To My "Moderate" Republican Friends Who Oppose Trump - Revision history

Cyberherbalist at 19:35, 9 January 2026

2026-01-09T19:35:28Z

Cyberherbalist at 22:30, 2 December 2025

2025-12-02T22:30:08Z

Cyberherbalist: Created page with "'''To all my friends and acquaintances who consider themselves "moderate Republicans," and who oppose Trump with all their hearts.''' I will start by saying I did not support..."

2025-12-02T22:25:11Z

Created page with "'''To all my friends and acquaintances who consider themselves "moderate Republicans," and who oppose Trump with all their hearts.''' I will start by saying I did not support..."

New page

'''To all my friends and acquaintances who consider themselves "moderate Republicans," and who oppose Trump with all their hearts.'''

I will start by saying I did not support Trump in 2016. I thought he was not the right man for the job -- but neither was Hillary, so I voted for an independent candidate who had not chance at all of being elected. Just to protest. But Trump's performance in office made it clear that I had been wrong about him. Note that I don't particularly like him. He rather annoys me when he talks. He says some pretty darned dumb things from time to time. But what was the result of his first term? Only a Democrat could call it a failure; it was in fact quite successful, despite the left having hissy fits every other day. And it only ended on a negative note because of Covid. If Hillary had been elected in 2016 she would have ended on a negative note, too.

But in 2024, what other choice was there besides Trump? Biden was a damaged man, who was not entirely mentally competent even during the 2020 campaign, and after he was elected became even less so until we saw what he had become during that disastrous "debate" with Trump. And the person he chose as his running mate, to be a heartbeat away from the presidency? Is there anyone, other than a Democrat sycophant, who truly believed Kamala Harris is capable of serving as President? But besides that, just how "democratic" was her rise from vice presidential candidate to the top of the ticket? Not very democratic at all, but if the Democrat party had only acknowledged early enough just how damaged Joe Biden was, they might have had an actual democratic process to choose her, instead of the farce of her "ordination" that occurred. So ultimately we got Harris vs Trump, and what proof did we have that Harris could serve effectively? None at all, while Trump had already served a term as president, and none of the horrors the Democrats predicted would take place if he was elected actually came to pass. It should have been clear from the start that the only safe choice was Trump.

And the accusations against Trump from the very beginning were likewise unprecedented. Trump had never been called a "racist" in his entire life, and in fact had supported black civil rights organizations, appeared positively on such programs as Oprah's, and The View, receiving nothing but praise. Until he announced for president. Then suddenly he was a racist, homophobe, anti-woman, and just about any kind of negative thing that could be imagined. Of course, being the outspoken person that he is, he gave the talking heads and politicians plenty of grist for their defamation mills.

And then we have the media. The only mainstream media organization that would give Trump any kind of break when it came to reporting on the campaign was Fox News. And Fox News is a hiss and byword among the Democrats as a joke of a news group. As for the rest, they were all clearly and unquestionably against Trump and everything he stood for. All of them, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and MSNBC, stood foursquare and without the slightest hesitation for Joe Biden as first the most wonderful candidate for president and then the greatest president ever elected. Biden's most ardent supporter, media personality Joe Scarborough made this impassioned defense of Biden, after supposedly having spent some time with the president: “I've said it for years now: he's cogent. But I undersold him when I said he was cogent. He's far beyond cogent. In fact, I think he's better than he's ever been intellectually, analytically. …This version of Biden … is the best Biden ever. Not a close second. And I've known him for years. ... If it weren't the truth, I wouldn't say it.” And then we saw Biden’s pathetic and heart-rending debate performance with Trump, after which Biden’s wife Jill praised him as if he were a toddler: “Joe, you did such a great job, you answered every question, you knew all the answers!” This was the man who was the best choice for President? If he was "the best Biden ever," what does that say for his political career before becoming president?

After Biden's negative mental state became clear, ABC News was involved in making Kamala Harris look far better than she actually was, by heavily editing the interview they conducted with her. When successfully sued for this bias, it became clear that she didn't know what she was talking about half the time. And without that heavy editing she was obviously and clearly incompetent for the job of president. And since ABC saw the poor quality of candidate she was in actuality, yet still colluded to try to make her seem competent, how can we ever trust them again?

The degree of lawfare that has been directed at Trump has been unprecented. They impeached him twice, but failed to remove him from office. He was indicted for patently ridiculous reasons in New York and Georgia. The 34 "felonies" he was convicted of and thereafter constantly brought up by his opponents were for crimes that are just normal business operations if done by anyone else. He was fined an utterly impossible amount of the money for these imagined crimes, nearly half a billion dollars, that even the liberal courts of New York found to be unconstitutional. The fact that the indictments in New York were entirely politically motivated is obvious from the fact that the prosecutor stated from the outset of her term that she was out to "get" Trump.

