Trump is Christ
>>85714194Okay, flop 'em on the table:1. What Obama Policies did Trump really revoke?2. What 'Jesus Policies' did Obama revoke?Both are bombing middle eastern children as far as I've heard. Both lick the boot of zionism. Both worship the Epstein class and Mammon.Ah, right, they differ on [NPC tier culture war issue #1335887.3b]. They're complete opposites, got it!
>>85714225Basically this yeah elections are always choosing the lesser of two evils Bernie Sanders was cool but because he's an old fart he didn't realize in 2016 that elections were becoming more about entertainment than they were about actual policy change
>>85714240Yeah, he wasn't prepared for the new type of electoral campaigns. It began with cable TV basically, but the rise of social media kicked stuff into overdrive.To be fair, Hillary 'Pokemon go to the polls' Clinton was prepared even worse and that's on top of her policy record. But the DNC had to push her carcass over the finish line by all means necessary
Anytime I see Obama I just recall how eloquent and effective he was. Best president america ever had.
>>85714225>Ah, right, they differ on [NPC tier culture war issue #1335887.3b] They're complete opposites, got it!yes, that is the only difference
its all the jews anyway so just vote for the 80 year old fat malignant narcissist pedo rapist
>>85714278Let me tell you about FDR
>>85715623Don't speak to me of angels, for I have seen their maker
>>85714225>1. What Obama Policies did Trump really revoke?DEI>2. What 'Jesus Policies' did Obama revoke?No DEI
>>85714240>actual policy>Bernie Sanders>literal populist whose taxation and expenditure plan made no sense>pretending you can just "tax the rich" for free shit while every single large social democracy on Earth is funded by heavy consumption taxes on the poor and middle class
>>85715653Obama was a corporate stooge who pretended to drink the tap water in Flint, Michigan. FDR taxed the ultra-wealthy and brought America out of the Great Depression and ushered it into the Atomic Age. Obama passed a half-assed healthcare law that kisses the asses of corporations. FDR put together the framework for free healthcare for all, saying that without economic protections for the common person, fascism would rise again. FDR predicted the future from 100 years past. I've only seen Obama predict about 5 years out at best.
>>85715700Give me a good reason why someone needs more than a billion dollars.
No, I said a good reason! :-)
>>85715780FDR locked 120k Anime-Americans in internment camps without due process and tried to pack the supreme court when he couldn't control it. The New Deal didn't end the Great Depression, WW2 mobilization did, after a decade of idiotic policies that actually prolonged mass unemployment. Obama delivered concrete healthcare coverage to 20 million uninsured Americans overnight, while FDR's "framework" was just rhetoric that covered a total of zero people. FDR routinely ignored civil rights and excluded black workers from SS to appease segregationists. He didn't predict the future lmao, he handed eastern europe to Stalin at Yalta.
>>85715807Non-serious post therefore I win
>>85714278When Obama gets a netflix movie deal he's earned it, and every cent of the millions they paid himWhen Melania gets an Amazon movie deal, she's a grifter, it's a trump family con job and she should go to jail
>>85716618yeah you got it. that's meritocracy vs oligarchy
The biggest red pill for the Left should be that the Democrats did nothing with the Epstein files.Yet they continue to do their masters bidding. Continue to yap away about Trump being a pedo. Completely ignoring the fact their people that they vote for have no interest in punishing Trump even if he was guilty. It's all just noise and distraction and they're too stupid to realise it
>>85714194They just want power over society, they're both satanic cults.
>>85714278Don't you see his evil niggerdom? Niggering us with nigger magic?The only solution is to get a senile fat blob who shits his pants twice a day and bankrupted three casinos while raping sex slaves on Mossad's sex slave island.What else could we have possibly done?
>>85714225>1. What Obama Policies did Trump really revoke?Trump cut back on deportations.
It's part of the fascist playbook to use religion to gather support even if their ideas are the complete opposite of Jesus' teachings. In fact religion is so useful for this purpose that I'm sure it was authored by evil men who had that purpose in mind.
>>85716696You've been distracted into voting for a billionaire mogul with no other plan than to serve Israel and fund wars.
>>85717570>In fact religion is so useful for this purpose that I'm sure it was authored by evil men who had that purpose in mind.Yes, Jesus yeeted himself on a cross so a certain moustachio man could manipulate chuds 2000 years later.
>>85714194you people are golems
>>85714194Affordable healthcare is satanic?
>>85718120Yes, stealing money from your neighbors at gunpoint in order to fund an inefficient government healthcare program is satanic.
>>85714194He's a dick but he's no worse than Obama or anyone else before him. I hate how Obeezy gets treated like he's jesus but did the same shit as trump on immigration. People are stupid.The European Parliament (not a real thing) unveiled a statue of him just openly insulting him. I hope he cuts off Europe and they come begging for American help.
