Young Republican's Racist Texts Leak

[DiscostewSM]

The mod who cooperates with you is of your ilk. So not exactly making a point there.

It seems you guys don't want to answer the question. Either you welcome disagreement here, or you don't. Answer the question.

So your argument is that you don't like it when the mods "do their job" in clearing out the disruptive people that just so happen to be those that lean far right. If there were far-left people doing such things, they'd be cleared out too.

This is very much following what I had said in the now-deleted post.

 

[Hanafuda]

It's not, if you want every "conservative" voice in general to be allowed here, the answer is an unequivocal no. There is no reasonable debate to be had with those people, Americans would've lost the Revolutionary War if this many turncoats were lurking around back then.

Still a qualified response, but I've badgered you do just answer the question enough. I'll take it as "I would prefer no conservative dissent here at all." You can continue to elaborate if you like, but you're leaning into this just being a leftist consensus board, aren't you?

Post automatically merged: Oct 18, 2025

Because it's not a yes or no question.

There are nuances to this and not explaning the details would mean that you are free to misconstrue his argument in any way you see fit, which is outright disingenuous,

You're right, it's not a yes or no question.

It's an either / or question. You either want dissent and debate here, or you don't.

Well?

 

[gamefan5]

Still a qualified response, but I've badgered you do just answer the question enough. I'll take it as "I would prefer no conservative dissent here at all." You can continue to elaborate if you like, but you're leaning into this just being a leftist consensus board, aren't you?

Post automatically merged: Oct 18, 2025

You're right, it's not a yes or no question.

It's an either / or question. You either want dissent and debate here, or you don't.

Well?

Yes, I am right. It's an either or question. Thank you for correcting yourself

I appreciate the fact that you left out the rest of my comment explaning WHY he shouldn't make a simple choice without a careful explanation.

He explained it sufficiently well. You're the only one who isn't accepting his answer. And look how you decide to choose for him, when you know damn well that he never said that all conservatives aren't welcomed to debate.

The truth of the matter here is that not opinions have the same amount of relevance and worth. I rather debate with one of my best friends who is a smart conservative, instead of another one peddling and repeating what Trump keeps saying, when most of the thjngs coming out of his mouth is uninformed drivel,

And I'm a science major. I've been in debates countless times and the worse thing you can do is choose a position/argument without an explanation supporting it. That makes your position, more often than not, extremely weak and easily dismissable.

 

[MPRTwice]

So kind of exposing what everyone already knew: You can dress up a fat racist hillbilly in a suit, but they're still a fat racist hillbilly.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/...ook&nrid=49d82a93-d202-49ed-a149-f087284d9ee0

There's talk about:
-Killing
-Racism
-Sexism
-White supremacy
-Loving Hitler
-Calling rape "Epic".
-Calling others obese, when they're all clearly obese themselves.
-Gloating about using their group's money on themselves for Ozempic, balding cream, vacations, and massages.

These types of chuds are the future of the GOP, and their level of vileness is beyond what most could imagine. These specific dorks will be removed because they were caught, and they'll be replaced with different dinguses who have the same views, but haven't been caught yet.

As I've said multiple times here, the US is rotting from the inside. The right has zero desire to vet who they put into power anymore, and they seem to elevate the worst and most uneducated people in their own states.

I'm sure we'll see some people come out of the woodworks and say "Oh, I'm sure YOU'RE so pure! I'm sure that you have a chat with friends that's just as bad as this!". No, normal people don't.

you should hear what happened today: some nut decided to endanger everyone on the road on purpose, and the conversation was straight out of Psalm 141:10 "Let the wicked fall into their own nets, whilst that I withal escape.":

"you gonna call your mommy?"
Me: Actually sir, I'm calling the police; your comment, tone, willful decision to be a danger to yourself and others on the road while breaking the law, your face, and your license are now _all_ on camera in the same video; I will send it to them later today. No worries.

"!"

And he was doing much more than that, but the police report is filed and all of that was caught on camera; he fell into his own net!

I hope that makes you feel a little better that justice is served eventually, and for him, he now can call _his_ mommy to pick him up from prison on bail despite him appearing very old.

Post automatically merged: Oct 18, 2025

I will leave this here too: the effects of neo-republican brain damage:

 

[Xzi]

You can continue to elaborate if you like, but you're leaning into this just being a leftist consensus board, aren't you?

A mix of leftists and moderates does make for an environment more conducive to reasonable/long-form discussion, yes. As I already said, plenty of other online spaces I can go to if I want to get into an ugly mud-slinging brawl with bootlickers too lazy to form their own thoughts and opinions. I live in a state that was red throughout and beyond my high school years, and my city still remains split right around 50-50, so I'm never in danger of melding into any "bubble" permanently.

It's not that conservative opinions aren't being heard, you're always the loudest ones in any given room. Those opinions get disregarded because the vast majority of Americans are not on board with dismantling democracy and the constitution. MAGA isn't the Republican party you grew up with, it's time to wake up and smell the rotting corpse flowers.

