Posts by hollowmason64

Honestly, I don't even know whether to laugh or cry at this one... goodbye, common sense 🤦

steelfox98 said:

Don't hold your breath. I've seen enough disappointment in this life to know better. steelfox98 says:
Where exactly did you say they don't bother to ask?
Look at this thread... honestly, are you even aware of what you're posting?
The vote on that bill just gave Andrej Plenković and Horvat all the leverage they need to brush this under the rug and point the finger at everyone else. Typical. I remember when things actually meant something in DC, before this constant deflection became the norm. It’s exhausting.
Is it really that hard to see? For anyone with half a brain cell left, this is just more typical Republican-style bullshit. I've seen this circus before, back when I was working those long shifts in Chicago. It never changes.

I suppose so, but if that's how you want to play it, you clearly aren't interested in actually communicating.
They voted for that desperate Republican law out of pure populism, too afraid to touch the one issue that actually triggers their voters. And then, predictably, those criminals have the nerve to claim, "Even the opposition supported our bill!" Typical.

If you see it, you see it. If you don't, you don't. Honestly, those Republicans should have just stayed home that day—not just skipping the vote, but staying out of the country entirely. People like that would still be out there blindly trusting Andrej Plenković regardless.

It’s obvious to everyone now. If the opposition had actually pulled themselves together back then—even with that one unconventional move on such a sensitive issue—they could have pivoted the focus toward yet another Republican disaster. If they had, Andrej Plenković wouldn't be standing there today talking about "opposition support." Not a chance.
We all knew that any legislation birthed by the Republican Party was bound to be a disaster, but I didn't realize just how catastrophic it would actually be. Did you? Would you have paid more attention if every single opposition member had voted against that reconstruction bill? I certainly would have.

"Quote:"

Look, if they hadn't voted for it, Andrej Plenković would just be pointing fingers anyway. He’d claim they didn't give a damn about people sitting out there without a roof over their heads. He’d argue that reconstruction would only be halfway done if they hadn't backed that law. It's all just a load of nonsense.

He’d love to call them out, but he'd end up swallowing his own pride just to cover for another one of those Republican Party stunts. Typical.
They broke his quorum, so we just sat there laughing at his pathetic whining. It’s the same old story. Right after the election, every single opposition leader refused to even grab a coffee with him. They knew better. With Andrej Plenković, you don't get a conversation—you only get a knife in the back.
Look at what happened last week. Everyone was fixated on Wolfgang Schäuble and that predictable mess over at NBC. It was all a distraction. We saw how the opposition used their blockade to push a visibly rattled Andrej Plenković into cutting the live broadcast of the session. Typical.

"Quote:"

It always comes back to this. The Republicans will find some way to pin their own mess on someone else. It's predictable. Those who actually want to hold them accountable will see it, and those who don't... well, they won't. Same old story. Everything else is just mindless spin. It’s a desperate attempt to twist the truth so hard you end up biting your own tongue. I've seen this dance before.

Was that aimed at me?
Let’s be real: that disastrous Republican law gave them all the cover they needed. Like you said, everything else is just pure spin. To me, this is nothing more than classic Republican-style damage control to justify their own screw-ups.

"Quote:"

Yeah, they voted for that bill. Just like they spent the entire night protesting outside the US Congress before everything was dissolved for elections, all because they were desperate to push that specific legislation through first. The whole point was to get that damn law passed so reconstruction could actually kick off. The plan was to just tweak and amend things on the fly as problems popped up on the ground—as long as they got moving. I can say this with total confidence: even the harshest critics and haters of the Republican Party—and I proudly count myself among them—never imagined these people would sit on their hands for over a year, completely indifferent while we head into another winter.

The Republican Party would have pushed that law through even without any opposition, but hey—some of them actually did vote for it. That’s despite the fact that the Republican Party rejected every single meaningful amendment meant to fix it. Don't quote me on the specifics, but I think they conceded on a few trivial ones.

I absolutely agree with that last part, but that’s my whole point. If the opposition had actually united back then, they would have realized something smelled way worse than usual. Like that whole situation with Wolfgang Schäuble.

