Do right wingers here really believe that Trump's appointees (Gaetz, RFK, & Gabbard) are actually QUALIFIED for those offices?

[WestCanMan]

22 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

What are you talking about? During his first administration so many of his top people he selected quit or got fired it was a joke.   He couldn’t keep anyone in office. No US administration has had so many people come and go in a single term  That sure doesn’t sound like he’s amazing at hiring too talent

Sure, he fired people, and Biden/Harris didn't.

FYI Trump wasn't a "Washington insider" when he was elected the first time, so he hired a lot of people whom he knew by repute alone. Turns out many of them weren't the right people. 

Who did a better job, Beave? 

Not only that, Kamala had a 92% turnover rate in her first 3 years alone because her employees kept quitting. 

Quote

And Most of the senior people Trump selected for his first administration absolutely despise him and say he is a disaster

People who got fired always feel that way. No one wants to brag about being hired as the Secretary of ________ and then get publicly fired. Of course they have something to say, and when CNN shoves a microphone in your face and says: "If you slander him well enough, maybe there's a full-time gig in it for you", people do the obvious. 

Like Trump said, "If you don't fire the people, they don't say anything bad about you. 

Can you think of some people that Biden should have fired, but didn't? Like the 'border czar' for example? 😉

 

And why does your answer have to be so partisan? I can admit that GW Bush was a terrible president. I think he was dumber than Biden was when Biden was that age. 

At this stage of the game it's impossible to make the case that Biden gets a passing grade. He was dreadful. The world is at war, Americans are struggling financially, everyone is moving away from the US dollar, the border is open, and political rhetoric, at least from the dems' side, is more hateful than ever. 

Trump won against terrorism, bigtime. It was a slaughter. No one really talks about terrorism in the US very much, even to this day.

The Trump economy boomed. 

World peace made historic gains. 

The border was far more secure than it is now.

Black people feel like they had it better under Trump than any other president, including Obama. 

 

Sure, he fired people, and in doing so he ran a very successful government. Have you thought of any Biden appointees that should have been fired yet? Maybe even Biden himself?  

Quote

“pretty undisciplined – doesn’t like to read, doesn’t read briefing reports”

If you're being honest, that was Kamala. She didn't read briefing reports and it showed, because everything that she did was a failure. 

If you had to say that Trump "didn't read briefing reports", what do you think they said? Things like "We don't think that Covid is transmissible between humans, so there's no need to ban non-Americans from flying in from China"? (Oh yeah, I guess that I could also add, Trump was actually quite a bit smarter than some of his advisors, even within their own areas of expertise.)

So was Trump really as bad as you said, and somehow he just got lucky, over and over again, for 4 years in a row? That's a pretty good lucky streak, don't ya think? Or are you just not as smart as you think you are? 

 

Anyways, do you think the world will be more or less peaceful under Trump? Just take a guess....

Edited November 21, 2024 by WestCanMan

[robosmith]

24 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Attacks on appointees are more forceful and completely devoid of any attempts at naming details. 

"He's a white supremacist who was accused of raping a woman in either the fall of 1995 or early winter of 1996, now try to prove the negative motherfather" is the accepted slander template.

Actual facts are easy to dispute, but proving the negative is literally impossible. 

Try to prove that you're not a Nazi right now, io. Try to prove that you never colluded with Peruvians. Can't be done. That's why it works with Demis every time. There's no slander too serious to require even a minor burden of proof from the Dems' POV, and that's why "Bork" is a word in the dictionary now. 

• Bork Definition & Meaning

  

  Merriam-Webster

  https://www.merriam-webster.com › dictionary › bork

   

  The meaning of BORK is to attack or defeat (a nominee or candidate for public office) unfairly through an organized campaign of harsh public criticism or ...

The fact that you believe the MW definition which includes the word "unfairly" tells people who KNOW HIS HISTORY all they need to know about your IGNORANCE.

Bork was the guy who obeyed Nixon's orders to fire the Watergate special prosecutor when no one above him would do it and RESIGNED instead. AKA, helped Nixon cover up his CRIMES. That is NOT JUSTICE and Bork helped Nixon commit the Watergate crimes. Fair and Bork do not belong in the same sentence. Duh

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, CouchPotato said:

You sure showed me.

