# 'Trump is a douchebag' (Ann Coulter) [original title: Dinesh’s Stupid Movie]



## Creamu (Jun 17, 2022)

'As much as I’m enjoying the January 6th committee’s careful assembly of evidence proving former President Trump is a douchebag, I wasn’t seeing much in the way of a criminal offense until this week’s underreported story about how Trump used his “STOP THE STEAL” fundraising appeals to grift his supporters out of $250 million, none of which was, in fact, used to fight election fraud.

It didn’t even go to the poor saps who got themselves arrested at the Capitol on Jan. 6. Instead, the $250 million seems to have been funneled exclusively to Trump businesses, family and friends.

And let’s not forget Steve Bannon’s “We Build the Wall” swindle; Trump sending out a fundraising appeal to raise funds for his new private plane; and a Trump-affiliated organization paying Kimberly Guilfoyle $60,000 to give a two-minute speech on Jan. 6 (introducing her fiance, Don Jr.). Every time you think you have your arms fully around Trump’s con, you realize it’s unfathomably more cynical and far-reaching than you could have imagined.

Is there anyone in Trump World who isn’t trying to fleece the Deplorables? Haven’t they suffered enough?

Which brings me to Dinesh D’Souza’s movie “2,000 Mules.” The movie tells Trump diehards (a dwindling crowd) that their man probably DID win the 2020 election!

Using cellphone tracking data obtained by “True the Vote” (which sounds like a group named by Melania Trump — “BE BEST!”) D’Souza claims to have proof that 2,000 people delivered multiple ballots to election drop boxes in the five crucial battleground states that Trump lost.

There are two problems with this.

First, the movie doesn’t show what it says it shows.

[...]

The second problem — my problem with the movie — is the idea that Trump’s 2020 loss cries out for an explanation. We know for a fact that Trump was wildly popular, sailing to a landslide election on the love of a grateful nation. Only something nefarious could explain his defeat!

Hello? Trump lost only one demographic in 2020 compared to 2016. What was that demographic? …

Answer: WHITE MEN!

How did liberal activists pull off that?

In the five states where D’Souza deploys his hocus-pocus cellphone data — Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — Trump lost 8% of white voters compared to 2016. He lost 12% of white men.

That’s according to Trump’s own pollster, the highly respected Tony Fabrizio, as well as everyone else who’s looked at the 2020 election data. It was also predicted by anyone who supported Trump in 2016 — and then watched him piss away his presidency for four years by betraying his base.

[...]'

-Ann Coulter







https://anncoulter.com/2022/06/15/dineshs-stupid-movie/


----------



## Hanafuda (Jun 18, 2022)

She's an oppo plant. Both sides have 'em. Her job is to disgust and repulse everyone, regardless of political affiliation, while pretending to be 'conservative.'


----------



## Marc_LFD (Jun 18, 2022)

I watched that movie to see what the buzz was about, it was basically a YouTube movie. Meh.


----------



## Lacius (Jun 18, 2022)

Hanafuda said:


> She's an oppo plant. Both sides have 'em. Her job is to disgust and repulse everyone, regardless of political affiliation, while pretending to be 'conservative.'


Yeah, and Democrats and Antifa did the Capitol riots.

Ann Coulter is a conservative, and I'm hard-pressed to find much of anything she's said that conservatives generally don't agree with.


----------



## Xzi (Jun 18, 2022)

She's right, but she's also part of the conservative propaganda machine that brought us Trump in the first place.  So they can both eat a bag of dicks.


----------



## XDel (Jun 18, 2022)

Conservatism died a LONG time ago, it's just that our definition of things have changed; "with the times" as they say.


----------



## Xzi (Jun 18, 2022)

XDel said:


> Conservatism died a LONG time ago, it's just that our definition of things have changed; "with the times" as they say.


It hasn't changed at all.

_“Conservatism Consists of Exactly One Proposition, to Wit: There Must Be In-Groups Whom the Law Protects but Does Not Bind, Alongside Out-Groups Whom the Law Binds but Does Not Protect.”  - _Frank Wilhoit


----------



## XDel (Jun 18, 2022)

Xzi said:


> It hasn't changed at all.
> 
> _“Conservatism Consists of Exactly One Proposition, to Wit: There Must Be In-Groups Whom the Law Protects but Does Not Bind, Alongside Out-Groups Whom the Law Binds but Does Not Protect.”  - _Frank Wilhoit



Sure, and the Beatles didn't used to be considered too much, nor Elvis, nor was I Love Lucy ever considered offensive, and there was never a time when people stayed married more often and not, and kids had a mother and a father, and Conservatives like Dave Rubin didn't pay women to have babies for him. Sure, I've no idea what I'm talking about.