The reason they voted for it was just to get some kind of legislation on the books, because even a flawed law like that was supposed to kickstart the rebuilding process. Or at least, that was the idea. Because there was constant whining about how work couldn't actually begin until the law was passed.
And honestly, I totally get that logic. When you've spent six months without a roof over your head, you just want things to move—you think, "Let's just get started and fix the details as we go," since realistically, nobody could have predicted every single little problem upfront.

Then, once they realized they'd been screwed over, they lost the quorum during the amendments a few months later—check out the link this genius posted as proof of an event from several months prior 😁
It’s just like when the whole COVID mess started and everyone gave them their full support, only to blow them off when they saw how they were being played, like that coffee meeting you mentioned.

Now it's finally clear to the citizens...

So now it's suddenly obvious that the Republicans are solely responsible for the rebuilding—or rather, the lack thereof? Well, they can go jump in a lake if they're only realizing that now.

The Republican Party would have passed that law that day regardless of the opposition

And that’s exactly the point of the whole argument. It's like trying to blame the opposition for not caring that rebuilding can't start without legislation while people are left homeless.
We both know the Republicans would find a way to shift the blame in any scenario, simply because they're shameless, immoral pieces of work.

Alex Moore3 said:What lie are you talking about???
Maybe this one?
https://www.telegram.com/politics-news-on-reconstruction/amp/

Look, I'm actually feeling a little embarrassed for you right now. 😁

Do you even read past the headline, or do you just Google stuff to find a title that supports whatever nonsense you're trying to pass off as truth? 🤣🤣🤣

So, you're basically blaming the Democratic Party and the Progressives for passing that reconstruction law, claiming they were just looking for any excuse to break quorum like they did last week. Then you drop a link where Plenki kukati complains about how the opposition blocked them from voting on the amendments to the reconstruction law 🙏instead of actually fixing things.

Honestly, you should be embarrassed.
Though, seeing as you’ve typed out so much nonsense, I doubt you even know what shame feels like. It requires a bit of self-reflection, and based on what you've written here, it looks like you're completely immune to that.

Alex Moore3 said:They couldn't pass that law a week before.
On the second attempt, they actually put in some effort and passed a controversial, poorly designed, and unworkable law, and they even had help from the Democratic Party and the Greens.
Satisfied with that answer?

The only thing that ruins your little lie about the law not being voted on a week prior is the fact that it was actually passed after a two-week special session of US Congress.
Next time you decide to stretch the truth, maybe try inventing something that isn't so easily debunked by checking the official US Congress website.
And yes, I am very satisfied with the answer.

steelfox98 said:Where did I ever say citizens aren't asking questions now?
They voted for a disastrously bad law, effectively handing Joe Biden and that genius Smith an excuse to use the classic Republican tactic: shifting all the blame onto the opposition.

What really gets to me is seeing these constant Republican-style excuses for the other side's screw-ups on this forum. They voted, but it doesn't matter. They lied, but it doesn't matter.
It feels like reading an epic poem written by two opposing machines stuck in a loop. 🙂

And yeah, sure, I voted for Eric Adams in the local elections just to kick out Al Capone, Dilbert, and their whole crew. That doesn't mean I'm going to blindly defend every blatant mistake they make.

What are you talking about when you say they don't care?
Looking at the rest of your post... man, do you even realize what you're writing?
Are you saying that voting for the law gave Plenković and Horvat the ammunition to play it off and point fingers elsewhere?
Is it really that hard for people who actually think for themselves to see that this is just standard Republican nonsense?
If you see it, you see it. If you don't... well, the Republicans could have stayed home on election day and we'd still be stuck with people believing Plenković.
On the flip side, if they hadn't voted for it, Plenković would just be accusing them of not giving a damn about people sitting without roofs over their heads, claiming the reconstruction would only be halfway done if everyone hadn't supported the law—it's all just a bunch of garbage...
..which brings us back to the main point: Republicans will always find a way to blame someone else for their own screw-ups. It's the same deal whether you recognize who is responsible or not.
Anything else is just silly spinning and twisting things in a way that only serves to make you look foolish.

