For those of you who think MAGA Trump supporters are in a cult

[Loren Pechtel]

@Swammerdami

I mean, I would wager it's because it's more an uncommon use, because it doesn't come up to need very often.

I would go so far as to say that concern:involvement is a part of concern:worry, being used instead of of "worrying".

The concept of involvement with a connotation for worry specifically is I think why you are seeing this use more recently. Because it's not just "I'm worried"; it's got this thread of "because now I think this is really a problem that involves me somehow".

Yup, it's been an uncommon but valid usage for a long time. A problem that may exist is worrying. A problem that certainly does exist but those magnitude is uncertain is concerning. And the world now has an awful lot more concerning situations than it used to.

 

[Jarhyn]

@Swammerdami

I mean, I would wager it's because it's more an uncommon use, because it doesn't come up to need very often.

I would go so far as to say that concern:involvement is a part of concern:worry, being used instead of of "worrying".

The concept of involvement with a connotation for worry specifically is I think why you are seeing this use more recently. Because it's not just "I'm worried"; it's got this thread of "because now I think this is really a problem that involves me somehow".

Yup, it's been an uncommon but valid usage for a long time. A problem that may exist is worrying. A problem that certainly does exist but those magnitude is uncertain is concerning. And the world now has an awful lot more concerning situations than it used to.

Yeah, for me, worry is like, whenever it comes to the surface or across my senses I say "think about that" and then I literally "focus" on my worry and think about that in the same context for a while. No big deal, down it goes for further ruminations.

With concern, I find myself chewing on it in the forefront. I can't even get it to go back down with a brief shot of worry, because whatever smaller thought processes exist behind me, they tried and failed too many times and it's out of their pay grade. I have to formalize parts of a plan, pay it real concern, before it will go back down and I can go back to stirring in an appropriate amount of worry to keep going on it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm just going by what I read and hear:

Because you read and hear the cult.

There is irrefutable evidence that details how President Obama and his national security team directed the creation of an intelligence community assessment that they knew was false,” Gabbard said at the briefing, adding that the idea that Russia interfered in the election to promote Trump was a “contrived narrative”.

"Obama’s administration “manufactured findings from shoddy sources … In doing so, they conspired to subvert the will of the American people, who elected Donald Trump in that election in November of 2016”, she said.

Gabbard added that she had referred the former president to the Justice Department for a possible criminal prosecution.

And why we are supposed to trust her? The Felon does not want competent people around him, at this point assume any of his appointees are utterly unqualified.

It is possible that aljazeera news isn't accurate but at this point I would trust that above anything read on wikipedia.

Al Jazeera is controlled by Qatar, Qatar is in bed with Iran. And Iran and Russia are at least somewhat in bed together.

Al Jazeera used to be heavily slanted but basically truthful. (In a Biden and Putin were in a race against each other, Putin placed a respectable second while Biden placed next to last sense.) Now, there isn't even a kernel of honesty.

 

[Swammerdami]

I'm just going by what I read and hear:

Because you read and hear the cult.

There is irrefutable evidence that details how President Obama and his national security team directed the creation of an intelligence community assessment that they knew was false,” Gabbard said at the briefing, adding that the idea that Russia interfered in the election to promote Trump was a “contrived narrative”.

BTW. As I prepared this multi-quote for this post, I deleted some text including a closing I (italics) tag. The editor generously restored that tag
and added another sixteen tags, all of which I removed manually. Sixteen. I counted them. The editor "thought" it was being clever, but it is the WORST editor I have ever seen. (And I joined the "20 million keystrokes club" decades ago. Even IBM's IEBUPDTE -- anybody else here ever use that? -- was a FAR better editor.)

And why we are supposed to trust her? The Felon does not want competent people around him, at this point assume any of his appointees are utterly unqualified.

It is possible that aljazeera news isn't accurate but at this point I would trust that above anything read on wikipedia.

Al Jazeera is controlled by Qatar, Qatar is in bed with Iran.

Hunh? Cite? Oh, I forgot. Loren is in Netanyahu's cheering section; this taints all of his opinions re: the Middle East.
SPOILER alert: Saudi Arabia is more evil than Iran. Qatar maintains relations with both these evil powers. Trump's Amerika and the war criminal Netanyahu are far more evil than Qatar. But I guess anyone who does not support the massacres in Gaza is evil in Loren's eyes.