He's not going to get that. You have to actually hold up your sarcasm sign

[CouchPotato]

26 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

He's not going to get that. You have to actually hold up your sarcasm sign

Am I being sarcastic? I really don't know. Sometimes it's just easier this way.

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, CouchPotato said:

Am I being sarcastic? I really don't know. Sometimes it's just easier this way.

Yeah he's still not going to get that. You actually have to hold up your "Parenting difficult children for dummies" book. 

[CouchPotato]

5 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Yeah he's still not going to get that. You actually have to hold up your "Parenting difficult children for dummies" book. 

I was totally pwned.

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

He's not going to get that. You have to actually hold up your sarcasm sign

The FACT is, I DID show him (and you) that you guys were WRONG.

Gaetz is unqualified and that's why he had to drop out. Duh

And you're too stupid to understand that. 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, CouchPotato said:

I was totally pwned.

hahaha yeah because you just agreed with him to get along while with me....   hey, wait a minute..... 

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

The FACT is, I DID show him (and you) that you guys were WRONG.

As predicted, you did not get it  

It was humor. I should have remembered you struggle with that.  Sometimes i forget that you're not a real little boy   

[robosmith]

13 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

hahaha yeah because you just agreed with him to get along while with me....   hey, wait a minute..... 

As predicted, you did not get it  

It was humor. I should have remembered you struggle with that.  Sometimes i forget that you're not a real little boy   

So you're doubling down on stupid. LMAO

[CdnFox]

24 minutes ago, robosmith said:

So you're doubling down on stupid. LMAO

I mentioned you twice if that's what you mean..    

You still didn't get it did you  

[Nationalist]

9 hours ago, robosmith said:

So you're doubling down on stupid. LMAO

Speaking of stupid. Now Pam Bondi will be AG. She has a serious issue with the justice administration. Did you really think you Tweenkies could stop the fix? Lol...

MSNBC has been dropped by Comcast.

Ahhh robo-twit...none of your heroes can stop this now. Your whole warped apparatus will be dismantled. And you'll get to watch it in it's death throes.

Have a nice day.

Edited November 22, 2024 by Nationalist

[BeaverFever]

On 11/21/2024 at 5:17 PM, WestCanMan said:

Sure, he fired people, and Biden/Harris didn't.

FYI Trump wasn't a "Washington insider" when he was elected the first time, so he hired a lot of people whom he knew by repute alone. Turns out many of them weren't the right people. 

Who did a better job, Beave? 

Not only that, Kamala had a 92% turnover rate in her first 3 years alone because her employees kept quitting. 

Trump didn’t just fire some people. He lost A LOT of people many of whom quit in protest while others were forced to resign in disgrace for being crooks, wife-beaters and/or Russian stooges  Some were fired because they wouldn’t violate their ethics by kissing his ring and offering a pledge of loyalty to him personally  

 
1) Not the same as cabinet members hand-picked to run the country at its highest level 

2) None came out to berate Kamala and become outspoken “anti-Kamala” critics the way so many of Trump’s former staff publicly turned on him  

3) Kamala didn’t publicly berate, abuse and blame them on Twitter whenever she wanted to deflect criticism from herself

4) the reasons given for leaving Harris were:

a) The lack of prominence  given to the VP office in the Biden administration and promising opportunities elsewhere in DC and the private sector 

b) Harris managed her office “like a prosecutor” as reported “which included pointed questions about footnotes in their reports or the reasons behind why certain items had been added to her schedule.

“It’s stressful to brief her, because she’s read all the materials, has annotated it and is prepared to talk through it,” said one former aide.

“You can’t come to the vice president and just ask her to do something,” said another staffer. “You need to have a why.”

So in other words, she was the opposite of Trump who knew nothing, read nothing, spouted off random half-baked non-sequitur nonsense and staff would get their recommendations approved by flattery and tricking him into thinking it was his great idea  

5) Its noted that more than 20 of the people who left her VP staff came back to work on her presidential campaign 

6) Unlike Trump’s chaotic administration, Kamala’s staff eventually stabilized after they recruited people more accustomed to her “demanding” management style. 
 

