Dear Nathan:

This isn't a blog. We've don't need to hear the same thing 2000 times.

dejadeadnz:

 

Dear Nathan:

 

This isn't a blog. We've don't need to hear the same thing 2000 times.

 

YES! Note how the frequency of his posts has increased since he has received tacit approval for them.

dejadeadnz:

 

Dear Nathan:

 

This isn't a blog. We've don't need to hear the same thing 2000 times.

 

There's an element of truth to them, it may be unpopular opinion, but the counter-opinion of the majority of posters here (including me) has also been expressed thousands of times.

I don't agree (with other comments) that he's a "troll".  There have been plenty of "pro-trump" trolls and "concern trolls" appear in Trump/US political threads here, they almost inevitably end up falling foul of FUG and receive the banhammer. (if you do engage with them they just can't help themselves from confirming what they are).

His comments are IMO consistent with a great threat - explaining why Trump may very well be re-elected in a couple of months. 

Fred99:

 

There's an element of truth to them, it may be unpopular opinion, but the counter-opinion of the majority of posters here (including me) has also been expressed thousands of times.

 

I don't agree (with other comments) that he's a "troll".  There have been plenty of "pro-trump" trolls and "concern trolls" appear in Trump/US political threads here, they almost inevitably end up falling foul of FUG and receive the banhammer. (if you do engage with them they just can't help themselves from confirming what they are).

 

His comments are IMO consistent with a great threat - explaining why Trump may very well be re-elected in a couple of months. 

 

Definitions of Internet trolls vary in detail, but most agree that the term applies to posters who try to cause disruption with their posts. On this basis, @Nathan more than qualifies.

Almost without exception, his posts are unrelentingly negative. He has been making them for quite awhile, and they are all essentially the same. His consistent message is that the political system in America and the electoral process by which leaders are chosen, are hopelessly, irredeemably corrupt. Whoever you vote for, (s)he is so compromised that it makes no difference at all who wins. The candidates are evil. The process is useless. It makes no difference what anyone chooses because things will just stay the same. His purpose is to spread a sense of despair and hopelessness, undermining any motivation anyone might have to bother to vote at all. His message is that the democrats are just as bad as the republicans, that Biden and Harris are just as evil as Trump, that America will continue heading down the sewer regardless of what anyone does and there is no point in even trying. If that is not a definition of trolling, I don't know what is.

If he said these things once or twice or three times, he would just be venturing his opinion, but he says them again and again and again. He is not offering anything new. He is not providing any different information. He is just endlessly regurgitating his refrain that the system is broken and it can't be fixed. He is annoying. He is a troll.

Rikkitic:

 

Almost without exception, his posts are unrelentingly negative.

 

And our posts in Trump threads aren't?

Fred99:

 

Rikkitic:

 

Almost without exception, his posts are unrelentingly negative.

 

 

And our posts in Trump threads aren't?

 

Not at all. Nearly all anti-Trump posts implicitly or explicitly state how much better things would be without him. @Nathan states that nothing can ever be better so we might as well just lie down and die.

Rikkitic:

 

Not at all. Nearly all anti-Trump posts implicitly or explicitly state how much better things would be without him. @Nathan states that nothing can ever be better so we might as well just lie down and die.

 

Well it's a valid opinion, doesn't break FUG to be pessimistic, and if "coincidentally" that opinion aids Trump and is widespread (which I suspect it is), that reinforces somewhat the argument that the Democrat party is hapless in opposition, due in part to exactly the reasons he highlights.

I guess one silver lining (such as it is) is if Trump does win again, at least he can't run again - which would give Kamala or whoever a good shot in 2024.

Of course, the cloud is if he does win, well if you think America is bad now...4 more years of this crap? I can't see my wife going home to visit her relatives for some time if they continue on the current trajectory.

quickymart:

 

I guess one silver lining (such as it is) is if Trump does win again, at least he can't run again - which would give Kamala or whoever a good shot in 2024.

 

Of course, the cloud is if he does win, well if you think America is bad now...4 more years of this crap? I can't see my wife going home to visit her relatives for some time if they continue on the current trajectory.

 

It's worse than that. This is how Trump behaves when he wants to be re-elected. Just wait until he is in his second term and has nothing to lose.

Paul1977:

 

quickymart:

 

I guess one silver lining (such as it is) is if Trump does win again, at least he can't run again - which would give Kamala or whoever a good shot in 2024.

 

Of course, the cloud is if he does win, well if you think America is bad now...4 more years of this crap? I can't see my wife going home to visit her relatives for some time if they continue on the current trajectory.

 

 

It's worse than that. This is how Trump behaves when he wants to be re-elected. Just wait until he is in his second term and has nothing to lose.

 

It would be a reasonable guess that if re-elected, then he'll start campaigning for "Ivanka 2024". 
She's as dumb as a brick,  has had a fantastic career working as an "unpaid" volunteer for her dad's regime, fills in for the first lady, married into another crime syndicate family, and is pretty enough to lead a campaign and then the presidency via Instagram.

Why assume there would be a vacancy? If Trump gets a second term, he will ensure that he is made president for life. He has already announced that intention.

nathan: The Dem establishment have proven they will do, and say anything, to stop any substantive progressive campaign. They are tied to their big donors, to Wall St, and to the military budget, almost all of the Dems voted for Trumps 20% military budget increase. Its very clear they are not going to allow a Peoples movement to startup in any dominant way.

Sigh, just stop engaging. He's just going to close his ears to you and blog again and then waste everyone else's time.

Rikkitic:

 

Why assume there would be a vacancy? If Trump gets a second term, he will ensure that he is made president for life. He has already announced that intention.

 

Rubbish.  How?  This is scare tactics, its virtually impossible, since Trump doesn't have the numbers to change the constitution.

Neither side is trustworthy.  Hilary said the quiet part out loud, saying "Biden should not concede under any circumstances" if the race is close.  And she's right, it probably will drag out with the mail-in and absentee voting.

It took 6 weeks to count just the Primary votes for NY.  The Presidential transition time is only 2 months.  This is going to be a reverse Bush vs Gore legal fight

It's amazing how Biden's been able to get away with committing the felony of advising democrat voters to vote twice - a mail-in vote and at a polling booth.

No wait - that actually happened but was Trump - telling republican voters in NC to commit electoral fraud.  The POTUS who's tweeted dozens of times in full caps " LAW & ORDER!"

That's the problem I have when @nathan claiming that both sides are corrupt thus "the same". They are, but the differences in the scale and number of crimes are incomparable.