The Trump Presidency - Chapter 2

[NobodyHere]

I voted for Kamala, don't blame me that she was a terrible candidate.

[cuervo72]

Ah, time to add to that list.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I voted for Kamala, don't blame me that she was a terrible candidate.

That's fine, but show me some sort of evidence that the GOP doesn't pick people based on race and genitals. I'll wait.

[Brian Swartz]

Yeah, I have many issues with Harris, but this isn't one of them. The DEI complaints make sense in some limited circumstances where it's a changing history stand-in for example, but the idea that Republicans somehow aren't selecting people for anything on race/gender is absurd. There's also no good reason to think that's why Trump won.

[RainMaker]

I'm sure all those 30 year old lifetime federal judges that were being nominated with no experience were based on merit.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Then maybe your party shouldn't of pinned their hopes on a DEI hire.

Just say black. It's OK.

[NobodyHere]

The Republicans are selecting people based on who can win.

That's why they're winning.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Just say black. It's OK.

I don't remember Joe saying he picked Kamala because of her race.

[RainMaker]

She was also picked to be the VP and they won. Her selection for President was mostly a hailmary after the Democrats plans to cover up Biden's mental decline became public. She never would have been the nominee through any sort of democratic process.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

The Republicans are selecting people based on who can win.

That's why they're winning.

Well except for the previous election.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Well except for the previous election.

You can live in the past if you want.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

The Republicans are selecting people based on who can win.

That's why they're winning.

So it's ok to pick based on race and gender if you win? Unless you still insist that's not what the GOP does.

Trump's cabinet also isn't voted on. He selects them and they've been almost entirely white males in both administrations. But I'm sure that's only because they were the most qualified. Like Gaetz, Hegseth, his personal attorneys, etc. Donalds and Scott will be thankful to know that the fact that they're black had nothing to do with them not being selected for VP or any other administration position.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

The Republicans are selecting people based on who can win.

Harris was also selected based on who they thought would win. So again, no difference there.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

Harris was also selected based on who they thought would win. So again, no difference there.

So maybe one of those thought processes were wrong.

[Brian Swartz]

That's true in literally every election no matter what happens. Only one candidate wins. This lacks what you might call a point.

Serious question; are you posting under the influence of ... shall we say ... any adult substances?

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

You can live in the past if you want.

So are you complaining about the VP or not? Cause they won after she was what you describe as a DEI hire.

[JPhillips]

dola

Hegseth's lawyer says that Hegseth paid the woman who accused him of sexual assault and that there's an NDA. He denies assault, but that sure does look bad.

[NobodyHere]

Im just a terrible person. You all are right. I,m Wrong.

I'm sorry to bother you.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Then maybe your party shouldn't of pinned their hopes on a DEI hire.

She was a successful prosecutor, she was ELECTED AG of the most populous state, she was Elected Senator of California, she was elected as VP as part of a ticket with Biden.

She is beyond qualified and way more qualified than anyone in Trumps orbit.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Lathum

She was a successful prosecutor, she was ELECTED AG of the most populous state, she was Elected Senator of California, she was elected as VP as part of a ticket with Biden.

She is beyond qualified and way more qualified than anyone in Trumps orbit.

Look,

You win, I don't know anything.

Have fun win your winning candidate.

[Racer]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Biden and Cheney were different, but almost every VP in the past 60 years has been an identity pick.

Vance - young men
Harris - black women
Pence - white evangelicals

There's very little for the VP to do, so it's normal to pick a candidate who helps shore up a particular demographic. This absolutely happens with male candidates.

Originally Posted by Lathum

She was a successful prosecutor, she was ELECTED AG of the most populous state, she was Elected Senator of California, she was elected as VP as part of a ticket with Biden.

She is beyond qualified and way more qualified than anyone in Trumps orbit.

I think both of these are true. Harris was picked in 2020 by Biden because she was both a woman of color and highly qualified.

Most Vice President picks now days are "DEI" picks because they are usually chosen to balance the ticket.

Tim Walz was certainly a DEI choice. Harris was almost certainly going to pick a white male to balance the ticket. Was Tim Walz an unqualified vice president pick? I don't think so.

[Racer]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

She was also picked to be the VP and they won. Her selection for President was mostly a hailmary after the Democrats plans to cover up Biden's mental decline became public. She never would have been the nominee through any sort of democratic process.

This is impossible to say.

If Biden had decided much sooner not to run for a 2nd term there would have been a Democratic primary.

Harris would have potentially had a big visibility advantage by being the sitting vice president. over other potential candidates such as Gavin Newsome, Gretchen Whitmer, Josh Shapiro, Mark Kelly, and Cory Booker. It's impossible to say for sure who is the Democratic nominee for president in that hypothetical scenario.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Jas_lov

I think the house cleaner was Doug Emhoff, not Tim Walz.

Oh yes, my mistake on remembering exactly which Democrat was screwing who. Perhaps I was thinking of the Georgia AG that was going after Trump but somehow landed on Walz and not Kamala’s husband. At least Kamala didn’t marry until she was 50 to avoid her looking like she was wrecking her own home with her affairs. So let me give her some credit there.

As for Hegseth, it is a bad look indeed if he paid a lady for an NDA, let’s hope it doesn’t interfere with his job duties.

