
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why are the conservative libertarians fighting maga so hard?
Posted on 10/2/26 at 7:48 am to wackatimesthree
Posted on 10/2/26 at 7:48 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
Do you see how ridiculous that is?
He does, that's why he won't give a straight answer and is trying to do everything he can to frame the discussion dishonestly
Posted on 10/2/26 at 7:48 am to djsdawg
quote:
It means nothing to them.
It means nothing to you either.
Posted on 10/2/26 at 8:00 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
He does, that's why he won't give a straight answer and is trying to do everything he can to frame the discussion dishonestly
What's amazing to me is how quickly populism has infected the Republican base.
15 years ago not one Republican I know would have argued that it's o.k. to ignore the Constitution if I don't like the particular ideology of the citizens in question.
The Democratic populists would have, and did, frequently. Heck, that's been the 2nd Amendment fight for as long as I have been alive. The exact same argument as he's making about Islam.
"The framers never intended or anticipated this situation, the Constitution made a mistake in allowing this, we're all going to die from this, etc., etc."
It's amazing to me that Republican populists can still understand why that application of this argument is bogus, yet turn around and make the exact same argument applied to something else.
It really does come down to one thing. He's not afraid of guns, but he is afraid of Islam.
That's it. It's a 100% emotional, fear driven argument.
Posted on 10/2/26 at 8:07 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
What's amazing to me is how quickly populism has infected the Republican base.
Emotions are strong.
That's why they try to steer everything to a binary decision tainted with catastrophe syndrome.
quote:
15 years ago not one Republican I know would have argued that it's o.k. to ignore the Constitution if I don't like the particular ideology of the citizens in question.
15 years ago there wasn't [manufactured threat]
That's the response.
quote:
The Democratic populists would have, and did, frequently.
Correct.
quote:
It really does come down to one thing. He's not afraid of guns, but he is afraid of Islam.
That's it. It's a 100% emotional, fear driven argument.
Correct.
I just ran this through AI, for an example
quote:
Given current demographics, birth rates, and population trends in America, how long would it take for Muslims to reach 10% of our total population? Please be sure to take into account the projected total population growth of all people along with the impacts of socio-economic status and standard of living on Muslim birth rates.
quote:
Based on demographic projections from the Pew Research Center and the U.S. Census Bureau, the Muslim share of the U.S. population is unlikely to reach 10% in the foreseeable future, and certainly not within the next century. Under standard demographic models, reaching that threshold would either require multiple centuries or fundamentally unprecedented, sustained shifts in immigration policy.
quote:
If the net growth rate of the Muslim population's share observed between 2015 and 2050 (roughly +0.3 percentage points per decade) were simply extrapolated forward—even ignoring the inevitable cooling of growth due to aging and sub-replacement fertility—it would take roughly 200 to 250 years (well into the 23rd century) to reach 10%.
That's just 10%. Hardly a majority.
This post was edited on 10/2/26 at 8:07 am
Posted on 10/2/26 at 8:18 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
by SlowFlowPro
quote:
Why are the conservative libertarians fighting maga so hard?
Top 3 for me:
1. I'm a bitch
2. I'm a shitty divorce lawyer
3. I wake up and have to live in Lake Charles everyday
Fify
Posted on 10/2/26 at 8:19 am to hashtag
The reliance on ad homs indicates you can't reply rationally.
Posted on 10/2/26 at 8:22 am to SlowFlowPro
How’s it ad homs if it’s the truth? Are you embarrassed by yourself?
Posted on 10/2/26 at 8:22 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:no one here gives a frick about your opinions. You've had TDS for 10+ years and you pretend like you're just a principled Conservative who hates where your party has gone.
The reliance on ad homs indicates you can't reply rationally.
In reality, you bitch about every fricking thing Republicans, Conservatives, MAGA, or Trump does and ignore everything the Liberals/Democrats do. You pretend to want to save the Republicans while intentionally acting in a way that only harms them long-term.
frick. Off.
Posted on 10/2/26 at 8:23 am to hashtag
quote:
no one here gives a frick about your opinions. You've had TDS for 10+ years and you pretend like you're just a principled Conservative who hates where your party has gone.
In reality, you bitch about every fricking thing Republicans, Conservatives, MAGA, or Trump does and ignore everything the Liberals/Democrats do. You pretend to want to save the Republicans while intentionally acting in a way that only harms them long-term.
frick. Off.
sounds rational to me
Posted on 10/2/26 at 8:25 am to DeBoar
quote:
How’s it ad homs if it’s the truth?
Because even if it is true (and I'm not saying it is or isn't) it's irrelevant to the question.
Posted on 10/2/26 at 8:25 am to Bunk Moreland
Because having the government take shares of companies is what socialists do and what we slammed Obama for doing in 08 with the bailouts?
Posted on 10/2/26 at 8:25 am to RohanGonzales
Very rational and hey that’s funny he’s a divorce lawyer.
Posted on 10/2/26 at 8:25 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
Because even if it is true (and I'm not saying it is or isn't) it's irrelevant to the question.
Damn felate him more while you defend him. Yeesh
Posted on 10/2/26 at 8:28 am to hashtag
quote:
no one here gives a frick about your opinions.
Wrong again
quote:
You've had TDS for 10+ years
No. I've been rationally critical of Trump/MAGA. You just melted over 3 such examples and all you could muster was ad homs.
quote:
like you're just a principled Conservative who hates where your party has gone.
I don't want the major anti-left party in the US to devolve into an Idiocracy built around leftist economics.
The question is why so many are OK with this
Posted on 10/2/26 at 8:28 am to 3down10
quote:
The constitution is backed by the 2nd amendment.
What extra powers do you have?
None.
It is pretty obvious that he is simply cannot comprehend your points, and probably never will. At this point, you are just beating your head against a wall.
He wants a nanny state that will protect him against all of his irrational fears.
Posted on 10/2/26 at 8:29 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I don't want the major anti-left party in the US to devolve into an Idiocracy built around leftist economics. The question is why so many are OK with this
So don’t vote and let the actual leftist win? You are a genius, divorce attorney
Posted on 10/2/26 at 8:35 am to DeBoar
quote:
So don’t vote and let the actual leftist win?
False choice fallacy.
Posted on 10/2/26 at 8:42 am to SlowFlowPro
No it’s not it’s simple math, retard.
Posted on 10/2/26 at 8:45 am to DeBoar
quote:
No it’s not it’s simple math, retard.
I'm arguing for making conservative pols better.
You're ignoring that entirely and trying to constrain the discussion to a binary scenario of bad conservative options v. the blanket left.
It's a false choice. We can have better conservative pols v. that blanket left, which is the option you're eliminating with your dishonest framing and logical fallcy.
The entire point of the discussion, especially my points, is to offer better non-left options to counter the left.

Popular
Back to top



1






