Nightwingdragon

joined 2 years ago
[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 131 points 12 hours ago (10 children)

It broke the minute Trump exposed the fact that the Constitution says exactly nothing about what to do if anyone chooses to violate it, and the answer to the question of "What are you gonna do about it?" was essentially "Nothing."

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 126 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (6 children)

and appeared to fabricate stories that could not possibly be true

This is literally Trump's entire life in one sentence.

Side Story:

During Trump's time making guest appearances for WWE, he was featured as being the cornerman in a "Battle of the Billionaires" where his representative would fight in a match at Wrestlemania against a man of Vince McMahon's choosing. Trump was supposed to represent a wrestler named Bobby Lashley at the event. When it came time for Trump to make the live announcement about who he "carefully chose" to represent him at Wrestlemania, Trump famously said his name was "Bobby Lindsey".

Trump could never, ever get names right.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 10 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

I do get a bit of a personal chuckle out of reading this. As I'm reading this, I'm literally in the middle of an argument with a bunch of people in the reddit politics sub who actually support Trump bullying Canada around, saying "Canada needs the US more than the US needs Canada, so of course we should negotiate", the $1.3 billion deal was for "Infrastructure jobs and better border security", and "we're gonna have to pay some tariffs to the US and if we don't Canada's economy will crumble"

Trying to explain to them that negotiating with Trump in good faith is a non-starter was itself a non-starter. I certainly hope that their opinion wasn't the opinion of the people of Canada in general.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world -3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is why I said it's a case of "Don't hate the player, hate the game."

If our founding fathers were to have set up another method of dealing with changing populations, gerrymandering wouldn't be a thing and we wouldn't be having this discussion. But the rules set up by our founding fathers was essentially little more than a blueprint for gerrymandering without actually using the word gerrymandering. I don't have to like it, but I can't necessarily hate one party or another when they're both just trying their best to exploit the rules they were given to maximum advantage.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

That's only for Cabinet positions. Judicial nominees are only required to engage in some light rimming.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago (2 children)

This is Trumpworld. The only thing you need to have a basic understanding of is how to kiss Trump's ass.

The lack of a basic understanding of the Constitution isn't a disqualifier. It's a prerequisite.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The problem for him is that a hard NO would also disqualify him in front of this Congress.....

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago

Silly, silly boy.....

You didn't actually think that the rules he wants enforced on everybody else is supposed to apply to him too, did you?

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 65 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Very important thing, you know. Some of those transsexuals may have actually survived the floods, and they may actually have to go take a piss after emerging from the floodwaters.......

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (13 children)

Hardly newsworthy. Gerrymandering is literally enshrined in our constitution. Congressional maps have always been redrawn by the party in power to ensure that they remain in power. I would expect Democrats to be doing the same thing if we were talking about California.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I've heard this before. I'm not convinced.

 

This just keeps getting better and better.

 

So now we're back to tariffs again. Until next month. Or something. Maybe.

 

The "including Harvard" is my own inclusion, not from the article's title.

But I think it's important to note that despite the public battles that Harvard is having with Trump, even they are ultimately caving to Trump's policies behind the scenes.

 

We now have entire countries playing Trump's games by Trump's rules. There's a reported 50+ countries trying to "negotiate" with Trump. This is why he continues doing the things he does. Because after all the tough talk and saber rattling, they all crumble like a house of cards in a hurricane at the first hint of pressure.

view more: next ›