MAGAThread XX: A Journal of the Plague Year

[Cannot think of a name]

This motherfucker signed the fucking wall.

Presumably because he couldn't get anyone to put his name in big light up letters along it...

[Jedi Council]

He's 100% right. It's a delicate situation because while I personally don't think the death penalty would be wildly inappropriate for the magnitude of what he's done the clearest path to sanity is to capitalize on the chilling effect the failed assault had on non-psychotich conservatives and seek reunification.

Yeah I agree, almost all conservatives I know stopped trying to defend Trump

About four years too late.

They get zero credit for abandoning him when the thing they have been warned about for years finally happened. They get zero credit for anything when sensible people have been ripping their hair our trying to show Trump for the dickweed charlatan that he is for years, and were ignored time and again.

[Jedi Council]

This motherfucker signed the fucking wall.

Presumably because he couldn't get anyone to put his name in big light up letters along it...

Biden should tear it down.

[Kexholm Karelia]

Yeah I agree, almost all conservatives I know stopped trying to defend Trump

About four years too late.

They get zero credit for abandoning him when the thing they have been warned about for years finally happened. They get zero credit for anything when sensible people have been ripping their hair our trying to show Trump for the dickweed charlatan that he is for years, and were ignored time and again.

I don’t regret supporting Trump though, because what he did manage to do before 2020, including tax cuts, formation of anti-China bloc in Asia, border security, etc. was good

[Diahon]

About four years too late.

They get zero credit for abandoning him when the thing they have been warned about for years finally happened. They get zero credit for anything when sensible people have been ripping their hair our trying to show Trump for the dickweed charlatan that he is for years, and were ignored time and again.

I don’t regret supporting Trump though, because what he did manage to do before 2020, including tax cuts, formation of anti-China bloc in Asia, border security, etc. was good

no

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

About four years too late.

They get zero credit for abandoning him when the thing they have been warned about for years finally happened. They get zero credit for anything when sensible people have been ripping their hair our trying to show Trump for the dickweed charlatan that he is for years, and were ignored time and again.

I don’t regret supporting Trump though, because what he did manage to do before 2020, including tax cuts, formation of anti-China bloc in Asia, border security, etc. was good

How did he form an anti-China bloc in Asia? There were plans to form one, but Trump scuppered US involvement in the TPP right after taking office.

Also, did you notice anything from the tax cuts?

[Vassenor]

About four years too late.

They get zero credit for abandoning him when the thing they have been warned about for years finally happened. They get zero credit for anything when sensible people have been ripping their hair our trying to show Trump for the dickweed charlatan that he is for years, and were ignored time and again.

I don’t regret supporting Trump though, because what he did manage to do before 2020, including tax cuts, formation of anti-China bloc in Asia, border security, etc. was good

Nothing says "formation of an anti-China bloc" like pulling the US out of everything and thus leaving China free to exercise whatever power it wants in the region.

[Rusozak]

This motherfucker signed the fucking wall.

Presumably because he couldn't get anyone to put his name in big light up letters along it...

There isn't enough of it finished for that.

[Kexholm Karelia]

I don’t regret supporting Trump though, because what he did manage to do before 2020, including tax cuts, formation of anti-China bloc in Asia, border security, etc. was good

no

[Des-Bal]

So...if they stopped defending Trump, why is impeaching Trump alienating in any way? Seems like a great way for them to also distance themselves from Trump.

Yeah, you could make them walk on the cross to prove their purity, but it's more likely to incite renewed hostilities than secure peace. Run them off their feet and rub their noses in it or get the country back to something resembling civilized discourse.

Don't wound people, live and let live or destroy them utterly. The alternative is that you waste a huge opportunity.

[Cannot think of a name]

So...if they stopped defending Trump, why is impeaching Trump alienating in any way? Seems like a great way for them to also distance themselves from Trump.

Yeah, you could make them walk on the cross to prove their purity, but it's more likely to incite renewed hostilities than secure peace. Run them off their feet and rub their noses in it or get the country back to something resembling civilized discourse.

Don't wound people, live and let live or destroy them utterly. The alternative is that you waste a huge opportunity.

How is it making them walk on the cross (is that a saying? What does that even mean? Did you mean carry their cross or walk the plank?) if they're distancing themselves as well? Or have you misread this situation and think that impeaching Trump impeaches the entire Republican Party? The only way he gets convicted is if you get almost 20 Republicans to convict as well, sending a signal that Trump is not the party, thus indicating that there is a bridge to unite. Otherwise you're saying "Well, we can't have any consequences because that might hurt people's feelings" when we're talking about someone who encouraged his followers to physically attack the Capitol building to prevent the peaceful transition of power.