>>85714278Why are you on this site? You're clearly an unthinking sheep. Reddit would be much more suited to you type of people.
>>85718120it's funny the political ads in my state are lamenting Trumps policy on federal funding for sanctuary states, ya know, you could just stop harboring criminals and giving them federal gibs, then maybe all the white people in your political ads wouldn't lose their federal gibs.
this shit is actually evil, bro. anyone here remember the trump "bible"? he has gone on record to admit he's not a christian and is taking advantage of retards. which is kinda based desu but that's it.>>85714225fpbp lmao.
>>85714257Hilary lost for several reasons. She refused to campaign in the battle ground states and she's a woman.
>>85718152lets not consider vocabulary, clarity, precision, coherence, rhetorical structure, expressive range, and the ability to articulate complex ideas and not shitting yourself and so on
>>85718143>He's a dick but he's no worse than Obama or anyone else before him.the american voter
>>85715807>FDR locked 120k Anime-Americans in internment campsObama also put many people into internment camps. He just called them detention centers like they were just classes in school you had to attend because you annoyed your teacher>The New Deal didn't end the Great Depression, WW2 mobilization didWW2 mobilization did a lot of heavy lifting, yes, but the New Deal laid the groundwork.. It would have probably taken a few more years to really jumpstart the war economy without it>FDR routinely ignored civil rightsLet's ask Edward Snowden how much Obama cared about civil rights, shall we?>he handed eastern europe to Stalin at YaltaHe formalized a territorial shift that was fait accompli with the battle at Kursk. What was FDR to do about it? Attack 5 Million red army soldiers standing in Germany with his few divisions?Considering the Soviets were scammed out of a sizeable proportion of their sphere of influence what they were promised at yalta, for example greece and considering they could have overrun the allied lines all the way to Lisbon (UK and france were exhausted from a war that took place before and the supply lines of the US were stretched beyond all reason and their greatest asset were nuclear bombs, which weren't available in any relevant quantities yet), FDR did pretty well in containing them. Obama couldn't even contain a ragtag band of religious zealots on Toyota pickups without the whole world chiming in to clean up his and Bush's mess. The quality of US presidents along with leadership in other western countries has sharply and steadily declined since the end of the 70s and continues like this to this day. It's not purely Obama's fault in particular to be fair, but it's an undeniable trend
>>85717578Yeah we gotta vote the Dems into power. Nobody ever accused good old Joe Biden of being a pedophile, or shielding Pedophiles by not releasing the Epstein files during his presidency. It never happened.
>>85718120What year of Obamas presidency had the price of healthcare go down? What year between 2009-2016 did healthcare get more affordable?
>>85714194Trump is not the son of god. Trump is only a prophet
>>85714278>>85715623>>85715780>>85715807>>85717302Good shit. No, you know what fuck it, you're all kings if late night.
>>85719820>Trump is only about profit.FTFY
>>85719369>DetentionEO 9066 targeted US citizens and lawful permanent residents. They were unconstitutionally and forcefully jailed and lost their property without charges, trials, or individual suspicion, purely based on race and ancestry. It has nothing in common with modern civil immigration enforcement. Civil border detention of non-citizens is one thing Obama did better than any president in history, and his administrative oversight was central to this effectiveness.>MobilizationThe macroeconomic consensus is pretty clear here, New Deal interventions like the NIRA and regulatory doubt stagnated flow of private capital, kept real wages constrained and prolonged high unemployment across the decade. It was the WW2 industrial boom, which also lead to many New Deal acts being dismantled, that finally woke the economy back up, while the civilian new deal only artificially prolonged that slumber. Source: Cole and Ohanian, Robert Higgs>SnowdenTha's a deflection. Modern surveillance involves the 4th, but FDR's civil rights record involved actual policy concessions to segregationists, like intentionally excluding agricultural and domestic workers from the 1935 SS and wagner acts, which effectively removed over 60% of blacks nationwide. He also refused to support anti lynching legislation or to integrate the military.>Fait accompliWe are talking of diplomatic legitimacy though, not something hypothetical. By signing off on soviet territorial and political concords in poland and eastern europe, FDR granted actual international legitimacy to Stalins SOI. He did this directly against the 1941 Atlantic Charter's core principle of self-determination. And, the Soviet Onion was completely mobilized right after the war. This was about to end. Managing these territories after occupation is a nightmare, and FDR gave them a massive gift by reducing political dynamics and anti-terrorism constraints. The territorial conquest was just part one.
And both are false idols you silly humans worship.