Quincy:

What bothers me is how often I see these Republican-style excuses popping up on this forum from Možemo and their mistakes. They voted, but it doesn't matter. They lied, but it doesn't matter. It feels like reading an epic poem written by two opposing machines.🙂

Sure, they voted for that law. They were out there protesting in front of US Congress all night right before the dissolution and elections because they wanted that law passed first.
The whole point was to get that damn law on the books so the reconstruction could finally start.
The idea was to pass it, then tweak and adjust it as problems popped up on the ground—but the priority was just to get moving.
I can say this with total confidence: even the harshest critics of the Republican Party—and I count myself among them—never thought they would sit on their hands for over a year while these people didn't give a single damn about the fact that another winter was coming.

Alex Moore3 said:You're absolutely right that the Republican Party would have passed that law on a second attempt even without opposition. It might have been harder, and they would have taken the full blame, but since the Democratic Party and the Progressives helped them out, the responsibility is naturally shared.
If anything is being weak here, it's your effort to justify why the Democratic Party and the Progressives aligned themselves with the Republican Party in this instance.
It’s funny how you explain that they criticized the proposal so heavily, only to end up voting for the very thing they opposed. I guess Joe Biden just forced their hand.😁
Another interesting point from the link above is that some parties were extremely critical and warned the law wouldn't work. Their representatives didn't even vote for it.
Wait, so the Democratic Party and the Progressives voted for a disastrous law, but they aren't responsible???
Let me try rephrasing that: The Republican Party, the Democratic Party, and the Progressives are ALL responsible for passing a terrible law that has delayed recovery for over a year and risks us having to return EU funds, all while citizens are stuck waiting through another winter in temporary housing. How does that sound? ☕

Wait, "a little tougher"???
Seriously, please tell me how passing a law becomes just "a little tougher" when you already have the 76 votes you need to make it happen?
I am dying of curiosity here, please, I really need to hear an explanation for that logic. 🙂

Quincy:

So, are you saying the Democratic Party and the Progressives voted for a disastrously bad law, but they aren't responsible for it???

Of course not. How can you be held accountable for managing something when you don't have a single lever at your disposal—not even a tiny bit of influence over any of them?

steelfox98 said:Quincy

They’re responsible for polishing their image while ignoring massive legal loopholes. If M! and the Democratic Party actually had some backbone and didn't vote for this, people might wonder why the united opposition isn't backing the nation's absolute number one priority.
The way things are, Plenković and Smith can easily dodge blame by claiming the opposition supported their legislation.
Bottom line: M! and the Democratic Party just wanted to screw everyone over while keeping their hands clean.

Your logic is a bit shaky 😵 — on one hand, you're arguing that if the opposition hadn't supported the law, citizens would notice, but now that nothing is getting built, citizens don't seem to care?
Are you saying back then it would have been obvious the law was bad because the opposition rejected it, but now nobody knows who to blame for the lack of progress?
You're being a little contradictory here.

Rachel Barrett8 said:Alright then, how many dead voters who supposedly cast ballots for the Republican Party have actually screwed us over so far, and what's been done about it?☕

Oh, right—you mean those fines they handed out to that group over there.😁

So, you're basically admitting they cheated, just like this... What do you think they'd be doing if there wasn't anyone left to watch them?

Alex Moore3 said:The Republican Party proposed that law, and both the Democratic Party and the Progressives sided with them. Those are the facts. Part of the opposition even claimed the law was flawed and unenforceable, which turned out to be true.
Now, the Democratic Party and the Progressives are distancing themselves and making valid demands for changes, but it would be decent of them to admit fault and apologize to the citizens who will spend another winter in shipping containers thanks to them.
It would also be fair if certain forum members who defend them would acknowledge this. But I know that's not realistic.😁
Or at least explain the differences between these three parties based on how they voted on this law. Is the Republican Party solely responsible, or are the Democratic Party and the Progressives also to blame?

