#biden mug

[jettreno]

y’all I can’t stop thinking about that bi kamala harris mug. it’s outrageously funny. what the hell

[hyperdemona]

This is real and was posted on the president's Instagram

[futurebird]

hes so cringe trying to be like trump and posting a mug shot

[ajjconcertat2am]

not to be a dirty filthy creature whos into politics but yall its gunna go bananas mode tommorow

[caffeinatedkris]

[poli-doppels]

Funny Biden Coffee Mug from POLI-DOPPELS

[toruandmidori]

We are already over the 2024 elections and they haven’t even begun. 

Fly your apathy flag proudly with our new range of funny and entirely disaffected political campaign coffee mugs and gifts. 

Available to buy online in our Redbubble store now, links: 

MEH!

YET ANOTHER OLD WHITE GUY

WE’RE ALL DYING ANYWAY

[overclockedopossum]

OK fuck it. I've seen this post cross my dash twice already and left it but I'm sick of it. Truth is always your ally when you're in the right, and this post is lacking in truth.

Firstly, let me point out what the OP is doing. This is a style of argument called a "gish gallop" - but I've also seen it called a "trump tirade". You make a series of shaky assertions in quick succession. Since it takes a lot longer to demonstrate the truth than it does to assert a half-truth, this is a way to mislead people while being difficult and time-consuming to fact-check (see the length of what follows...).

Since the advised way to deal with this is to focus on the shakiest claim, let's do that. I'll get to Israel as well, because that's relevant. But the absolute worst part is an X in the Trump column for "vaccines and public health". Sure, pick a random antivaxxer and odds are they'll be a trump supporter. However the reality is that the Trump administration were responsible for starting "operation warp speed" and delivering covid-19 vaccines in the USA (and across the world). You cannot sum up a presidency that put tens of billions of dollars into vaccine development with "vaccines and public health: X". That is not truthful.

I do want to briefly mention that some of the items on the list are empty non-items. What's "advocating racial equality"? Is it doing anything, or is it saying words? The number of police killings has gone up under Biden, who opened his presidency by using federal agents in much the way Trump did. His 2022 budget was criticised for increasing the amount of money given to US police. But those are actions, not words. He may advocate racial equality but that doesn't do much.

Anyway, Israel. This is the big one. I'm going to focus on gojira007's addition, as there's more of an argument to engage with, and that will in passing cover the claims made by the OP.

With that said, gojira007's argument is really misleading. Saying that trump's stated goal is to "finish the job" implies continuing forever, but even just clicking through to the article will tell you "he would advise Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to swiftly conclude Israel's war in Gaza". Read more into it and you'll find he's said “We’ve got to get to peace. You can’t have this going on, and I will say Israel has to be very careful because you are losing a lot of the world. You are losing a lot of support.” Looks a lot like support for a ceasefire to me! I have encountered people who genuinely read Trump's stance as "nuke gaza" in order to finish the job, but that's obviously completely at odds with his stated concern about international support.

To the other claim - "Biden is one of the only American Presidents in my lifetime to threaten limiting Military Aid to Israel" - that article is from May. Click through to read and it related to an invasion of Rafah, which was carried out. Was the threat carried out? Not according to the guardian:

Biden has not delivered on his threat to curb arms deliveries, which would have triggered outrage from not just Republicans but pro-Israel Democrats. Administration officials have instead sought to parse what “going into Rafah” means. When he issued his ultimatum a month ago, Biden had suggested it meant the IDF advancing to the city’s “population centres”. That has clearly already happened, but US officials are now arguing the forays so far have not been “major operations”.

It is true that Biden had prior to that threat already halted shipments of the very biggest bombs, but that doesn't seem to have changed anything. It's worth noting that both of the Bushes achieved actual changes in Israel's behaviour by threatening loan guarantees (this may or may not be outside gojira007's lifetime). Moreover, this should also be viewed in the context of how extreme Israel's current behaviour is - while there have absolutely been threats to Israel's aid before I'm not sure if there has ever been a period of sustained military action that has killed this many Palestinians. Incidentally, the current war isn't even the first Israeli atrocity during the Biden administration.

It's difficult to say what would be different under Trump when it comes to Palestine, because October 7th doesn't have an equivalent. However while he's clearly no friend to Palestinians, having recognised disputed and illegal Israeli claims, he has also pushed for peace (as long as it doesn't inconvinience Israel). When there was a pretext for bombings Trump did purport to "support Israel 100%", but the result was nowhere near as disproportionate as what's happening now.

Overall I don't think there's evidence that Trump would fail to clear the historically low bar that has been set by the Biden administration when it comes to avoiding killing in Gaza. While there are other aspects of his policy regarding Israel that you can criticise (at least some of which Biden has continued), it is not truthful to suggest he's worse than Biden on the matters of either military support or a ceasefire.