And Iran and Russia are at least somewhat in bed together.

Al Jazeera used to be heavily slanted but basically truthful. (In a Biden and Putin were in a race against each other, Putin placed a respectable second while Biden placed next to last sense.) Now, there isn't even a kernel of honesty.

Hunh??
RVonse didn't even read the Aljazeera article. He got his info from Truth Social or such, and Googled to see if the report was citable from a less contemptible source. Google presented him with an Aljazeera URL. RVonse couldn't have actually read the Aljazeera article: It says the OPPOSITE of what he claimed.

But even worse than RVonse not even reading the news article he cites is Loren not reading Swammi's post #151 !
Here, Loren. I'll give you another chance to correct your opinion of the Aljaeera story you are wrongly condemning:

www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/7/25/can-barack-obama-be-prosecuted-over-russian-interference-intelligence

Oh my. Aljazeera did what a good objective news source SHOULD do. Gabbard is a news maker. Her pie-hole opens and words emerge therefrom. Aljazeera reports what those words were. When an OBJECTIVE source reports what SOMEONE ELSE says, it's doing its job and may or may not be in agreement with the person quoted.

It is possible that aljazeera news isn't accurate but at this point I would trust that above anything read on wikipedia.

Prevarication. If you actually trusted aljazeera more than Trump and the other MAGA liars, you'd be able to escape from your Tunnel of Ignorance. In particular you would have read the actual article that you linked to!!

For example, here is what the Aljazeera reporters reported in the article that you just linked to and pretended to have read.
Let me repeat that: in the article that you just linked to and pretended to have read.

However, declassified documents released by Gabbard this week, including a September 2020 report led by House Republicans on the intelligence committee, do not appear to implicate Obama in any apparent way, experts say.

“There is no evidence of criminal acts on Obama’s part or anyone in his administration,” Barbara Ann Perry, who analyses US presidents at the Virginia-based Miller Center, told Al Jazeera.

Several investigations by Congress and the intelligence community have previously found that Russia did interfere in the 2016 election.

@RVonse -- while I have your attention would you kindly comment on a recent news story:

In a long post on social media, Mr. Trump said he had directed his team to fire Erika McEntarfer, the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, who was confirmed on a bipartisan basis in 2024.

Emily Liddel, an associate commissioner for the bureau, confirmed late Friday that Dr. McEntarfer had been fired and that William Wiatrowski, the deputy commissioner, would serve as acting commissioner.

The president fired Dr. McEntarfer after the bureau released monthly jobs data showing surprisingly weak hiring in July and large downward revisions to job growth in the previous two months.

Kudos to RVonse, one of the few Trump supporters with the intellect to read the news, and the gumption to offer his opinions. Will you give us your opinion on this story? WHY did McEntarfer falsify labor statistics? [/sarcasm] Do you agree with Trump that McEntarfer is a saboteur working for the Deep State? And that she falsified data, presumably to aid the nefarious ambitions of Democrats like Hillary and other pedophiles?

 

[Toni]

Personally, I would be astonished if Epstein actually died by suicide.

 

[TV and credit cards]

It is possible that aljazeera news isn't accurate but at this point I would trust that above anything read on wikipedia.

Al Jazeera used to be heavily slanted but basically truthful. (In a Biden and Putin were in a race against each other, Putin placed a respectable second while Biden placed next to last sense.) Now, there isn't even a kernel of honesty.

Oh bullshit Loren.
It's as easy as taking the same story reported from a few different news sources and comparing them.
What doesn't have a kernel of honesty is your statement.

 

[WAB]

Personally, I would be astonished if Epstein actually died by suicide.

Frankly, I'd be surprised if he didn't. Here's a rich man, living a hedonistic life style, suddenly in a jail cell and facing a prison sentence as an egregious sex offender, pedo, and trafficker. Unless he'd been granted protection, his life would have been worse than hell, and most certainly worse than death. In his shoes, I'd have found any possible way to off myself.

I'm not offering an opinion either way with respect to what actually happened. I'm sure it was in a lot of people's best interest for him to be dead.