That attempt of yours to shift the blame onto other parties is completely missing the mark, because the Republican Party would have pushed this through regardless.
And yeah, sure, they criticized the flaws in the bill before the vote, but the biggest failure of this whole thing—something absolutely nobody could have seen coming—is that even after more than a year and a half since the disaster, not a single house has actually been built.
And that right there? That is the sole responsibility of the Republican Party.

Peter Sanders4 said:offtopic apology

Using Vote.org would boost turnout. Period. You’re worried about security because you don't grasp the technical side, but I’m telling you, it can be done securely.

If I had the option to vote online, my participation wouldn't hover around 50%; it would likely hit 100%. Apply that logic to the rest of the country.

I tend to stay pretty vigilant about safety just because I’m acutely aware of exactly where I live and what I’m seeing and reading every single day. Honestly, you have to be completely disconnected from reality to claim that everything is perfectly secure.

If you actually cared about casting a vote, you would have shown up to the polls. Period.
I really have to disagree with the idea that this can just be applied to everything else. It feels like a bit of a reach to me because you're starting from the assumption that everyone is actually using the federal digital ID portal. In reality, that's just not how things work for most people out there.

Chloe Martinez7 said:From what I've seen, the people I actually know wouldn't vote for the Republican Party even if they lost their minds.☕

People who aren't on board with the Republican Party honestly couldn't care less about the upcoming elections. They have no intention of getting involved again, mostly because they have enough decency to realize they don't have any right to dictate how everyone else should live their lives.

Rachel Barrett8 said:Let me clarify my point here.

I mean, sure, you can go online right now and buy a car or even a house worth $100,000. You could even order several tons of freight from China worth tens of thousands of dollars with just a few clicks.

But when it comes to elections? These modern online gadgets just don't feel secure enough for me.😵

Goodness, trying to have a real conversation with someone who acts like a toddler... that’s just where your logic is sitting right now.
I don't really feel like sitting here and listing every single specific difference between the two right now, so I’ll just give you the bottom line. It comes down to the end result. When someone robs you blind like that, you realize it pretty much instantly, and you can actually start looking into ways to fix it or take action. Around here, you're just left totally in the dark—you have no clue if you've been cheated or not.

Alex Moore3 said:Nina also added this:

"We have the moral high ground to criticize this act, unlike some others—it's strange to hear the Green Party claiming the law is flawed now. Why did you vote for it in the first place? The Greens fueled the moral panic, pushed for its immediate passage, and supported it right along with the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. They are complicit and owe the public an apology. This law is poorly written and impossible to enforce," said the Bridge representative in Congress.

Here is a little more, just so you don't think Nina is out there making these accusations all by himself:

The disaster involving the Reconstruction Act, which they are already changing after only a year, is a perfect example of how this Government operates.

https://www.telegram.com/politics/disaster-of-this-government/

And that brings us to the amendments to the Reconstruction Act passed by the Republican Party, the Democratic Party, and the Greens.

But if you want to claim they are the only opposition, go ahead. You're quite the analyst. 😁

They kept saying "we can handle this today," just like they always do. They weren't the only ones making those promises either, but honestly, six months had already slipped by. At that point, I figured any version of the Reconstruction Law was better than nothing at all—something we could just tweak and fix as we went along. I mean, I don't think even the biggest pessimists or the most hardcore critics of the Republican Party (and trust me, I count myself among them) actually expected these incompetent fools to fail at rebuilding even a single house after a year and a half.
I spent a lot of time wondering how much they’d embezzle or how many homes would end up being shoddy, half-baked jobs, but the idea that they wouldn't have finished a single house after more than 18 months? That never even crossed my mind.

Peter Sanders4 said:You’re pushing for higher voter turnout, yet you’re simultaneously against online voting? That doesn't quite add up.

Both the Republican Party and the Democrats have stood together, acting like brothers, to reject such an option in the US Congress.

Two different parties, but they move as one...

On another note, isn't it interesting how $2 million just vanished with a single stroke of a pen due to a court ruling? Truly beautiful justice.

