Trump Presidency Round 2

[Polish Leppy 22]

This guy is reposting tweets from Aaron Rupar? That's definitely @Cackalacky2.0 haha

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

I don't think anyone has suggested that anyone other than Ukrainians need to fight. I think what has been suggested is that Europe and the US continue to give like 1% of their defense budgets to continue aiding Ukraine.

That way the world continues to know that wars of conquest will not be rewarded with weakness and capitulation. That's basically the legacy of the Allied victory in World War 2, and the basis of a world order that MAGA wants to throw in the trash. Eisenhower and Company are rolling in their graves.

So if Russia invades 4 other countries tomorrow, the expectation is that each nation ponies up 5% of their defense budget to fight wars that aren't theirs?

 

[Irish#1]

I don't think #1 cares lol

You guys were so caught up in your little tug party that you bite on shit so easily that I don’t even have to try.

 

[calvegas04]

Lol wut

 

[TorontoGold]

You guys were so caught up in your little tug party that you bite on shit so easily that I don’t even have to try.

lol what does this mean, you don't actually believe in anything you post and it's just to look like an old angry out of touch person so people online call you out on it? Weird kink, but to each their own!

 

[ab2cmiller]

 

[calvegas04]

 

[Gladiator]

Good job trump

Are you posting a joke?

Nuclear Submarines do not need to refuel. It's called a nuclear reactor and has been in use around the world since the 70's.

The useful lifetime of a nuclear submarine is estimated to be approximately 25 to 30 years, after this period the submarine will face fatigue and corrosion of components, obsolescence and escalating operating costs. The decommissioning of these submarines is a long process; some are held in reserve or mothballed for some time and eventually scrapped, others are disposed of immediately. *Wiki*

Might be that darn DEI equal pay thing that had something to do with the Navy forgetting about the reactor's timeline.
Just imagining the girls reaction when she try's to find the hole that the diesel needs to be pumped into

 

[calvegas04]

Losing support it seems

 

[calvegas04]

 

[ulukinatme]

Are you posting a joke?

Nuclear Submarines do not need to refuel. It's called a nuclear reactor and has been in use around the world since the 70's.

The useful lifetime of a nuclear submarine is estimated to be approximately 25 to 30 years, after this period the submarine will face fatigue and corrosion of components, obsolescence and escalating operating costs. The decommissioning of these submarines is a long process; some are held in reserve or mothballed for some time and eventually scrapped, others are disposed of immediately. *Wiki*

Might be that darn DEI equal pay thing that had something to do with the Navy forgetting about the reactor's timeline.
Just imagining the girls reaction when she try's to find the hole that the diesel needs to be pumped into

Yeah, this nuclear sub thing looks bogus. Nobody is reporting on it aside from the Daily Express which is garbage.

 

[BilboBaggins]

So if Russia invades 4 other countries tomorrow, the expectation is that each nation ponies up 5% of their defense budget to fight wars that aren't theirs?

That's not what is happening, don't strawman this situation. Russia started the largest invasion in Europe since WW2 to prevent a country from westernizing... the invasion failed they are now desperate for a way out.

It's just not that complicated.

Russia doesn't have the ability to invade four other countries. They barely have the ability to stay in Ukraine. Instead of finding odd excuses to cut and run, the US should make the obvious decision and continue to bleed them in Ukraine.

But if they did invade other countries, I would probably support the US sending military aid (via payments to US companies to increase our defense production capabilities) so that Russia is bled out faster.

Remember when Conservatives praised Reagan for retooling the US military and making the USSR match the spending, therefore helping to hasten their demise? Those were the days. Now we have "conservatives" finding every lame excuse they can to throw 80 years of American policy in the garbage for inexplicable reasons.

 

[Old Man Mike]

Wasn't bogus. Why would anyone post that?

(I found two dozen articles about it rather easily.)

If any of us are interested in truth, the refusal was/is real but from a private business.

The Norwegian government was quick to say that this is not governmental policy.

I'd really like folks to post truth rather than "want-it-that-way." Makes understanding WAY more possible.

 

[calvegas04]

Wasn't bogus. Why would anyone post that?

(I found two dozen articles about it rather easily.)

If any of us are interested in truth, the refusal was/is real but from a private business.

The Norwegian government was quick to say that this is not governmental policy.

I'd really like folks to post truth rather than "want-it-that-way." Makes understanding WAY more possible.

Be careful, the MAGA crowd doesn't believe in news sources

 

[Irish#1]

U.K., France and Ukraine agree to work on ceasefire plan

The agreement, announced by U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, emerged in the wake of an extraordinary exchange between Trump and Zelenskyy, and will be presented to the U.S.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[ulukinatme]

How many times have we heard that Russia was on the brink of collapse since the first Ukrainian surge? I'll believe it when I see it. Sounds like a lot of wishful thinking while Europe continues to support Russia indirectly as they purchase their energy. Russia still maintains a large manpower advantage over Ukraine. It's the fisherman with a dollar on a pole, the payoff is always just out of reach, but don't give up now and quit sending Ukraine our money. Ukraine can't win without NATO/US direct intervention, and that's not likely to happen. I see the Independent talking about the imminent collapse of the Russian economy, I don't see unbiased publications making the same predictions.

 

[Irish#1]

That's not what is happening, don't strawman this situation. Russia started the largest invasion in Europe since WW2 to prevent a country from westernizing... the invasion failed they are now desperate for a way out.

It's just not that complicated.

Russia doesn't have the ability to invade four other countries. They barely have the ability to stay in Ukraine. Instead of finding odd excuses to cut and run, the US should make the obvious decision and continue to bleed them in Ukraine.

But if they did invade other countries, I would probably support the US sending military aid (via payments to US companies to increase our defense production capabilities) so that Russia is bled out faster.

