If anyone hates neocons, it's this guy. I didn't like some of the stuff that he had to say, but people went way overboard in calling him a shill and stuff like that.
I am voting for Trump and as he never apologizes to anyone, I shall follow in his great example and will also never apologize for supporting DeSantis in the primary.
I want to beat Joe Biden and thus I am voting for Trump.
Some of you have called me a shill, a DeSimp, a retard and a few of you told me to eat shit and die.
I don't even care about any of that and I want no apology from any of you.
I just want to beat Biden.
We are all in the same political coalition and that means focusing our attention against Joe not each other.
I am voting for Trump and as he never apologizes to anyone, I shall follow in his great example and will also never apologize for supporting DeSantis in the primary.
All I'm saying is for calling everyone else deranged Trump cultists for pointing out fairly obvious issues with DeSantis, I'd like to see an apology. He doesn't have to, and I don't expect him to. Most of them never will, despite doing crazier shit than OTP ever did, including slandering Richard Baris as a disgraced junkie.
I think he's acted like a shill because not only has he refused to recognize even very basic issues with DeSantis' campaign, but he's also tried to ingratiate White Nationalists to back DeSantis, despite that being an obviously silly attempt even by their admission (particularly after his antisemitism law stunt).
All I'm saying is for calling everyone else deranged Trump cultists for pointing out fairly obvious issues with DeSantis, I'd like to see an apology.
Every time I've seen him call people 'Trump cultists', it's people who are Trump or bust. So if your recollection is a remotely accurate characterization, then you are justified, but I don't think it is.
I think he's acted like a shill because not only has he refused to recognize even very basic issues with DeSantis' campaign,
If that makes a cultist, then nearly everyone is in big trouble. Because refusing to recognize very basic issues in people you like or their campaigns is fairly universal.
I support Trump, but I was called a Trump cultist even though I wanted Larry Elder to win. Similarly, I don't think JD Vance was carried by Mike DeWine. I said that DeSantis did some good things, but was being terribly mislead by Bushites who were probably going to try and tank both DeSantis' and Trump's political careers. That is why I was called a cultist.
That's not a cultist, and I don't call anyone who is a die-hard DeSantis supporter a Cultist. Dave Rubin is not a cultist. He genuinely supports DeSantis, but he's also a shill for Ron. Meghan Kelly falls in that same boat.
Yes, you are a shill if you are refusing to acknowledge basic issues with people you like. If I were to say, "Larry Elder has no major flaws", that would be a bullshit lie because he lost to Gavin Newsom. That's not only shilling for Larry Elder, but bad shilling at that. I can be an adult about this and not stake my identity on being a propagandist for someone. Even if you are going to be a propagandist, you need to have a counter-argument, not an insult.
Well, he was wrong about that if he called you a cultist for that. But whatever it was, it's water under the bridge now. Words are air.
Yes, you are a shill if you are refusing to acknowledge basic issues with people you like
This guy was critical of DeSantis regarding his Ukraine comments.
If I were to say, "Larry Elder has no major flaws", that would be a bullshit lie because he lost to Gavin Newsom.
While your point is correct, your example does not actually follow. Losing to Gavin Newsom does not demonstrate that you have major flaws (though no doubt he has). Jesus could lose to Newom, and the fact of losing is not what indicates flaws.
I disagree. Losing to Gavin Newsom, who is now facing a second recall, suggests some kind of major organizational or activism deficiency. He might not have many policy deficiencies, but logistical deficiencies still count.
Every time I've seen him call people 'Trump cultists', it's people who are Trump or bust.
Then you haven't been around enough. In fact IIRC he's even one of those NPC-esque commenters that uses the royal "you" to refer to everyone on the forum, as if we're all one blob.
Though I disagree with your definition of cultist as well. The phrase applied to Trump was specifically crafted to invoke the idea of a "cult of personality" around the man, like some dictator. That his core voter base is a pitchfork wielding gaggle of fawning acolytes, rather than a broad coalition of the center-right and people disaffected by politics. By your definition someone could personally despise Trump, yet still be a 'Trump cultist' somehow because they don't think anyone else would be an effective choice in the office and voting for Uniparty Choice A vs Uniparty Choice B doesn't matter.
I've argued with him a lot. And in fact, I did it when his positions were far more popular than they are now. I do remember being downvoted for disagreeing with his claim that "Trump can't win". He didn't change, this place did.
The phrase applied to Trump was specifically crafted to invoke the idea of a "cult of personality" around the man, like some dictator.
I've used the term 'Trump cultist' myself, and that is my no means what I believe.