 

[RVonse]

Prevarication. If you actually trusted aljazeera more than Trump and the other MAGA liars, you'd be able to escape from your Tunnel of Ignorance. In particular you would have read the actual article that you linked to!!

For example, here is what the Aljazeera reporters reported in the article that you just linked to and pretended to have read.
Let me repeat that: in the article that you just linked to and pretended to have read.

However, declassified documents released by Gabbard this week, including a September 2020 report led by House Republicans on the intelligence committee, do not appear to implicate Obama in any apparent way, experts say.

“There is no evidence of criminal acts on Obama’s part or anyone in his administration,” Barbara Ann Perry, who analyses US presidents at the Virginia-based Miller Center, told Al Jazeera.

Several investigations by Congress and the intelligence community have previously found that Russia did interfere in the 2016 election.

@RVonse -- while I have your attention would you kindly comment on a recent news story:

In a long post on social media, Mr. Trump said he had directed his team to fire Erika McEntarfer, the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, who was confirmed on a bipartisan basis in 2024.

Emily Liddel, an associate commissioner for the bureau, confirmed late Friday that Dr. McEntarfer had been fired and that William Wiatrowski, the deputy commissioner, would serve as acting commissioner.

The president fired Dr. McEntarfer after the bureau released monthly jobs data showing surprisingly weak hiring in July and large downward revisions to job growth in the previous two months.

Kudos to RVonse, one of the few Trump supporters with the intellect to read the news, and the gumption to offer his opinions. Will you give us your opinion on this story? WHY did McEntarfer falsify labor statistics? [/sarcasm] Do you agree with Trump that McEntarfer is a saboteur working for the Deep State? And that she falsified data, presumably to aid the nefarious ambitions of Democrats like Hillary and other pedophiles?

So Al Jazeera presents that Gabbard released a 2020 House Republican report that did not implicate Obama. Does not in any way refute my post nor make any claim Gabbard is wrong. Nor does this even tell us Al Jazeera believes Gabbord is wrong. It simply just gives us background we already knew. That Trump had to deal with a lot of rino's and never Trumpers during his first administration.

As for firing of Dr. McEntarfer I think Trump was an absolute moron for doing this. If anything the problem has been early reporting being too optimistic before all the facts come in. Trump has just formally told the world that US government stats can not be trusted at all in the future. He has told the world that politics takes priority over telling the truth...not that I ever believed reports given from any administration anyway.

 

[Swammerdami]

So Al Jazeera presents that Gabbard released a 2020 House Republican report that did not implicate Obama. Does not in any way refute my post nor make any claim Gabbard is wrong. Nor does this even tell us Al Jazeera believes Gabbord is wrong. It simply just gives us background we already knew. That Trump had to deal with a lot of rino's and never Trumpers during his first administration.

YOU implied that Aljazeera supported Gabbard's version. In fact, that agency did what you should like and what the mainstream source that most agrees with you pretends to do: "Fair and Balanced; we REPORT, you decide."

As for firing of Dr. McEntarfer I think Trump was an absolute moron for doing this. If anything the problem has been early reporting being too optimistic before all the facts come in. Trump has just formally told the world that US government stats can not be trusted at all in the future. He has told the world that politics takes priority over telling the truth...not that I ever believed reports given from any administration anyway.

You concede that the firing was wrong. Then, with the sentence I've purpled you show utter miscomprehension of stats reporting and the value of CONSISTENCY.

Still the fact you found Trump wrong was encouraging ... UNTIL [paraphrasing]:
"Same-same; the Demon-crats did it first and probably worst."

Metaphor and some of the hardest-core Hardcorians have left us. But I hope you stick around, RVonse. In their own special way your opinions are truly astonishing.

 

[robnisch]

"SQUIRREL"

 

[Loren Pechtel]

BTW. As I prepared this multi-quote for this post, I deleted some text including a closing I (italics) tag. The editor generously restored that tag
and added another sixteen tags, all of which I removed manually. Sixteen. I counted them. The editor "thought" it was being clever, but it is the WORST editor I have ever seen. (And I joined the "20 million keystrokes club" decades ago. Even IBM's IEBUPDTE -- anybody else here ever use that? -- was a FAR better editor.)

Yeah, it handles tags very badly.

Al Jazeera is controlled by Qatar, Qatar is in bed with Iran.