[Diahon]

no

"trump might be a bloody-minded authoritarian, but he did some good things for me" is not a ringing endorsement for american conservatism that you likely think it is

[Page]

"trump might be a bloody-minded authoritarian, but he did some good things for me" is not a ringing endorsement for american conservatism that you likely think it is

"I got mine" is the very essence of being a conservative. My parents are the perfect example of this. They never had a problem with gay people (so long as they're outside the family, sure their lesbian friends can babysit their dog when they go on vacation but I don't dare tell the family I'm bisexual!), but you know, the Republicans gave me a tax cut. They don't like that there are children in cages but I got a tax cut.

That's the entire deal with "moderate" Republicans. They don't endorse all of it but so long as their personal finances are fine who gives a shit?

[Senkaku]

About four years too late.

They get zero credit for abandoning him when the thing they have been warned about for years finally happened. They get zero credit for anything when sensible people have been ripping their hair our trying to show Trump for the dickweed charlatan that he is for years, and were ignored time and again.

I don’t regret supporting Trump though, because what he did manage to do before 2020, including tax cuts, formation of anti-China bloc in Asia, border security, etc. was good

He killed TPP, helped worsen relations between Japan and South Korea, and didn't build the wall, and you're willing to trade an upper-class tax cut for the price of coup attempts and incessant corruption scandals?

[Des-Bal]

How is it making them walk on the cross (is that a saying? What does that even mean? Did you mean carry their cross or walk the plank?) if they're distancing themselves as well? Or have you misread this situation and think that impeaching Trump impeaches the entire Republican Party? The only way he gets convicted is if you get almost 20 Republicans to convict as well, sending a signal that Trump is not the party, thus indicating that there is a bridge to unite. Otherwise you're saying "Well, we can't have any consequences because that might hurt people's feelings" when we're talking about someone who encouraged his followers to physically attack the Capitol building to prevent the peaceful transition of power.

One literally treads on the cross to show contempt for or a renunciation of christianity. It was apocryphally required of merchantmen trading in the far east and the prisoners of tartars, mongols, muslims etc. depending on the time.

The point is that the percentage of people willing to say "I will not allow tribal loyalty to lead me to support a coup" and the people willing to say "I will allow Trump to be impeached" are not the same. What you perceive as expecting an olive branch by those in the wrong may turn out to be the treaty of Versailles.

[Cannot think of a name]

How is it making them walk on the cross (is that a saying? What does that even mean? Did you mean carry their cross or walk the plank?) if they're distancing themselves as well? Or have you misread this situation and think that impeaching Trump impeaches the entire Republican Party? The only way he gets convicted is if you get almost 20 Republicans to convict as well, sending a signal that Trump is not the party, thus indicating that there is a bridge to unite. Otherwise you're saying "Well, we can't have any consequences because that might hurt people's feelings" when we're talking about someone who encouraged his followers to physically attack the Capitol building to prevent the peaceful transition of power.

One literally treads on the cross to show contempt for or a renunciation of christianity. It was apocryphally required of merchantmen trading in the far east and the prisoners of tartars, mongols, muslims etc. depending on the time.

The point is that the percentage of people willing to say "I will not allow tribal loyalty to lead me to support a coup" and the people willing to say "I will allow Trump to be impeached" are not the same. What you perceive as expecting an olive branch by those in the wrong may turn out to be the treaty of Versailles.

Or maybe 'letting bygones be bygones' will be Reconstruction.

[Des-Bal]

Or maybe 'letting bygones be bygones' will be Reconstruction.

Reconstruction was more like Versailles. It functioned more like a military occupation than a reconciliation and created a deep resentment, the echoes of which are still felt today. Reconstruction is a perfect example of what happens when you put your boot on someone's neck but then let them live. The moment the north focused elsewhere the south undid everything they possibly could and took out their anger on former slaves.

[Cannot think of a name]

Or maybe 'letting bygones be bygones' will be Reconstruction.

Reconstruction was more like Versailles. It functioned more like a military occupation than a reconciliation and created a deep resentment, the echoes of which are still felt today. Reconstruction is a perfect example of what happens when you put your boot on someone's neck but then let them live. The moment the north focused elsewhere the south undid everything they possibly could and took out their anger on former slaves.

