Imgflip Logo Icon

Trump bashing

Trump bashing | NOT ONE OF THE DEMOCRAT POSTERS ON THIS PAGE HAS THE GUTS TO SAY WHO THEY WOULD VOTE FOR. THEY  ARE  EITHER  ASHAMED,  EMBARRASSED  OR  GUTLESS. WHICH ARE YOU? | image tagged in trump,democrats,republicans,voting,opinion,election 2020 | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
1,465 views 46 upvotes Made by VonHook 4 years ago in politics
164 Comments
[deleted]
19 ups, 4y,
5 replies
13 ups, 4y
made w/ Imgflip meme maker
2 ups, 4y
Well spoken
4 ups, 4y,
1 reply


Lol. I just made this one today. Does this meme express hope? Joy? Happiness? Gratitude? Thankfulness? You be the judge.

Here's another one from today, a repost this time, meaning some other liberal (probably) made it:

Either your theory is wrong or I'm not a Leftist!

When it comes to throwing tantrums, you're onto something here, but both Politics *and* PoliticsTOO are by and large whinefests at the other side. This is called "negative partisanship" and it's one of the big problems in our politics today, I think.

The caveat being: there is indeed much to be upset about in our leadership today from an objective perspective, and we should speak up and hold our leaders' feet to the fire when they do err.

Heck, that's what Trump 2013 would have said!
8 ups, 4y,
1 reply
Black Girl Wat Meme | SO WHERE’S THE PART ABOUT “WHAT YOU LOVE ABOUT THE DEMOCRAT PARTY”? THAT’S WHAT THE OP IS ASKING FOR | image tagged in memes,black girl wat | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
As usual, you dredge up something that isn’t even what the meme you’re rebutting Is talking about.
2 ups, 4y,
1 reply
Oops, didn’t get down that low in the list. That’s what happens when the list is ordered best first. 😊😊
4 ups, 4y,
1 reply
Tell us about it
[deleted]
5 ups, 4y,
1 reply
2 ups, 4y
"Why not just make Electoral College more closely reflect the popular vote?"

It currently does. The electoral college is a combination of the HOR and the Senate. The HOR being the part that resembles population and the Senate giving a flat 2 reps per state. This system was specifically made so majorities don't stomp out the little guy without also giving an individual state too much power. It is and always has been a mix of both worlds.

When you look at the electoral map, the country was more than 80% red after the 2016 election. Those 3 million votes you spoke earlier about literally came from a handful of Democratic cities. So it worked just as intended. The vast majority of states chose Trump. Just because big cities with condensed populations vote liberal does not mean the whole country wants them.

May I ask though, is it true you are a lawyer?
2 ups, 4y
Democrats can’t event remove winner take all from their primary elections. Maybe you should be complaining to them about that before saying the rest of the country should change the constitution because you thing more liberals will win.
1 up, 4y,
1 reply
2 ups, 4y
You’re all over the map.

And I know you’ve had the EC explained to you several times but you just don’t get it. Admit it, you’d be praising the EC if the outcome of these elections were the other way around.
[deleted]
1 up, 4y,
1 reply
[deleted]
3 ups, 4y,
2 replies
[deleted]
0 ups, 4y
I did rather we didn't have a political line spectrum. However, I described it in terms of the political spectrum just to highlight how people on both sides of the political spectrum can be described in those terms. Heck, I wonder if I can be described in those terms.
0 ups, 4y,
1 reply
If you really think “the ‘entire apparatus of modern American government’ is the Left”

Chances are you’re far-right!
[deleted]
3 ups, 4y,
1 reply
0 ups, 4y
Which is why we’ve amended the Constitution multiple times since the Founding, as expressly allowed by the terms of the Constitution itself, and even un-amended it (Prohibition).

And we have added gloss to the text through federal and Supreme Court decisions which elucidate its meaning in specific contexts.

And sometimes situations arise which were apparently totally overlooked by our Founders.

Example: The Constitution itself says nothing about how to fight a pandemic, and yet we are doing it anyway — arguably unconstitutionally, as quarantining is quite totalitarian indeed — because to do otherwise would be suicide.

So no: I understand all that history quite well.

The issue is that society has changed quite a bit since our Founding. I don’t know exactly what you have in mind, but basically dialing the clock back to 1787, or whenever year you would personally identify as when American liberty was at its maximum (and I’d be very curious to hear what your answer to that question would be) would require much more radical change than anything I have seen anyone else advocating on ImgFlip.

So my questions of today for you are:

—Where exactly did we “go wrong?”

—Which aspects of modern American government would you keep, and which would you toss?