Remember when Conservatives praised Reagan for retooling the US military and making the USSR match the spending, therefore helping to hasten their demise? Those were the days. Now we have "conservatives" finding every lame excuse they can to throw 80 years of American policy in the garbage for inexplicable reasons.

In general I agree with this, but I’m not sure Russia will get bled dry. We’ve seen Reports of Russia being short of manpower and weapons for a couple of years yet they’re still in Ukraine.

We need to reach a peaceful solution now instead of losing more lives.

 

[ulukinatme]

Bitch vance getting warm welcome

Hundreds seems a bit exaggerated. Tens of thousands side with Vance.

 

[calvegas04]

Hundreds seems a bit exaggerated. Tens of thousands side with Vance.

Try a non twitter poll from a non maga reporter.

Politics News | Breaking Political News, Video & Analysis-ABC News

ABC News is your trusted source on political news stories and videos. Get the latest coverage and analysis on everything from the Trump presidency, Senate, House and Supreme Court.

projects.fivethirtyeight.com

 

[ulukinatme]

Try a non twitter poll from a non maga reporter.

Politics News | Breaking Political News, Video & Analysis-ABC News

ABC News is your trusted source on political news stories and videos. Get the latest coverage and analysis on everything from the Trump presidency, Senate, House and Supreme Court.

projects.fivethirtyeight.com

That's not really the same thing though, is it?
Interesting, so Vance is trending more and more favorable over time. He started out +10 Unfavorable and has now closed the gap to +2 in a matter of months. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[calvegas04]

Hundreds seems a bit exaggerated. Tens of thousands side with Vance.

 

[ColoradoIrish]

View attachment 3058373

Trump was right! Zelensky is polling at 4% 😂

 

[ulukinatme]

View attachment 3058373

This isn't really any different than the poll I posted earlier. Smerconish labels himself as independent, but if you look through all the past polls his viewership definitely trends away from Trump and Trump policies. In none of the polls have they supported Trump actions, almost consistently it's a 75%/25% split. The results are different, but you're polling a biased audience.

 

[Blazers46]

In the US - giving up territory is not popular


In Ukraine - giving up territory is even less popular
52% want a peace deal, of that 52% believe that Ukraine should concede land.....so 27% of the country supports giving up land to have a peace deal with land concessions.

So, seems like MAGA is again wrong in what other people want.

The conversation was if they want the war to be done. Full stop. You are correct they don’t want to give up land, that’s a completely different argument we weren’t talking about. Why would they want to or why would anyone want them too? Doesn’t make anyone wrong because you are arguing a point nobody was talking about. Congrats on being 100% correct in your argument with yourself and I will agree with myself that people don’t want this war to continue.

 

[BilboBaggins]

How many times have we heard that Russia was on the brink of collapse since the first Ukrainian surge? I'll believe it when I see it. Sounds like a lot of wishful thinking while Europe continues to support Russia indirectly as they purchase their energy. Russia still maintains a large manpower advantage over Ukraine. It's the fisherman with a dollar on a pole, the payoff is always just out of reach, but don't give up now and quit sending Ukraine our money. Ukraine can't win without NATO/US direct intervention, and that's not likely to happen. I see the Independent talking about the imminent collapse of the Russian economy, I don't see unbiased publications making the same predictions.

I haven't read "on the brink of collapse." No one respected is saying that. They are saying that Russia wants a way out because they are spending a lot of time, money, and men in Ukraine.

So long as Ukraine wants to continue the war, the US and Europe should continue to arm them. It's a fraction of the defense budget that no American will notice.

And given that the war revealed some pretty dreadful production capabilities (or lack thereof), the US and Europe should continue to use this war to boost defense production. I would think that part of "Making America Great Again" is fostering the domestic defense production capabilities necessary to deter our enemies.

 

[calvegas04]

Great interview

 

[NDVirginia19]

 

[calvegas04]

 

[TracyGraham]

So, is it accurate that the people that support the Trump position seem to think somehow the U.S. is doing Ukraine a favor by "helping" them cede the Donbas and the Crimea to Russia? Is there a reason that Ukraine can't just do this on their own? Why does Ukraine need the guidance of the US to give up their land to an invader? How in any way would the U.S. be helping? This is the big disconnect. Trumpers seem to think they are helping Ukraine while everyone else seems to think they are clearly fucking Ukraine/helping Putin. We won't guarantee protection, right? This is really hard for a dum dum like myself to grasp. My definition of help would be either telling Russia:
a)they can't have the Donbas
b)continue supplying Ukraine with weapons
c)at worst tell Russia they can have Crimea and even some other proRussian areas but we will annihilate you if you take one more inch.
But those don't seem to be options in Trumps plan, right?

 

[ulukinatme]

So, is it accurate that the people that support the Trump position seem to think somehow the U.S. is doing Ukraine a favor by "helping" them cede the Donbas and the Crimea to Russia? Is there a reason that Ukraine can't just do this on their own? Why does Ukraine need the guidance of the US to give up their land to an invader? How in any way would the U.S. be helping? This is the big disconnect. Trumpers seem to think they are helping Ukraine while everyone else seems to think they are clearly fucking Ukraine/helping Putin. We won't guarantee protection, right? This is really hard for a dum dum like myself to grasp. My definition of help would be either telling Russia they can't have the Donbas or continue supplying Ukraine, but those are not options in Trumps plan, right?

Ukraine isn't getting their remaining land back, not without NATO/US boots on the ground. While it's mostly been a stalemate the last few years, Ukraine has given up some ground again recently. Their best bet at this point is peace and to probably cut their losses, because no one wants to risk their own country's lives to fight for Ukraine. Russia gets a small piece to appease them, Ukraine gets peace, and the rest of us can quit throwing resources at an unwinnable war.