 

[gamefan5]

A mix of leftists and moderates does make for an environment more conducive to reasonable/long-form discussion, yes. As I already said, plenty of other online spaces I can go to if I want to get into an ugly mud-slinging brawl with bootlickers too lazy to form their own thoughts and opinions. I live in a state that was red throughout and beyond my high school years, and my city still remains split right around 50-50, so I'm never in danger of melding into any "bubble" permanently.

It's not that conservative opinions aren't being heard, you're always the loudest ones in any given room. Those opinions get disregarded because the vast majority of Americans are not on board with dismantling democracy and the constitution. MAGA isn't the Republican party you grew up with, it's time to wake up and smell the rotting corpse flowers.

Should have used a Rafflesia

 

[DarknessPlay3r]

As far as allowing conservative-minded people here, I'm fine with that so long as they can keep their heads screwed on straight, but that's an extreme rarity among MAGA. It takes minimal poking and prodding before they reveal their true beliefs align with the young Republicans who are the topic of this thread. Right-wing libertarians (in the US) have proven themselves to be hypocrites when it comes to opposing authoritarianism as well. Which pretty much just leaves a scattered few conservative individuals from Europe as capable of being a voice of reason any more. Foxi4 being an example of that, even if there's plenty I still disagree with him on.

Foxi4 is an excellent example. Myself as well, find I have things we disagree on. However in the same breath I am always willing and interested to take a moment and consider the rationale and viewpoint being made.

The more time that goes on, the more it feels like there are 3 types of Republicans

People who are conservative but seeing shit like this pushes them to saying fuck no. Then either not voting or in some cases voting Blue to give a big middle finger to those who no longer represent them.

Those like Foxi4 who believe in the core values and fundamentals of what that party was once (Think Lincoln ect) (average normal community minded person who may not be vocal but still wants to see good in the world)

And the fucking Nazi/Facist/Elite garbage we didn't seem to exterminate during and after WWII that now have even more tools (Information. Thanks big data!) to manipulate/control everyone/everything.

To the point, I too would welcome conservative-minded people here, and would value more actual discussion and intelligent views. However given what here is, doesn't appeal or draw that type of person.

 

[titan_tim]

So, let me ask you a question ... not just you but anyone else here, especially those who actually believe the Democratic party is in the USA is "right wing," ... would you rather have several conservative-minded persons in here to confront your assumptions with counterpoint, or not? Just like the leftish members here, some will be good at arguing, and some will be dunces. Some will be moderate in their lean, while others will be downright extreme and obtuse to reality. Everyone gets to have a good debate, take their best shot at rebuttal, maybe get some perspective on how 'the other half' thinks .... or not. What's your preference, really?

Be honest about this. Don't be like the hypocritical members here who openly post that one or another conservative poster "doesn't really want to argue in good faith" or some such lame baloney, while at the same time they push that person to 'just leave,' smear them with filthy names and insults, and report them in an attempt to get them banned at every opportunity. That's the reality here for anyone who dares to ever disagree with the circle-jerk.

So, do you want debate? Or do you just want to have a room where you can all puff and slobber on each other about how great you all are, and how everyone else is a Nazi?

I'm serious.

Of course you need both sides. There have been too many times in my life when I've had my mind changed on different subjects to believe that you shouldn't always be receptive to new information.

That being said, when there is a firehose of different ideas and comments, you need to take only what you believe to be reasonable information to heart. If you're doing an experiment on the dangers of a drug, and one person out of 100,000 dies in a month whereas another lives until past 110, you need to consider them outliers and can't take them into consideration of the remaining 999,998.

With people and their opinions, it isn't as simple as a number that you can cull as an outlier.
- First, you take out anyone who calls for violence or bigotry. Those are easy to weed out.
- Then you take out anyone who advocates for things that are objectively morally reprehensible. The subjective you can debate on, but most times you need to agree to disagree on those.
- The last are the people debating in bad faith. Those people don't need to be removed entirely, but can be poked when something blatant disrupts their world view bubble.

A lot of people do that with you, as you say that you want to protect the constitution, but supporting this administration makes stat stance nearly impossible to defend. "Uh oh, Trump just said he doesn't know if he needs to uphold the constitution. * poke poke *. Uh oh, the Trump administration wants to withhold Habeas corpus *Poke poke* Hanafuda".

 

[SeltzerMist]

To claim to be a constitutionalist and having voted for Trump in any election is laughably contradictory

 

[Axido]

Nobody likes to eat crow, but you and the other boomers were warned countless times. You chose to let tribalism override all logic and sense anyway, and at this rate we'll need Germany to invade the US to help rid us of the fourth reich.

Please excuse the late reply. We first had to print out your request to store it as a physical file. Also we tried to contact you via fax machine but that attempt ultimately failed.

We want to express that we are not planning to invade the United States of America. In fact, we are incapable of doing so regardless due to the current state of our military equipment and the amount of soldiers present in our army. We can send helmets if you want, though.

Additionally, since a certain political party in our country that somehow likes to copy the style and manners of your current president is gaining traction amongst our less mentally developed voters, we cannot guarantee that our government remains non-fascist in the foreseeable future. So better don't count on us. * wink *

We are hard at work fixing this... which translates to "It is legally possible and demanded by the majority of the public to try and ban this party, but our current government is made up of some close friends of them, so the necessary process is not being initiated."