>>85719962>It has nothing in common with modern civil immigration enforcement.Why not? Because it has been formalized in some way or it's worded nicer on CNN. If a non-mainstream democrat (i.e. either a leftist or a republican president) would have done what Obama did, you'd see a deluge of faux outrage from the DNC>The macroeconomic consensus is pretty clear hereIs it? You conflate certain failed measures with the entire New Deal. Had nothing been done during that time, then the crisis might have deindustrialized the US, rendering it unable to gear up for war, when it finally did>Tha's a deflection. Modern surveillance involves the 4thNo, it's not and no matter what laws are being abused to justify the state spying on its own citizens or making their five eyes partners doing it for them, it is still a hostile act against the own citizenry and that lead right back to the initial problem: When the 'Patriot Act' was introduced under Bush, it sparked, rightfully so, a massive outcry from liberals, same es with interment camps/'detention centers'. When the Democrats regained power, those very same institutions got a fresh coat of paint and a softer sounding name and that's it. Foreign wars called righetous crusades against terrorism by the GOP became humanitarian interventions to drill new wells and build girl's schools in Afghanistan, but it still boiled down to occupying foreign countries and bombing people, many of whom were innocent citizens and bystanders. There's a reason why Trump made it part of his platform in 2016 to end the forever wars: People were fed up with the whole idea, no matter if they were red team or blue team. The only bitter thing is that Trump in his second term turned around on this.To be continued
>>85720152ContinuationBack to FDR: You accuse him of not abolishing segregation more than 20 years before the civil rights movement. You demand from a somewhat left-leaning president to commit utter and complete political suicide by going against segregation, which was unbelievably deeply ingrained into american society at that time. No president at that time could have done anything agains it. It would have been easier to convince the American public to join the axis powers than to desegregate. So making accusations against FDR for that is disingenuous. Obama on the other hand had a whole generation of Civil rights protests behind him to do anything, but still chose to bomb foreign children, bail out the banks while his people starved and, as stated before, put everyone under the greatest surveillance regime the world has known at that point. Pointing the finger at one whose capabilities to enact legislation was limited while shielding the other who at some point even had a supermajority and could rule as he pleased displays ahistorical double-standards, I'm afraid.To be Concluded.
>>85720155Conclusion:>We are talking of diplomatic legitimacy thoughExactly and the Soviet Union was the one country who bled the most to free Europe from nazism. They won their legitimacy on the battlefield, whether anyone liked it or not and for the record, both FDR and Churchill really disliked it as you possibly know. But they had to throw them some bones so as to not entice them to take by fore what they feel is owed to them. Fostering Anti-soviet terrorism would only have served to destabilize the whole of eastern europe and central asia. Nothing good would have come from that. By integrating them into the post-war order, including the UN, the infrastructure to keep the cold war from escalating, especially so early on when the soviets had such a massive advantage in conventional military power. Concessions had to be made, whether you like the optics of it or not. Contrast this with Obamas inept handling of Eastern European affairs, sending Victoria 'Fuck the EU' Nuland to help instigate the Maidan Coup, which resulted in eight years of low-tension combat between Ukrained and its breakaway states and as of now four years (and counting) of direct warfare between it an Russia, incurring millions of casualties and Billions (even on involved states like Germany if you consider the Ukrainian terrorist attacks against the Northstream pipelines), possibly trillions once this is all over, of costs in war material and rebuilding efforts. Sure, they're denying Russia the 'diplomatic legitimacy', but sacrificing millions of people on the altar of war for this purpose is more than just a little bit cynical, but again, this is not something unique to Obama. We all remember Madeleine Albright serving under the Democrat Bill Clinton stating it was worth killing half a million innocent children just so they could show some dinghy desert dictator who's boss
>>85720163That's a lot of text just to provide false equivalencies, revisionism, and plenty of deflection.>ImmigrationTaking US citizens constitutional rights and seizing their property based on ancestry is internment, akin a concentration camp. Processing non-citizens at the border is immigration enforcement. Dismissing the distinction as a leftist spin is no argument, just a refusal to engage with basic constitutional law.>MacroeconomicsAmerica wouldn't have deindustrialized, plenty of studies done about that, I did give you the source. Private capital crashed and remained stifled precisely because of New Deal price-fixing and regulatory volatility (NIRA, AAA). WW2 mobilization was wholly detached from the New Deal. It actually required dismantling the price controls and cartel structures so actual industrial capacity could be unlocked. >Civil RightsFDR actively codified racial exclusion to secure southern votes. Explicitly drafting SS and the wagner act to strip millions of blacks of economic stability. His refusal to back the anti-lynching bill was capitulation. On the other hand, Obama's filibuster-proof majority lasted barely 72 working days. Oh and the bank bailout (TARP)? Passed under Bush.>Foreign PolicyMilitary occupation is one thing. Diplomatic endorsement of totalitarian subjugation is another. At Yalta FDR directly violated the Atlantic Charter by granting international cover to Stalin's puppets and regimes. Btw, calling euromaidan (it's real name, not using your pro-kremlin framing) a US coup is a russian state talking point, might want to be careful with your information bubble. It strips millions of ukrainians of their agency for rejecting a corrupt leader who abandoned a popular EU integration treaty. Western intervention isn't responsible for russian aggression, that just inverts cause and effect.
