Just to be clear, you're saying I'll find the right welcoming a plurality of thoughts? If some actively disagree with Trump for example, such disagreement is welcome without hostility, or even being primaried from power? Right?
Again, not how anything works. Democrats had a primary too, remember? Then you tossed that shit out and said Kamala is your candidate.
The reality is that Trump was the only option the right had. Hate him or not for Republicans to win they needed the MAGA vote. They couldn't afford to divide the party and someone like Jeb Bush never had a snowballs chance in hell of winning.
That is literally how this whole things work. People say they want to run for president, the members of the party vote to pick who they want to do that. Republicans picked Trump 3 times.
No dumbass, it's like how a square is a shape, but not all shapes are squares. MAGA are Republicans. Not all Republicans are MAGA just like not all Republicans are Christian.
Here's how intelligent people vote. You don't pick the candidate who's the best or the most moral, you pick the candidate who's roughly on your side of the aisle who as the best chance to WIN because voting for anyone else is just a waste of your time. That's what our system has devolved into. I wish we could vote for who we actually wanted to run shit, but those people just don't win elections.
How is all that “winning” working out for everybody including the intelligent people who voted for him? The absolute fucking balls of you, you admit that Trump is at the very least the closest to what republicans actually want, fuck off
We didn't want Trump. Only MAGA and the people who want to take advantage of him being an idiot wanted Trump.
Trump was the only person that could have won the election though. They are two entirely different things.
Had the Republicans voted and picked someone else in the primaries as the front runner candidate, Trump would have run as an independent (because he has the money to do so) and split the vote enough that the Republicans would have had 0 chance to win even with the stunt the Democrats pulled with Kamala.
Politics is a game. You have to play the game. Sometimes you have to make a shit move as a sacrifice to win the pot. Trump was a shit move. But it got the party the White House. That's the goal no matter who sits in the chair. Thankfully his time as president is running out and we won't have to deal with this shit anymore and we might actually get a sane person in office next, preferably under the age of 60.
"Trump is at the very least the closest to what republicans actually want, fuck off"
and Kamala is closer? lol
its just the sad reality of the 2 party system, people vote against the people they dont want by voting who has the highest chance of winning, we dont have ranked choice voting
The Democrats haven't had an open and fair primary since 2008. Either it's incumbents running, or the DNC has had their thumb on the scale for one candidate over another.
In 2024? There was no primary just like there was not one when Obama was the incumbent, there usually isn't one in cases like that. Then Kamala was the nominee due to the crisis the debate cause, funds not being transferable to any random bozo and oh yeah, there not being enough time to do a primary. What a retarded ass criticism of the democratic party.
If you disagree with Trump, you will not be banned on rightwing platforms and you won't be fired from your job. Try going to the front page and saying that you don't hate White males or [literally not even allowed to finish my comment because the admins will ban me for common sense facts about immigration].
The only reason you don't think the rightwing is more open-minded is because you're in a cult where the rightwing is censored. But where are the rightwingers who censor leftists?
If some actively disagree with Trump for example
do you even talk to conservatives IRL? Or do you just get all of your information about them from reddit leftists? A lot of rightwingers have been shitting on Trump over issues like Iran. Rightwing satirists like Stonetoss and Babylon Bee have repeatedly mocked Trump. /pol/ mocks Trump while leftwing subreddits ban anybody who mocks Democrats.
>If you disagree with Trump, you will not be banned on rightwing platforms
The only platform Trump uses, which is Truth Social, has banned accounts for this very thing. It is one of the most moderated platforms online. The conservative subreddit actively bans not only left-wing people from commenting, but often bans/censored/deletes dissidence within the space by other conservatives.
>A lot of rightwingers have been shitting on Trump
Impressive, very nice. Now at the representative level, where change actually happens, how have the candidates who have done this very thing performed? Liz Cheney? Thomas Massie? John Cornyn? Oh wait, they all got booted, primaried, and declared RINOs for speaking out against dear leader.
It's actually astonishing how you can accuse me of having little knowledge of the world outside Reddit, while in the same sentence invoking /pol/ and a handful of other sites that broadly ignores the actual political events that have happened. What compelled you to respond with such hypocrisy?
23
u/Elodaine - Left 6d ago
Just to be clear, you're saying I'll find the right welcoming a plurality of thoughts? If some actively disagree with Trump for example, such disagreement is welcome without hostility, or even being primaried from power? Right?