“Trump wrong on Reagan, tariffs”

[QP!]

Of course it is fine. Foreign interference in elections is fine if the leftists want what they want.

And of course you jump on this stupid line and reinforce it with your own stupidity.


Trump has started what is basically a Trade War with allied countries. A Trade War and what is said in it to support or counter the tariffs narrative is NOT ELECTION INTERFERENCE in any way shape or form no matter how much stupid people try and spin that way.

It also has ZERO impact on the coming Supreme Court hearings comprised of mostly Reagan Conservatives who absolutely know what his view was and are not now in shock to learn it from Ontario.

But lets go one more step, if you can put aside the stupid, and PRETEND the SC did not know Reagans views, and you can tell is why it wrong for them to learn what Reagan thought from any source? Like if Netflix was airing a documentary piece on Reagan and it aired his views, and some SC justice saw it... explain to me why that is wrong??


You won't because you cannot as you are just repeating 'stupid'.

 

[zymurgy]

Not my claims, the GOP Senate’s findings, and if so, provided them, back up what you say, deliver

you posted it as facts. now you want me to verify the facts you post

derp derp go the gas lighting shit stains

 

[Diogenes]

Really, then show us how one accesses “bbc+1”

If you're too stupid to search BBC.com using the search term "Reagan tariff ad" that's on you, not me.

 

[QP!]

There is no question Ontario ran the clear and unedited views of Reagan and he was against Tariffs generally.

There is no question Trump and Magats are lying about it as they fear the truth of Reagans view harms them in some way.

There is no speech by Trump, Biden or any POTUS in the history of the US, where it has been quoted that this magat claim of 'editing' would not apply as what they are saying is that because they did not air it in its entirety, that is then an 'edit'.

So the only way to not 'edit' is to provide full transcripts or replays. So if the speech is an hour, you cannot quote only the key parts you want to air or that is 'editing' in a way that makes it not trusted says the magats.

Magats believe that as they are stupid.

 

[Diogenes]

There is no question Ontario ran the clear and unedited views of Reagan and he was against Tariffs generally.

You lie.

https://x.com/i/grok/share/ER37CXOuABeJ1O0mlDFaGAmmd

 

[FastLane]

“Wall Street Journal editorial board: Trump ‘wrong’ on Reagan, tariffs”​

“The editorial board of The Wall Street Journal is criticizing President Trump over his reaction to an advertisement commissioned by the Canadian province of Ontario knocking him on trade policies that invoked former President Ronald Reagan.”

“Mr. Trump is wrong about the Reagan speech, and he was wrong when he said on social media that ‘Ronald Reagan LOVED tariffs for purposes of National Security and the Economy,'” the Journal wrote in an editorial published Sunday.”

“The Gipper was a free trader. In the 1987 speech, Reagan was trying to explain why he was making an exception to his free-trade policies on semiconductor imports from Japan,” the newspaper argued. “Mr. Trump has been fortunate that his tariffs haven’t triggered much retaliation, which has spared us from a global trade war. But the tariffs are doing economic damage by raising costs for consumers and businesses and by dampening animal spirits that should be soaring with his tax bill and deregulation.”

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/5575025-wall-street-journal-slams-trump/

Ouch, that one must have sent Trump into another tizzy, have to put Bondi on it, suppose we’re going to hear now that the WSJ is a liberal source

Been echoing the facts for the last three days, that the ad was correct in its portrayal of Reagan and tariffs, the disdain for tariffs has always been a hallmark of conservative economics

So it is an OPINION PIECE. Big deal.

 

[Diogenes]

So it is an OPINION PIECE. Big deal.

And he unironically posted these:

Amazing how “copy and paste” copies and pastes obviously an op ed piece from certainly some MAGA source and tries to pass it off as his own, funny

your second unsourced copied and pasted op ed offering accuses the ad of cherry picking and then goes on to cherry pick statements and phrases from the ad to show that it was edited, again, funny For Trump, MAGA, you, and your copied and pasted op eds, to say Canada lied about Regan’s views is wrong, 100% wrong, as fhe WSJ confirms

 

[QP!]

So it is an OPINION PIECE. Big deal.

Its what is called an 'Opinion Piece' but it is making a statement of fact that 'Trump is wrong'. Not 'Our view is Trump is wrong' or 'our assessment Trump is wrong', and is a clear statement that 'Trump is wrong'.