That his core voter base is a pitchfork wielding gaggle of fawning acolytes, rather than a broad coalition of the center-right and people disaffected by politics. By your definition someone could personally despise Trump, yet still be a 'Trump cultist' somehow because they don't think anyone else would be an effective choice in the office and voting for Uniparty Choice A vs Uniparty Choice B doesn't matter.
I don't think it makes sense to label RDS as a Uniparty Choice. If someone was able to validly argue that case, then yes, he would not be a cultist. But in reality, I think it was mostly people who were upset about the possibility of Trump losing, and sacrificing a whole lot more over that - cult behavior.
Lmao fuck you Tony, this pissant was doing the Destankis supporter meme of being a holier than thou, condescending shitbag nevertrumper calling all of us delusional, cultists, morons, what have you.
I'm not a worm who lets disrespect like that slide without some form of sincere apology. Suddenly "well it's clear Ron never stood a chance 🤓" after all that ain't working.
The most annoying thing about you was not being a shill or supporting DeSantis, but that you think you're better than everyone else here yet still continued to come here to push your messages. When people tell you you're wrong, you call them cultists and downvote any comments that disagree. There's a couple other users who act like that...
It is pretty clear to me that Ron DeSantis had no chance in 2024. Trump is pretty much invincible in the GOP Presidential primaries.
Everyone here already knew that and it's not because they're Trump cultists. You should consider why your information was wrong and who you trust. But I won't be surprised if you're back in November to say "I told you so" and why we were wrong for supporting him, maybe earlier if he gets indicted as you predicted.
Yeah that was probably the least surprising thing about this primary. Lol.
It's possible to swoop in and snatch the crown from the heir apparent, but you need a really good reason. And "I'm younger" and "I can git 'er done better" are NOT good reasons.
All the other stuff that came later - the deer in headlights awkwardness, the donor meddling, the platform boots, the invading Mexico - was just the 24 hit air juggle combo on a campaign that was DOA.
He's repeatedly stated that 'Trump cultists' are the ones who were saying that they wouldn't back DeSantis. Which is pretty accurate, and even if it were wrong, it's a perfectly legitimate POV. Just like DeSantis cultists are people who wouldn't back Trump.
The people on this thread are really, really silly. This guy backed a different candidate than we did, and now you're obsessed with telling him "I TOLD YOU SO" to boost your own ego when he is on the side of the angels now.
Nah. He's at least insinuated I was a trump cultist for pointing out people have the right to vote for Trump in a primary even if he thinks Trump will lose in an election against biden
Then he went on a rant about how much he hates Trump cultists
We're talking about evidence-based predictions here (or really patently obvious outcomes) and complete disdain for the community you're trying to sway - not who anyone does or doesn't want to vote for. I don't mind if someone supports DeSantis. He seems like a nice governor. I wouldn't assume someone who doesn't vote for Trump is a DeSantis cultist. That doesn't even make sense.
Anyone who is so into DeSantis that he's DeSantis or bust - meaning that he won't vote for Trump if he's the nominee. That's a DeSantis cultist.
I've been critical of this guy, and in fact was so when his takes were a good deal more popular than they are now. But I do understand him. While I'm not as anti-coronavaccine as the average person here, this guy suffered because of the mandates, and as a result, he thought that DeSantis was good for his foresight and Trump was less so because he continued to advocate for the vaccine. That is understandable.
Now let's suppose that you are correct and he did show 'disdain' for the community, and that it's not good to be able to stand up for yourself (even if wrongly) against a group. Water under the bridge. What is it achieving to hate on a guy who supported DeSantis, then accepted with grace that his candidate lost and is now on your side?
it's not good to be able to stand up for yourself (even if wrongly) against a group
Never said that. Anyway you're kind of generalizing here as well. Perhaps others care but I don't need or want an apology from the guy. He can do what he wants. If he's not a shill perhaps he will reconsider where he gets his news from and that those of us who disagreed might have been on to something. Nothing wrong with challengers throwing the hat in the ring, but there was never a question that Trump would be the nominee.
True, you mentioned 'disdain' for the community. That is the unfavorable interpretation of what he was doing, and what I said was a positive spin on the same thing.
If he's not a shill
If?
Nothing wrong with challengers throwing the hat in the ring, but there was never a question that Trump would be the nominee.
Hindsight is 20/20. Before the indictments, there was a window of opportunity.,
I imagine if you have no shame (like her), the temptation to live fat off the hog of campaign funds while paying your friends lavish salaries must be absolutely massive.
Trump has now won every single primary and caucus so far except for Washington D.C. and Vermont!
It is pretty clear to me that Ron DeSantis had no chance in 2024.
Trump is pretty much invincible in the GOP Presidential primaries.
Trump will amass the 1215 delegates to secure the nomination by March 19th.
