TDS Is Being Defined Better And Better

[Kondor3]

TDS is simply a complete and total obsession to get Trump, no matter what. Nothing else matters. Not gas prices, prices you pay for groceries, not mass shootings, nothing. Take this example:

“I did not support Liz (Cheney) prior to all of this because she’s a very conservative Republican — she voted with Trump 93% of the time — but I do now,” Shelly Newman, 69, said as the goat-tail untying competition got underway in a dusty ring. Newman, a retired corporate training director, said she plans to sign up as a Republican to vote for her (Cheney) in the Aug. 16 primary.


So, we've got a TDS'r who's got the disease so badly she's willing to switch parties in the Wyoming primary in order to vote for Liz Cheney, who she knows voted with Trump 93% of the time, all just to get Trump. Nothing else matters.

Liz Cheney Is Paying the Price in Her Home State for Crossing Trump

(Bloomberg) -- Liz Cheney’s starring role in making the case against Donald Trump in nationally televised hearings has made this stalwart conservative a pariah among Republicans and won her few friends in her home state of Wyoming, where her family is considered almost royalty.Most Read from...

finance.yahoo.com

TDS is quite real.

TDS is quite justified.

Rump is an existential threat to American representative democracy.

Whatever it takes, within the law, to ensure that that traitorous kokksukker never holds high office again...

 

[Independent thinker]

False equivalences, and whataboutisms then. Got it.

Whataboutism means you agree with it but don't want to talk about it because you want to talk about the other side, not your side.

 

[Independent thinker]

Just how many calls did POS trump make to Governors, Election Officials, (R) congress members, in an ATTEMPT to stay in power?








Now pos trump is the true divider of our ONCE Great Country, the USA.

So? How many calls did Hillary & Co make to governors, elecection officials, and congress members in an attempt to stay in power? They tried every trick in the book to overturn the 2016 election.

 

[Independent thinker]

Aww, you nutjobs are mad because some are using tactics that your ilk, have been using for years?

In late February 2008, Limbaugh announced "Operation Chaos," a political call to action with the initial plan to have voters of the Republican Party temporarily cross over to vote in the Democratic primary and vote for Hillary Clinton, who at the time was in the midst of losing eleven straight primary contests to Barack Obama.

At the point in which Limbaugh announced his gambit, Obama had seemed on the verge of clinching the Democratic nomination.[107] However, Clinton subsequently won the Ohio primary and the Texas primary (while losing the Texas caucus and the overall delegate split) with large pluralities from rural counties; thus reemerging as a competitive opponent in the race.

By 2020, the name "Operation Chaos" had become associated enough with presidential party raiding that South Carolina Republicans seeking to disrupt that state's Democratic presidential primary recycled the name for their own efforts.

My point was this lady has TDS so bad that she is willing to vote for someone who voted with Trump 93% of the time just to get Trump. Nothing is more important than getting Trump. Not the economy or inflation or anything. Just get Trump.

 

[The Original Tree]

Just how many calls did POS trump make to Governors, Election Officials, (R) congress members, in an ATTEMPT to stay in power?








Now pos trump is the true divider of our ONCE Great Country, the USA.

How many times did you get a tingle down your leg when you saw Michele Obama's Adam's Apple?

 

[Independent thinker]

I still find it odd you worship Trump so much you would bansih someone form your parity for disagreeing with Trump on one issue while voting with him 93% of the time

First of all, I don't worship Trump. In fact, I backed up Liz Cheney in the very beginning as I felt she had the right to her own opinion. But, then she came down with full blown TDS and could think of nothing but getting Trump 24/7, a man who lost the election and was no longer in office.

 

[Independent thinker]

You just explained your version of TDS...

You don't care if Trump broke the law, you don't want it investigated and don't care if his name is cleared... This is a simple case of nobody is above the law...

Trump by his actions has strung this investigation on and on... This is his typical tactic... But it is not the normal actions of an innocent man, innocent men try to clear their name...

Personally I don't think Trump should be protected by Executive Privilege in the case of Jan 6th... He wasn't working for the US Government when he was telling his supporters the Election lie, when he was pressuring Pence to break the law, when he dismissed his legal team for a bunch of misfits that told him what wanted to hear. This was about winning an election, if Biden was at the same actions he would have no protection.

Executive Privilege is not in the constitution... The right comes into effect when revealing information would impair governmental functions. Trump wasn't doing governmental functions, he was contesting an election and possibly illegally..

There is no evidence that Trump broke the law, except in the TDS heads of the left. They are doing this kangaroo investigation where they have already declared they will not be referring Trump for any criminal charges.

 

[Independent thinker]

What's interesting is there are smoke signals that conservatives are moving on from Trump. DeSantis won the NH poll and Kurt Schlichter has an article out today about the case against Trump for 2024. Many of us are ready and able to move on.

It's the deranged liberals who cannot. Huh.

Exactly. That's what TDS is. You just can't move on. For some reason it is extremely important to them to prove that Biden won the election and is president, even though Trump left the White House on the scheduled date and Biden took over and has been president for over a year. But, for some reason, the left have to prove it after the fact and they are trying to prove it to a group of people who they can never prove it to anyway. But they still have to prove it.

 

[forkup]

Whataboutism means you agree with it but don't want to talk about it because you want to talk about the other side, not your side.