----------



## Xzi (Jun 18, 2022)

XDel said:


> Sure, and the Beatles didn't used to be considered too much, nor Elvis, nor was I Love Lucy ever considered offensive, and there was never a time when people stayed married more often and not, and kids had a mother and a father, and Conservatives like Dave Rubin didn't pay women to have babies for him. Sure, I've no idea what I'm talking about.


You seem to be confusing a cultural shift/cultural progress with a change to the way conservatism works.  It's always been about making the rich richer and the poor poorer, and that trend has only continued to accelerate over time.  If you really want a return to "traditional family values," that would require a single full-time job to pay enough to support a family of four.  And to accomplish that would require a massive revitalization of unions in the US, at the very least.  Meaning we'd all have to unite against our corporate and capitalist overlords, rather than continuing to punch down at powerless minority social groups, as you seem to enjoy doing so often.


----------



## XDel (Jun 18, 2022)

Xzi said:


> You seem to be confusing a cultural shift/cultural progress with a change to the way conservatism works.  It's always been about making the rich richer and the poor poorer, and that trend has only continued to accelerate over time.  If you really want a return to "traditional family values," that would require a single full-time job to pay enough to support a family of four.  And to accomplish that would require a massive revitalization of unions in the US, at the very least.  Meaning we'd all have to unite against our corporate and capitalist overlords, rather than continuing to punch down at powerless minority social groups, as you seem to enjoy doing so often.



So by default, a cultural shift is cultural progress? Is that what you are saying? And I assume by suggesting that that you don't assume that the, or at least a large enough portion of the rich and powerful are not using their money and influence to direct and influence the social culture? As you also saying that our great great grandparents were not against entering the World Wars, or going along with the Industrial Revolution, and so on and so forth? Or that they were happy and all on board about what was happening to children, privacy, education, the family unit, and so forth, as the world rapidly reshaped itself in the 20th century? Do you not consider families a powerless minority, or the interest of those like so many natives who wished to live on their own terms, off the land, and away from "civilization"? How about children, how about unborn children? What feature does one require to be considered oppressed?


----------



## Xzi (Jun 18, 2022)

XDel said:


> So by default, a cultural shift is cultural progress? Is that what you are saying?


Not by default, no.  A cultural shift could also entail becoming a police state.  When it comes to the LGBTQ crowd, however, they've always existed, but it's only recently that they've been able to express themselves freely and openly with less fear of retribution.  That is progress.  Whether it's progress you approve of or not is irrelevant.



XDel said:


> And I assume by suggesting that that you don't assume that the, or at least a large enough portion of the rich and powerful are not using their money and influence to direct and influence the social culture?


I'm referring to culture as separate from consumerism here, though there is often a fair amount of overlap.  That said, it's much easier to keep us divided along political and religious lines than to keep us divided over which brand of socks we wear.



XDel said:


> As you also saying that our great great grandparents were not against entering the World Wars, or going along with the Industrial Revolution, and so on and so forth? Or that they were happy and all on board about what was happening to children, privacy, education, the family unit, and so forth, as the world rapidly reshaped itself in the 20th century?


If you want to point to one defining factor that got us to where we are today, it's Reaganism, and entirely too many Americans were on board with it or even continue to be.  There's always been a resistance and/or a subculture, we even had pro-Communism protests which spurred the New Deal, but ultimately corporations got everything they wanted and then some.



XDel said:


> Do you not consider families a powerless minority, or the interest of those like so many natives who wished to live on their own terms, off the land, and away from "civilization"?


American families hold immense power in shaping our future, but again, only if they can put their political and religious differences aside and unite against our common enemy.  Otherwise they're just being manipulated by media into tolerating any amount of oppression for the purpose of maintaining the status quo.

Native Americans have deserved better throughout all of history, and they still deserve better today.  All the more reason we shouldn't be allowing dickhead oil conglomerates to build pipelines through what little land they were granted by the government.  Their legal recourse has minimal effectiveness precisely because they're one of the out-groups that the law binds but does not protect.



XDel said:


> How about children, how about unborn children? What feature does one require to be considered oppressed?


Children are equally oppressed by our ultra-capitalist system, for example being given floor sealant instead of milk at summer school. Fetuses are frankly better off being aborted than being born poor or into adoptive/foster care in this country. Knowingly or not, the pro-life crowd is just a tool used by our military-industrial complex to keep the meat grinder churning. When there's a shortage of workers, they have more leverage in demanding higher pay and better benefits. When there's twenty applicants for every job, it's much easier for corporations to keep wages and benefits suppressed, because there will always be someone desperate enough to accept those poor conditions.


