the rights misused or hopes they are misused and deserves to die as a result?

Pretty fucking stupid take.

Do you want to absolish all guns?

Do you support free speech rights despite knowing they will be misused? Does that mean you support verbal threats and want black people called the n-word?

JFC
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top