Do you believe that the Republican Party is the domestic enemy to our Constitution?

[msc545]

[MisterWack]

We live in a corrupt two party system where there’s an illusion of power.

ICE is funded by hotels, airlines, and other corporations which funneled money into Donald J Trump’s campaign for President.

That is a little example.

Another would be

Invasion of Venezuela was funded by the Oil Lobby, Military Complex, and other corporate influence which tapped this administration’s shoulder in order to tip the balance in their favor.

There is a lot of dirty work into making this happen and is not up to Donald J Trump alone. The world of politics has Newsmax, OANN, Fox News and others justify to their viewers that this is somehow strong, patriotic, powerful leadership in order to sell them the agenda of the ultra rich and powerful.

Again, we have this on both party lines since George Washington himself said we shouldn’t rely on a two party system and wanted there to be more parties available.
I would like the Republican Party subscribers to message Donald Trump, get on interviews, and take a stand against this nonsense corruption since it is the only way to get back power to the American public. We need to hold our leaders accountable, that can only happen if we stand together regardless of party lines and call this shit out regardless of who is in The White House. Call out your Congressmen, Senators, etc. too.
This is wrong! This is not how Democracy should run! This is not how The Republic should run!

Donald Trump also did insider trading where he sunk the stocks to make money and has done shady Crypto trading to get billions while back in The White House.
He is even in The Epstein Files and falsely claims he is absolved due to what’s in The Files which I respond by look into Epstein Files and look what’s in there for yourselves rather than listen to Donald Trump.

[goaded]

files.mastodon.online/.../caf4ab0da15fe859.jpeg

[MisterWack]

@goaded Absolutely.
However now they can testify and simply spill the beans, hopefully for the world to see in public (if Republicans allow them)

[goaded]

That's the problem, they probably don't have the beans to spill. At least not in that area.

[lightbulb27]

I think they both are and have been for a long time. The division is strong. They are the current bunch walking over the constitution.

What happened to "Gold is your money"? Nobody is instilling that better than Trump as he allows it to b revalued and attempts to reign in spending... albeit blowing spending out the water as well. The other guys were caught manipulating gold, printing money to the moon. Add to it all the theft and fraud being found. Democrats fixing the election by editing the search engines.

They are all crooks, republicans seem the better of the options at the moment.

The sign of the times is bad. With AI coming, I see no reconciliation. Truth.. is dead.

[goaded]

Do you know what Reactionary Centrism is? ↗

[goaded]

Never mind, "The other guys were caught..." when Trump has openly banked billions in the last year shows you're just lying.

[RandomGirl42]

Ty for inviting me to share and I believe I can, " Be the first girl to share an opinion
and earn 3 more Xper points!" 😊

[MisterWack]

Wooo you go girl! 🥳🎉

I don't know, having fun is all lol

[RandomGirl42]

I can't believe I got an MHO for this! 🤣

[NathanDavis]

California, as of now... is taking advantage of gerrymandering

and I see that as a very clear sign, that both sides are willing to do what it takes, for the power, so to me... all politicians serve the elite, not the Constitution of America...

[goaded]

Those poor Republican victims of the Democrats fighting back for a change!

How and why is California taking advantage of gerrymandering?

How? Democratically: "On August 11, 2025, Newsom sent a letter to Donald Trump, stating that California would pause any mid-decade redistricting effort if other states called off their efforts"... "California Proposition 50, officially known as the Election Rigging Response Act,[4] is an amendment to the constitution of the U. S. state of California, which was passed by voters in a special election ballot on November 4, 2025. At the urging of California governor Gavin Newsom, the proposition was put on the ballot by the Democratic-controlled California State Legislature. Approved by 64.4% of voters"

Why: "In June 2025, Republican lawmakers in Texas first proposed gerrymandering the state's congressional district lines to favor Republicans" (no voter input needed).

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_50

[NathanDavis]

@goaded "we will take advantage too"

and yeah, they are doing it today... exactly what I said

Texas does it... California does it, both sides... the same

[goaded]

No. That's bullshit. If I hit you and you hit me back, is that the same? There is a huge difference between aggressor and defender. Only one is justified (and only one asked the voters of their state for permission).

