Now the QtRUmplicans led by the likes of the former guy and tuQer Qarlson are tripping all over themselves to defend RUssia and denigrate President Joe Biden.
I haven’t seen Tucker or Trump say anything pro-Russia. Tucker has been critical of Biden’s response, but that’s not the same as defending Russia.
I haven’t heard anything in the last few weeks from Trump, but his stance has always been Putin wouldn’t try stuff like this if he was president. Believe him or not, that’s not the same as defending Russia. Havent read Dreher, but I will later. I doubt he is pro Russia invading Ukraine though. Probably just critical of the response or saying we should stay out of it, which is not the same as defending Russia.
I'm sorry, you're wrong. Read the tweet from Candace Owens that I posted. Is that not pro-Russia?
Read it all if you want the view straight from the Kremlin.
For Russia, the core question is NATO. NATO is the post-war military alliance created in 1949 to keep the Soviets from invading Western Europe. And it worked pretty well for about 40 years. The Soviet Union has not existed in more than three decades; it’s part of history now. And yet NATO very much lives on, better funded than ever. It’s an army without a purpose. So at this point, NATO exists primarily to torment Vladimir Putin who, whatever his many faults, has no intention of invading Western Europe. Vladimir Putin does not want Belgium. He just wants to keep his western borders secure.
That’s why he doesn’t want Ukraine to join NATO. And that makes sense. Imagine how we would feel if Mexico and Canada became satellites of China. We wouldn’t like that at all. In Russia’s case, this is an existential question. A NATO takeover of Ukraine would compromise Russia’s access to its Sevastopol Naval Base – that’s the site of the Russia Black Sea’s fleet and one of the country’s only connections to international waters. In the words of Russia scholar Richard Sakwa, if Russia lost the Sevastopol Naval Base, it would be "the biggest military geopolitical defeat of Russia in the last thousand years."
I couldn’t read your quote from Owens.
That quote from Tucker was from December, so obviously not about the current invasion. I haven’t seen him support this invasion. His stance is pretty much why should we care, how will helping Ukraine help America? And if Trump was president Putin wouldn’t be doing this. And this is what Ukraine paid Hunter for. I don’t agree with any of those points. But again, it’s not supporting the invasion or current situation. His stance is I don’t care, not “go Russia!”
How is this rationalization any different than what would be expected of a confirmed Russian agent?
That still comes across to me as indifferent and why should we care more than being pro-Russia. I disagree, we should care. But even if you’re right, and Tucker is all pro-Russia invading and taking Ukraine, my point was I don’t know any Americans who feel that way. I should have responded by asking who is a QtRumplican? Because Bentley said QtRumplicans like Russia now. That word gets thrown around a lot and often I see it as meaning anyone who voted for trump, or is Republican, or sometimes even simply not a Biden supporter. But in any case, covers tens of millions of Americans. I see a lot of people arguing why we should care about Ukraine, but I don’t personally know a single person who doesn’t and isn’t worried about what can happen. And if that many people really didn’t care, we all would know quite a few.
If that comes across to you as indifferent, your mental gymnastics are impressive AF.
He literally says what do Americans have to gain with a war from Russia. You don’t need any mental gymnastics to conclude Tucker only wants to act if it benefits America/him. Just need to read or listen to what he says. He only cares about America and himself, not Russia or Ukraine. No kind of gymnastics, physical or mental, required.
Now the QtRUmplicans led by the likes of the former guy and tuQer Qarlson are tripping all over themselves to defend RUssia and denigrate President Joe Biden.
I haven’t seen Tucker or Trump say anything pro-Russia. Tucker has been critical of Biden’s response, but that’s not the same as defending Russia.
I haven’t heard anything in the last few weeks from Trump, but his stance has always been Putin wouldn’t try stuff like this if he was president. Believe him or not, that’s not the same as defending Russia. Havent read Dreher, but I will later. I doubt he is pro Russia invading Ukraine though. Probably just critical of the response or saying we should stay out of it, which is not the same as defending Russia.
I'm sorry, you're wrong. Read the tweet from Candace Owens that I posted. Is that not pro-Russia?
Read it all if you want the view straight from the Kremlin.
For Russia, the core question is NATO. NATO is the post-war military alliance created in 1949 to keep the Soviets from invading Western Europe. And it worked pretty well for about 40 years. The Soviet Union has not existed in more than three decades; it’s part of history now. And yet NATO very much lives on, better funded than ever. It’s an army without a purpose. So at this point, NATO exists primarily to torment Vladimir Putin who, whatever his many faults, has no intention of invading Western Europe. Vladimir Putin does not want Belgium. He just wants to keep his western borders secure.
That’s why he doesn’t want Ukraine to join NATO. And that makes sense. Imagine how we would feel if Mexico and Canada became satellites of China. We wouldn’t like that at all. In Russia’s case, this is an existential question. A NATO takeover of Ukraine would compromise Russia’s access to its Sevastopol Naval Base – that’s the site of the Russia Black Sea’s fleet and one of the country’s only connections to international waters. In the words of Russia scholar Richard Sakwa, if Russia lost the Sevastopol Naval Base, it would be "the biggest military geopolitical defeat of Russia in the last thousand years."
I couldn’t read your quote from Owens.
That quote from Tucker was from December, so obviously not about the current invasion. I haven’t seen him support this invasion. His stance is pretty much why should we care, how will helping Ukraine help America? And if Trump was president Putin wouldn’t be doing this. And this is what Ukraine paid Hunter for. I don’t agree with any of those points. But again, it’s not supporting the invasion or current situation. His stance is I don’t care, not “go Russia!”
How is this rationalization any different than what would be expected of a confirmed Russian agent?
That still comes across to me as indifferent and why should we care more than being pro-Russia. I disagree, we should care. But even if you’re right, and Tucker is all pro-Russia invading and taking Ukraine, my point was I don’t know any Americans who feel that way. I should have responded by asking who is a QtRumplican? Because Bentley said QtRumplicans like Russia now. That word gets thrown around a lot and often I see it as meaning anyone who voted for trump, or is Republican, or sometimes even simply not a Biden supporter. But in any case, covers tens of millions of Americans. I see a lot of people arguing why we should care about Ukraine, but I don’t personally know a single person who doesn’t and isn’t worried about what can happen. And if that many people really didn’t care, we all would know quite a few.
If that comes across to you as indifferent, your mental gymnastics are impressive AF.
He literally says what do Americans have to gain with a war from Russia. You don’t need any mental gymnastics to conclude Tucker only wants to act if it benefits America/him. Just need to read or listen to what he says. He only cares about America and himself, not Russia or Ukraine. No kind of gymnastics, physical or mental, required.
tucker isn't pro russian. he's anti-democrat. if biden said he was going to let ukraine deal with its own problems, his segment would have been the opposite, that we need to be the american beacon of hope our forefathers envisioned, where we helped our neighbours in trouble, stood up to bullies, etc, etc.
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
The only good thing I see in any of this concerning China is that they’re up to their balls in omicron from the virus they themselves created right now, so the timing isn’t ideal for them to invade Taiwan. I don’t think that means they won’t, but maybe it hampers their plans a bit?