Right now Trump has secured about 1040 delegates.
This reads like you've moved on to the acceptance stage of grief...
So confirms he isn't a leftist or neocon as accepts reality lol
If anyone hates neocons, it's this guy. I didn't like some of the stuff that he had to say, but people went way overboard in calling him a shill and stuff like that.
I still don't trust you, and I still think you're a shill, but one thing is incontrovertible:
you owe an apology to about half the people here.
I am voting for Trump and as he never apologizes to anyone, I shall follow in his great example and will also never apologize for supporting DeSantis in the primary.
I want to beat Joe Biden and thus I am voting for Trump.
Some of you have called me a shill, a DeSimp, a retard and a few of you told me to eat shit and die.
I don't even care about any of that and I want no apology from any of you.
I just want to beat Biden.
We are all in the same political coalition and that means focusing our attention against Joe not each other.
Alright, I admit that I walked into that one.
MAGA 2024.
We all have more in common than things we disagree on.
I got nothing personal against any of you here.
People care a lot about who the nominee is and have thus sometimes said things that should have not been said.
He owes no one an apology, and if anything, anyone calling him a shill owes him an apology. He's one of the original Option 4 voters.
If you want to continue infighting over ego when effectively you're on the same side now, that really is on you.
All I'm saying is for calling everyone else deranged Trump cultists for pointing out fairly obvious issues with DeSantis, I'd like to see an apology. He doesn't have to, and I don't expect him to. Most of them never will, despite doing crazier shit than OTP ever did, including slandering Richard Baris as a disgraced junkie.
I think he's acted like a shill because not only has he refused to recognize even very basic issues with DeSantis' campaign, but he's also tried to ingratiate White Nationalists to back DeSantis, despite that being an obviously silly attempt even by their admission (particularly after his antisemitism law stunt).
I'm not going to fight with him, I never have.
Every time I've seen him call people 'Trump cultists', it's people who are Trump or bust. So if your recollection is a remotely accurate characterization, then you are justified, but I don't think it is.
If that makes a cultist, then nearly everyone is in big trouble. Because refusing to recognize very basic issues in people you like or their campaigns is fairly universal.
I support Trump, but I was called a Trump cultist even though I wanted Larry Elder to win. Similarly, I don't think JD Vance was carried by Mike DeWine. I said that DeSantis did some good things, but was being terribly mislead by Bushites who were probably going to try and tank both DeSantis' and Trump's political careers. That is why I was called a cultist.
That's not a cultist, and I don't call anyone who is a die-hard DeSantis supporter a Cultist. Dave Rubin is not a cultist. He genuinely supports DeSantis, but he's also a shill for Ron. Meghan Kelly falls in that same boat.
Yes, you are a shill if you are refusing to acknowledge basic issues with people you like. If I were to say, "Larry Elder has no major flaws", that would be a bullshit lie because he lost to Gavin Newsom. That's not only shilling for Larry Elder, but bad shilling at that. I can be an adult about this and not stake my identity on being a propagandist for someone. Even if you are going to be a propagandist, you need to have a counter-argument, not an insult.
Well, he was wrong about that if he called you a cultist for that. But whatever it was, it's water under the bridge now. Words are air.
This guy was critical of DeSantis regarding his Ukraine comments.
While your point is correct, your example does not actually follow. Losing to Gavin Newsom does not demonstrate that you have major flaws (though no doubt he has). Jesus could lose to Newom, and the fact of losing is not what indicates flaws.
I disagree. Losing to Gavin Newsom, who is now facing a second recall, suggests some kind of major organizational or activism deficiency. He might not have many policy deficiencies, but logistical deficiencies still count.
Then you haven't been around enough. In fact IIRC he's even one of those NPC-esque commenters that uses the royal "you" to refer to everyone on the forum, as if we're all one blob.
Though I disagree with your definition of cultist as well. The phrase applied to Trump was specifically crafted to invoke the idea of a "cult of personality" around the man, like some dictator. That his core voter base is a pitchfork wielding gaggle of fawning acolytes, rather than a broad coalition of the center-right and people disaffected by politics. By your definition someone could personally despise Trump, yet still be a 'Trump cultist' somehow because they don't think anyone else would be an effective choice in the office and voting for Uniparty Choice A vs Uniparty Choice B doesn't matter.
I've argued with him a lot. And in fact, I did it when his positions were far more popular than they are now. I do remember being downvoted for disagreeing with his claim that "Trump can't win". He didn't change, this place did.
I've used the term 'Trump cultist' myself, and that is my no means what I believe.
I don't think it makes sense to label RDS as a Uniparty Choice. If someone was able to validly argue that case, then yes, he would not be a cultist. But in reality, I think it was mostly people who were upset about the possibility of Trump losing, and sacrificing a whole lot more over that - cult behavior.