Right. I wish I was done, but one other thing.

if you want to vote for a third party, what you are going to do is vote for biden in november 2024 and then as soon as that’s done, start trying to get ranked choice voting in your state

I would argue this is something like the Nirvana Fallacy. If it's plausible to get ranked choice voting while continuing to vote blue across the board, then it would be a wonderful solution. Do you think it's plausible, reader? Or is it just being said to shut you up?

Personally, I'm old enough to remember the last three election cycles where leftists were told "first vote blue but after that you can try to push the person you already voted for left I guess" (the cycle before that Obama actually looked promising). At some point you have to draw a line.

Besides, I would suggest that ranked choice is far more likely to be adopted by the DNC if lack of it is perceived to be hurting them at the ballot box. That means a third-party vote high enough to swing the election, cast by people who will not be bullied back into voting DNC by pied piper tactics in place of policy improvements.

(Obligatory: obviously not voting at all is pointless, if you can it's worth going to the ballot boxes and voting Green. Furthermore, voting for congresspeople, on ballot measures etc is important - don't take out your dislike of Biden on DNC candidates for congress! Also, the more local stuff can often make a massive difference.)

(by all means take out your dislike of specific DNC candidates on those candidates at the ballot box if there's good reason to but control of congress is very important whoever is in the white house)

Look.

I have made you a chart. A very simple chart.

People say "You have to draw the line somewhere, and Biden has crossed it-" and my response is "Trump has crossed way more lines than Biden".

These categories are based off of actual policy enacted by both of these men while they were in office.

If the ONLY LINE YOU CARE ABOUT is line 12, you have an incredible amount of privilege, AND YOU DO NOT CARE ABOUT PALESTINIANS. You obviously have nothing to fear from a Trump presidency, and you do not give a fuck if a ceasefire actually occurs. You are obviously fine if your queer, disabled, and marginalized loved ones are hurt. You clearly don't care about the status of American democracy, which Trump has openly stated he plans to destroy on day 1 he is in office.

[ellenhenryart]

[mariacallous]

Democrats and liberal pundits are already trying to figure out how the Trump campaign not only bested Kamala Harris in the “Blue Wall” states of the Midwest and the Rust Belt, but gained on her even in areas that should have been safe for a Democrat. Almost everywhere, Donald Trump expanded his coalition, and this time, unlike in 2016, he didn’t have to thread the needle of the Electoral College to win: He can claim the legitimacy of winning the popular vote.

Trump’s opponents are now muttering about the choice of Tim Walz, the influence of the Russians, the role of the right-wing media, and whether President Joe Biden should not have stepped aside in favor of Harris. Even the old saw about “economic anxiety” is making a comeback.

These explanations all have some merit, but mostly, they miss the point. Yes, some voters still stubbornly believe that presidents magically control the price of basic goods. Others have genuine concerns about immigration and gave in to Trump’s booming call of fascism and nativism. And some of them were just never going to vote for a woman, much less a Black woman.

But in the end, a majority of American voters chose Trump because they wanted what he was selling: a nonstop reality show of rage and resentment. Some Democrats, still gripped by the lure of wonkery, continue to scratch their heads over which policy proposals might have unlocked more votes, but that was always a mug’s game. Trump voters never cared about policies, and he rarely gave them any. (Choosing to be eaten by a shark rather than electrocuted might be a personal preference, but it’s not a policy.) His rallies involved long rants about the way he’s been treated, like a giant therapy session or a huge family gathering around a bellowing, impaired grandpa.

Back in 2021, I wrote a book about the rise of “illiberal populism,” the self-destructive tendency in some nations that leads people to participate in democratic institutions such as voting while being hostile to democracy itself, casting ballots primarily to punish other people and to curtail everyone’s rights—even their own. These movements are sometimes led by fantastically wealthy faux populists who hoodwink gullible voters by promising to solve a litany of problems that always seem to involve money, immigrants, and minorities. The appeals from these charlatans resonate most not among the very poor, but among a bored, relatively well-off middle class, usually those who are deeply uncomfortable with racial and demographic changes in their own countries.

And so it came to pass: Last night, a gaggle of millionaires and billionaires grinned and applauded for Trump. They were part of an alliance with the very people another Trump term would hurt—the young, minorities, and working families among them.

Trump, as he has shown repeatedly over the years, couldn’t care less about any of these groups. He ran for office to seize control of the apparatus of government and to evade judicial accountability for his previous actions as president. Once he is safe, he will embark on the other project he seems to truly care about: the destruction of the rule of law and any other impediments to enlarging his power.