My main hang-up with your voting idea really comes down to trust. If they're already lying and cutting corners like this, what makes you think they wouldn't just pull the same stunts with an online system?
And don't even get me started on the census... I mean, look at how many people from Canada signed up claiming they live here in the States. They didn't even have to try to make sure someone was actually home to report them. Not to mention if we were doing physical door-to-door censuses, a census worker wouldn't be able to tell if twenty people were crammed into a tiny little apartment, but with this way, they can fly under the radar easily.
Plus, for online voting to work, you'd need the highest level of security through something like a federal ID portal, which would require a card reader—meaning more money out of pocket—and honestly, half the time those things don't even work properly anyway.

Peter Sanders4 said:offtopic apology

Of course turnout would increase. Personally, I manage to make it out about 50% of the time. Sometimes I'm out of town, sometimes I just can't be bothered to drive 1.5 miles from my house, or maybe I've got a BBQ going that day. It would also cut down on the chances of people faking their participation.

Everything you're saying sounds like a bunch of excuses to me. When election day actually rolls around, people find a way to make it happen. There's no such thing as "I couldn't make it to the polls"—I remember one time I landed at the airport around 6 PM and practically sprinted to get to my polling station before they closed at 7. Back when the runoff was between Obama and Trump, I actually had my leg in a cast and was staying at my grandma's place on the other side of town. I still managed to coordinate a ride and ended up hopping up the stairs to my polling station on crutches.
The bottom line is, people show up when they want to. When they don't, they always have a thousand reasons why.

dustymarlin10 said:You're generalizing.
They definitely talk to me, and I vote for those kinds of people too.
I think I've only ever missed one election in my entire life.
It's just that most of the time, those types don't even make it to office, so the Criminal Party ends up running things again anyway.

☕

It doesn't really matter if they win or lose. What matters is that you showed up, cast your ballot, and did your part. If everyone—or at least most of the folks sitting on their couches right now—actually did the same, maybe your candidate would actually have a shot. A lot of people get caught up in this flawed logic where they think, "Oh, they don't have a chance anyway," which is totally backwards because that exact mindset is why they stay home and skip the polls.
Regardless of how your candidate performs or what the final tally looks like, you still need to show up. You always should.

dustymarlin10 said:Totally.
It's pathetic how people try to protest just by staying home on election day.

Though, you really have to wonder who is even worth voting for half the time.
I still haven't gotten over how much that coalition let everyone down back in the day, especially with the total incompetence shown by guys like Joe Lieberman and Bill Clinton.

People don't just forget when they've been played, right?

Look, I totally get the frustration, but I don't get why you'd let it eat at you so much that you just sit back and let others decide your future without picking up the scissors yourself. It’s just not smart.
It’s not like I’ve gone to every single election with total enthusiasm. Sometimes I have, but other times it was just about choosing the lesser of two evils or voting against someone.
At the end of the day, if there isn't a perfect choice, you're stuck with whatever political options are left. Honestly, whenever I unroll that massive ballot, I feel like the little desk at my old school wasn't even big enough to lay it out flat. You really see everything on there—thieves, liars, people who are completely detached from reality, true believers, and naive kids... everyone from the far left to the far right...
And when you look through hundreds of names and can't find a single decent option worth trusting? That actually says more about the system where nobody is good enough.
And those are usually the people who end up being the loudest when it comes to complaining and criticizing everything.

I can't really get my head around what was being said there. It felt a bit off to me.

Nicholas King said:The prerequisite for any of that would be being able to name even five key figures from the Možemo movement who aren't based in Washington, D.C. Right now, that seems like an impossible mission.

There is a very high probability that Možemo will exhaust themselves entirely within Washington, D.C., leaving them completely unable to build out any meaningful infrastructure at the national level.

So, they’ve officially taken control in Madison now. That makes four people ousted nationwide. Honestly, three years is more than enough time to get things sorted, but clearly, that wasn't the case here.