Fuck me, the way these fucking threads pivot and turn into trash is ridiculous. And we wonder why Asian Americans in this country are getting assaulted on the street.
Now the QtRUmplicans led by the likes of the former guy and tuQer Qarlson are tripping all over themselves to defend RUssia and denigrate President Joe Biden.
I haven’t seen Tucker or Trump say anything pro-Russia. Tucker has been critical of Biden’s response, but that’s not the same as defending Russia.
I haven’t heard anything in the last few weeks from Trump, but his stance has always been Putin wouldn’t try stuff like this if he was president. Believe him or not, that’s not the same as defending Russia. Havent read Dreher, but I will later. I doubt he is pro Russia invading Ukraine though. Probably just critical of the response or saying we should stay out of it, which is not the same as defending Russia.
I'm sorry, you're wrong. Read the tweet from Candace Owens that I posted. Is that not pro-Russia?
Read it all if you want the view straight from the Kremlin.
For Russia, the core question is NATO. NATO is the post-war military alliance created in 1949 to keep the Soviets from invading Western Europe. And it worked pretty well for about 40 years. The Soviet Union has not existed in more than three decades; it’s part of history now. And yet NATO very much lives on, better funded than ever. It’s an army without a purpose. So at this point, NATO exists primarily to torment Vladimir Putin who, whatever his many faults, has no intention of invading Western Europe. Vladimir Putin does not want Belgium. He just wants to keep his western borders secure.
That’s why he doesn’t want Ukraine to join NATO. And that makes sense. Imagine how we would feel if Mexico and Canada became satellites of China. We wouldn’t like that at all. In Russia’s case, this is an existential question. A NATO takeover of Ukraine would compromise Russia’s access to its Sevastopol Naval Base – that’s the site of the Russia Black Sea’s fleet and one of the country’s only connections to international waters. In the words of Russia scholar Richard Sakwa, if Russia lost the Sevastopol Naval Base, it would be "the biggest military geopolitical defeat of Russia in the last thousand years."
I couldn’t read your quote from Owens.
That quote from Tucker was from December, so obviously not about the current invasion. I haven’t seen him support this invasion. His stance is pretty much why should we care, how will helping Ukraine help America? And if Trump was president Putin wouldn’t be doing this. And this is what Ukraine paid Hunter for. I don’t agree with any of those points. But again, it’s not supporting the invasion or current situation. His stance is I don’t care, not “go Russia!”
How is this rationalization any different than what would be expected of a confirmed Russian agent?
That still comes across to me as indifferent and why should we care more than being pro-Russia. I disagree, we should care. But even if you’re right, and Tucker is all pro-Russia invading and taking Ukraine, my point was I don’t know any Americans who feel that way. I should have responded by asking who is a QtRumplican? Because Bentley said QtRumplicans like Russia now. That word gets thrown around a lot and often I see it as meaning anyone who voted for trump, or is Republican, or sometimes even simply not a Biden supporter. But in any case, covers tens of millions of Americans. I see a lot of people arguing why we should care about Ukraine, but I don’t personally know a single person who doesn’t and isn’t worried about what can happen. And if that many people really didn’t care, we all would know quite a few.
If that comes across to you as indifferent, your mental gymnastics are impressive AF.
He literally says what do Americans have to gain with a war from Russia. You don’t need any mental gymnastics to conclude Tucker only wants to act if it benefits America/him. Just need to read or listen to what he says. He only cares about America and himself, not Russia or Ukraine. No kind of gymnastics, physical or mental, required.
It clearly benefits America to assist Ukraine. One would have to completely misunderstand the power America wields and the power of liberal democracies in order to argue it does not benefit the US. So arguing that the US should roll over for Putin is precisely the same as supporting Russia, particularly when aping Putin's arguments.
Also, don't fall into the trap of saying "Americans have to gain with a war from Russia". We aren't going to a hot war with Russia. Our strategy would be no different than when the Soviets assisted the Vietcong and we assisted the Afghans. So again, Tucker is creating a straw man, using Kremlin talking points, to argue that it's not our problem. It is our problem. Democracy is our problem. European borders are our problem. Potential for Putin to try to re-create the Soviet Empire is our problem.
Now the QtRUmplicans led by the likes of the former guy and tuQer Qarlson are tripping all over themselves to defend RUssia and denigrate President Joe Biden.
I haven’t seen Tucker or Trump say anything pro-Russia. Tucker has been critical of Biden’s response, but that’s not the same as defending Russia.
I haven’t heard anything in the last few weeks from Trump, but his stance has always been Putin wouldn’t try stuff like this if he was president. Believe him or not, that’s not the same as defending Russia. Havent read Dreher, but I will later. I doubt he is pro Russia invading Ukraine though. Probably just critical of the response or saying we should stay out of it, which is not the same as defending Russia.
I'm sorry, you're wrong. Read the tweet from Candace Owens that I posted. Is that not pro-Russia?
Read it all if you want the view straight from the Kremlin.
For Russia, the core question is NATO. NATO is the post-war military alliance created in 1949 to keep the Soviets from invading Western Europe. And it worked pretty well for about 40 years. The Soviet Union has not existed in more than three decades; it’s part of history now. And yet NATO very much lives on, better funded than ever. It’s an army without a purpose. So at this point, NATO exists primarily to torment Vladimir Putin who, whatever his many faults, has no intention of invading Western Europe. Vladimir Putin does not want Belgium. He just wants to keep his western borders secure.
That’s why he doesn’t want Ukraine to join NATO. And that makes sense. Imagine how we would feel if Mexico and Canada became satellites of China. We wouldn’t like that at all. In Russia’s case, this is an existential question. A NATO takeover of Ukraine would compromise Russia’s access to its Sevastopol Naval Base – that’s the site of the Russia Black Sea’s fleet and one of the country’s only connections to international waters. In the words of Russia scholar Richard Sakwa, if Russia lost the Sevastopol Naval Base, it would be "the biggest military geopolitical defeat of Russia in the last thousand years."
I couldn’t read your quote from Owens.
That quote from Tucker was from December, so obviously not about the current invasion. I haven’t seen him support this invasion. His stance is pretty much why should we care, how will helping Ukraine help America? And if Trump was president Putin wouldn’t be doing this. And this is what Ukraine paid Hunter for. I don’t agree with any of those points. But again, it’s not supporting the invasion or current situation. His stance is I don’t care, not “go Russia!”
How is this rationalization any different than what would be expected of a confirmed Russian agent?
That still comes across to me as indifferent and why should we care more than being pro-Russia. I disagree, we should care. But even if you’re right, and Tucker is all pro-Russia invading and taking Ukraine, my point was I don’t know any Americans who feel that way. I should have responded by asking who is a QtRumplican? Because Bentley said QtRumplicans like Russia now. That word gets thrown around a lot and often I see it as meaning anyone who voted for trump, or is Republican, or sometimes even simply not a Biden supporter. But in any case, covers tens of millions of Americans. I see a lot of people arguing why we should care about Ukraine, but I don’t personally know a single person who doesn’t and isn’t worried about what can happen. And if that many people really didn’t care, we all would know quite a few.