Pretending otherwise is just propaganda.

[NathanDavis]

@goaded are you implying that gerrymandering was a thing that just started two instances ago...

lmfao...

and that Texas did it first, and California did it because of Texas?

come on, you're way better than this... you can be, I mean

[goaded]

We're talking about today. "California, as of now... is taking advantage of gerrymandering". YOU SAID: "as of now". Now you want to move the goalposts.

No, I'm stating outright that reacting to openly partisan gerrymandering by asking your state's voters if it's OK if you temporarily suspend the state's constitutional requirement that maps be non-partisan (California) is not the same as a state explicitly trying to steal five more seats for Trump by the legislature (Texas).

Even then, California is better than Texas because at least they had a constitutional requirement that maps be non-partisan until Texas tried to cheat in the federal elections.

Every state should have that requirement.

[NathanDavis]

@goaded as of now, it is... because they just started it days ago

[goaded]

Are you just saying nonsense in the hope I'll go away? You were trying to move the goalposts, perhaps you are again? We're talking about *this* election cycle. Right?

Reacting to openly partisan gerrymandering by asking your state's voters if it's OK if you temporarily suspend the state's constitutional requirement that maps be non-partisan (California) is not the same as the state that is explicitly trying to steal five more seats for Trump by the legislature (Texas).

[NathanDavis]

@goaded asking to people who are way too dense to understand... lmao

[msc545]

Nathan, I'm a Californian. We are not too dense to understand. We are some of the smartest people in the country, and we live and work here. We understand exactly what Texas did, and we understand exactly what we voted for. Don't kid yourself about these things. We are the bluest blue state in the country. This isn't fucking Mississippi.

[NathanDavis]

I will ask the two of you... and I hope you both can focus on the question itself, and not in your absolute NEED to take partisan sides

if Texans in Texas are feed up with their Republican government/if Californians in California are feed up with their Democrat government... should they have a right and chance to make their individual vote count and have an effect in the elections, yes...

or, no... their vote should be effectively neutralized by the political powers

because this is the reality of gerrymandering... and the "re-map" of the districts are engineering to NEUTRALIZE and NULLIFY the choice of the people immediately

only an IDIOT would say yes, to that... "our votes should be sabotaged even if we want a different choice, we should not have a right for our choice to be actually effective"

but hey, maybe that's too harsh a word for some people

[goaded]

Are you saying gubernatorial elections are affected by these changes? How about Senate elections? Mayoral? Municipal? Local council? School Board? Dog catcher? No? Funny that.

You keep pretending that unprovoked gerrymandering to maintain undeserved power in the federal House is exactly the same as the need to keep the federal government from being taken over by those bad actors. You're wrong.

[NathanDavis]

by your logic... a crime is alright, acceptable and perfectly fine, as long as you do so in retaliation or revenge

"unprovoked gerrymandering"

lmfao... you really have outdone yourself

[goaded]

I answered the question you asked: Republicans in California have the same chance they always had to affect their state elections. And, no, no crime was committed, and self-defence is a real thing.

California, as a state, decided they weren't going to stand for Texas, as a state, unilaterally and without asking their voters trying to steal power in the federal government.

At least California went about the changes in a democratic way (three votes in the legeslature and a state-wide vote on a matter that affects the whole state), while Texas never passed a law saying they had to have non-partisan maps because they knew they might have to do exactly this at some point.

Let me ask you a simple question: Would California have even proposed this action if Texas hadn't tried to steal 5 seats for the Republicans? Would it have passed (considering they even had a Republican governor just 15 years ago)?

Let's see if you can be honest.

[NathanDavis]

@goaded is it okay to neutralize the choices of the people

yes or no...

[goaded]

No. And it hasn't happened. But as usual I'm answering your questions while you ignore mine.

Would California have even proposed Proposition 50 action if Texas hadn't tried to steal 5 seats for the Republicans? Would it have passed (considering they even had a Republican governor just 15 years ago)?