Hunh? Cite? Oh, I forgot. Loren is in Netanyahu's cheering section; this taints all of his opinions re: the Middle East.
SPOILER alert: Saudi Arabia is more evil than Iran. Qatar maintains relations with both these evil powers. Trump's Amerika and the war criminal Netanyahu are far more evil than Qatar. But I guess anyone who does not support the massacres in Gaza is evil in Loren's eyes.

Why do I have to keep pointing out basic reality of the world?

(All of this is simply from the first page of Google)
Iran/Qatar:

The Qatar Crisis: Beyond the Qatar-Iran-Terrorism Framework | The Pardee Atlas Journal of Global Affairs

sites.bu.edu

Qatar, Iran, and the United States

A nuclear-armed Iran should concern every American and the global community. UANI seeks to prevent Iran from fulfilling its ambition to obtain nuclear weapons.

www.unitedagainstnucleariran.com

Qatar/AlJazeera:

Al Jazeera Must Register as a Foreign Agent of Qatar

Standing in a Gaza hospital this month, an elderly man with a bandaged arm told an Al Jazeera reporter a simple fact: “As for the resistance , they come and hide among the people.” The man added: “They can go to hell and hide there.” The reporter promptly turned his back on the man and changed...

www.fdd.org

Al Jazeera Media Network (AJMN)

statemediamonitor.com

And Iran and Russia are at least somewhat in bed together.

Al Jazeera used to be heavily slanted but basically truthful. (In a Biden and Putin were in a race against each other, Putin placed a respectable second while Biden placed next to last sense.) Now, there isn't even a kernel of honesty.

Hunh??
RVonse didn't even read the Aljazeera article. He got his info from Truth Social or such, and Googled to see if the report was citable from a less contemptible source. Google presented him with an Aljazeera URL. RVonse couldn't have actually read the Aljazeera article: It says the OPPOSITE of what he claimed.

I didn't look at the Al Jazeera article because I know it's not a credible source.

But even worse than RVonse not even reading the news article he cites is Loren not reading Swammi's post #151 !
Here, Loren. I'll give you another chance to correct your opinion of the Aljaeera story you are wrongly condemning:

Why should I change my opinion?

I would assume that their statement is true but that is completely irrelevant since "X said Y" is not remotely proof that Y is true, and is a standard tactic to deceive readers into thinking Y is true while maintaining supposed impartiality.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Personally, I would be astonished if Epstein actually died by suicide.

Frankly, I'd be surprised if he didn't. Here's a rich man, living a hedonistic life style, suddenly in a jail cell and facing a prison sentence as an egregious sex offender, pedo, and trafficker. Unless he'd been granted protection, his life would have been worse than hell, and most certainly worse than death. In his shoes, I'd have found any possible way to off myself.

I'm not offering an opinion either way with respect to what actually happened. I'm sure it was in a lot of people's best interest for him to be dead.

I do agree that suicide is a quite reasonable choice in his situation--if there weren't discrepancies and a lot of people with a big motive I would have no reason to doubt it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

As for firing of Dr. McEntarfer I think Trump was an absolute moron for doing this. If anything the problem has been early reporting being too optimistic before all the facts come in. Trump has just formally told the world that US government stats can not be trusted at all in the future. He has told the world that politics takes priority over telling the truth...not that I ever believed reports given from any administration anyway.

Are you getting a hint of why we object to The Felon?

And note that things are playing out pretty much as we expected. Doesn't that suggest that the rest of what we've predicted is also likely to be right?

 

[Swammerdami]

BTW. As I prepared this multi-quote for this post, I deleted some text including a closing I (italics) tag. The editor generously restored that tag
and added another sixteen tags, all of which I removed manually. Sixteen. I counted them. The editor "thought" it was being clever, but it is the WORST editor I have ever seen. (And I joined the "20 million keystrokes club" decades ago. Even IBM's IEBUPDTE -- anybody else here ever use that? -- was a FAR better editor.)

Yeah, it handles tags very badly.

Yes. But did you ever use IBM's IEBUPDTE?

I didn't look at the Al Jazeera article because I know it's not a credible source.

Left-wingers dislike right-wing media and vice versa. Similarly, of course you dislike sources that treat Netanyahu as a war criminal rather than as a hero. Rather than playing a round of "He said; she said" I Googled for the image that locates news sources on a Reliability spectrum.

