Bobby. wrote on Apr 15^th, 2026 at 11:12am:


Do you blame me? 

You always attack anything from the left, from policy, people and supporters, while at the same time you shill for the right and even specific coalition politicians and policies.

You only seem to wheel out the "I vote independent" when what you've supported fails and it's time to accept accountability for what you've preached.  But no, like Scoot, you try to side step and make it out like you've always opposed xyz or supported something else.

flip

Bobby. wrote on Apr 15^th, 2026 at 12:50pm:


Iran tried to nationalize their oil industry for the benefit of their own citizens and in 1953 the CIA aided and abetted by the UK launched a coup and overthrew the democratically elected president and replaced him with a US stooge until 1979 when that crook was deposed and replaced with the first Ayatollah

So I don't like our chances of ever benefiting from our own resources. It's forbidden

Bobby. wrote on Apr 15^th, 2026 at 1:01pm:


they don't care as long as they get their taxes from it

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 15^th, 2026 at 11:53am:


Bobby?

Bobby. wrote on Apr 15^th, 2026 at 12:50pm:


While I'll give you credit for at least looking it up, it's pretty telling that you had to ask AI after the fact rather than knowing any of this before you walked into a voting booth.

That's not a minor detail, that's the whole problem.

You keep framing this as if Trump was some bold outlier fixing a broken system, when in reality he ignored virtually every piece of expert advice put in front of him and delivered exactly the outcomes he was warned about.

The tariffs weren't some genius protectionist masterstroke, they were a blunt instrument. American consumers paid more, businesses paid more, supply chains tightened, labour shortages worsened after mass deportations, and instead of a manufacturing renaissance you got stagnation. No surge in jobs, no meaningful reshoring, just higher costs and a shrinking trajectory. That wasn't unforeseeable, it was predicted.

Same story with Iran. He tore up a functioning agreement, one that the IAEA confirmed was actively constraining Iran's nuclear program, not because it failed, but because it had Obama's name on it. His entire negotiating strategy then defaulted to threats and escalation, which predictably collapsed. When advisors, including military leadership, warned him about the cost, the regional fallout, and the risk to the Strait of Hormuz, he didn't adjust course, he removed the people giving the advice.

That's not strength, that's ego.

And when you bypass Congress to launch military action, you don't get to spread the blame around later. The legality becomes questionable, but the responsibility is crystal clear. The downstream effects, fuel volatility, fertiliser costs, global food pressure, that all traces back to decisions that didn't need to be made in the first place.

He didn't have to act. That's the point. Stability was already there, imperfect but functional. He chose disruption for the sake of it.

So yes, he did the "opposite" of previous governments. And the result is exactly what happens when you ignore expertise, sideline institutions, and run policy through personal grievance.

And let's not rewrite history now. You don't get to spend years cheerleading him, posting the usual AI-generated messianic nonsense about how he'd save the world, then suddenly pivot to "I'm just an independent thinker" the moment it all goes sideways. That's the same accountability dodge we've seen a hundred times.

Votes have consequences. Real ones. Economic, geopolitical, human.

If you're going to take part in that process, the bare minimum is being informed before the fact, not scrambling to justify it afterwards while pointing at distractions like culture war rubbish.

Because that's exactly how people end up voting against their own interests while thinking they're doing the opposite.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 15^th, 2026 at 1:59pm:


Yet you keep supporting, and one would presume voting for, those who aren't even trying, while attacking those who do, and anyone who supports them.

It's almost as if you don't have any right to sook about this, isn't it...

It's all just a way to "they're just as bad as each other" your way out of having to face up to how you keep backing those making the problems worse and attacking those proposing actual solutions.