• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

What did Democrats do wrong?

What did Democrats do wrong?

  • Didn't fight inflation enough.

    Votes: 12 15.2%
  • Didn't fight illegal immigration enough.

    Votes: 22 27.8%
  • Too much focus on abortion.

    Votes: 2 2.5%
  • Too much transgender stuff.

    Votes: 28 35.4%
  • America not ready for Progressive women leader.

    Votes: 26 32.9%
  • Should have kept Joe.

    Votes: 3 3.8%
  • Not enough focus on new jobs.

    Votes: 2 2.5%
  • Nothing, Trump cheated & played dirty!

    Votes: 14 17.7%
  • Didn't stop Gaza War.

    Votes: 8 10.1%
  • I can be Agent M.

    Votes: 6 7.6%

  • Total voters
    79
Dude, at the end of the meeting, Trump was asked what would happen if Russia broke off peace talks. Here is Trumps response:


I really don't think Zelensky was the problem here.
Zelensky was a tough guy long before America "empowered" him. He's been a tough guy since day one of the invasion, when *nobody* was empowering him. When it wasn't even clear whether Ukraine would rally behind him. Every day Ziggurat strays farther from the light.
 
Zelensky has probably the hardest job in the world, at the moment.
Possibly. And yet he still screwed up the easy part. And make no mistake, this was the easy part.
And Trump was being an absolute, totally gratuitous, counter-productive, ignorant and uncharitable dickhead.
And Zelensky didn't know this about Trump going in? Seriously, did no one prep him on how to handle Trump?
Trump's job was much easier. All he had to do was cut Zelensky some slack, or just not take things in this direction to begin with.
Again: Zelensky needs Trump, Trump doesn't need Zelensky. You can wish Trump played it differently all you want to, but he's not the one with everything on the line. That's not fair, but that's reality. Complaining that it's unfair doesn't actually help, no matter how true it may be.
 
Yes. No cost. All Zelensky had to do at that meeting was say nice things, and I do indeed consider that no cost.
He said thank you a few dozen times in his address to Congress, including to the Weakest One directly. And if he did say thank you again, The weakest One and Bowman would have continued to berate him. Let's stop pretending to be stupid enough to think this was a good faith negotiation.
He didn't have to make any concessions, just say nice things.
He already did. And Bowman went into him. How about you expect President and Vice President to be grown ass adults and good allies? Are you that isnecure you need to here him kiss our ass over and over?

Wait, not kiss our ass. No, you want him to kiss Trump's ass over and over again.

Too bad debasing one's self for trump is his voters' job.
And he couldn't even manage that. Even under your ideal president, all the hard details about security guarantees would have been worked out later, not at that meeting, so there was no need to press the issue right then.
there was no need for that spectacle. I don't care how small your penis is, you don't need try and embarrass Zelensky in public like that. And of course he talks about "great ratings" like its some Real Housewives ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊.
 
Yes, actually it is.
Says it all from your perspective, I suppose. The US and Russia should not in any way shape or form be on the same side, opposite Zelensky here. No more than we should have sided with Hitler and told Europe to belly up.
Because they're the two most important parties for Ukraine to deal with, and the only way to a negotiated peace is through them.
Disagreed. We should be standing against Russia as a united front, and I'm talking every free nation on the planet.
Perhaps you don't think Ukraine should negotiate peace. But be honest about what you're advocating then. And be aware that the US has no obligation to fund an endless war in Ukraine. Will Europe take up the slack?

We didn't need to. They did anyways.

Indeed, because we didn't actually need to negotiate with the Taliban. We could force our will. Ukraine is not in a similar position.