Jesus advocated for tax cuts for billionaires?
>>85714278i miss that nigga like you wouldn't believe. i done even care if he bombed the middle east to. at least he was eloquent. trump was too during his 2016 campaign now he just sounds like a fucking retard
>>85719369>What was FDR to do about it? Sign peace agreement with Germany and send them by lend-lease 100 millions tons of fuel and 10000 P-51 fighters.
>>85718438>"uh... Um... Uuuuuuuhhh.... Let me be clear....... The presidency is not uhhh.... Uuummmm......Uuuuuhhhhh"Why can't you people ever accept a fact? You really think a stuttering moron spoke intelligently otherwise? Think about it, how could that even be?There's an acceptance now that someone can point out something and instead they of others accepting that, they try to get around it by saying that their argument holds true because I haven't specifically covered another part of it. If he's a moron who can't speak, how could he have complex speeches etc? What he's gonna be as thick as concrete but somehow a genius? Are you fucking retarded?I suppose that's how you people get by though. The truth is nothing to you. You just deflect so that you're not confronted with unpleasant ideas and forced to grow. You'd rather remain a child. You don't have the capacity to be an adult.
>>85720265yes, and a lot of it
>>85720265What part of Render into Caesar you stupid goyim don't understand?
>>85714194only thing bout trump and christ is the both are jew
>>85720221>Taking US citizens constitutional rights and seizing their property based on ancestryIsn't there currently a discussion going on that citizen's rights are only afforded to white people going by the letter of the law? Remember, Japanese-Americans as well as any Citizens not of anglo-Saxon or at the very least germanic descent were not considered real Americans by broad swaths of the electorate, regardless of whether they were GOP or democrat leaning. FDR was on the mainstream of that time. Obama was touted as this progressive champion of civil rights and build those cages he and the DNC later decried when Trump used them. You cannot measure someone from 80-100 ago by today's liberal purity standards and then diluting the real suffering a very recent president has wrought.>America wouldn't have deindustrialized, plenty of studies done about thatAnd it didn't with the New deal in place, so we have established that, as the basline, the New deal did not do more harm than good and keep in mind that I didn't reject the thesis that the War helped with engaging the US industrial power. The real question is: Would have any other economic program that candidates on the ballots at that time proposed been better or worse than the sometimes flawed policies of the New Deal? Excluding Huey Long, the answer is no. The GOP at that time had nothing to offer than austerity and misery, similar to European conservatives today. And to contrast this: Was there any better alternative to Obama bailing out the banks while letting home owners lose everything they worked their entire lives for and sending in the police to squash civil protests against it? Most likely. Stating that Bush passed it first is dodging responsibility. Obama could have reversed the legislation, letting the banks own up to what they did and bailed out the people instead. He did not.To be continued...
>>85721173Continuing: Obama consciously let his predecessor's work stand and with how aggressively partisan US politics undeniably is, this can only mean a tacit agreement. And talking down 72 working days is a true deflection. How much time do you need to get things done in a congress thats rubber stamping everything you want? That's another failing, at least if you're partisan for the DNC: Obama's failure to push through a replacement for Ruth Bader-Ginsburg. Instead of making her get off her high horse of wanting to be replaced by a female president, he should have played hard ball. Instead, he handed the GOP a solid majority in the supreme court for at least one or two generations. Saying that he has no legal powers to make her would be deflecting the issue: An effective president also uses soft powers and a gifted orator as Obama as people made him out to be should have been able to convince an aging Judge that was aligned with him politically to do what is best for their side of the political divide. With so many working days, there was barely a limit to what he could have gotten done. Sleepy Joe Biden never had the same powers. Even with a formal majority, he had the two rogues Sinema and Manchin who basically turned the majority into a stalemate. Even without dementia, Old Joe never had a chance. But Obama held all the cards and just chose to squander the opportunity he was given.To be continued...
>>85721176Continuing:>FDR actively codified racial exclusion to secure southern votes. Welcome to politics. It's a dirty game. You have to make compromises if you want to win. They say that this is what Sanders wan't good enough at, which led to him losing, which of course wouldn't be entirely correct, seeing as the party apparatus was hellbent on finally crowning Hillary like she was always meant to. It was her turn, after all.Should FDR have handed the southern states and some less than enthusiastic northern states to the GOP, thereby possibly losing the election just to conform to the coastal liberal purity standard? Also, didn't Obama also stab Occupy Wallstreet in the back to gain the support of the DNC donors? Not to mention using violence on environmentalists peacefully demonstrating against pipelines being laid through protected areas? Again, Obama coasted into the white house on easy mode, since the GOP lost the people's support at the end of the Bush administration. He didn't really need to make concessions, but despite this and despite having overwhelming legislative powers for a while, the end result was more pauperization and a shrinking middle class. Again, there were reasons why people decided to, as they said at that time, throw the proverbial dynamite stick into the ballot boxes by electing Trump and nearly nominating a secular jewish socialist as democrat candidate if the DNC hadn't rigged the entire process, which they didn't deny in court but affirmed that it was their right to do so. They didn't do so during FDRs terms, so there is a difference between the usefulness of the policies of the two and no, it's not russian botting if that's the next line of diluting actual criticism. People hoped for change with Obama. They got a nickel and a dime.To be continued...
