this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2025
686 points (96.9% liked)
Not The Onion
12851 readers
938 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Invade Mexico, invade greenland, rename the gulf..... hello... he's bonkers, what the fuck are we doing letting this shit back in power....
Well, you see. We let those willfully ignorant fucks in the bible belt vote for some reason.
I've never seen a more vibrant walking, talking example of the need for the 25th amendment.
I low key wonder if that's the Republican plan. Just 25th amendment him and let Vance takeover. Vance pardons Trump who goes on Fox News weekly to yell about Mexicans or whatever.
We'll have a Theilocracy then.
They'll 25th amendment him throw Vance in and we'll be a fascist oligarchy before March Madness.
Not that we're miles away now.
Yeah, that's what I've been thinking since his speech. I'm thinking the people he's surrounded with are encouraging his non-sensical ramblings so they can replace him with Vance, who is a Thiel/billionaire puppet, and likely more predictable and reliable than Trump.
You are radicalizing your former allies and neighbors, that is what you are doing.
You said we, this is a normal response that isn’t super accusatory or aggressive. It just sounds it because you’re interpreting it as directed towards you the individual, but it’s for “you all,” which is the standard way to respond to a comment in the first person plural
Thanks, that was the spirit in which the reply was intended. He asked, I answered. Grammar is a motherfucker.
I'm not advocating for radicalization. I'm saying they are predictable consequences.
In my original comment, I specify. He's bonkers is referring to Trump, the actor of those referred to actions.
In your reply, you state 'YOU', as if the people against this / and? the people pushing it are responsible for that radicalization, and I take no responsibility for that shitstain's actions against our allies.
You could have easily been more clear by stating 'conservatives' or Trump supporters or - if you meant a blanket indictment - you idiots who didn't punish the insurrection / pay taxes to a corrupt system of governing etc., hence my dismissal of your reply.
Vague aspersions cast without insight generally get that response.
Thanks for taking the time to re-reply, even after your initial zinger got modded away just to demonstrate to the people that even when the average American says WE, they just mean.... ME.
Not much I can do to make my point more clearly than that.
chefs kiss
life's full of fun ironies, if we can find ways to appreciate them. a hard lift sometimes.
best of luck!
I wasn’t the person who originally answered you, just someone who saw you lash out at someone and understood why. You said this (emphasis mine):
And someone answered your question in the way that makes sense (second person plural). It’s not an aspersion, it’s literally just stating the consequences of us electing trump (we as a country did, regardless of whether you or I voted for him).
quod erat demonstrandum
ipso facto vis-a-vis
shut the fuck up