But this site turned up:

Al Jazeera website
Bias: Skews Left
Reliability: Reliable, Analysis/Fact Reporting

Click to get a graphic that compares Al Jazeera with dozens of other sources. It's very hard to find -- controls on the left help -- but Al Jazeera website is adjacent to Boston Globe.

But even worse than RVonse not even reading the news article he cites is Loren not reading Swammi's post #151 !
Here, Loren. I'll give you another chance to correct your opinion of the Aljaeera story you are wrongly condemning:

Why should I change my opinion?

I would assume that their statement is true but that is completely irrelevant since "X said Y" is not remotely proof that Y is true, and is a standard tactic to deceive readers into thinking Y is true while maintaining supposed impartiality.

So: RVonse pretends to use Al Jazeera as a source, and misrepresents the content 100%. Now, rather than reading the Al Jazeera article -- or even reading the very brief excerpt I provided from that article -- you use RVonse's total misrepresentation to help confirm your bias against a website (as graded by  Ad Fontes Media) roughly as reliable as CNN: The Situation Room, slightly more reliable than Newsweek, and WAY ahead of CBS: 60 Minutes in reliability.

Got it.

 

[RVonse]

As for firing of Dr. McEntarfer I think Trump was an absolute moron for doing this. If anything the problem has been early reporting being too optimistic before all the facts come in. Trump has just formally told the world that US government stats can not be trusted at all in the future. He has told the world that politics takes priority over telling the truth...not that I ever believed reports given from any administration anyway.

Are you getting a hint of why we object to The Felon?

And note that things are playing out pretty much as we expected. Doesn't that suggest that the rest of what we've predicted is also likely to be right?

But Trump (for all his many faults) has also proven the left were and are still horribly wrong. On the most important things that count:

1). Globalism - the elite scam intended to drive down middle class wages causing higher inequality with them and everyone else. It took Trump to finally bring down this false narrative.
2). The economic Forum was "just a committee" and did not mean anything. It took Trump to bring down their false narrative as well.
3). That huge numbers of low educated immigration were desperately needed and would not affect the quality of middle class wages. Same as above.
4). That tariffs can not work and will kill the economy. Despite the economic tariff hating experts the stock market is at record highs right now. And a very good chance the US may yet re-industrialize. It is still early to tell on this however.
5). That all types of religion are harmful.. That social religious institutions needed by the poor were no longer needed by elite That de-population is good.
6). That all main stream media can always be trusted to tell the truth.

Trump won't be president much longer anyway but I still continue to believe (even with his serious flaws) he was well worth it for the US. Our chance of survival is much higher today than it would have been otherwise. When it comes to income disparity and strength of the middle class, the red states are faring much better than the blue ones right now. Especially for the young adults trying to start families.

 

[scombrid]

I feel like I just read a Basil Marceaux campaign speech.

 

[RVonse]

As for firing of Dr. McEntarfer I think Trump was an absolute moron for doing this. If anything the problem has been early reporting being too optimistic before all the facts come in. Trump has just formally told the world that US government stats can not be trusted at all in the future. He has told the world that politics takes priority over telling the truth...not that I ever believed reports given from any administration anyway.

You concede that the firing was wrong. Then, with the sentence I've purpled you show utter miscomprehension of stats reporting and the value of CONSISTENCY.

Still the fact you found Trump wrong was encouraging ... UNTIL [paraphrasing]:
"Same-same; the Demon-crats did it first and probably worst."

Metaphor and some of the hardest-core Hardcorians have left us. But I hope you stick around, RVonse. In their own special way your opinions are truly astonishing.

After reading more sources about Dr. McEntarfer it appears I was hasty in my opinion and should reconsider my original position about Trump's firing.

Her firing does appear to actually have merit when everything is taken into consideration. Not because of the failing final stats but because her original numbers were put out too optimistically without any explanation that they might be so inaccurate. Since her job is to inform the public accurately she very much failed to inform the public in a professional manner.

 

[bilby]

As for firing of Dr. McEntarfer I think Trump was an absolute moron for doing this. If anything the problem has been early reporting being too optimistic before all the facts come in. Trump has just formally told the world that US government stats can not be trusted at all in the future. He has told the world that politics takes priority over telling the truth...not that I ever believed reports given from any administration anyway.