[NathanDavis]

now there's some progress... you are NOT okay with gerrymandering

but now you claim that California is not gerrymandering the electoral districts

did I hear that right? it has not happened yet? are you also going to claim that California will not re-map the electoral districts?

[goaded]

Would California have even proposed Proposition 50 action if Texas hadn't tried to steal 5 seats for the Republicans? Would it have passed (considering they even had a Republican governor just 15 years ago)?

[NathanDavis]

[goaded]

Yes, you're dodging the question while misrepresenting what I say. Pathetic.

Would California have even proposed Proposition 50 action if Texas hadn't tried to steal 5 seats for the Republicans? Would it have passed (considering they even had a Republican governor just 15 years ago)?

[NathanDavis]

@goaded you were right when you said it has not happened, yet...

as far as I know, there were no elections these days

but they did plan for this exact thing to happen... to neutralize the votes of the people, and to steal Republican representation in California

is it going to happen? we'll see...

[goaded]

WTF are you on about? Your "steal Republican representation in California" is a lie. The state maps are unchanged since the 2021 independent California Citizens Redistricting Commission set them because of the census.

Would California have even proposed Proposition 50 action if Texas hadn't tried to steal 5 seats for the Republicans?

It's a simple question. Answer it or be blocked.

[msc545]

@goaded it's a really good question that you posed, and there is no way that he is going to answer it. He has avoided it multiple times here because he knows that if he answers it, it really tells the truth about him.

[NathanDavis]

block me already... @goaded

since it is actually you who goes around chasing after me... not like I am going to lose anything

[NathanDavis]

so, what about you... @msc545

do you also think that doing something wrong is justified... if you're "second" to do such wrong?

or... are you also going to claim that California is not about to neutralize and effectively erase Republican representation in California?

what's your own take on all this?

[msc545]

In regard to your first question, you would need to specify what the first and second things were. The actual timing of those things is not the issue.

I'm not sure if California is about to neutralize and effectively erase Republican representation in my state. But if it is, I honestly don't care. Republicans are prevaricating criminals who really should not have a voice in politics at all.

[NathanDavis]

@msc545

"Texas gerrymandering is very wrong"

"California gerrymandering is not wrong... because Texas did it first"

is gerrymandering wrong but also fine and okay... according to who else did it first, or later?

as for not caring... that's fair

I also don't care for elections at all... I don't even vote, since my vote has also been neutralized by these so called "districts"

[msc545]

The argument that “California gerrymandering is justified because Texas did it first” would be morally weak if it were merely retaliation.

However, the stronger argument is not retaliation — it is process legitimacy:

Texas uses partisan legislative control.

California uses an independent commission.

The difference is structural, not chronological.

[goaded]

I respond to lies I read on here. That probably feels to you like I'm chasing you, but it's simply because you mislead people (by only mentioning California and not the reason) and make shit up, like that the Democrats want to "steal Republican representation in California". You know the state maps are unchanged since the 2021. The balance of power in California will remain exactly the same.

You know damn well that California never even have proposed Proposition 50 action if Texas hadn't tried to steal 5 seats for the Republicans. But you think responding in kind to bad actors is somehow bad, if the response comes from the left.

How dare they democratically act to neutralise obvious cheating from the right!

"California gerrymandering is not wrong... because Texas did it first" Yes. Exactly that. Especially as they held four separate votes including one by the whole state's voters. There would have been Republicans voting against cheating in Texas, just like there were Republicans willing to testify against Trump, had they held a vote/trial.

Re-leveling the playing field is not cheating. Imagine a football team just deciding they're going to add five more players; you can't complain if the referee says it's OK and the other team also puts up five more players!

[NathanDavis]

the end result is the same

both parties have neutralized the individuals' vote to have their choice represented

entire districts in which people made their choice and fairly elected their representation... was taken away

taken... away

and notice I didn't mention any political party left or right

and that, is just... wrong

[NathanDavis]

sorry, forgot to tag you @msc545

[goaded]

Which of Texas and California is more likely to have non-partisan electoral maps in 10 years time?

To help you work it out: which of Texas and California had a constitutional requirement for non-partisan electoral maps six months ago?