Americans who wish to stop Trump in this assault on the American constitutional order, then, should get it out of their heads that this election could have been won if only a better candidate had made a better pitch to a few thousand people in Pennsylvania. Biden, too old and tired to mount a proper campaign, likely would have lost worse than Harris; more to the point, there was nothing even a more invigorated Biden or a less, you know, female alternative could have offered. Racial grievances, dissatisfaction with life’s travails (including substance addiction and lack of education), and resentment toward the villainous elites in faraway cities cannot be placated by housing policy or interest-rate cuts.

No candidate can reason about facts and policies with voters who have no real interest in such things. They like the promises of social revenge that flow from Trump, the tough-guy rhetoric, the simplistic “I will fix it” solutions. And he’s interesting to them, because he supports and encourages their conspiracist beliefs. (I knew Harris was in trouble when I was in Pennsylvania last week for an event and a fairly well-off business owner, who was an ardent Trump supporter, told me that Michelle Obama had conspired with the Canadians to change the state’s vote tally in 2020. And that wasn’t even the weirdest part of the conversation.)

As Jonathan Last, editor of The Bulwark, put it in a social-media post last night: The election went the way it did “because America wanted Trump. That’s it. People reaching to construct [policy] alibis for the public because they don’t want to grapple with this are whistling past the graveyard.” Last worries that we might now be in a transition to authoritarianism of the kind Russia went through in the 1990s, but I visited Russia often in those days, and much of the Russian democratic implosion was driven by genuinely brutal economic conditions and the rapid collapse of basic public services. Americans have done this to themselves during a time of peace, prosperity, and astonishingly high living standards. An affluent society that thinks it is living in a hellscape is ripe for gulling by dictators who are willing to play along with such delusions.

The bright spot in all this is that Trump and his coterie must now govern. The last time around, Trump was surrounded by a small group of moderately competent people, and these adults basically put baby bumpers and pool noodles on all the sharp edges of government. This time, Trump will rule with greater power but fewer excuses, and he—and his voters—will have to own the messes and outrages he is already planning to create.

Those voters expect that Trump will hurt others and not them. They will likely be unpleasantly surprised, much as they were in Trump’s first term. (He was, after all, voted out of office for a reason.) For the moment, some number of them have memory-holed that experience and are pretending that his vicious attacks on other Americans are just so much hot air.

Trump, unfortunately, means most of what he says. In this election, he has triggered the unfocused ire and unfounded grievances of millions of voters. Soon we will learn whether he can still trigger their decency—if there is any to be found.

[porterdavis]

A great long read from Tom Nichols of The Atlantic:

“Democrats and liberal pundits are already trying to figure out how the Trump campaign not only bested Kamala Harris in the “Blue Wall” states of the Midwest and the Rust Belt, but gained on her even in areas that should have been safe for a Democrat. Almost everywhere, Donald Trump expanded his coalition, and this time, unlike in 2016, he didn’t have to thread the needle of the Electoral College to win: He can claim the legitimacy of winning the popular vote.

Trump’s opponents are now muttering about the choice of Tim Walz, the influence of the Russians, the role of the right-wing media, and whether President Joe Biden should not have stepped aside in favor of Harris. Even the old saw about “economic anxiety” is making a comeback.

These explanations all have some merit, but mostly, they miss the point. Yes, some voters still stubbornly believe that presidents magically control the price of basic goods. Others have genuine concerns about immigration and gave in to Trump’s booming call of fascism and nativism. And some of them were just never going to vote for a woman, much less a Black woman.

But in the end, a majority of American voters chose Trump because they wanted what he was selling: a nonstop reality show of rage and resentment. Some Democrats, still gripped by the lure of wonkery, continue to scratch their heads over which policy proposals might have unlocked more votes, but that was always a mug’s game. Trump voters never cared about policies, and he rarely gave them any. (Choosing to be eaten by a shark rather than electrocuted might be a personal preference, but it’s not a policy.) His rallies involved long rants about the way he’s been treated, like a giant therapy session or a huge family gathering around a bellowing, impaired grandpa.

Back in 2021, I wrote a book about the rise of “illiberal populism,” the self-destructive tendency in some nations that leads people to participate in democratic institutions such as voting while being hostile to democracy itself, casting ballots primarily to punish other people and to curtail everyone’s rights—even their own. These movements are sometimes led by fantastically wealthy faux populists who hoodwink gullible voters by promising to solve a litany of problems that always seem to involve money, immigrants, and minorities. The appeals from these charlatans resonate most not among the very poor, but among a bored, relatively well-off middle class, usually those who are deeply uncomfortable with racial and demographic changes in their own countries.