>>85721181Continuing:>Military occupation is one thing. Diplomatic endorsement of totalitarian subjugation is another. It's just optics. What tangible purpose would it have served to deny the soviets the prize they already had won? No Romanian or Hungarian farmer switching from one dictatorship to the next would have cared if some lofty 'Atlantic charter' said that this was really bad. If they were willing to fight for freedom, they would have done so against their fascist regimes already. Being unable to deal with real situations in a pragmatic manner is pure dogmatism. This is what blinded the Germans so much they lost the war and it made a sclerotic USSR collapse. Likewise, we can see that China is thriving because they cast away old dogmas and preserved their system this way. Saying the Atlantic charter should take priority over a lasting peace in Europe is zealotry. FDR was right to take another path, as was Trump for negotiating in Afghanistan in his first term. As for Obama, despite any charters and treaties, especially those of the north atlantic kind, he still spied on his closest allies. I don't think the people in Germany or France found it very humorous when they got stabbed in the back by him, the supposed civil rights lawyer, like this.To be continued...
>>85721184Continuing:>Btw, calling euromaidan (it's real name, not using your pro-kremlin framing) a US coup is a russian state talking pointPointing fingers at Russia has always been the easy excuse for everything. The fact remains that this was a coup. Ukraine had regularly scheduled elections and the participants instead chose to not only ignore them, but to drive the democratically elected head of government (https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-222138%22]}) out of office. If overturning democratic elections by force isn't a coup, then what is? Yes, the western media portrayed the insurrection as heroic David vs Goliath, but remember the January 6th riots. Those people also wanted to overturn a democratic election. The only reason they got called traitors and the usurpers of Maidan square are regarded as freedom fighters is because they've both won and they were advancing the cause of western values. The insurrectionists then made a sham out of deposing him by stating that he, who has been violently driven out of his home country by the very same coup they were legitimizing, has abandoned his post. I suppose remembered how that worked from the soviet days. Is that to say he wasn't corrupt? No, of course not. He was corrupt, much like every ruler in this part of the world, but to be fair, most rulers in general abuse their power in some way or another, but that's another story. Following that, there has been much dissent directed against subverting democracy like that, which was the spark for the secessionist movement in the first place. Some dissenters even had to pay with their lives for speaking out their dissent when the trade union building in Odesa was set on fire by supporters of the new regime. By saying that all ukrainians welcomed the usurpers is denying the will of not only the electorate that gave the former head of government their mandate, but it is also stripping the people of their agency to dissent. To be concluded...
>>85721191Conclusion:Likewise it's a fact that Ms. Nuland appeared on the Maidan square shortly before they turned violent and we know from historical precedence that the US tends to support coups all over the world (e.g. coups against Mossadegh or Chile in 1973 just to name a few examples). To think that they did nothing is beyond naive. Once the files are declassified, this will be as clear as it was in the cases of Iran and Chile. And from Ms. Nuland's personal stance towards the EU as evidenced by her famous quote, we can derive that it was never about leading Ukraine into a prosperous future within the European family. They supported the coup to drive the wedge between two brotherly peoples, expose the erstern flank of russia and hopefully strike a spark that would ignite the flames of war and this is what they got. They bleed Europe white of their money, russia of their international partnerships and Ukraine of the lives of their men and women all while having the US selling weapons to the highest bidder. One could argue that Ukraine should have become less authoritarian, but here's the question: How many lives is a little bit more liberalism worth? And what if one pays the cost, but still gets a more authoritarian home country despite the promises, considering how elections have been suspended for many years now, how the nouveau regime silences dissenters and how it openly abducts its own citizens to feed into the meatgrinder. These are all the consequences that emerged from this coup, one that Obama was all too willing to embrace. As we can remember, Trump was mostly neutral on the matter, so there has been a contrast between how both administrations regarded and treated the situation there. Going back to FDR, we can conclude with the gift of hindsight that he was wise to not enable such a mess, but Obama considered himself to be above consequences, as he so often did. I will give Obama credit for stopping Hillary's ascension the first time around though
>>85721195Oh boy, here we go.>UnoFDR unconstitutionally incarcerated US citizens. Wasn't a mainstream policy, and equating it to civil immigration enforcement of non-citizens at the border is a collapse of your constitutional literacy. Border processing bears zero legal or constitutional resemblance to incarcerating native-born american citizens based on ethnicity. Legally, EO 9066 stripped over 120k citizens and lawful residents of their 4th, 5th, and 14th amendment rights. They were forced into camps. And in 1982 the bipartisan commission on wartime relocation concluded that this was prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership.And the temporary facilities built in '14? Built under TVPRA to humanely process an unprecedented influx at the border, not to strip native-born citizens of property and incarcerate them based on ancestry.>DosNo one said the New Deal deindustrialized the US. It artificially prolonged the stagnation and mass unemployment, you can find peer-reviewed research, eg Journal of Political Economy, that clearly demonstrates that. WW2 forced the dismantling of many ND acts and finally allowed the economy to flourish.>TresTARP was signed into law by Bush on october 3rd 2008. Obama took office only months later. You fundamentally misunderstand financial mechanics if you think Obama couldve reversed that. You can't un-ring a bell like that, as it wouldve triggered a total collapse of the global payment and credit system.>CuatroArticle III gives the president zero legal or executive authority to force the SCOTUS justices to retire. Blaming Obama merely once more shows your lack of constitutional literacy. And the senate supermajority existed for just 72 working days, during which the ACA was passed.