How do you reconcile your answer, in the unlikely event you provide one (it has to be "California") with your propagandist claim "the end result is the same"?

Stop trying to pretend that any of this would have happened without Trump and Texas starting it.

[slatyb]

Today? Seems obvious. They are trying to disenfranchise people likely to vote Democratic, and allowing Trump to take any number of unconstitutional actions.

[WestofNowhere]

Yup. Dead party walking. As soon as Trump and Maga dies, the Republican party is finished. Half of them may end up in jail and nobody is going to vote for them.

[AngryCarl3]

The Republican Party isn't actually changing the Constitution, they're just ignoring it.

[Alex-Snow]

Yes we need some new younger blood and not a bunch of billionaires

[888theGreat]

Sadly , it looks like Republicans are more anti constitutional than Democrats at this point

[goaded]

I don't know if you've seen this testimony from Jack Smith:

"one of the strengths of our case and why we felt we had such strong proof is all witnesses were not going to be political enemies of the President. They were going to be political allies.

We had numerous witnesses who would say, "I voted for President Trump. I campaigned for Trump President Trump. I wanted him to win." The Speaker of the House in Arizona. The Speaker of the House in Michigan.

We had an elector in Pennsylvania who is a former Congressman who was going to be an elector for President Trump who said that what they were trying to do was an attempt to overthrow the government and illegal.

Our case was built on, frankly, Republicans who put their allegiance to the country before the party."

It's a shame it never got to court.

[Sevenpointfive]

only by proxy. same as DNC. only by proxy. without a new party or entirely new good people that can't be bought we're screwed.

[exitseven]

no way, President Trump has been the most pro Constitution President since WW2

[goaded]

I'm sure I must have shown you this testimony, under oath, from Jack Smith:

"one of the strengths of our case and why we felt we had such strong proof is all witnesses were not going to be political enemies of the President. They were going to be political allies.

We had numerous witnesses who would say, "I voted for President Trump. I campaigned for Trump President Trump. I wanted him to win." The Speaker of the House in Arizona. The Speaker of the House in Michigan.

We had an elector in Pennsylvania who is a former Congressman who was going to be an elector for President Trump who said that what they were trying to do was an attempt to overthrow the government and illegal.

Our case was built on, frankly, Republicans who put their allegiance to the country before the party."

It's a shame it never got to court.

[exitseven]

@goaded jack smith would say anything to save his ass. Can you actually name one thing President Trump did that violated the Constitution? I can name at least one for Bugsy.

[msc545]

LOL !!!

[goaded]

Good grief. Ever heard of the Emoluments Clause? Trump's selling pardons for a millions of dollars each.

[exitseven]

@goaded If there was proof of this the democrats would be screaming about it on CNN 24.7

[msc545]

What the hell is wrong with you? Trump brags about it.

[goaded]

There's no time to scream about any particular crime or outrage because there are so many of them!

Off the top of my head: Trump's DHS has more people (by many times) locked up under terrible conditions in concentration camps than the Nazis did in 1939, including people legally in the country, meanwhile they're shooting citizens to death. Trump's letting big corporations pollute more, which will kill more Americans. He pardoned unrepentant criminals, including a former Nicaraguan president convicted of importing 400 tons of cocaine into the US, so he doesn't care about drugs. Stopping USAID has let millions worldwide die. Of all the people in the Epstein files, the only person convicted is a woman who's now in a luxury prison as long as she keeps quiet. Trump is undermining the UN and NATO with his Bored of Peace pay-to-play club of which the US is NOT a member (that would require congressional approval). Trump sold the oil he took from Venezuela and put the money in a bank in Qatar which he can use a s a slush fund, out of reach of US law. Trump's appointees see their job in congressional hearings not to answer questions but to rant and rave at the citizen's representatives...

Which one should people be talking about every day?

[exitseven]

@goaded yikes, watch CNN much?

[goaded]

You know it's all true, right? Maybe you should watch something other than Fox News.

[DrPepper12]

Undoubtedly

[Ariesman81]

Rhinos are

[Anonymous]

Lol no..