 

[Ross Dolan]

There is no question Ontario ran the clear and unedited views of Reagan and he was against Tariffs generally.

There is no question Trump and Magats are lying about it as they fear the truth of Reagans view harms them in some way.

There is no speech by Trump, Biden or any POTUS in the history of the US, where it has been quoted that this magat claim of 'editing' would not apply as what they are saying is that because they did not air it in its entirety, that is then an 'edit'.

So the only way to not 'edit' is to provide full transcripts or replays. So if the speech is an hour, you cannot quote only the key parts you want to air or that is 'editing' in a way that makes it not trusted says the magats.

Magats believe that as they are stupid.

The MAGA morons either are stupid as a bag of rocks...or as traitorous as Benedict Arnold.

Or, of course, both...which I am beginning to suppose some people posting here are.

 

[archives]

However, it is who those fur'ners aided in this thread... Durrrr... You've once again lost the topic in your emotive rubbish. His post was pointing out the hypocrisy of the leftists supporting foreign interference here.

And I was showing him how Russian interference, which by any measure was much more threatening than a TV as, didn’t bother him so his hypocrisy couldn’t be anymore transparent

 

[archives]

you posted it as facts. now you want me to verify the facts you post

derp derp go the gas lighting shit stains

You now claiming the GOP Senate Committee was making up their own facts? And that is only one of many inquires into the election that show the same results

 

[zymurgy]

You now claiming the GOP Senate Committee was making up their own facts? And that is only one of many inquires into the election that show the same results

your reading comprehension is so pathetic

the Russians were heavily involved, but not all the efforts were to aid the Republican Party. all the efforts were done to create chaos though.

your attempt to change the narrative is not working

 

[archives]

So it is an OPINION PIECE. Big deal.

An opinion piece from the editorial board of the leading conservative economic vehicle who if anyone knows Regan’s views on economic affairs

It is a big deal, very big deal

 

[archives]

your reading comprehension is so pathetic

the Russians were heavily involved, but not all the efforts were to aid the Republican Party. all the efforts were done to create chaos though.

your attempt to change the narrative is not working

Wait a minute, so now it comes down to what percentage of Russian interference in the election was to aid the GOP and what percentage of that interference was to create chaos?

We’ll make it easy for you, yes or no, did Russian interference in the election, an established fact, aid the GOP?

Obvious answer is yes, and unless you think Canada’s one TV ad was more of a threat to the US than Russian interference in our elections, your hypocrisy is showing

 

[zymurgy]

Wait a minute, so now it comes down to what percentage of Russian interference in the election was to aid the GOP and what percentage of that interference was to create chaos?

We’ll make it easy for you, yes or no, did Russian interference in the election, an established fact, aid the GOP?

Obvious answer is yes, and unless you think Canada’s one TV ad was more of a threat to the US than Russian interference in our elections, your hypocrisy is showing

derp derp

it comes down to honesty. I am not for foreign nations helping one side, or harming one side. or causing chaos to all sides

so why is Canada ok to do so? why are you so desperate to change the narrative from what I argued about?

 

[archives]

derp derp

it comes down to honesty. I am not for foreign nations helping one side, or harming one side. or causing chaos to all sides

so why is Canada ok to do so? why are you so desperate to change the narrative from what I argued about?

Wait a minute, who is Canada helping other than Canada? Who benefits from the ad other than Canada?

You got onto get out more, the world isn’t an endless melodrama, get out more or turn the Channel

 

[zymurgy]

Wait a minute, who is Canada helping other than Canada? Who benefits from the ad other than Canada?

^derp derp.

the shit stain party. no integrity.. no brains. no chance.

 

[archives]

^derp derp.

the shit stain party. no integrity.. no brains. no chance.

 

[Damocles]

And I was showing him how Russian interference, which by any measure was much more threatening than a TV as, didn’t bother him so his hypocrisy couldn’t be anymore transparent

What you are doing here is underlining that you do not care about foreign interference if it aligns with your priorities and/or attacks the right person. That foreign interference only interests you when it interferes with your own priorities.

 

[Diogenes]

What you are doing here is underlining that you do not care about foreign interference if it aligns with your priorities and/or attacks the right person. That foreign interference only interests you when it interferes with your own priorities.

Clearly.