No, first of all, a "whataboutism" is a fallacious argument. It's called an appeal to hypocrisy. It is fallacious because even if you are right about the other side it would still not make your actions acceptable.

Second of all, it's tied to my second problem. Namely the false equivalency. Another fallacy. Just because "someone on the left" in your case maybe a pundit or if you're really lucky some lawmaker. I'm presuming since you didn't share a link to show me what Democrats were arguing for faithless electors. That in no way is equivalent to a concerted effort by the president of the United States trying to simply go around electors entirely and simply try to get the Vice-President to openly ignore the certified election results.

This was Clinton a few days after she lost.


This is Trump even now.



So no I don't agree. Oh and by the way I didn't make the whataboutism. You did.

 

[forkup]

because you want to talk about the other side, not your side.

I have zero fear of comparing the actions of Democrats vs actions of Trump vis-a-vis losing elections. You probably should fear a comparison.

 

[Independent thinker]

No, first of all, a "whataboutism" is a fallacious argument. It's called an appeal to hypocrisy. It is fallacious because even if you are right about the other side it would still not make your actions acceptable.

Second of all, it's tied to my second problem. Namely the false equivalency. Another fallacy. Just because "someone on the left" in your case maybe a pundit or if you're really lucky some lawmaker. I'm presuming since you didn't share a link to show me what Democrats were arguing for faithless electors. That in no way is equivalent to a concerted effort by the president of the United States trying to simply go around electors entirely and simply try to get the Vice-President to openly ignore the certified election results.

This was Clinton a few days after she lost.


This is Trump even now.



So no I don't agree. Oh and by the way I didn't make the whataboutism. You did.

When you claim whataboutism from another poster you are admitting that your side did the very same thing but you just don't want to talk about that, you only want to talk about one side.

 

[Independent thinker]

I have zero fear of comparing the actions of Democrats vs actions of Trump vis-a-vis losing elections. You probably should fear a comparison.

I have no fear. Democrats have a very long history of not accepting election results. Of course your kangaroo investigation is going to find out what kangaroo investigations set out to do. Are you prepared for kangaroo investigations after Republicans take over the House?

 

[forkup]

When you claim whataboutism from another poster you are admitting that your side did the very same thing but you just don't want to talk about that, you only want to talk about one side.

Lol. Again when I say it's a false equivalency. I say the exact opposite of "my side did the very same thing." But hey I understand that intellectual honesty or reading comprehension isn't your thing.

If you want to argue that some Democrat did something, kinda, maybe, if you squint real hard, sort of similar and therefore the Republican President of the United States is justified in straight-up ignoring the election results go right ahead.

I for one am not interested in engaging that level of intellectual honesty, and outright stupidity.

 

[Winco]

There is no evidence that Trump broke the law, except in the TDS heads of the left. They are doing this kangaroo investigation where they have already declared they will not be referring Trump for any criminal charges.

There is no evidence that Trump broke the law.
Are you denying that trump called multiple people and asked them to overturn the election?

Or do you just not consider that action as 'breaking the law.'

 

[Independent thinker]

Lol. Again when I say it's a false equivalency. I say the exact opposite of "my side did the very same thing." But hey I understand that intellectual honesty or reading comprehension isn't your thing.

If you want to argue that some Democrat did something, kinda, maybe, if you squint real hard, sort of similar and therefore the Republican President of the United States is justified in straight-up ignoring the election results go right ahead.

I for one am not interested in engaging that level of intellectual honesty, and outright stupidity.

How could he ignore election results if he left the White House and let Biden in to be president? So what about what he says? He let Biden take over! Democrats screamed election fraud for four years after Trump won.

 

[Independent thinker]

There is no evidence that Trump broke the law.
Are you denying that trump called multiple people and asked them to overturn the election?

Or do you just not consider that action as 'breaking the law.'

Well, let's see now. We've got a Jan 6th kangaroo investigation going on and even they themselves say that they will not be referring Trump for any criminal prosecution. So, apparently, even they themselves must not think Trump broke any laws.

 

[Winco]

Well, let's see now. We've got a Jan 6th kangaroo investigation going on and even they themselves say that they will not be referring Trump for any criminal prosecution. So, apparently, even they themselves must not think Trump broke any laws.

Thompson misspoke and was quickly corrected

It’s not up to the committee to bring charges. C’mon man , you know that

 

[ElmerMudd]

So? How many calls did Hillary & Co make to governors, elecection officials, and congress members in an attempt to stay in power? They tried every trick in the book to overturn the 2016 election.

Bullshit

 

[Independent thinker]

Thompson misspoke and was quickly corrected

It’s not up to the committee to bring charges. C’mon man , you know that

I'm sure they'll try. They've been trying for five years now. Even in New York, a doggedly liberal bastion where they tried their best to get Trump, several prosecutors resigned because the higher ups ruled that there just wasn't enough evidence against Trump to bring him to trial. Democrats abuse of power and vote suppression knows no bounds. They want to suppress people voting for Trump by trying to take Trump out so that he can't run. Why do democrats hate democracy so much they will suppress votes in order to win?

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

My point was this lady has TDS so bad that she is willing to vote for someone who voted with Trump 93% of the time just to get Trump. Nothing is more important than getting Trump. Not the economy or inflation or anything. Just get Trump.

So, what's your point?

Al Capone was public enemy number one.
Trump and his regime are the most corrupt people ever to enter the white house.
Of course, republicans worship the traitor.