Again, if you think Ukraine shouldn't negotiate with Russia, then there's no problem. They can just keep fighting and dying.
To all the above: or the planet can stand up against an invading dictator. Not fondle Putin's balls and tell him how much we love him. Wrong message. Wrong side.
Saying "thank you" isn't groveling. You have a very peculiar view of what it means to show gratitude.
A video has been circulating on reddit recently, compiling dozens of times Zelensky has thanked the world community, the US, President Biden, and yes, President Trump, all from before the meeting. Trump and Vance were either liars or stupid to be unaware of how much gratitude the man has shown. Yet they sat there like a pair of twats browbeating Zelensky, asking if he had thanked anyone even once. That level of ignorance is not credible. They were purely being a pair of ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊, to show support of Mother Russia.
 
Last edited:
Says it all from your perspective, I suppose. The US and Russia should not in any way shape or form be on the same side, opposite Zelensky here.
I'm not saying we are. But Ukraine cannot get a negotiated peace with Russia on its own. It needs another party to those negotiations to help facilitate them. There's no chance that Europe is actually going to step up to the plate (though if they prove me wrong, more power to them). So it's either the US, or nobody.

Which means Zelensky needs the US, and specifically Trump. But he didn't act like he needs us. So either he doesn't want a negotiated peace, or he badly misunderstands the situation. Because the situation is that Trump doesn't need Zelensky. The US doesn't actually have a lot of strategic interest in the outcome of this war. China is far more important to us than Russia.
No more than we should have sided with Hitler and told Europe to belly up.
We sided with Stalin. So the idea that we can't cut a deal with Russian dictators, well, we have in the past.
 
I'm not saying we are. But Ukraine cannot get a negotiated peace with Russia on its own. It needs another party to those negotiations to help facilitate them.
Ukraine doesn't want a negotiated peace. It never asked for a negotiated peace. It asked for help getting its territory back from the invader. Trump is offering to withhold that help, unless Ukraine cedes its territory to the invader. After which, the help won't be necessary anymore (until Russia invades again). Trump is being an absolute, pro-Putin, pro-Moscow dickhead. It's pretty ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ amazing that you are able to cast Zelensky as the villain in this piece.
 
I'm not saying we are. But Ukraine cannot get a negotiated peace with Russia on its own. It needs another party to those negotiations to help facilitate them. There's no chance that Europe is actually going to step up to the plate (though if they prove me wrong, more power to them). So it's either the US, or nobody.

Which means Zelensky needs the US, and specifically Trump. But he didn't act like he needs us. So either he doesn't want a negotiated peace, or he badly misunderstands the situation. Because the situation is that Trump doesn't need Zelensky. The US doesn't actually have a lot of strategic interest in the outcome of this war. China is far more important to us than Russia.

We sided with Stalin. So the idea that we can't cut a deal with Russian dictators, well, we have in the past.
Zelensky needs security guarantees for any kind of peace treaty to work, which Russia is unwilling to agree to right now. Trump is meeting with Russia (in theory to negotiate peace but who the Hell knows), and trash talking Zelensky on the internet. Zelensky goes to meet with Trump, in theory to sign a mineral rights deal he would never sign if it wasn't for Russia's invasion, and to make the case for security guarantees. He lays out a simple case for security guarantees in front of the press during the meeting, and asks how that factors into the negotiations. Again, Zelensky needs security guarantees for any sort of peace treaty to work. You can argue about the way he brought it up, but he needed to bring it up in order to get his point through to Trump and his supporters.

In a normally functioning White House, the President and his staff would have been expecting this question from the moment that the trip was announced and had a twenty second sound bite ready to go. One which acknowledged Zelensky's point but which made no assurances one way of the other in order not to offend anybody. It would have been an easy softball question and a chance to make the President look like a reasonable negotiation partner.

Trump and Vance reacted like Zelensky had told them to have sex with their mothers and criticized him for not groveling more. Then Trump said that it would be great television.
 
Last edited:
The US doesn't actually have a lot of strategic interest in the outcome of this war.
I think.we have a massive interest in one of our enemies getting aggro on the NATO border.
We sided with Stalin. So the idea that we can't cut a deal with Russian dictators, well, we have in the past.
Yes. When faced with the Nazis, we ended up with some strange bedfellows, because of the more massive threat.