On 11/21/2024 at 5:17 PM, WestCanMan said:

People who got fired always feel that way. No one wants to brag about being hired as the Secretary of ________ and then get publicly fired. Of course they have something to say, and when CNN shoves a microphone in your face and says: "If you slander him well enough, maybe there's a full-time gig in it for you", people do the obvious. 

Like Trump said, "If you don't fire the people, they don't say anything bad about you. 

 

No sorry. Don’t try to normalize what is extremely abnormal. NO president has had so many ex-staffers come out to denounce them or has been denounced so extensively, if they had any denounce them at all. And these ex-staffers didn’t simply share their views because they”CNN shoved a microphone in their face”. They made the special effort to seek out the media and speak publicly to denounce trump.
 

Trump is absolutely unique, not only for the extreme level of criticism that his ex-staff have for him but also in the sheer number of staff to come out with it. For any other president the number of staff who become critics is usually between 0 and 1 , most of whom keep their opinions to themselves and maintain an appearance of civility. MeanwhileTrump has dozens of critics who go out of their way to tell the world what an awful human being and terrible president he was.  Both the degree to which he is despised and the number of staffers who so despise him is absolutely without any historical precedent. 

On 11/21/2024 at 5:17 PM, WestCanMan said:

political rhetoric, at least from the dems' side, is more hateful than ever. 

Sorry Republican political rhetoric has been hateful for years   But of course you’re biased you think it’s not hateful to call Obama a n*gger or Hillary a c*nt but it’s hateful to call someone “deplorable”   You don’t think it’s hateful when Republicans heckled Obama and Biden during their SOTU speeches but you think it’s hateful if anyone dares publicly criticize a Republican. 

Edited November 22, 2024 by BeaverFever

[CouchPotato]

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

Sorry Republican political rhetoric has been hateful for years   But of course you’re biased you think it’s not hateful to call Obama a n*gger or Hillary a c*nt but it’s hateful to call someone “deplorable”  

You are comparing rhetoric from some random people on the street toward a politician in the spotlight with rhetoric from a politician about random people on the street.

[CouchPotato]

2 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

You don’t think it’s hateful when Republicans heckled Obama and Biden during their SOTU speeches but you think it’s hateful if anyone dares publicly criticize a Republican. 

No one thinks it is hateful to criticize a Republican. What Hillary did was to say half of Trump supporters belong in a basket of deplorables. That's roughly 1/4 of the voting public. That's pretty stupid. And this is not a one off with liberals in political office. Whenever people do not support them on something, they insinuate something is wrong with the people. It's never that there could be something wrong with their policy. It's never that they might have done a bad job promoting a policy. Or it's never that some people just see things differently. That's just impossible. The people are either racist, misogynist or they have been brainwashed by Russian disinformation.

Edited November 22, 2024 by CouchPotato

[robosmith]

6 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Speaking of stupid. Now Pam Bondi will be AG. She has a serious issue with the justice administration. Did you really think you Tweenkies could stop the fix? Lol...

Another nominee does NOT guarantee confirmation. Duh

6 hours ago, Nationalist said:

MSNBC has been dropped by Comcast.

Nope, you're demonstratating your IGNORANCE AGAIN.

6 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Ahhh robo-twit...none of your heroes can stop this now. Your whole warped apparatus will be dismantled. And you'll get to watch it in it's death throes.

Thanks for doubling down on IGNORANCE.

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, CouchPotato said:

No one thinks it is hateful to criticize a Republican. What Hillary did was to say half of Trump supporters belong in a basket of deplorables. That's roughly 1/4 of the voting public. That's pretty stupid. And this is not a one off with liberals in political office. Whenever people do not support them on something, they insinuate something is wrong with the people. It's never that there could be something wrong with their policy. It's never that they might have done a bad job promoting a policy. Or it's never that some people just see things differently. That's just impossible. The people are either racist, misogynist or they have been brainwashed by Russian disinformation.