>>85721325>CincoFDR's racial policies weren't standard dirty politics, that's handwaving it away and misses the impact. FDR didn't just compromise with the south, he codified Jim Crow into federal economics. 60% of blacks nationwide were excluded from the same safety nets and wealth-building mechanisms that created the white middle class.>SeisThe formal diplomatic recognition FDR granted to soviet puppet regimes violated the 1941 Atlantic Charter, period. This signing off on a totalitarian SI wasn't pragmatic, and it wasn't peace-building. It entirely surrendered moral and legal standing, and abandoned allies like Poland (who fought the nazis alongside the west).>SieteAgain, the regurgitated kremlin talking points. Millions of ukrainians lived it differently. Euromaidan began when Yanukovych by himself abandoned an overwhelmingly popular EU agreement due to intense russian economic coercion. And after, Yanukovych ordered snipers to shoot peaceful protesters while he himself fled to russia. Ukraine's fully democratically elected parliament voted 328-0 to remove him from office (after the president ordered snipers on civilians...) under constitutional emergency provisions. Meanwhile J6 was an attempt to stop the certification of a verified election by a losing candidate. Clear as day, those two.>OchoFree nd fair democratic elections were held shortly after in may 2014, monitored and certified by the OSCE. Nuland distributing diplomatic support or passing out bread in kyiv is obviously not a CIA coup. The ukrainians just had a very popular domestic uprising against a corrupt autocrat who abandoned his mandate, something russians should copy from their western brothers.
>thread has devolved not to democrats vs republicans>but rather which democrat was a better socialistUpvoted, more of this
>>85720541>Render into CaesarInstructions unclear, Caesar rendered into 3D
>>85721427kek'd hard thank u nigger
I've seen a lot of boomer memes. But this takes the cake.
>>85721325>And the temporary facilities built in '14? Built under TVPRA to humanely process an unprecedented influx at the border, not to strip native-born citizens of property and incarcerate them based on ancestry.Those people are still human, no? And from the time the Democrats made a ruckus about how miserable lives in the camps were, we know they weren't 'humane'. There surely were better ways of dealing with the situation. This was just the easiest, as it would appease the border states>WW2 forced the dismantling of many ND acts and finally allowed the economy to flourish.I already conceded that the New Deal was flawed, didn't I? But another question on the matter: Who oversaw the US economy during WW2 as president? In other words, who 'allowed the economy to flourish'?>You fundamentally misunderstand financial mechanics if you think Obama couldve reversed that.He still could have enacted safeguards for the ordinary people without such repercussions. Obama chose to squash the protests instead.>Article III gives the president zero legal or executive authority to force the SCOTUS justices to retire.Either you grossly misread my statement on it or willfully built a strawman. Obama, the great orator that he is, could have convinced, not coerced Ruth Bader-Ginsburg to resign. He knew what was at stake. She did as well. Instead they lamented the fact after she passed, which is a common theme among Democrats: Always cry over something that cannot be changed and dodge respinsibility for the things that can.>And the senate supermajority existed for just 72 working days, during which the ACA was passed.72 Working days for just one act, huh. Talk about ineffectual. How do other presidents without supermajorities get anything passed at all if they're working just as slowly? Trump doesn't have so much trouble, Bush didn't have any problems, Clinton fared reasonably well and so on.To be Continued...