If that comes across to you as indifferent, your mental gymnastics are impressive AF.
He literally says what do Americans have to gain with a war from Russia. You don’t need any mental gymnastics to conclude Tucker only wants to act if it benefits America/him. Just need to read or listen to what he says. He only cares about America and himself, not Russia or Ukraine. No kind of gymnastics, physical or mental, required.
name 3 things tucker has been right about, ever.
he is a talking head on a known biased network. he is a contrarian. all of them. glen beck, tucker, ingraham. judge pirro, all of them are contrarians and have the same schtick. ask questions and then try to answer them with some skewed version of reality. if things were flipped their position would be the exact opposite of what they are now. if a democrat is in office, they side with russia. if a republican is in office they pull the patriotism card and call those that are opposed to war the real enemy. it is propaganda and it is as old as time. they do not give the viewer facts, they try to persuade the viewer that their views are the truth.
but seriously though. name three things tucker has been right about. i would have asked you to name one, but anybody, including tucker, can get one right over the course of an entire career.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Now the QtRUmplicans led by the likes of the former guy and tuQer Qarlson are tripping all over themselves to defend RUssia and denigrate President Joe Biden.
I haven’t seen Tucker or Trump say anything pro-Russia. Tucker has been critical of Biden’s response, but that’s not the same as defending Russia.
I haven’t heard anything in the last few weeks from Trump, but his stance has always been Putin wouldn’t try stuff like this if he was president. Believe him or not, that’s not the same as defending Russia. Havent read Dreher, but I will later. I doubt he is pro Russia invading Ukraine though. Probably just critical of the response or saying we should stay out of it, which is not the same as defending Russia.
I'm sorry, you're wrong. Read the tweet from Candace Owens that I posted. Is that not pro-Russia?
Read it all if you want the view straight from the Kremlin.
For Russia, the core question is NATO. NATO is the post-war military alliance created in 1949 to keep the Soviets from invading Western Europe. And it worked pretty well for about 40 years. The Soviet Union has not existed in more than three decades; it’s part of history now. And yet NATO very much lives on, better funded than ever. It’s an army without a purpose. So at this point, NATO exists primarily to torment Vladimir Putin who, whatever his many faults, has no intention of invading Western Europe. Vladimir Putin does not want Belgium. He just wants to keep his western borders secure.
That’s why he doesn’t want Ukraine to join NATO. And that makes sense. Imagine how we would feel if Mexico and Canada became satellites of China. We wouldn’t like that at all. In Russia’s case, this is an existential question. A NATO takeover of Ukraine would compromise Russia’s access to its Sevastopol Naval Base – that’s the site of the Russia Black Sea’s fleet and one of the country’s only connections to international waters. In the words of Russia scholar Richard Sakwa, if Russia lost the Sevastopol Naval Base, it would be "the biggest military geopolitical defeat of Russia in the last thousand years."
I couldn’t read your quote from Owens.
That quote from Tucker was from December, so obviously not about the current invasion. I haven’t seen him support this invasion. His stance is pretty much why should we care, how will helping Ukraine help America? And if Trump was president Putin wouldn’t be doing this. And this is what Ukraine paid Hunter for. I don’t agree with any of those points. But again, it’s not supporting the invasion or current situation. His stance is I don’t care, not “go Russia!”
How is this rationalization any different than what would be expected of a confirmed Russian agent?
That still comes across to me as indifferent and why should we care more than being pro-Russia. I disagree, we should care. But even if you’re right, and Tucker is all pro-Russia invading and taking Ukraine, my point was I don’t know any Americans who feel that way. I should have responded by asking who is a QtRumplican? Because Bentley said QtRumplicans like Russia now. That word gets thrown around a lot and often I see it as meaning anyone who voted for trump, or is Republican, or sometimes even simply not a Biden supporter. But in any case, covers tens of millions of Americans. I see a lot of people arguing why we should care about Ukraine, but I don’t personally know a single person who doesn’t and isn’t worried about what can happen. And if that many people really didn’t care, we all would know quite a few.
If that comes across to you as indifferent, your mental gymnastics are impressive AF.
He literally says what do Americans have to gain with a war from Russia. You don’t need any mental gymnastics to conclude Tucker only wants to act if it benefits America/him. Just need to read or listen to what he says. He only cares about America and himself, not Russia or Ukraine. No kind of gymnastics, physical or mental, required.
You believe Tucker Carlson cares about America?
That's precious.
I said America/himself. He cares what’s good for him but plays it off as what’s good for America.
Now the QtRUmplicans led by the likes of the former guy and tuQer Qarlson are tripping all over themselves to defend RUssia and denigrate President Joe Biden.
I haven’t seen Tucker or Trump say anything pro-Russia. Tucker has been critical of Biden’s response, but that’s not the same as defending Russia.
I haven’t heard anything in the last few weeks from Trump, but his stance has always been Putin wouldn’t try stuff like this if he was president. Believe him or not, that’s not the same as defending Russia. Havent read Dreher, but I will later. I doubt he is pro Russia invading Ukraine though. Probably just critical of the response or saying we should stay out of it, which is not the same as defending Russia.
I'm sorry, you're wrong. Read the tweet from Candace Owens that I posted. Is that not pro-Russia?
Read it all if you want the view straight from the Kremlin.
For Russia, the core question is NATO. NATO is the post-war military alliance created in 1949 to keep the Soviets from invading Western Europe. And it worked pretty well for about 40 years. The Soviet Union has not existed in more than three decades; it’s part of history now. And yet NATO very much lives on, better funded than ever. It’s an army without a purpose. So at this point, NATO exists primarily to torment Vladimir Putin who, whatever his many faults, has no intention of invading Western Europe. Vladimir Putin does not want Belgium. He just wants to keep his western borders secure.
That’s why he doesn’t want Ukraine to join NATO. And that makes sense. Imagine how we would feel if Mexico and Canada became satellites of China. We wouldn’t like that at all. In Russia’s case, this is an existential question. A NATO takeover of Ukraine would compromise Russia’s access to its Sevastopol Naval Base – that’s the site of the Russia Black Sea’s fleet and one of the country’s only connections to international waters. In the words of Russia scholar Richard Sakwa, if Russia lost the Sevastopol Naval Base, it would be "the biggest military geopolitical defeat of Russia in the last thousand years."
I couldn’t read your quote from Owens.
That quote from Tucker was from December, so obviously not about the current invasion. I haven’t seen him support this invasion. His stance is pretty much why should we care, how will helping Ukraine help America? And if Trump was president Putin wouldn’t be doing this. And this is what Ukraine paid Hunter for. I don’t agree with any of those points. But again, it’s not supporting the invasion or current situation. His stance is I don’t care, not “go Russia!”
How is this rationalization any different than what would be expected of a confirmed Russian agent?