Here, there is no greater threat that we are mustering forces against. We are simply siding with the greater threat, against everything we stand for.
 
Does anyone actually think that meeting could have gone the other way? It was planned. Vance acted on cue, as did the guy with the wardrobe question. Trump was never going to help Ukraine, he's on Russia's side. What he was trying to do was provoke Zelensky into an actual real display of anger (I bet Trump was hoping he'd take a swing at Vance) and then use that as further excuse for siding with Russia. Since Zelensky isn't an idiot he didn't do that, but Trump and his minions are acting as if he did because that's what they had scripted. It was all a Trump stage-directed "reality" show, except the contestant didn't react as scripted and Trump's minions stupidly forgot that you can't edit live television.

You can, however, edit reality if you've got a cult of fools who believe anything they're told.

Remember how Zelensky took a big bite out of the White House's resident cat, Sprinkles? No? If Trump tweeted that it happened then about a third of the country would suddenly remember it.
 
Ukraine doesn't want a negotiated peace. It never asked for a negotiated peace. It asked for help getting its territory back from the invader.
That's not going to happen. I've told you before, nobody actually wants to do that. Biden didn't want to, Trump doesn't want to, and none of the European countries want to. So the actual choice in front of Zelensky is continuing this war for years more, with the likely result still being a stalemate, or a negotiated peace.
Trump is offering to withhold that help, unless Ukraine cedes its territory to the invader.
Yes. Because he doesn't think it's in the US interest to continue funding a meat grinder war that doesn't change the outcome, and he's not interested in escalating the war to the level required to push Russia back. Because again, nobody actually wants to give Ukraine enough weapons to actually push back Russia. Nobody. I know you don't like that, that you think we should be willing to escalate, but we aren't. And that has basically nothing to do with Trump.
It's pretty ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ amazing that you are able to cast Zelensky as the villain in this piece.
No, he's not a villain. But he screwed up at the White House. And I'm not sure why you're having trouble seeing that. Seriously, he played it completely wrong. He needs Trump, but Trump doesn't need him, and given that reality he should have shown considerable deference to Trump. He did not, and that was a mistake. Again, whether that's fair or not is rather beside the point. That's the reality of the situation.
 
Yes. When faced with the Nazis, we ended up with some strange bedfellows, because of the more massive threat.

Here, there is no greater threat that we are mustering forces against.
Yes, actually there is. China. China is a bigger threat than Russia. A much bigger threat.
 
Does anyone actually think that meeting could have gone the other way? It was planned. Vance acted on cue, as did the guy with the wardrobe question. Trump was never going to help Ukraine, he's on Russia's side. What he was trying to do was provoke Zelensky into an actual real display of anger (I bet Trump was hoping he'd take a swing at Vance) and then use that as further excuse for siding with Russia. Since Zelensky isn't an idiot he didn't do that, but Trump and his minions are acting as if he did because that's what they had scripted. It was all a Trump stage-directed "reality" show, except the contestant didn't react as scripted and Trump's minions stupidly forgot that you can't edit live television.
It was a dog and pony show for Putin, and credulous maga weirdos, setting things up for whatever that thing is tomorrow night.
You can, however, edit reality if you've got a cult of fools who believe anything they're told.
Just look at the trumpsplaining in this thread.
 
Trump is certainly trying to appease Russia in the worst ways possible. Now Trump and his band of ◊◊◊◊ wads are halting offensive cyber ops? Nice.

I'm sure you, Zigg, will be all for it. I'm sure you'll support it with some half-assed reasoning about how we can't work with Russia on a deal if we don't back off. Is Russia going to do the same? ◊◊◊◊ no. Mother ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ hell mother ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ no. The Russians will go 10x harder than they did before because the line between offensive and defensive cybersecurity operations is a bit hazy.

◊◊◊◊ Trump is a moron.
 
the master deal maker yelling about thanks yous and playing cards and getting nothing

you guys forget the myth you built around him. which is fair, because it was a myth. he’s actually just an old, fat dumbass
 

Back
Top Bottom