>>85721669To be Continued...Continuation:>FDR's racial policies weren't standard dirty politics, that's handwaving it away and misses the impact. FDR didn't just compromise with the south, he codified Jim Crow into federal economics. 60% of blacks nationwide were excluded from the same safety nets and wealth-building mechanisms that created the white middle class.You're making a moral argument. Politics isn't about morals and it never has been and never will be. It's about interests and the power to enforce them. Once you strip it down to the bare facts, it remains as such: FDR needed to compromise in order to not hand the white house over to the GOP who favored complete isolationism, which might or might not have meant complete domination by either the German Empire or, in case they still won, a Pan-Eurasian Soviet Union. If you're not willing to do what's necessary, fine. Most people aren't willing to get their hands dirty. FDR was willing and he got results to show for it. What does Obama have to show for except continuing the forever wars in the middle east and trouble in eastern Europe? Surely not Obamacare, as there are many complaints that it made their coverage even more expensive, if you can believe that with the extortion racket that is the US healthcare system and people still die from lacking healthcare. Charitably speaking, it might have been a first building block that has never been picked up to build upon, but on its own merits, it's a failure.>The formal diplomatic recognition FDR granted to soviet puppet regimes violated the 1941 Atlantic Charter, period.What follows from that? The Atlantic charter is not holy scripture, as much as you apparently make it out to be. Just as much as the UN human rights charta isn't if you look at what US goons did and still do to defenseless, innocent prisoners in Guantanamo Bay and several black sites all over the world, including on Obama's watchTo be Continued...
>>85717344I know this is hard to hear but jesus was middle eastern
>>85721675Continuation:>This signing off on a totalitarian SI wasn't pragmatic, and it wasn't peace-building. It entirely surrendered moral and legal standing, and abandoned allies like Poland (who fought the nazis alongside the west).Pure speculation. A Soviet Union denied recognition could have decided to deny recognition to western European states in turn, starting with a newly founded Germany and then what? It could have decided to not idly stand by and let themselves get cheated out of their sphere of influence in Greece. If there's no framework to articulate their interests in, what's stopping them? Up until the mid or late 50s, they had the advantage in military strength. Allowing all-out conteinetal wars to start for pure moral zealotry is something mankind should have evolved away from with the end of the crusades. Moral grandstanding does not replace sound international diplomacy. In the end, the pragmatists win. But if morals are so important, where were Obama's sanctions on Pakistan for harboring Bin Laden? He and his predecessor saw fit to bomb two other countries into the stone age for the mere suggestion that he might live there or run any kind of operations. What were his measures against Saudi Arabia for lapidating women? Azerbaijan? Israel? Either it is about morals above all else because they are unbetrayable values or it's about business in the end, but then you cannot blame FDR for doing the same.To be Continued...
>>85721690Continuation:Also, it was not the US's responsibility to babysit Poland. UK and France made their promises. Churchill was probably too busy starving out a few million indians at the time to really care about making good on his word. Very sad. Let's be real: Poland was nothing more than the western allies' meatshield. They were used as such and disposed thereafter. Ultimately expendable. If Poland wasn't, then Churchill would have declared war the second the USSR invaded Poland and dragged France and later the US into it. Now answer this: Did the western allies stand up for their high morals or did they prefer pragmatism in dealing with Germany above all else? Back into the present: Did Obama bomb Turkey when they sheltered ISIS soldiers and traded plundered oil for medical services? Morals are inviolable, so he must have done it, right? Demanding complete purity from one side and letting so many instances of wrongdoing slide on the other is called a double standard.To be Continued...
>>85721697Continuation:>Again, the regurgitated kremlin talking points. Millions of ukrainians lived it differently. Euromaidan began when Yanukovych by himself abandoned an overwhelmingly popular EU agreement What they 'lived' is irrelevant in the face of the facts and it was a fact that Yanukovich was democratically elected. And as the democratically elected leader of his souvereign country, it was his right to walk away from any and all treaties and agreements he considered to not be in the interest of his country. If the insurrectionists would really have wanted to, they could have run in the next elections and ousted Yanukovich this way. They could also have initiated a referendum, sort of like Brexit, just in reverse. They had every opportunity, but chose to leave the democratic framework to impose their will on everyone within the country, even those who styed loyal to the person with the real democratic mandate. Then again, the leaders of the moral west just recently demonstrated what they think of referendums not befitting their paymasters interests: In Berlin a referendum to buy back mismanaged apartments won a clear majority and not only did the local city government refuse to act on it for several years, but the federal government is introducing legislation to criminalize the will of the people post-facto and the 'free media' is running a smear campaign rarely ever seen in the country's history against the only party remotely willing to respect the will of the people. I suppose the people of Germany have every right or even an obligation to rise up against such a government, don't they? Or would different rules apply now that this cannot be abused to hurt Russian strategic interests?To be Continued...
>>85721701Continuation:>Free nd fair democratic elections were held shortly after in may 2014, monitored and certified by the OSCE. Nuland distributing diplomatic support or passing out bread in kyiv is obviously not a CIA coup.Free and fair elections? Would Yanukovich have been able to stand in to defend his post after being driven into exile by the insurrection? Would he have been able to campaign without having to worry about being lynched by a mob of maidanists or some western-catered Svoboda party cadres? Sure, if any candidates not conforming to the new order forced on the country by the usurpers are eliminated, the remaining candidates can hold their free and fair elections, because the result is already clear in all aspects that actually matter.To be Concluded...