So after pages of handwringing about this you're saying that violence shouldn't have any consequences and the people who condoned it should not be held to account?

[Senkaku]

Reconstruction was more like Versailles. It functioned more like a military occupation than a reconciliation and created a deep resentment, the echoes of which are still felt today. Reconstruction is a perfect example of what happens when you put your boot on someone's neck but then let them live. The moment the north focused elsewhere the south undid everything they possibly could and took out their anger on former slaves.

So after pages of handwringing about this you're saying that violence shouldn't have any consequences and the people who condoned it should not be held to account?

I read it more as saying the North shouldn't have "let [the South] live," they should've just finished the old Southern order off (whatever that looks like)... which has implications for the present that do seem to be at odds with previous statements about not condoning political violence, but would also (I guess) be in line with wanting consequences for people trying to violently overthrow the state

[Cannot think of a name]

So after pages of handwringing about this you're saying that violence shouldn't have any consequences and the people who condoned it should not be held to account?

I read it more as saying the North shouldn't have "let [the South] live," they should've just finished the old Southern order off (whatever that looks like)... which has implications for the present that do seem to be at odds with previous statements about not condoning political violence, but would also (I guess) be in line with wanting consequences for people trying to violently overthrow the state

It is a bit of a pretzel.

[Des-Bal]

So after pages of handwringing about this you're saying that violence shouldn't have any consequences and the people who condoned it should not be held to account?

Violence absolutely should have consequences the issue is what consequences follow the imposition of those consequences. We are in a hole and it may well be the case that escaping and seeing justice done are mutually exclusive goals.

I read it more as saying the North shouldn't have "let [the South] live," they should've just finished the old Southern order off (whatever that looks like)... which has implications for the present that do seem to be at odds with previous statements about not condoning political violence, but would also (I guess) be in line with wanting consequences for people trying to violently overthrow the state

No contradiction, I like peace and civility. Compromise and extermination are tried and true strategies, slap fighting is a classic blunder. If you're not willing to destroy the opposition then shake hands.

[Senkaku]

If you're not willing to destroy the opposition then shake hands.

A reasonable idea on its face, but it usually functions in practice throughout history (including the US today) as the inverse-- "if you're not willing to shake hands with the opposition, then destroy them."

[Cannot think of a name]

So after pages of handwringing about this you're saying that violence shouldn't have any consequences and the people who condoned it should not be held to account?

Violence absolutely should have consequences the issue is what consequences follow the imposition of those consequences. We are in a hole and it may well be the case that escaping and seeing justice done are mutually exclusive goals.

That doesn''t at all seem like the standard you were stomping your feet about earlier, and there are certainly some deep complications, but no one wants that dumbass can of worms re-opened.

Plus, there's a more pressing and immediate issue...

I have to ask again...you do understand how impeachment works, right? That if Trump is impeached not only is it just Trump that is impeached but it would have to be done in cooperation with Republicans in office? And that Republicans cannot be forced to impeach the president-where that true we would have impeached this asshole last year and wouldn't be here right now.

Just what is it exactly do you think it is that's being proposed?

[Jerzylvania]

Has anyone else noticed that theres barely any conservatives or trump supporters etc left on NSG?

This place has become a left-liberal echo chamber for the better or the worse.

They've all been called up to "the front".

[Des-Bal]

A reasonable idea on its face, but it usually functions in practice throughout history (including the US today) as the inverse-- "if you're not willing to shake hands with the opposition, then destroy them."

I wouldn't say most often. Violence is common but coexistence is more common than mass killing.

That doesn''t at all seem like the standard you were stomping your feet about earlier, and there are certainly some deep complications, but no one wants that dumbass can of worms re-opened.

Plus, there's a more pressing and immediate issue...

I have to ask again...you do understand how impeachment works, right? That if Trump is impeached not only is it just Trump that is impeached but it would have to be done in cooperation with Republicans in office? And that Republicans cannot be forced to impeach the president-where that true we would have impeached this asshole last year and wouldn't be here right now.

Just what is it exactly do you think it is that's being proposed?

It's absolutely the same standard, the condemnation of violence and the refusal to make excuses for it. Conservatives seem ready to do that and my concern is pursuing impeachment might dissuade them.

If you're worried about republican congressmen committing acts of terrorism let me assuage your fears; less than half of them would probably do that.