----------



## XDel (Jun 18, 2022)

Xzi said:


> American families hold immense power in shaping our future, but again, only if they can put their political and religious differences aside and unite against our common enemy.  Otherwise they're just being manipulated by media into tolerating any amount of oppression for the purpose of maintaining the status quo.
> 
> 
> So what you are saying is religion has to die, but my religion is my highest conceived set of values which is personal. As for being manipulated by the media, the only religion there is WOKE, there is no Christian establishment.


----------



## Xzi (Jun 18, 2022)

XDel said:
			
		

> So what you are saying is religion has to die, but my religion is my highest conceived set of values which is personal. As for being manipulated by the media, the only religion there is WOKE, there is no Christian establishment.


No, your religion doesn't need to die, but you do need to realize that it has been co-opted and mutated into something unrecognizable by corporate interests.  Jesus was more or less a socialist, and he explicitly told people to love thy neighbor as thyself.

As for the "woke establishment," how many gay presidents have we had?  How many Christian ones?  Exactly.  You're talking out your ass.  Eleven months out of the year, corporations pander to straight white males.  For one month they pander to gay people instead, and you lose your freaking mind.


----------



## infamousjcv (Jun 18, 2022)




----------



## Marc_LFD (Jun 18, 2022)

Hanafuda said:


> She's an oppo plant. Both sides have 'em. Her job is to disgust and repulse everyone, regardless of political affiliation, while pretending to be 'conservative.'


Ah, that reminds me, the U.K. government is "conservative," but in actuality they don't conserve/preserve anything.

Most Democrats and Conservatives don't even practice what they preach.

In 2024, I hope Tulsi Gabbard runs for President. I'm tired of old forgetful old men and men who promise to bring "greatness" back.



Enough of hiring people based on their skin color or gender. The best person [qualified and experienced] for the job is what needs to happen.


----------



## Jayro (Jun 18, 2022)

We need to get rid of the rule that says you have to be at least 35 years old to run the country, because there is plenty of fresh, young minds out there that could run this place better than the 99% of crusty-ass white men we've had so far. Old people tend to be conservative-leaning, which is just the absolute wrong direction to go, always.


----------



## Taleweaver (Jun 18, 2022)

Creamu said:


> First, the movie doesn’t show what it says it shows.


Yeah... You'd think that two recounts, an illegal investigation by 'cyber ninjas' (they picked that name, not me) that only found a handful individual voter frauds of extra Trump votes would be enough, but no... An extra movie. Because clearly, Trump fans are gullible folks with too much money. Thanks to capitalism, movies like that were bound to happen.

Same with Trump. You call it under reported. Meanwhile, everyone not in his inner circle knew about that scheme of his for over a year by now.


----------



## Taleweaver (Jun 18, 2022)

Creamu said:


> It didn’t even go to the poor saps who got themselves arrested at the Capitol on Jan. 6


 "the poor saps"... Fucking seriously? What's next... Sympathy for the pilots who died crashing into the twin towers? 

Being a moron isn't an excuse for terrorism. Even if Trump is guilty(and for the record: he is), those clowns aren't excused in any way.


----------



## Hanafuda (Jun 18, 2022)

Lacius said:


> .... I'm hard-pressed to find much of anything she's said that conservatives generally don't agree with.



That's how an oppo plant works. They say things with which you agree, but at the same time because of the person they are, they sicken you. You start rationalizing yourself out of agreeing with those statements, to protect your self-esteem and dissociate yourself from the repugnant person on the TV screen.

All of them on Fox, MSNBC, CNN, etc. are really there only to make money as entertainers, to get airtime for the benefit of their careers. Media politics is just a racket.

Hell, even real politics is just a racket.


----------



## Hanafuda (Jun 18, 2022)

Interesting trivia: Dinesh D-Souza and Coulter were romantically involved some time ago. She's 60 now and every man she has ever dated escaped her. She has never married.


----------



## Marc_LFD (Jun 18, 2022)

Hanafuda said:


> Interesting trivia: Dinesh D-Souza and Coulter were romantically involved some time ago. She's 60 now and every man she has ever dated escaped her. She has never married.


That blonde with blue eyes has no children? What will be of the Conservative Christian values!! 



Spoiler



I honestly never went to church, but consider myself Christian as I'm of European ancestry. That said, there's nothing wrong mocking and insulting "Conservatives" (and "Democrats") while at it.

I'm tired of the whole Left/Right bs.


----------



## Creamu (Jun 18, 2022)

Marc_LFD said:


> That blonde with blue eyes has no children? What will be of the Conservative Christian values!!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It is interesting to my that she gets attacked on a personal level, while other authors I have posted don't get that treatment. I don't know enough about her to understand the situation, I found her article interesting, it stands on its own personalties aside.