That still comes across to me as indifferent and why should we care more than being pro-Russia. I disagree, we should care. But even if you’re right, and Tucker is all pro-Russia invading and taking Ukraine, my point was I don’t know any Americans who feel that way. I should have responded by asking who is a QtRumplican? Because Bentley said QtRumplicans like Russia now. That word gets thrown around a lot and often I see it as meaning anyone who voted for trump, or is Republican, or sometimes even simply not a Biden supporter. But in any case, covers tens of millions of Americans. I see a lot of people arguing why we should care about Ukraine, but I don’t personally know a single person who doesn’t and isn’t worried about what can happen. And if that many people really didn’t care, we all would know quite a few.
If that comes across to you as indifferent, your mental gymnastics are impressive AF.
He literally says what do Americans have to gain with a war from Russia. You don’t need any mental gymnastics to conclude Tucker only wants to act if it benefits America/him. Just need to read or listen to what he says. He only cares about America and himself, not Russia or Ukraine. No kind of gymnastics, physical or mental, required.
It clearly benefits America to assist Ukraine. One would have to completely misunderstand the power America wields and the power of liberal democracies in order to argue it does not benefit the US. So arguing that the US should roll over for Putin is precisely the same as supporting Russia, particularly when aping Putin's arguments.
Also, don't fall into the trap of saying "Americans have to gain with a war from Russia". We aren't going to a hot war with Russia. Our strategy would be no different than when the Soviets assisted the Vietcong and we assisted the Afghans. So again, Tucker is creating a straw man, using Kremlin talking points, to argue that it's not our problem. It is our problem. Democracy is our problem. European borders are our problem. Potential for Putin to try to re-create the Soviet Empire is our problem.
I agree with that second paragraph (and most of the first). I wasn’t defending anything Tucker said, just pointing it out.
Now the QtRUmplicans led by the likes of the former guy and tuQer Qarlson are tripping all over themselves to defend RUssia and denigrate President Joe Biden.
I haven’t seen Tucker or Trump say anything pro-Russia. Tucker has been critical of Biden’s response, but that’s not the same as defending Russia.
I haven’t heard anything in the last few weeks from Trump, but his stance has always been Putin wouldn’t try stuff like this if he was president. Believe him or not, that’s not the same as defending Russia. Havent read Dreher, but I will later. I doubt he is pro Russia invading Ukraine though. Probably just critical of the response or saying we should stay out of it, which is not the same as defending Russia.
I'm sorry, you're wrong. Read the tweet from Candace Owens that I posted. Is that not pro-Russia?
Read it all if you want the view straight from the Kremlin.
For Russia, the core question is NATO. NATO is the post-war military alliance created in 1949 to keep the Soviets from invading Western Europe. And it worked pretty well for about 40 years. The Soviet Union has not existed in more than three decades; it’s part of history now. And yet NATO very much lives on, better funded than ever. It’s an army without a purpose. So at this point, NATO exists primarily to torment Vladimir Putin who, whatever his many faults, has no intention of invading Western Europe. Vladimir Putin does not want Belgium. He just wants to keep his western borders secure.
That’s why he doesn’t want Ukraine to join NATO. And that makes sense. Imagine how we would feel if Mexico and Canada became satellites of China. We wouldn’t like that at all. In Russia’s case, this is an existential question. A NATO takeover of Ukraine would compromise Russia’s access to its Sevastopol Naval Base – that’s the site of the Russia Black Sea’s fleet and one of the country’s only connections to international waters. In the words of Russia scholar Richard Sakwa, if Russia lost the Sevastopol Naval Base, it would be "the biggest military geopolitical defeat of Russia in the last thousand years."
I couldn’t read your quote from Owens.
That quote from Tucker was from December, so obviously not about the current invasion. I haven’t seen him support this invasion. His stance is pretty much why should we care, how will helping Ukraine help America? And if Trump was president Putin wouldn’t be doing this. And this is what Ukraine paid Hunter for. I don’t agree with any of those points. But again, it’s not supporting the invasion or current situation. His stance is I don’t care, not “go Russia!”
How is this rationalization any different than what would be expected of a confirmed Russian agent?
That still comes across to me as indifferent and why should we care more than being pro-Russia. I disagree, we should care. But even if you’re right, and Tucker is all pro-Russia invading and taking Ukraine, my point was I don’t know any Americans who feel that way. I should have responded by asking who is a QtRumplican? Because Bentley said QtRumplicans like Russia now. That word gets thrown around a lot and often I see it as meaning anyone who voted for trump, or is Republican, or sometimes even simply not a Biden supporter. But in any case, covers tens of millions of Americans. I see a lot of people arguing why we should care about Ukraine, but I don’t personally know a single person who doesn’t and isn’t worried about what can happen. And if that many people really didn’t care, we all would know quite a few.
If that comes across to you as indifferent, your mental gymnastics are impressive AF.
He literally says what do Americans have to gain with a war from Russia. You don’t need any mental gymnastics to conclude Tucker only wants to act if it benefits America/him. Just need to read or listen to what he says. He only cares about America and himself, not Russia or Ukraine. No kind of gymnastics, physical or mental, required.
It clearly benefits America to assist Ukraine. One would have to completely misunderstand the power America wields and the power of liberal democracies in order to argue it does not benefit the US. So arguing that the US should roll over for Putin is precisely the same as supporting Russia, particularly when aping Putin's arguments.
Also, don't fall into the trap of saying "Americans have to gain with a war from Russia". We aren't going to a hot war with Russia. Our strategy would be no different than when the Soviets assisted the Vietcong and we assisted the Afghans. So again, Tucker is creating a straw man, using Kremlin talking points, to argue that it's not our problem. It is our problem. Democracy is our problem. European borders are our problem. Potential for Putin to try to re-create the Soviet Empire is our problem.
I agree with that second paragraph (and most of the first). I wasn’t defending anything Tucker said, just pointing it out.
I understand, and I understand that you're not in the Tucker camp. I just think you are minimizing the effect of his words. The goal doesn't have to be to cheer Putin. Simply providing rationalization for the aggression while simultaneously saying we need to stay out, has the exact effect as cheerleading.
Now the QtRUmplicans led by the likes of the former guy and tuQer Qarlson are tripping all over themselves to defend RUssia and denigrate President Joe Biden.
I haven’t seen Tucker or Trump say anything pro-Russia. Tucker has been critical of Biden’s response, but that’s not the same as defending Russia.
I haven’t heard anything in the last few weeks from Trump, but his stance has always been Putin wouldn’t try stuff like this if he was president. Believe him or not, that’s not the same as defending Russia. Havent read Dreher, but I will later. I doubt he is pro Russia invading Ukraine though. Probably just critical of the response or saying we should stay out of it, which is not the same as defending Russia.
I'm sorry, you're wrong. Read the tweet from Candace Owens that I posted. Is that not pro-Russia?
Read it all if you want the view straight from the Kremlin.
For Russia, the core question is NATO. NATO is the post-war military alliance created in 1949 to keep the Soviets from invading Western Europe. And it worked pretty well for about 40 years. The Soviet Union has not existed in more than three decades; it’s part of history now. And yet NATO very much lives on, better funded than ever. It’s an army without a purpose. So at this point, NATO exists primarily to torment Vladimir Putin who, whatever his many faults, has no intention of invading Western Europe. Vladimir Putin does not want Belgium. He just wants to keep his western borders secure.