And consider, too, what we have discovered about the Biden administration's interference with the free speech rights of all those who opposed them. After Elon Musk bought Twitter it was revealed that the FBI had been deeply and secretly involved in colluding with Twitter management, suppressing anyone who spoke "misinformation" against the administration and its policies. And then we learned from Mark Zuckerberg himself that Facebook and the rest of Alphabet's social media platforms had been cooperating with the Biden administration to do what Twitter had been doing. Zuckerberg apologized and said they wouldn't do it again, but can we believe him? And finally in the past week YouTube has admitted that they were doing exactly the same thing at the Biden administration's behest. One might ask, is it not fascists who seek to suppress and punish unapproved speech? The answer is, yes, fascists are famous for this, and what does this tell you about the Biden administration and the Democrats? So what are we to think about the Democrats and their supporters in the media calling Trump a fascist? This is called "projection," which is to accuse one's opponents of doing the exact same thing one is doing.

What of the attempts to assassinate Trump? One nearly succeeded, and the other was discovered just minutes before the assassin was in range to fire. How many other presidents or presidential candidates in the past fifty years faced such mortal danger? Did Joe Biden? Barack Obama? No, of course not.

After all this, the Democrats and their fellow-travelers still have the gall to claim that it is Trump who is the fascist? That Trump is a danger to "our Democracy"? If it is not obvious to you that it is Trump's opponents who are acting quite fascistic and are a serious danger to our Republic, then I have a bridge to sell you.

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:30, 2 December 2025
Line 18:		Line 18:

	After all this, the Democrats and their fellow-travelers still have the gall to claim that it is Trump who is the fascist? That Trump is a danger to "our Democracy"? If it is not obvious to you that it is Trump's opponents who are acting quite fascistic and are a serious danger to our Republic, then I have a bridge to sell you.		After all this, the Democrats and their fellow-travelers still have the gall to claim that it is Trump who is the fascist? That Trump is a danger to "our Democracy"? If it is not obvious to you that it is Trump's opponents who are acting quite fascistic and are a serious danger to our Republic, then I have a bridge to sell you.
		+
		+	-----
		+
		+	Back to [[Political Writings]]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 '''To all my friends and acquaintances who consider themselves "moderate Republicans," and who oppose Trump with all their hearts.'''
-I will start by saying I did not support Trump in 2016. I thought he was not the right man for the job -- but neither was Hillary, so I voted for an independent candidate who had not chance at all of being elected. Just to protest. But Trump's performance in office made it clear that I had been wrong about him. Note that I don't particularly like him. He rather annoys me when he talks. He says some pretty darned dumb things from time to time. But what was the result of his first term? Only a Democrat could call it a failure; it was in fact quite successful, despite the left having hissy fits every other day. And it only ended on a negative note because of Covid. If Hillary had been elected in 2016 she would have ended on a negative note, too.
+I will start by saying I did not support Trump in 2016. I thought he was not the right man for the job -- but neither was Hillary, so I voted for an independent candidate who had no chance at all of being elected. Just a protest vote.
-But in 2024, what other choice was there besides Trump? Biden was a damaged man, who was not entirely mentally competent even during the 2020 campaign, and after he was elected became even less so until we saw what he had become during that disastrous  "debate" with Trump. And the person he chose as his running mate, to be a heartbeat away from the presidency? Is there anyone, other than a Democrat sycophant, who truly believed Kamala Harris is capable of serving as President? But besides that, just how "democratic" was her rise from vice presidential candidate to the top of the ticket? Not very democratic at all, but if the Democrat party had only acknowledged early enough just how damaged Joe Biden was, they might have had an actual democratic process to choose her, instead of the farce of her "ordination" that occurred. So ultimately we got Harris vs Trump, and what proof did we have that Harris could serve effectively? None at all, while Trump had already served a term as president, and none of the horrors the Democrats predicted would take place if he was elected actually came to pass. It should have been clear from the start that the only safe choice was Trump.
+But Trump's performance in office made it clear that I had been wrong about him. Note that I don't particularly like him. He rather annoys me when he talks. He says some pretty darned dumb things from time to time. But what was the result of his first term? Only a Democrat could call it a failure; it was in fact quite successful, despite the left having hissy fits every other day. And it only ended on a negative note because of Covid. If Hillary had been elected in 2016 she would have ended on a negative note, too.
-And the accusations against Trump from the very beginning were likewise unprecedented. Trump had never been called a "racist" in his entire life, and in fact had supported black civil rights organizations, appeared positively on such programs as Oprah's, and The View, receiving nothing but praise. Until he announced for president. Then suddenly he was a racist, homophobe, anti-woman, and just about any kind of negative thing that could be imagined. Of course, being the outspoken person that he is, he gave the talking heads and politicians plenty of grist for their defamation mills.
+But in 2024, what other choice was there besides Trump? Biden was a damaged man, who was not entirely mentally competent even during the 2020 campaign, and after he was elected became even less so until we saw what he had become during that disastrous "debate" with Trump. And the person he chose as his running mate, to be a heartbeat away from the presidency? Is there anyone, other than a Democrat sycophant, who truly believed Kamala Harris is capable of serving as President? But besides that, just how "democratic" was her rise from vice presidential candidate to the top of the ticket? Not very democratic at all, but if the Democrat party had only acknowledged early enough just how damaged Joe Biden was, they might have had an actual democratic process to choose her, instead of the farce of her "ordination" that occurred.
-And then we have the media. The only mainstream media organization that would give Trump any kind of break when it came to reporting on the campaign was Fox News. And Fox News is a hiss and byword among the Democrats as a joke of a news group. As for the rest, they were all clearly and unquestionably against Trump and everything he stood for. All of them, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and MSNBC, stood foursquare and without the slightest hesitation for Joe Biden as first the most wonderful candidate for president and then the greatest president ever elected. Biden's most ardent supporter, media personality Joe Scarborough made this impassioned defense of Biden, after supposedly having spent some time with the president: “I've said it for years now: he's cogent. But I undersold him when I said he was cogent. He's far beyond cogent. In fact, I think he's better than he's ever been intellectually, analytically. …This version of Biden … is the best Biden ever. Not a close second. And I've known him for years. ... If it weren't the truth, I wouldn't say it.” And then we saw Biden’s pathetic and heart-rending debate performance with Trump, after which Biden’s wife Jill praised him as if he were a toddler: “Joe, you did such a great job, you answered every question, you knew all the answers!” This was the man who was the best choice for President? If he was "the best Biden ever," what does that say for his political career before becoming president?
+So ultimately we got Harris vs Trump, and what proof did we have that Harris could serve effectively? None at all, while Trump had already served a term as president, and none of the horrors the Democrats predicted would take place if he was elected actually came to pass. It should have been clear from the start that the only safe choice was Trump.
 After Biden's negative mental state became clear, ABC News was involved in making Kamala Harris look far better than she actually was, by heavily editing the interview they conducted with her. When successfully sued for this bias, it became clear that she didn't know what she was talking about half the time. And without that heavy editing she was obviously and clearly incompetent for the job of president. And since ABC saw the poor quality of candidate she was in actuality, yet still colluded to try to make her seem competent, how can we ever trust them again?
@@ Line 13: / Line 19: @@
 The degree of lawfare that has been directed at Trump has been unprecented. They impeached him twice, but failed to remove him from office. He was indicted for patently ridiculous reasons in New York and Georgia. The 34 "felonies" he was convicted of and thereafter constantly brought up by his opponents were for crimes that are just normal business operations if done by anyone else. He was fined an utterly impossible amount of the money for these imagined crimes, nearly half a billion dollars, that even the liberal courts of New York found to be unconstitutional. The fact that the indictments in New York were entirely politically motivated is obvious from the fact that the prosecutor stated from the outset of her term that she was out to "get" Trump.
-And consider, too, what we have discovered about the Biden administration's interference with the free speech rights of all those who opposed them. After Elon Musk bought Twitter it was revealed that the FBI had been deeply and secretly involved in colluding with Twitter management, suppressing anyone who spoke "misinformation" against the administration and its policies. And then we learned from Mark Zuckerberg himself that Facebook and the rest of Alphabet's social media platforms had been cooperating with the Biden administration to do what Twitter had been doing. Zuckerberg apologized and said they wouldn't do it again, but can we believe him? And finally in the past week YouTube has admitted that they were doing exactly the same thing at the Biden administration's behest. One might ask, is it not fascists who seek to suppress and punish unapproved speech? The answer is, yes, fascists are famous for this, and what does this tell you about the Biden administration and the Democrats? So what are we to think about the Democrats and their supporters in the media calling Trump a fascist? This is called "projection," which is to accuse one's opponents of doing the exact same thing one is doing.
+And consider, too, what we have discovered about the Biden administration's interference with the free speech rights of all those who opposed them. After Elon Musk bought Twitter it was revealed that the FBI had been deeply and secretly involved in colluding with Twitter management, suppressing anyone who spoke "misinformation" against the administration and its policies. And then we learned from Mark Zuckerberg himself that Facebook and the rest of Alphabet's social media platforms had been cooperating with the Biden administration to do what Twitter had been doing. Zuckerberg apologized and said they wouldn't do it again, but can we believe him? And finally YouTube admitted that they were doing exactly the same thing at the Biden administration's behest.
 What of the attempts to assassinate Trump? One nearly succeeded, and the other was discovered just minutes before the assassin was in range to fire. How many other presidents or presidential candidates in the past fifty years faced such mortal danger? Did Joe Biden? Barack Obama? No, of course not.
-After all this, the Democrats and their fellow-travelers still have the gall to claim that it is Trump who is the fascist? That Trump is a danger to "our Democracy"? If it is not obvious to you that it is Trump's opponents who are acting quite fascistic and are a serious danger to our Republic, then I have a bridge to sell you.
+After all this, the Democrats and their fellow-travelers still have the gall to claim that it is Trump who is the fascist? That Trump is a danger to "our Democracy"? If it is not obvious to you that it is Trump's opponents who are acting quite fascistic and are a serious danger to our democratic Republic, then I have a bridge to sell you.
 -----
 Back to [[Political Writings]]