Or they are brainwashed into a joining a political MAGA CULT and in need of rescuing.

I had a very good friend who used to be a very kind liberal, but suffered a trauma and was trapped in the right wing echo chamber by FOS LIES BULLSHIT.

It DOES HAPPEN through little fault of their own.

[CouchPotato]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

Or they are brainwashed into a joining a political MAGA CULT and in need of rescuing.

I had a very good friend who used to be a very kind liberal, but suffered a trauma and was trapped in the right wing echo chamber by FOS LIES BULLSHIT.

If it's anything like losing a friend to MSNBS, that's gotta be tough. I am sure you did all you could.

Edited November 22, 2024 by CouchPotato

[BeaverFever]

3 hours ago, CouchPotato said:

No one thinks it is hateful to criticize a Republican. What Hillary did was to say half of Trump supporters belong in a basket of deplorables. That's roughly 1/4 of the voting public. That's pretty stupid. And this is not a one off with liberals in political office. Whenever people do not support them on something, they insinuate something is wrong with the people. It's never that there could be something wrong with their policy. It's never that they might have done a bad job promoting a policy. Or it's never that some people just see things differently. That's just impossible. The people are either racist, misogynist or they have been brainwashed by Russian disinformation.

Is deplorable worse than “leftard” or “snowflake” which is what you call 50% of the voting population?

And what else do Republicans say about democrats?  Communists. Marxists. Secretly plotting to enslave society by making them dependent upon government. Secretly control government through the “deep state”.  Secretly controlling the mainstream media…somehow. Deliberately emptying third world insane asylums and prisons to smuggle them into the country to cause havoc. Secretly wanting to destroy first world countries. You say People who vote for them are “Sheeple”. You say black people are too gullible and stupid to understand their own interests and as an entire race they have been tricked by democrats. 
 

Can you point to the last time any prominent republican respectfully disagreed with a Democrat or simply said he thought democrats were  well-intentioned but foolisj misguided? It’s been a generation now since the.  Demonization has always been a conservative hallmark:  the left isn’t just wrongheaded, they’re actually EVIL.  They’re wrong and they know they’re wrong but they’re doing it anyways for sinister motives. 
 

The rhetoric of mainstream republican politicians and pundits FAR exceeds that of mainstream democrat politicians and pundits both in terms of how extreme the language and accusations are and in the frequency in which these things are said. “Deplorable” is not even close to being the worst thing you can call someone and Hillary only said it one time. Trump has made hateful personal attacks, name-calling, and viscous lies his trademark which he repeats at every rally and his acolytes in the republican party and propaganda outlets imitate him. 

[robosmith]

2 hours ago, CouchPotato said:

If it's anything like losing a friend to MSNBS, that's gotta be tough. I am sure you did all you could.

You mean MSNBC? They have NEVER had to pay $800M for LYING like FOS LIES. AKA, nothing alike.

[CouchPotato]

32 minutes ago, robosmith said:

You mean MSNBC? They have NEVER had to pay $800M for LYING like FOS LIES. AKA, nothing alike.

Oh, they have to pay for their lies.

MSNBC Viewership Craters 38%, CNN 27%, While Fox News Audience Jumps 41% Post-Election

https://www.thewrap.com/msnbc-cnn-fox-news-viewership-craters-post-election-morning-joe/

 

Edited November 23, 2024 by CouchPotato

[robosmith]

9 hours ago, CouchPotato said:

Oh, they have to pay for their lies.

MSNBC Viewership Craters 38%, CNN 27%, While Fox News Audience Jumps 41% Post-Election

https://www.thewrap.com/msnbc-cnn-fox-news-viewership-craters-post-election-morning-joe/

Nothing in your cite about LIES. Duh

[CdnFox]

9 hours ago, robosmith said:

Nothing in your cite about LIES. Duh

As you well know both MSNBC and CNN have been sued for lying and have had to pay what is estimated to be hundreds of millions of dollars between them. The christian boys incident alone put them in that range

And the fact that you pretend they haven't when you know they have just shows that you know you're lying