That’s why he doesn’t want Ukraine to join NATO. And that makes sense. Imagine how we would feel if Mexico and Canada became satellites of China. We wouldn’t like that at all. In Russia’s case, this is an existential question. A NATO takeover of Ukraine would compromise Russia’s access to its Sevastopol Naval Base – that’s the site of the Russia Black Sea’s fleet and one of the country’s only connections to international waters. In the words of Russia scholar Richard Sakwa, if Russia lost the Sevastopol Naval Base, it would be "the biggest military geopolitical defeat of Russia in the last thousand years."
I couldn’t read your quote from Owens.
That quote from Tucker was from December, so obviously not about the current invasion. I haven’t seen him support this invasion. His stance is pretty much why should we care, how will helping Ukraine help America? And if Trump was president Putin wouldn’t be doing this. And this is what Ukraine paid Hunter for. I don’t agree with any of those points. But again, it’s not supporting the invasion or current situation. His stance is I don’t care, not “go Russia!”
How is this rationalization any different than what would be expected of a confirmed Russian agent?
That still comes across to me as indifferent and why should we care more than being pro-Russia. I disagree, we should care. But even if you’re right, and Tucker is all pro-Russia invading and taking Ukraine, my point was I don’t know any Americans who feel that way. I should have responded by asking who is a QtRumplican? Because Bentley said QtRumplicans like Russia now. That word gets thrown around a lot and often I see it as meaning anyone who voted for trump, or is Republican, or sometimes even simply not a Biden supporter. But in any case, covers tens of millions of Americans. I see a lot of people arguing why we should care about Ukraine, but I don’t personally know a single person who doesn’t and isn’t worried about what can happen. And if that many people really didn’t care, we all would know quite a few.
If that comes across to you as indifferent, your mental gymnastics are impressive AF.
He literally says what do Americans have to gain with a war from Russia. You don’t need any mental gymnastics to conclude Tucker only wants to act if it benefits America/him. Just need to read or listen to what he says. He only cares about America and himself, not Russia or Ukraine. No kind of gymnastics, physical or mental, required.
You believe Tucker Carlson cares about America?
That's precious.
I said America/himself. He cares what’s good for him but plays it off as what’s good for America.
At the risk of repeating myself, your mental gymnastics are impressive AF.
The only good thing I see in any of this concerning China is that they’re up to their balls in omicron from the virus they themselves created right now, so the timing isn’t ideal for them to invade Taiwan. I don’t think that means they won’t, but maybe it hampers their plans a bit?
Yikes for the second time in 24h
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
Now the QtRUmplicans led by the likes of the former guy and tuQer Qarlson are tripping all over themselves to defend RUssia and denigrate President Joe Biden.
I haven’t seen Tucker or Trump say anything pro-Russia. Tucker has been critical of Biden’s response, but that’s not the same as defending Russia.
I haven’t heard anything in the last few weeks from Trump, but his stance has always been Putin wouldn’t try stuff like this if he was president. Believe him or not, that’s not the same as defending Russia. Havent read Dreher, but I will later. I doubt he is pro Russia invading Ukraine though. Probably just critical of the response or saying we should stay out of it, which is not the same as defending Russia.
I'm sorry, you're wrong. Read the tweet from Candace Owens that I posted. Is that not pro-Russia?
Read it all if you want the view straight from the Kremlin.
For Russia, the core question is NATO. NATO is the post-war military alliance created in 1949 to keep the Soviets from invading Western Europe. And it worked pretty well for about 40 years. The Soviet Union has not existed in more than three decades; it’s part of history now. And yet NATO very much lives on, better funded than ever. It’s an army without a purpose. So at this point, NATO exists primarily to torment Vladimir Putin who, whatever his many faults, has no intention of invading Western Europe. Vladimir Putin does not want Belgium. He just wants to keep his western borders secure.
That’s why he doesn’t want Ukraine to join NATO. And that makes sense. Imagine how we would feel if Mexico and Canada became satellites of China. We wouldn’t like that at all. In Russia’s case, this is an existential question. A NATO takeover of Ukraine would compromise Russia’s access to its Sevastopol Naval Base – that’s the site of the Russia Black Sea’s fleet and one of the country’s only connections to international waters. In the words of Russia scholar Richard Sakwa, if Russia lost the Sevastopol Naval Base, it would be "the biggest military geopolitical defeat of Russia in the last thousand years."
I couldn’t read your quote from Owens.
That quote from Tucker was from December, so obviously not about the current invasion. I haven’t seen him support this invasion. His stance is pretty much why should we care, how will helping Ukraine help America? And if Trump was president Putin wouldn’t be doing this. And this is what Ukraine paid Hunter for. I don’t agree with any of those points. But again, it’s not supporting the invasion or current situation. His stance is I don’t care, not “go Russia!”
How is this rationalization any different than what would be expected of a confirmed Russian agent?
That still comes across to me as indifferent and why should we care more than being pro-Russia. I disagree, we should care. But even if you’re right, and Tucker is all pro-Russia invading and taking Ukraine, my point was I don’t know any Americans who feel that way. I should have responded by asking who is a QtRumplican? Because Bentley said QtRumplicans like Russia now. That word gets thrown around a lot and often I see it as meaning anyone who voted for trump, or is Republican, or sometimes even simply not a Biden supporter. But in any case, covers tens of millions of Americans. I see a lot of people arguing why we should care about Ukraine, but I don’t personally know a single person who doesn’t and isn’t worried about what can happen. And if that many people really didn’t care, we all would know quite a few.
If that comes across to you as indifferent, your mental gymnastics are impressive AF.
He literally says what do Americans have to gain with a war from Russia. You don’t need any mental gymnastics to conclude Tucker only wants to act if it benefits America/him. Just need to read or listen to what he says. He only cares about America and himself, not Russia or Ukraine. No kind of gymnastics, physical or mental, required.
He cares not one bit about America. He only cares about things that benefit him and his orange hued savior And any autocratic dictators that his orange hued savior supports.
Now the QtRUmplicans led by the likes of the former guy and tuQer Qarlson are tripping all over themselves to defend RUssia and denigrate President Joe Biden.
I haven’t seen Tucker or Trump say anything pro-Russia. Tucker has been critical of Biden’s response, but that’s not the same as defending Russia.
I haven’t heard anything in the last few weeks from Trump, but his stance has always been Putin wouldn’t try stuff like this if he was president. Believe him or not, that’s not the same as defending Russia. Havent read Dreher, but I will later. I doubt he is pro Russia invading Ukraine though. Probably just critical of the response or saying we should stay out of it, which is not the same as defending Russia.
I'm sorry, you're wrong. Read the tweet from Candace Owens that I posted. Is that not pro-Russia?
Read it all if you want the view straight from the Kremlin.
For Russia, the core question is NATO. NATO is the post-war military alliance created in 1949 to keep the Soviets from invading Western Europe. And it worked pretty well for about 40 years. The Soviet Union has not existed in more than three decades; it’s part of history now. And yet NATO very much lives on, better funded than ever. It’s an army without a purpose. So at this point, NATO exists primarily to torment Vladimir Putin who, whatever his many faults, has no intention of invading Western Europe. Vladimir Putin does not want Belgium. He just wants to keep his western borders secure.