Lmao fuck you Tony, this pissant was doing the Destankis supporter meme of being a holier than thou, condescending shitbag nevertrumper calling all of us delusional, cultists, morons, what have you.
I'm not a worm who lets disrespect like that slide without some form of sincere apology. Suddenly "well it's clear Ron never stood a chance 🤓" after all that ain't working.
Interesting that you think that demanding apologies from people means that you have self-respect...
The most annoying thing about you was not being a shill or supporting DeSantis, but that you think you're better than everyone else here yet still continued to come here to push your messages. When people tell you you're wrong, you call them cultists and downvote any comments that disagree. There's a couple other users who act like that...
Everyone here already knew that and it's not because they're Trump cultists. You should consider why your information was wrong and who you trust. But I won't be surprised if you're back in November to say "I told you so" and why we were wrong for supporting him, maybe earlier if he gets indicted as you predicted.
Yeah that was probably the least surprising thing about this primary. Lol.
It's possible to swoop in and snatch the crown from the heir apparent, but you need a really good reason. And "I'm younger" and "I can git 'er done better" are NOT good reasons.
All the other stuff that came later - the deer in headlights awkwardness, the donor meddling, the platform boots, the invading Mexico - was just the 24 hit air juggle combo on a campaign that was DOA.
President Trump delivers the BEST Shoryukens, believe me! You've never seen a Shoryuken so good.
He's repeatedly stated that 'Trump cultists' are the ones who were saying that they wouldn't back DeSantis. Which is pretty accurate, and even if it were wrong, it's a perfectly legitimate POV. Just like DeSantis cultists are people who wouldn't back Trump.
The people on this thread are really, really silly. This guy backed a different candidate than we did, and now you're obsessed with telling him "I TOLD YOU SO" to boost your own ego when he is on the side of the angels now.
Nah. He's at least insinuated I was a trump cultist for pointing out people have the right to vote for Trump in a primary even if he thinks Trump will lose in an election against biden
Then he went on a rant about how much he hates Trump cultists
We're talking about evidence-based predictions here (or really patently obvious outcomes) and complete disdain for the community you're trying to sway - not who anyone does or doesn't want to vote for. I don't mind if someone supports DeSantis. He seems like a nice governor. I wouldn't assume someone who doesn't vote for Trump is a DeSantis cultist. That doesn't even make sense.
Anyone who is so into DeSantis that he's DeSantis or bust - meaning that he won't vote for Trump if he's the nominee. That's a DeSantis cultist.
I've been critical of this guy, and in fact was so when his takes were a good deal more popular than they are now. But I do understand him. While I'm not as anti-coronavaccine as the average person here, this guy suffered because of the mandates, and as a result, he thought that DeSantis was good for his foresight and Trump was less so because he continued to advocate for the vaccine. That is understandable.
Now let's suppose that you are correct and he did show 'disdain' for the community, and that it's not good to be able to stand up for yourself (even if wrongly) against a group. Water under the bridge. What is it achieving to hate on a guy who supported DeSantis, then accepted with grace that his candidate lost and is now on your side?
Never said that. Anyway you're kind of generalizing here as well. Perhaps others care but I don't need or want an apology from the guy. He can do what he wants. If he's not a shill perhaps he will reconsider where he gets his news from and that those of us who disagreed might have been on to something. Nothing wrong with challengers throwing the hat in the ring, but there was never a question that Trump would be the nominee.
True, you mentioned 'disdain' for the community. That is the unfavorable interpretation of what he was doing, and what I said was a positive spin on the same thing.
If?
Hindsight is 20/20. Before the indictments, there was a window of opportunity.,
Yeah that's what we've been telling you
Probably not after the indictments, and with his apparent backtracking on his excellent comments on Ukraine.
Hey, at least she really fought for that inch.
I'm a bit annoyed that she won Vermont, shithole as it may be, isn't a good enough outcome.
I'm assuming a lot of democrats participated in that vote.
It's an open primary and she won by 31 votes. I say again a whooping 31 pts
Very likely.
Styxhexxenhammer is going to be fucking livid lmao
He was more disappointed because so many Democrats flooded in. Mostly apologetic.
Yup. Word on the Grapevine is she's finally come to her senses (or her backers have) and is dropping out today. Good riddance.
I figured she'd try to bleed more money out of the Republican party.
I imagine if you have no shame (like her), the temptation to live fat off the hog of campaign funds while paying your friends lavish salaries must be absolutely massive.
A failed campaign still spends money.
She's using the Fanni Willis strategy.
Doesn't Vermont have an open primary? Which means she only won that one with Dem votes.