And so it came to pass: Last night, a gaggle of millionaires and billionaires grinned and applauded for Trump. They were part of an alliance with the very people another Trump term would hurt—the young, minorities, and working families among them.

Trump, as he has shown repeatedly over the years, couldn’t care less about any of these groups. He ran for office to seize control of the apparatus of government and to evade judicial accountability for his previous actions as president. Once he is safe, he will embark on the other project he seems to truly care about: the destruction of the rule of law and any other impediments to enlarging his power.

Americans who wish to stop Trump in this assault on the American constitutional order, then, should get it out of their heads that this election could have been won if only a better candidate had made a better pitch to a few thousand people in Pennsylvania. Biden, too old and tired to mount a proper campaign, likely would have lost worse than Harris; more to the point, there was nothing even a more invigorated Biden or a less, you know, female alternative could have offered. Racial grievances, dissatisfaction with life’s travails (including substance addiction and lack of education), and resentment toward the villainous elites in faraway cities cannot be placated by housing policy or interest-rate cuts.

No candidate can reason about facts and policies with voters who have no real interest in such things. They like the promises of social revenge that flow from Trump, the tough-guy rhetoric, the simplistic “I will fix it” solutions. And he’s interesting to them, because he supports and encourages their conspiracist beliefs. (I knew Harris was in trouble when I was in Pennsylvania last week for an event and a fairly well-off business owner, who was an ardent Trump supporter, told me that Michelle Obama had conspired with the Canadians to change the state’s vote tally in 2020. And that wasn’t even the weirdest part of the conversation.)

As Jonathan Last, editor of The Bulwark, put it in a social-media post last night: The election went the way it did “because America wanted Trump. That’s it. People reaching to construct [policy] alibis for the public because they don’t want to grapple with this are whistling past the graveyard.” Last worries that we might now be in a transition to authoritarianism of the kind Russia went through in the 1990s, but I visited Russia often in those days, and much of the Russian democratic implosion was driven by genuinely brutal economic conditions and the rapid collapse of basic public services. Americans have done this to themselves during a time of peace, prosperity, and astonishingly high living standards. An affluent society that thinks it is living in a hellscape is ripe for gulling by dictators who are willing to play along with such delusions.

The bright spot in all this is that Trump and his coterie must now govern. The last time around, Trump was surrounded by a small group of moderately competent people, and these adults basically put baby bumpers and pool noodles on all the sharp edges of government. This time, Trump will rule with greater power but fewer excuses, and he—and his voters—will have to own the messes and outrages he is already planning to create.

Those voters expect that Trump will hurt others and not them. They will likely be unpleasantly surprised, much as they were in Trump’s first term. (He was, after all, voted out of office for a reason.) For the moment, some number of them have memory-holed that experience and are pretending that his vicious attacks on other Americans are just so much hot air.

Trump, unfortunately, means most of what he says. In this election, he has triggered the unfocused ire and unfounded grievances of millions of voters. Soon we will learn whether he can still trigger their decency—if there is any to be found.

[shadow-0-8]

Phillip "America" Graves is sobbing right now.

-Graves is the kind of mother fucker to buy those stupid mugs that say covefee

-Graves is the kind of mother fucker to have a truck that flys two flags. The American flag and a MAGA flag

-Graves is the kind of mother fucker who follows three people on Twitter (I will never call it X). Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and his mom.

-Graves is the kind of mother fucker to own an account on "The Right Stuff" dating app.

If Trump ended up with a cheek scar like Graves, he would fucking LOVE THAT SHIT

NO! NO! NO! NO! DO NOT BRING THAT STINKY RACIST BASTARD INTO MY BELOVED GRAVES’ PERSONALITY!

And no, he’s flying two flags, the American one, and the dont tread on me flag, or the confederacy(not cause he’s racist he just loves the south)

he would definitely hate Biden, but for the sake of my own sanity, I’m going to say he’d also hate Trump, but just because of some of the Project 2025 stuff(some of that stuff is shitty, did we just go back 100 years?) and the riots, since he’d think everyone was acting like cattle, and we all know Graves isn’t a fan of following the group. He also wouldn’t like the felony charges.

honestly though, I don’t think he’d be big into politics, and frankly, I think if you asked him he’d say he just wants “anybody else” like the rest of us, or he’d probably just say “me” because, well, because he’s Graves.

[caffeinatedkris]

[poli-doppels]

Funny Biden Coffee Mug with 400 yr old Dracula

[toruandmidori]

We’re already over the 2024 elections and they’ve only just started.

Fly your apathy flag proudly with our new range of funny and entirely disinterested political campaign mugs.

Check out our full range on Teepublic here, individual links below:

MEH!

YET ANOTHER ONE

WE’RE ALL DYING ANYWAY