That’s why he doesn’t want Ukraine to join NATO. And that makes sense. Imagine how we would feel if Mexico and Canada became satellites of China. We wouldn’t like that at all. In Russia’s case, this is an existential question. A NATO takeover of Ukraine would compromise Russia’s access to its Sevastopol Naval Base – that’s the site of the Russia Black Sea’s fleet and one of the country’s only connections to international waters. In the words of Russia scholar Richard Sakwa, if Russia lost the Sevastopol Naval Base, it would be "the biggest military geopolitical defeat of Russia in the last thousand years."
I couldn’t read your quote from Owens.
That quote from Tucker was from December, so obviously not about the current invasion. I haven’t seen him support this invasion. His stance is pretty much why should we care, how will helping Ukraine help America? And if Trump was president Putin wouldn’t be doing this. And this is what Ukraine paid Hunter for. I don’t agree with any of those points. But again, it’s not supporting the invasion or current situation. His stance is I don’t care, not “go Russia!”
How is this rationalization any different than what would be expected of a confirmed Russian agent?
That still comes across to me as indifferent and why should we care more than being pro-Russia. I disagree, we should care. But even if you’re right, and Tucker is all pro-Russia invading and taking Ukraine, my point was I don’t know any Americans who feel that way. I should have responded by asking who is a QtRumplican? Because Bentley said QtRumplicans like Russia now. That word gets thrown around a lot and often I see it as meaning anyone who voted for trump, or is Republican, or sometimes even simply not a Biden supporter. But in any case, covers tens of millions of Americans. I see a lot of people arguing why we should care about Ukraine, but I don’t personally know a single person who doesn’t and isn’t worried about what can happen. And if that many people really didn’t care, we all would know quite a few.
If that comes across to you as indifferent, your mental gymnastics are impressive AF.
He literally says what do Americans have to gain with a war from Russia. You don’t need any mental gymnastics to conclude Tucker only wants to act if it benefits America/him. Just need to read or listen to what he says. He only cares about America and himself, not Russia or Ukraine. No kind of gymnastics, physical or mental, required.
You believe Tucker Carlson cares about America?
That's precious.
I said America/himself. He cares what’s good for him but plays it off as what’s good for America.
At the risk of repeating myself, your mental gymnastics are impressive AF.
Is that not what I said? How is pointing out exactly the words I used gymnastics? I’m flattered you’re impressed though.
Now the QtRUmplicans led by the likes of the former guy and tuQer Qarlson are tripping all over themselves to defend RUssia and denigrate President Joe Biden.
I haven’t seen Tucker or Trump say anything pro-Russia. Tucker has been critical of Biden’s response, but that’s not the same as defending Russia.
I haven’t heard anything in the last few weeks from Trump, but his stance has always been Putin wouldn’t try stuff like this if he was president. Believe him or not, that’s not the same as defending Russia. Havent read Dreher, but I will later. I doubt he is pro Russia invading Ukraine though. Probably just critical of the response or saying we should stay out of it, which is not the same as defending Russia.
I'm sorry, you're wrong. Read the tweet from Candace Owens that I posted. Is that not pro-Russia?
Read it all if you want the view straight from the Kremlin.
For Russia, the core question is NATO. NATO is the post-war military alliance created in 1949 to keep the Soviets from invading Western Europe. And it worked pretty well for about 40 years. The Soviet Union has not existed in more than three decades; it’s part of history now. And yet NATO very much lives on, better funded than ever. It’s an army without a purpose. So at this point, NATO exists primarily to torment Vladimir Putin who, whatever his many faults, has no intention of invading Western Europe. Vladimir Putin does not want Belgium. He just wants to keep his western borders secure.
That’s why he doesn’t want Ukraine to join NATO. And that makes sense. Imagine how we would feel if Mexico and Canada became satellites of China. We wouldn’t like that at all. In Russia’s case, this is an existential question. A NATO takeover of Ukraine would compromise Russia’s access to its Sevastopol Naval Base – that’s the site of the Russia Black Sea’s fleet and one of the country’s only connections to international waters. In the words of Russia scholar Richard Sakwa, if Russia lost the Sevastopol Naval Base, it would be "the biggest military geopolitical defeat of Russia in the last thousand years."
I couldn’t read your quote from Owens.
That quote from Tucker was from December, so obviously not about the current invasion. I haven’t seen him support this invasion. His stance is pretty much why should we care, how will helping Ukraine help America? And if Trump was president Putin wouldn’t be doing this. And this is what Ukraine paid Hunter for. I don’t agree with any of those points. But again, it’s not supporting the invasion or current situation. His stance is I don’t care, not “go Russia!”
How is this rationalization any different than what would be expected of a confirmed Russian agent?
That still comes across to me as indifferent and why should we care more than being pro-Russia. I disagree, we should care. But even if you’re right, and Tucker is all pro-Russia invading and taking Ukraine, my point was I don’t know any Americans who feel that way. I should have responded by asking who is a QtRumplican? Because Bentley said QtRumplicans like Russia now. That word gets thrown around a lot and often I see it as meaning anyone who voted for trump, or is Republican, or sometimes even simply not a Biden supporter. But in any case, covers tens of millions of Americans. I see a lot of people arguing why we should care about Ukraine, but I don’t personally know a single person who doesn’t and isn’t worried about what can happen. And if that many people really didn’t care, we all would know quite a few.
If that comes across to you as indifferent, your mental gymnastics are impressive AF.
He literally says what do Americans have to gain with a war from Russia. You don’t need any mental gymnastics to conclude Tucker only wants to act if it benefits America/him. Just need to read or listen to what he says. He only cares about America and himself, not Russia or Ukraine. No kind of gymnastics, physical or mental, required.
He cares not one bit about America. He only cares about things that benefit him and his orange hued savior And any autocratic dictators that his orange hued savior supports.
Yes. I clarified that he cares about what only impacts him.
Yeah so full-on invasion isn't going to be about sanctions at that point. Russian military is about to get smoked, and then unfortunately an entire country is going to pay for it with the largest migration of refugees that modern Europe has seen since WW2. And regardless Putin will get the division he wants. This sucks.
Gonna be a looooonnng road back for Russia to operate with other countries ever again.
Yeah so full-on invasion isn't going to be about sanctions at that point. Russian military is about to get smoked, and then unfortunately an entire country is going to pay for it with the largest migration of refugees that modern Europe has seen since WW2. And regardless Putin will get the division he wants. This sucks.
Gonna be a looooonnng road back for Russia to operate with other countries ever again.
Yes, right on. Poland will see a huge refugee population. The war will be bloody. Nothing good will come from this
I would imagine, like with Syria Germany, Sweden and the UK will take a huge responsibility with refugees and other countries will just sit on their hands.
And then Trump will mock the countries helping out, while at the same time saying the war is the US fault.
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
The only good thing I see in any of this concerning China is that they’re up to their balls in omicron from the virus they themselves created right now, so the timing isn’t ideal for them to invade Taiwan. I don’t think that means they won’t, but maybe it hampers their plans a bit?