Are you getting a hint of why we object to The Felon?

And note that things are playing out pretty much as we expected. Doesn't that suggest that the rest of what we've predicted is also likely to be right?

But Trump (for all his many faults) has also proven the left were and are still horribly wrong. On the most important things that count:

1). Globalism - the elite scam intended to drive down middle class wages causing higher inequality with them and everyone else. It took Trump to finally bring down this false narrative.
2). The economic Forum was "just a committee" and did not mean anything. It took Trump to bring down their false narrative as well.
3). That huge numbers of low educated immigration were desperately needed and would not affect the quality of middle class wages. Same as above.
4). That tariffs can not work and will kill the economy. Despite the economic tariff hating experts the stock market is at record highs right now. And a very good chance the US may yet re-industrialize. It is still early to tell on this however.
5). That all types of religion are harmful.. That social religious institutions needed by the poor were no longer needed by elite That de-population is good.
6). That all main stream media can always be trusted to tell the truth.

Trump won't be president much longer anyway but I still continue to believe (even with his serious flaws) he was well worth it for the US. Our chance of survival is much higher today than it would have been otherwise. When it comes to income disparity and strength of the middle class, the red states are faring much better than the blue ones right now. Especially for the young adults trying to start families.

I thought that this was a rather well done satire of a one-eyed Trumpist's absurd take.

Then I saw who posted it, and now I am not sure that the laughable absurdity and contradiction of reality it depicts was, in fact, intended as humour.

 

[Swammerdami]

After reading more sources about Dr. McEntarfer it appears I was hasty in my opinion and should reconsider my original position about Trump's firing.

Her firing does appear to actually have merit when everything is taken into consideration. Not because of the failing final stats but because her original numbers were put out too optimistically without any explanation that they might be so inaccurate. Since her job is to inform the public accurately she very much failed to inform the public in a professional manner.

Please tell us about the "more sources" that you read? My Googling just shows sources like:

How unusual are jobs numbers revisions? According to experts, they're a common feature.

Revisions are a "feature, not a bug" of any jobs report, former BLS commissioner told CBS MoneyWatch.

www.cbsnews.com

Even FoxNews and WSJ are refusing to swallow Trump's shit these days. They take the truthful side of this controversy:

Why does the Labor Department revise jobs reports? Here are 3 reasons

The Bureau of Labor Statistics' jobs report revisions are standard practice to improve data accuracy as more businesses respond to surveys, contrary to President Donald Trump's claims of rigged numbers.

www.foxbusiness.com

SO ... Will you please tell us what your sources are?

- - - - - - - -

I thought that this was a rather well done satire of a one-eyed Trumpist's absurd take.

Then I saw who posted it, and now I am not sure that the laughable absurdity and contradiction of reality it depicts was, in fact, intended as humour.

Truth is stranger than fiction. And whatever his faults, RVonse would make a great "straight man" for a political comic.

 

[laughing dog]

As for firing of Dr. McEntarfer I think Trump was an absolute moron for doing this. If anything the problem has been early reporting being too optimistic before all the facts come in. Trump has just formally told the world that US government stats can not be trusted at all in the future. He has told the world that politics takes priority over telling the truth...not that I ever believed reports given from any administration anyway.

You concede that the firing was wrong. Then, with the sentence I've purpled you show utter miscomprehension of stats reporting and the value of CONSISTENCY.

Still the fact you found Trump wrong was encouraging ... UNTIL [paraphrasing]:
"Same-same; the Demon-crats did it first and probably worst."

Metaphor and some of the hardest-core Hardcorians have left us. But I hope you stick around, RVonse. In their own special way your opinions are truly astonishing.

After reading more sources about Dr. McEntarfer it appears I was hasty in my opinion and should reconsider my original position about Trump's firing.

Her firing does appear to actually have merit when everything is taken into consideration. Not because of the failing final stats but because her original numbers were put out too optimistically without any explanation that they might be so inaccurate. Since her job is to inform the public accurately she very much failed to inform the public in a professional manner.

All initial estimates end up inaccurate because the agency doesn’t have all the information. That is true for all gov’t statistics. Holding someone accountable for the inevitable is both unfair and stupid.