—Do you have any contemporaneous examples of other countries who have successfully followed a path such as this, or would the radical change you seek be a uniquely “American experiment”?
[deleted]
9 ups, 4y,
1 reply
10 ups, 4y,
1 reply
Yeah, I was laughing at 'hard working journalists' line. Most can't be bothered to fact check before they rush out their propaganda. The difference between protecting Obama and maligning Trump should be clear to anyone with an IQ over 75. Can you imagine if Trump did anything like IRSgate?
[deleted]
7 ups, 4y,
1 reply
0 ups, 4y,
1 reply
Because the GOP Senate carries water for the Trump Administration all day long, as we saw in January

No amount of obstruction crosses the line: no Giuliani-manufactured conspiracy too tenuous not to swallow whole

Mitt Romney still had some sense though
[deleted]
2 ups, 4y,
5 replies
0 ups, 4y,
2 replies
Impeachment was good times, man: here’s a highlight reel
[deleted]
2 ups, 4y,
1 reply
0 ups, 4y
Pissed about the biggest cover-up in modern American political history and the de facto death of impeachment?

Hell yeah bro
0 ups, 4y,
1 reply
Except the Republicans in the house did demand witnesses to come to the stand, including all the people who claimed they were in on the conversation and the Biden's. Schiff did not allow it. Then when Trump's ratings went up, they decided they needed more witnesses in the Senate. The Senate literally went with the same rules used for Clinton's impeachment. To only look at what the house had gathered and make a judgement based on that.

The same Schiff you are defending who said that they needed more witnesses to come forth in the Senate is on camera saying they have all they need to put him away for life after the house hearings.

So let me ask you, if what the Senate did was unfair, why didn't democrats demand fairness with Clinton in the Senate trials?

And if Schiff literally said that they have all the witnesses they need, then why did he and all the Dem leaders push for the house to put it to a vote and move on? Why didn't he wait to call more witnesses before voting on it. They literally control the house and blocked all Republican witnesses, so how did this happen then?
0 ups, 4y,
1 reply
He's a professional bullshitter. Now, that sounds just like a lawyer but he's not.
0 ups, 4y
So bummer, I just found this out after trying to spark a couple conversations with him between yesterday and today. I was interested in talking to him as I actually have worked in a law office, so I thought we might be able to talk about the process and work through the reasoning behind decisions.

Turns out he is a liar and professionally does it. This is my mind is worse than someone who just watches the MSM and believes their BS. At least there issue was being spoon fed garbage. This guy is getting paid to shovel it despite knowing their shit better than most. What a shame.
0 ups, 4y,
1 reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 4y,
1 reply
0 ups, 4y
Did the GOP Senate run a fair trial?
0 ups, 4y,
1 reply
[deleted]
1 up, 4y,
1 reply
0 ups, 4y
Why not call Hunter and Joe to the stand?

Easy convictions, right?
0 ups, 4y,
1 reply
[deleted]
1 up, 4y,
1 reply
0 ups, 4y
Did any of these folks testify?
[deleted]
3 ups, 4y,
1 reply
1 up, 4y
You seem to be misinformed. The idea that Trump is dumb enough to perjure himself is a leftist talking point.

Did you know you can actually find videos of Trump being deposed on youtube? They are boring and he does exactly what a smart witness does. He keeps his answers short and only answers exactly what he is asked. I heard a claim that you might be a lawyer, why not look it up yourself? Any lawyer worth his salt could watch those videos and know that not only is it unlikely that he would, he also has experience being deposed and he actually said he would happily take the witness stand if a certain condition was met. As a lawyer, you must know that condition, right? Or did you even know he offered to take the stand?
[deleted]
7 ups, 4y,
1 reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 4y
I mean, I'm more left wing than most of these people, but News Media are just shills.
0 ups, 4y
To answer your question, conservatives and libertarians love the work of journalists. We just draw the line on what lefties seem to call journalism.

Showing a clip out of context and that spewing your own narritive isn't journalism.

Case in point, half the country still thinks Trump did not condemn neo nazis at Charlottsville. Anyone who watches the clip in full context knows he wasn't talking about neo nazis when he said good people on both sides, and anyone who watched the full context knows that he did condemn them.

And yet that is what these "journalists," as you lefties call them, are saying. So no, I whine about fake people pretending to be doing a noble thing, not actual journalists keeping us informed.
Show More Comments
Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator
IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
NOT ONE OF THE DEMOCRAT POSTERS ON THIS PAGE HAS THE GUTS TO SAY WHO THEY WOULD VOTE FOR. THEY ARE EITHER ASHAMED, EMBARRASSED OR GUTLESS. WHICH ARE YOU?