Yikes for the second time in 24h
Yikes, sorry I agree with the majority of Americans. You do know that most Americans believe that it leaked from a lab right? Count me in with the rest of them.
But for thread integrity, i just watched the tucker thing you guys are talking about, and he’s not siding with Putin, he’s just anti democrat/Biden the whole time.
” “If you’ve been watching the news, you know that Putin is having a border dispute with a nation called Ukraine. Now, the main thing to know about Ukraine for our purposes is that its leaders once sent millions of dollars to Biden’s family. Not surprisingly, Ukraine is now one of Biden’s favorite countries. Biden has pledged to defend Ukraine’s borders even as he opens our borders to the world. That’s how it works. Invading America is called equity. Invading Ukraine is a war crime.”
He’s saying the narrative that we need to protect Ukraine because Ukraine is a democracy isnt true, as the Ukrainian president has a habit of arresting his political opponents and shutting down news outlets that are critical of him. By all accounts, Ukraine is a tyrannical state, but because Biden is linked with them, the narrative is that they need protection.
IMO, he’s saying it might be good for Biden but bad for Americans, and while Biden has admitted this fact, we’re being told that denying Putin Ukraine on moral grounds is the greater victory:
“ Energy prices in the United States are about to go way up, and that means that everything you buy will become much more expensive, from the food you eat to the car you drive to the tickets you need to take your family on vacation this summer, assuming you can still afford a vacation by then. You’re about to become measurably poorer. That’s not a guess. Joe Biden has admitted this.
On the other hand, you’re going to win an important moral victory against dastardly old Vladimir Putin, who is much, much worse than Justin Trudeau. Just so you know. So you can feel good about that because…because…let’s see, come to think of it, why would you feel good about that? It seems like a pretty terrible deal for you and for the United States. Hunter Biden gets a million dollars a year from Ukraine, but you can no longer afford to go out to dinner. That’s not a bargain.”
I would imagine, like with Syria Germany, Sweden and the UK will take a huge responsibility with refugees and other countries will just sit on their hands.
And then Trump will mock the countries helping out, while at the same time saying the war is the US fault.
I hear you. Because if anything - given what NATO is and how beneficial it's to the US - then they/we/the US better fucking pour in with aid like crazy. That is when the dipshits in this country will lose their collective shit.
The fact that Trump and all his followers support Russia over the Ukraine and also the United States should be a surprise to absolutely nobody who has paid attention to anything the last 6 years.
The only good thing I see in any of this concerning China is that they’re up to their balls in omicron from the virus they themselves created right now, so the timing isn’t ideal for them to invade Taiwan. I don’t think that means they won’t, but maybe it hampers their plans a bit?
Yikes for the second time in 24h
Yikes, sorry I agree with the majority of Americans. You do know that most Americans believe that it leaked from a lab right? Count me in with the rest of them.
But for thread integrity, i just watched the tucker thing you guys are talking about, and he’s not siding with Putin, he’s just anti democrat/Biden the whole time.
” “If you’ve been watching the news, you know that Putin is having a border dispute with a nation called Ukraine. Now, the main thing to know about Ukraine for our purposes is that its leaders once sent millions of dollars to Biden’s family. Not surprisingly, Ukraine is now one of Biden’s favorite countries. Biden has pledged to defend Ukraine’s borders even as he opens our borders to the world. That’s how it works. Invading America is called equity. Invading Ukraine is a war crime.”
He’s saying the narrative that we need to protect Ukraine because Ukraine is a democracy isnt true, as the Ukrainian president has a habit of arresting his political opponents and shutting down news outlets that are critical of him. By all accounts, Ukraine is a tyrannical state, but because Biden is linked with them, the narrative is that they need protection.
IMO, he’s saying it might be good for Biden but bad for Americans, and while Biden has admitted this fact, we’re being told that denying Putin Ukraine on moral grounds is the greater victory:
“ Energy prices in the United States are about to go way up, and that means that everything you buy will become much more expensive, from the food you eat to the car you drive to the tickets you need to take your family on vacation this summer, assuming you can still afford a vacation by then. You’re about to become measurably poorer. That’s not a guess. Joe Biden has admitted this.
On the other hand, you’re going to win an important moral victory against dastardly old Vladimir Putin, who is much, much worse than Justin Trudeau. Just so you know. So you can feel good about that because…because…let’s see, come to think of it, why would you feel good about that? It seems like a pretty terrible deal for you and for the United States. Hunter Biden gets a million dollars a year from Ukraine, but you can no longer afford to go out to dinner. That’s not a bargain.”
See this is why you should not listen to Tucker. He is full into the Russia propaganda. Zelensky signed a decree early this month shutting down three pro Russia televisions stations. Do you think for one minute that the US would have allowed pro German and pro Japanese radio and television stations operate during the War? Not a chance. Did that make the US and anti-democratic nation?
Of course Tucker doesn't tell you that. He makes you think it was just a normal political party opposition that he shut down. Not the case. The rest of this is bullshit as well, particularly saying Justin Trudeau is worse that Putin. Last time I checked JT didn't invade Georgia and Chechnya, killing and displacing hundreds of thousands of civilians. Putin did.
He lies to you. Lies to you every single day on that television.
Russian President Vladimir Putin operates within a well-established political framework. He is an autocrat with near-unilateral control over his country. Russia has elections, but no one is under the impression that the results will be allowed to pose a threat to Putin’s power. Personal freedoms are constrained significantly; opponents of Putin’s regime have a habit of succumbing to sudden illness and accidents.
Yet American Republicans view him slightly more positively than they do leading Democratic officials. Between Putin and President Biden, it’s a toss-up that leans in Putin’s favor.
Polling from YouGov conducted for the Economist in January provides an apples-to-apples comparison between Putin and various American leaders. Overall, Putin is much less positively viewed than Biden, Vice President Harris or House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D- Calif.), for example. Those officials and the parties are all viewed with some favorability by about a third of the public, as is former president Donald Trump. Only Barack Obama stands out from the crowd here, with a third of Americans viewing him very favorably.
I added a dashed line there to indicate where Putin’s approval stands with the group.
That’s a more useful indicator when we look at the views held by Republicans. With Republicans, Putin is viewed far less positively than is Trump — but more positively than sitting Democratic leaders. Interestingly, only Obama matches Putin’s favorability among Republicans, certainly in part a function of his being out of office.
When we see poll results like this, the appropriate question is whether the difference between Biden and Putin is significant. In other words, the difference between the two presidents might simply be an artifact of the margins of uncertainty built into the poll. But it’s very clear that Republicans aren’t significantly more likely to approve of Biden. It’s just a question of whether they’re significantly more likely to approve of Putin.
One area in which there’s no statistical question: Republicans are far less likely to say they view Putin very unfavorably than they are to say the same of Biden or other leading Democrats.
Among Democrats, incidentally, approval of Putin, Trump and the Republican Party are essentially indistinguishable. About two-thirds of Democrats view Putin very unfavorably, about the same as they view the Republican Party. Four in five view Trump very unfavorably.