Sincerely,
Germany

 

[emigre]

Please excuse the late reply. We first had to print out your request to store it as a physical file. Also we tried to contact you via fax machine but that attempt ultimately failed.

We want to express that we are not planning to invade the United States of America. In fact, we are incapable of doing so regardless due to the current state of our military equipment and the amount of soldiers present in our army. We can send helmets if you want, though.

Additionally, since a certain political party in our country that somehow likes to copy the style and manners of your current president is gaining traction amongst our less mentally developed voters, we cannot guarantee that our government remains non-fascist in the foreseeable future. So better don't count on us. * wink *

We are hard at work fixing this... which translates to "It is legally possible and demanded by the majority of the public to try and ban this party, but our current government is made up of some close friends of them, so the necessary process is not being initiated."

Sincerely,
Germany

Dear Germany,

All the best in avoiding fascism 2: Electric Boogaloo from someone who very much wants to go to Berlin again. I hope your politicians gets its shit together.

Yours faithfully

Random British brown man

 

[titan_tim]

To claim to be a constitutionalist and having voted for Trump in any election is laughably contradictory

What'chu talk'in about!? You mean a president isn't constitutionally allowed to:

- Remove birthright citizenship
- Usurp Congress's power of the purse
- Sick the FCC on comedy shows to have them removed
- Undermine the independence of multiple independent departments
- Ignore multiple judgements against his acts
- Outwardly tell his DOJ who to prosecute
- Hold American citizens under arrest with no charges or communication to the outside world
- Send in the military to cities under the false accusation that they're warzones
- Have coins minted of him even though he's not dead
- Profit immensely from the presidency through blatantly illegal means

Am I missing anything here? I was just listing these things off the top of my head, but I'm sure there are more I'm missing.

Post automatically merged: Oct 20, 2025

Wonder if this person is also inconsequential? Trump's nominee to lead the office of Special Counsel? Very inconsequential....

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/10/20/paul-ingrassia-racist-text-messages-nazi-00613608

As I said, the party has a huge problem. I'm not saying every right wing person is a KKK member or a Nazi. But 100% of KKK and Nazis absolutely love the GOP right now. When you have those two groups on your side, it's time for some serious soul searching.

 

[Foxi4]

Which pretty much just leaves a scattered few conservative individuals from Europe as capable of being a voice of reason any more. Foxi4 being an example of that, even if there's plenty I still disagree with him on.

Who wakes me from my slumber?

As for the subject at hand, liberals don’t actually care about any “racist texts” leaking from any chatroom - they already automatically assume anyone with a conservative mindset is a fascist/nazi/the babadook. The outrage should be completely disregarded because it exists solely to generate infighting. Republicans always fall for that trick, they’re suckers.

 

[erikas]

So, republicans shitpost and democrats shoot people. Wonder what's worse.

 

[DiscostewSM]

So, republicans shitpost and democrats shoot people. Wonder what's worse.

Shooting people, like those assassination attempts on Trump's life? Because those were pretty much confirmed not to be by democrats.

 

[erikas]

Shooting people, like those assassination attempts on Trump's life? Because those were pretty much confirmed not to be by democrats.

Here's the thing. You can build as many walls of separation between yourself and the perpetrator as you want, or between the perpetrator and the democratic party. That only works if you disavow the act itself with no caveats. And people celebrating Kirks assassination was far too widespread and loud to be dismissed as "fringe".

 

[BlazeHeatnix]

So, republicans shitpost and democrats shoot people. Wonder what's worse.

Typical. You turn a blind eye to the mountains of corpses piled in the name of white supremacist idealism over the course of decades, and act like the killing of a white supremacist is the first politically-motivated murder in American history.

 

[Vixi]

"White supremacism" used to mean something, as in it was motivated by skin color alone and nothing else, which literally no one is arguing for. What you call white supremacism is people talking about cultural differences, and I don't really know how else to say this, but SOME CULTURES ARE SUPERIOR TO OTHERS. Would you like examples?

P.S. Even if you call Charlie Kirk a white supremacist, you still can't argue he advocated for political violence or the death of anyone, because he didn't.

He said gun deaths are necessary to own guns.

Post automatically merged: Oct 21, 2025

Here's the thing. You can build as many walls of separation between yourself and the perpetrator as you want, or between the perpetrator and the democratic party. That only works if you disavow the act itself with no caveats. And people celebrating Kirks assassination was far too widespread and loud to be dismissed as "fringe".

One of them previously voted Trump

 

[erikas]

He said gun deaths are necessary to own guns.

What he meant was, "people get killed" is not an argument for taking away your right and ability to defend yourself, and him getting shot doesn't prove him wrong either. Shinzo Abe was killed with a makeshift pipe shotgun.

 

[Vixi]

What he meant was, "people get killed" is not an argument for taking away your right and ability to defend yourself, and him getting shot doesn't prove him wrong either.

It is an argument. People argue it often.

Anyway, what does this have to do with leaked racist texts?