----------



## Dr_Faustus (Jun 21, 2022)

Jayro said:


> We need to get rid of the rule that says you have to be at least 35 years old to run the country, because there is plenty of fresh, young minds out there that could run this place better than the 99% of crusty-ass white men we've had so far. Old people tend to be conservative-leaning, which is just the absolute wrong direction to go, always.


Its also to note that by the time you reach your 30's you are basically too jaded to see the world change in any better way even if you had the means to do so yourself. 

Younger people are idealists and want to shake up the status quo for newer, better things. When you get older and see the same shit happen over and over again no matter what promises or crap they say but nothing changes for the better, you kinda just give up hope that it will ever get any better. As a result you become part of the system of problems just hoping to get by enough to survive it. 

What is really needed is to have our current system be flushed out and replaced with newer components. The way it exists now the current system will always exist even when the old figures retire/die the ones that will replace them will likely hold the same/similar values as they did. Perpetuating the system for ages to come. It would also help if to become a politician it did not require you to have assloads of cash and already existing ties to power/cash to get your position secure. There's a difference between wanting to help and represent the people because you are one of those people, and the concept of selling yourself to people claiming to understand their needs but are simply scamming them to gain power in office and do fuck all to help anyone but themselves and those who they play "hide the bribes" with.


----------



## Creamu (Jul 2, 2022)

Dr_Faustus said:


> What is really needed is to have our current system be flushed out and replaced with newer components. The way it exists now the current system will always exist even when the old figures retire/die the ones that will replace them will likely hold the same/similar values as they did. Perpetuating the system for ages to come. It would also help if to become a politician it did not require you to have assloads of cash and already existing ties to power/cash to get your position secure. There's a difference between wanting to help and represent the people because you are one of those people, and the concept of selling yourself to people claiming to understand their needs but are simply scamming them to gain power in office and do fuck all to help anyone but themselves and those who they play "hide the bribes" with.


Yes. The problem with having a plutocratic/nepotistic regime is that the will of the people is not represented at all. There needs to be some connection, but if the people of the regime are to foreign, they become paranoid with increasing plutocratic/nepotistic tendencies. 

This leads to the populus drifting away from the hegemon into hyperpolarisation and eventually fracturing the whole. The higher ups of the USA have now realized this and are trying to adjust. The problem is they themselves are quite fractured and maneuvering into a more stable direction might not be possible, them being too divided. I don't see them overcoming their paranoia, forcing them into a position where they simply can't get in touch with the populus which is quite incoherent itself. All in all its a huge mess, and it does look like they will fail in the attempt of holding things together.

Their next step is going for Ron DeSantis as a decelerating move. It is the same playbook as Ronald Reagan in the 80s. The 80s however where a time of a much more coherent populus in a way better condition. It seems inplausible to me that they will be able to make this trick work again this time. There is simply no ground for it.


----------



## Jayro (Jul 2, 2022)

Dr_Faustus said:


> Its also to note that by the time you reach your 30's you are basically too jaded to see the world change in any better way even if you had the means to do so yourself.
> 
> Younger people are idealists and want to shake up the status quo for newer, better things. When you get older and see the same shit happen over and over again no matter what promises or crap they say but nothing changes for the better, you kinda just give up hope that it will ever get any better. As a result you become part of the system of problems just hoping to get by enough to survive it.
> 
> What is really needed is to have our current system be flushed out and replaced with newer components. The way it exists now the current system will always exist even when the old figures retire/die the ones that will replace them will likely hold the same/similar values as they did. Perpetuating the system for ages to come. It would also help if to become a politician it did not require you to have assloads of cash and already existing ties to power/cash to get your position secure. There's a difference between wanting to help and represent the people because you are one of those people, and the concept of selling yourself to people claiming to understand their needs but are simply scamming them to gain power in office and do fuck all to help anyone but themselves and those who they play "hide the bribes" with.


Yeah, I think the whole "lobbying" (throwing money at) candidates is just bullshit. It doesn't cost millions of dollars to rent out a convention center to have people show up and support you, and traveling doesn't cost millions either, so what's all the money going to exactly? It's definitely some shady shit!


----------



## Creamu (Jul 5, 2022)

Jayro said:


> Yeah, I think the whole "lobbying" (throwing money at) candidates is just bullshit. It doesn't cost millions of dollars to rent out a convention center to have people show up and support you, and traveling doesn't cost millions either, so what's all the money going to exactly? It's definitely some shady shit!


Yes, whatever it is, it is the expression of a plutocracy.


----------