In the same poll, YouGov asked respondents whether they thought that Putin and Biden were strong leaders. Overall, Americans were twice as likely to say that Putin was a very or somewhat strong leader as they were to say the same of Biden. Among Democrats, both Putin and Biden were seen equivalently. Republicans were 10 times as likely to describe Putin as strong as they were Biden.
This appreciation of Putin’s strong-arm leadership certainly helps moderate Republican views of him. Trump’s own description of Putin as “savvy” and as purportedly being emboldened by Biden’s weakness is rooted in his long-demonstrated appreciation of Putin’s perceived strength.
It’s the sort of strength that probably seems more appealing from afar.
Comments
He only cares about America and himself, not Russia or Ukraine. No kind of gymnastics, physical or mental, required.
That's precious.
And it concerns me what this sets up China to do.
Also, don't fall into the trap of saying "Americans have to gain with a war from Russia". We aren't going to a hot war with Russia. Our strategy would be no different than when the Soviets assisted the Vietcong and we assisted the Afghans. So again, Tucker is creating a straw man, using Kremlin talking points, to argue that it's not our problem. It is our problem. Democracy is our problem. European borders are our problem. Potential for Putin to try to re-create the Soviet Empire is our problem.
he is a talking head on a known biased network. he is a contrarian. all of them. glen beck, tucker, ingraham. judge pirro, all of them are contrarians and have the same schtick. ask questions and then try to answer them with some skewed version of reality. if things were flipped their position would be the exact opposite of what they are now. if a democrat is in office, they side with russia. if a republican is in office they pull the patriotism card and call those that are opposed to war the real enemy. it is propaganda and it is as old as time. they do not give the viewer facts, they try to persuade the viewer that their views are the truth.
but seriously though. name three things tucker has been right about. i would have asked you to name one, but anybody, including tucker, can get one right over the course of an entire career.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
At the risk of repeating myself, your mental gymnastics are impressive AF.
This is slowly starting to reach the level of the Pearl Jam Mötley Crüe feud.
He only cares about things that benefit him and his orange hued savior
And any autocratic dictators that his orange hued savior supports.
Republicans view Putin more favorably than they do leading Democrats
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/02/23/republicans-view-putin-more-favorably-than-they-do-leading-democrats/?utm_source=reddit.com
I’m flattered you’re impressed though.
Gonna be a looooonnng road back for Russia to operate with other countries ever again.
And then Trump will mock the countries helping out, while at the same time saying the war is the US fault.
” “If you’ve been watching the news, you know that Putin is having a border dispute with a nation called Ukraine. Now, the main thing to know about Ukraine for our purposes is that its leaders once sent millions of dollars to Biden’s family. Not surprisingly, Ukraine is now one of Biden’s favorite countries. Biden has pledged to defend Ukraine’s borders even as he opens our borders to the world. That’s how it works. Invading America is called equity. Invading Ukraine is a war crime.”
He’s saying the narrative that we need to protect Ukraine because Ukraine is a democracy isnt true, as the Ukrainian president has a habit of arresting his political opponents and shutting down news outlets that are critical of him. By all accounts, Ukraine is a tyrannical state, but because Biden is linked with them, the narrative is that they need protection.
IMO, he’s saying it might be good for Biden but bad for Americans, and while Biden has admitted this fact, we’re being told that denying Putin Ukraine on moral grounds is the greater victory:
“ Energy prices in the United States are about to go way up, and that means that everything you buy will become much more expensive, from the food you eat to the car you drive to the tickets you need to take your family on vacation this summer, assuming you can still afford a vacation by then. You’re about to become measurably poorer. That’s not a guess. Joe Biden has admitted this.
On the other hand, you’re going to win an important moral victory against dastardly old Vladimir Putin, who is much, much worse than Justin Trudeau. Just so you know. So you can feel good about that because…because…let’s see, come to think of it, why would you feel good about that? It seems like a pretty terrible deal for you and for the United States. Hunter Biden gets a million dollars a year from Ukraine, but you can no longer afford to go out to dinner. That’s not a bargain.”
Of course Tucker doesn't tell you that. He makes you think it was just a normal political party opposition that he shut down. Not the case. The rest of this is bullshit as well, particularly saying Justin Trudeau is worse that Putin. Last time I checked JT didn't invade Georgia and Chechnya, killing and displacing hundreds of thousands of civilians. Putin did.
He lies to you. Lies to you every single day on that television.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/02/23/republicans-view-putin-more-favorably-than-they-do-leading-democrats/
Republicans view Putin more favorably than they do leading Democrats
Russian President Vladimir Putin operates within a well-established political framework. He is an autocrat with near-unilateral control over his country. Russia has elections, but no one is under the impression that the results will be allowed to pose a threat to Putin’s power. Personal freedoms are constrained significantly; opponents of Putin’s regime have a habit of succumbing to sudden illness and accidents.
Yet American Republicans view him slightly more positively than they do leading Democratic officials. Between Putin and President Biden, it’s a toss-up that leans in Putin’s favor.
Sign up for How To Read This Chart, a weekly data newsletter from Philip Bump
Polling from YouGov conducted for the Economist in January provides an apples-to-apples comparison between Putin and various American leaders. Overall, Putin is much less positively viewed than Biden, Vice President Harris or House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D- Calif.), for example. Those officials and the parties are all viewed with some favorability by about a third of the public, as is former president Donald Trump. Only Barack Obama stands out from the crowd here, with a third of Americans viewing him very favorably.
I added a dashed line there to indicate where Putin’s approval stands with the group.
That’s a more useful indicator when we look at the views held by Republicans. With Republicans, Putin is viewed far less positively than is Trump — but more positively than sitting Democratic leaders. Interestingly, only Obama matches Putin’s favorability among Republicans, certainly in part a function of his being out of office.
When we see poll results like this, the appropriate question is whether the difference between Biden and Putin is significant. In other words, the difference between the two presidents might simply be an artifact of the margins of uncertainty built into the poll. But it’s very clear that Republicans aren’t significantly more likely to approve of Biden. It’s just a question of whether they’re significantly more likely to approve of Putin.
One area in which there’s no statistical question: Republicans are far less likely to say they view Putin very unfavorably than they are to say the same of Biden or other leading Democrats.
Among Democrats, incidentally, approval of Putin, Trump and the Republican Party are essentially indistinguishable. About two-thirds of Democrats view Putin very unfavorably, about the same as they view the Republican Party. Four in five view Trump very unfavorably.
In the same poll, YouGov asked respondents whether they thought that Putin and Biden were strong leaders. Overall, Americans were twice as likely to say that Putin was a very or somewhat strong leader as they were to say the same of Biden. Among Democrats, both Putin and Biden were seen equivalently. Republicans were 10 times as likely to describe Putin as strong as they were Biden.
This appreciation of Putin’s strong-arm leadership certainly helps moderate Republican views of him. Trump’s own description of Putin as “savvy” and as purportedly being emboldened by Biden’s weakness is rooted in his long-demonstrated appreciation of Putin’s perceived strength.
It’s the sort of strength that probably seems more appealing from afar.