[Edward64]

Not sure if below article belongs here, but what the heck. The uptick in 4Bs is attributed to the Trump election. Watch out single guys ...

Just a moment...

And now, in the wake of Donald Trump’s reelection, 4B is going viral on U.S. social media among women who are furious with the men who helped the former president clinch a win. On TikTok alone, top videos have gained millions of views, and one widely shared tweet about the 4B movement post-election now has 450,000 likes and 21 million views at time of writing.

It’s too soon to say if the 4B movement is here to stay in the United States.

The four Bs stand for bi-hon (no marriage), bi-yeonae (no dating), bi-chulsan (no birthing) and bi-sex (no sex).

Article said began in SK because of the resentment by women there. I read a couple more articles and could not find est. number of Korean women doing this. In my opinion, SK women have more to complain about than US women. I can see it taking off in SK (not related to Trump obviously) and US women were already doing no marriage and no birthing before Nov. But hard to see US women mass adoption of no dating and no sex.

[Lathum]

I have 2 close friends, both divorced single moms, who do this. Not because of Trump being elected per se, but because men in general are horrible. They would also never date a Trump supporter if they did go back

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Not sure if below article belongs here, but what the heck. The uptick in 4Bs is attributed to the Trump election. Watch out single guys ...

Just a moment...



Article said began in SK because of the resentment by women there. I read a couple more articles and could not find est. number of Korean women doing this. In my opinion, SK women have more to complain about than US women. I can see it taking off in SK (not related to Trump obviously) and US women were already doing no marriage and no birthing before Nov. But hard to see US women mass adoption of no dating and no sex.

A liberal women that was a guest on Maher's show made a good point about this. Liberal women will follow this path and not conservatives. So, conservative families will be raising children in conservative homes that will become voters someday, while liberal women won't be producing or raising children in liberal homes. Great idea, right?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Sweed

A liberal women that was a guest on Maher's show made a good point about this. Liberal women will follow this path and not conservatives. So, conservative families will be raising children in conservative homes that will become voters someday, while liberal women won't be producing or raising children in liberal homes. Great idea, right?

I didn’t think of that, interesting unintended consequences.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I have 2 close friends, both divorced single moms, who do this. Not because of Trump being elected per se, but because men in general are horrible. They would also never date a Trump supporter if they did go back

Hate to break the news but, men in general are not horrible. Now if one party keeps telling them that they are, maybe just maybe, they'll vote for the other party?

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Oh yes, my mistake on remembering exactly which Democrat was screwing who. Perhaps I was thinking of the Georgia AG that was going after Trump but somehow landed on Walz and not Kamala’s husband. At least Kamala didn’t marry until she was 50 to avoid her looking like she was wrecking her own home with her affairs. So let me give her some credit there.

As for Hegseth, it is a bad look indeed if he paid a lady for an NDA, let’s hope it doesn’t interfere with his job duties.

Who has time for details? One Dem is screwing around, they’re all guilty.

And…unmarried people are legally allowed to have relationships, yes? I mean, I’m sure religious types would love to outlaw that, but for now I believe an unmarried person is allowed to manage their own “affairs”?

[cuervo72]

I mean, fuck - one of you is pissed that someone got a job with the wrong genitalia, another of you is bent because they had the temerity to actually use said genitalia. (And now we’re developing the angle that apparently NOT using that genitalia is ALSo offense. It’s almost as if owners of this genitalia can’t win!)

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Sweed

Hate to break the news but, men in general are not horrible. Now if one party keeps telling them that they are, maybe just maybe, they'll vote for the other party?

Has nothing to do with the party, has to do with their experiences. I have seen some of their DMs from dating sites. Trust me, men are horrible.

[Brian Swartz]

Some men are horrible. Others aren't. Taking the 'all men suck' approach is no better than the incel 'all women are evil' rants.

Some people suck in general. Not all people, of any group.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

Some men are horrible. Others aren't. Taking the 'all men suck' approach is no better than the incel 'all women are evil' rants.

Some people suck in general. Not all people, of any group.

apples and hand grenades.

When you are a woman who just saw majority of men vote to support a party actively trying to take away your rights it is easy to understand how they could look unfavorably at them as a whole.

[Brian Swartz]

I thought you just said it wasn't about party? Either way, no, it's completely apples and oranges. Men who are anti-women have grievances they think are legitimate also, based on their personal experiences.

It's understandable to have any matter of opinions, but when last figure I saw was 44% of men voted for Harris, you're throwing almost half of men under the bus who voted with you. And oh by the way, a lot of women voted for Trump too. The gender gap was about 10%, a fraction of the number of each gender that absolutely don't sync with that kind of 'men vs. women' narrative.

It's just an irrational response.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Who has time for details? One Dem is screwing around, they’re all guilty.

And…unmarried people are legally allowed to have relationships, yes? I mean, I’m sure religious types would love to outlaw that, but for now I believe an unmarried person is allowed to manage their own “affairs”?

Her “affairs” were getting down with a 60-year old man because he had clout to get ahead. You can spin it however you need to, you can get mad at God or Christians if you need to but those actions finally caught up to her when she was 60 and had to do it the right way and thankfully enough swing voters found out she didn’t have enough substance to her campaign.