>>85721706Conclusion:>The ukrainians just had a very popular domestic uprising against a corrupt autocrat who abandoned his mandate, something russians should copy from their western brothers. An uprising of this kind surely is illegal, right? If not, why is Macron sending militarized police units against literal schoolchildren at this exact time? Do you support the people liberating themselves from this corrupt autocrat or youd you recommend the people to hold still until the next round of elections? Again, corruption is nothing new in Eastern Europe and cannot be grounds to destabilizing an entire country and authoritarianism isn't limited to countries the west wants to establish new military bases in. In the end, it boils down to this: You have to make compromises and give concessions. Better to lose some than to gain nothing at all. But if all one such as Obama has to him is a flimsy perception of moral superiority, considering how little he really got done, then he better shouldn't have put kids in cages, bombed other kids, spied on yet other kids and pandered to absolutists lapidating little girls for showing too much skin of their ankles, because at that moral height, I'd drill for oil, but not feel any smug. The results of his policies in the form of the Trump presidency and all its cascading aftereffects speak amply for themselves. And no, the american people didn't suddenly turn racist in order to elect Orange Man and neither was it a Russian conspiracy that many sore Hillary shills alleged, ironically a few months after actually rigging the primaries against Sanders as was well documented in the DNC leaks.
>>85721708It's been real, my LLM using friend, but after just quickly flowing over your words, I have decided to be done explaining the same old points to you. You are refusing reality and keep deflecting with whataboutism. Therefore, my energy is better spent elsewhere.Goodbye.
>>85721754If You Ain't Bother Writing it, I Ain't Bother Reading It
>>85721754Suit yourself. Demanding the same standards when making up moral arguments and underpinning it with the actual records can be dismissed with calling out whataboutism, sure. Insinuating the usage of LLMs certainly is another useful tactic to delegitimize the opposition, fine. It's easier to do so, I understand, just as making strawmen and repeating points about which a consensus has been reached long ago.But ultimately, it doesn't matter. Both men's successes and failures are just history no, their reception ever changing in the eyes of the learned men dedicated to analyzing them. I hope you put your power into creating living circumstances wherever you live with the same vigor as you argued here and I hope it will be for the betterment of everyone involved.I wish you a good day. Until we meet again!
>>85721967Yeah, LLM-authored works are not worth reading. Good for drafting, good for peeking over the shoulder of some person whose data was scraped, but I'd rather see your prompts and then tweak them to get the A/B argument if that's how you want to play it. Talk is cheap. Show me the logic.
>>85722436What happened to>Therefore, my energy is better spent elsewhere.To answer your question: No LLM involved in formulating any posts. If they were, the post count would have been much higher and it would possess better grammar. Implying such usage is just a cheap way to deliegitimize the opposite side. Striking at the form rather than contending with the stated facts or the overall argument is certainly one strategy. If it's a winning one, I'm split on.In short: Any logic is right here. If that's not enough, then I take it as a compliment to have my eloquence and orthography being put on the same level as these technical marvels and that's it.
Anyone else at the point of thinking shit like this has a 50% chance of being a troll? Trump is a grade A retard. I say this as a guy who wanted him in for a second term. I'm pretty sure he could say trans women are woman, and at this point his hardcore supporters would somehow flip it in their mind to why he's actually right.
>>85722509>I'm pretty sure he could say trans women are woman, and at this point his hardcore supporters would somehow flip it in their mind to why he's actually right.That's the crux with extremely partisan politics. Likewise, the next democratic candiate could flip around and say there are only two genders and their fanbase would start eating it up and claim that this has always been their position.
>>85715794b-because what if *I* had a billion dollars?? im gonna be a billionaire any second now you libtards just want to stifle the american dream
>>85722497>What happened to>>Therefore, my energy is better spent elsewhere.I am a different poster >:)>technical marvelsLLMs are retarded, and being accused of being an LLM is being accused of being retarded.
>>85722619>what if *I* had a billion dollars?Then you prevented some billionaire from getting that money. Shame on you for choking out the billionaires!
>>85722790>I am a different poster >:)That figures. After all, the signature Obama images are missing>LLMs are retarded, and being accused of being an LLM is being accused of being retarded.Yes, they are and still, they are quite interesting technical constructs and they are trained to produce text that is grammatically correct and sounds well crafted, at least at first glance. I wouldn't assume I was consistently hold up to such a standard as you would expect of such a model or a native english writer of an elevated level, so the comparison can seem as being held in high esteem. Judging intention and effect is hard, doubly so over the internet if text is the only communication channel available, so it might have been backhanded. We can only wonder