I was just sitting here thinking about how much things have changed lately. It feels like every time I turn around, there's some new development or shift in the landscape that catches me off guard. You know, it reminds me of that one summer back in my college days when everything seemed to be moving at a hundred miles an hour, and you could barely catch your breath between classes. Anyway, looking at what’s being said, it really makes you stop and reflect on the direction we're heading. It's not always easy to make sense of it all, especially when the noise gets so loud. Sometimes you just need to step back, grab a coffee, and try to find some clarity amidst the chaos.

I don't really have much to add to what hollowmason64 was saying earlier, but I've been thinking about this all morning while grabbing my coffee. It’s one of those situations where you just have to step back and look at the bigger picture. Sometimes things feel a bit chaotic, but if you take a second to breathe, the logic starts to make sense. Anyway, just my two cents. hollowmason64 says: Because of all the cronies tied to the Republican Party, gas prices in Washington, D.C. are getting out of hand. Apparently, Eric Adams has decided he’s going to clear everyone out of the gas plant to make a change. It looks like things are heating up again over at City Hall. There’s been some serious talk lately regarding the Republican Party and their connection to the local gas plant operations. It’s one of those situations where you start digging into the budget and realize just how tangled the politics can get with basic city services. I was reading through the latest reports about the investigations into how these contracts were handled, and honestly, it feels a bit like a rerun of old news. You’d think after all the scrutiny we've seen in Washington, D.C., people would be more careful about how they tie party interests to essential infrastructure. But here we are. There’s this ongoing tension between the administration and the oversight committees, and it’s making everyone wonder if the current leadership—specifically looking at Eric Adams' style of management—is actually prioritizing the taxpayers or just keeping the machine running smoothly for the Republican Party. It’s easy to get cynical about it, but when you look at the sheer scale of the funds being moved around, it’s hard not to feel a little uneasy. I remember back when I lived in a smaller town near Madison, we had a similar issue with a local utility provider. It wasn't nearly this massive, obviously, but the feeling of "who's actually in charge here?" was exactly the same. Once you realize that the lines between private interests and public service are blurred, you start looking at every municipal decision through a different lens. Anyway, it'll be interesting to see if any actual accountability comes from this, or if it'll just become another headline that fades away once the next election cycle kicks in. Look at these successful Republican appointees they've brought on board—every single one of them is supposedly some kind of top-tier expert.

Any betting companies out there want to take a wager on where this genius actually ends up? I'm curious to see where the party decides to park him.
Honestly, people like that usually aren't much more than empty suits. You look at these "geniuses" and realize they probably wouldn't be able to stack crates at a warehouse if they didn't have their party membership card to lean on.

slysurfer14 said:Another wrong take thinking those stay-at-home voters belong to someone else...
a 50% turnout gives you basically the same results as an 80% turnout
the difference would be tiny

Not quite. We actually already ran the math on this once before to prove the correlation between small and large scale outputs.

dustymarlin10 said:There’s zero actual consequence for the ones convicted.
They'll pay back a fraction of what they swindled over thirty years—except it won't be them paying, just the taxpayers picking up the tab for their greed—and then they can just move on with their lives.

Isn't it just wild how you can declare someone guilty without actually dismantling the whole operation, banning them from operating, or tossing the ringleaders into a federal prison?

It’s honestly like seizing a tiny bit of cash from the Mafia and then letting them go right back to throwing parties and running their rackets.

Sadly, I don't see this having any real impact at all.

They'll probably just walk right back into a majority in the next election anyway.

I'm right there with you. It's unbelievable. And frankly, it's pretty gross.
The real shame for this country and its people is that an outfit like that is even allowed to exist as a legitimate political party.

Quincy:

They’ll probably walk away with a majority again, no matter what the next election looks like.

Well, that all really just depends on that 50-plus percent of people who are too comfortable in their positions to care.

Charles Fox10 said:Thanks.

You're welcome. You can tell I have a soft spot for certain mods 😬

fadedgull6 said:The entire justice system is firmly in the hands of the Republican Party.
The Republican Party is intentionally dragging its feet when it comes to selecting the head of CNN, mostly because they have their own legal baggage tied up in that court.
But today, all of that crumbled, and honestly, it's all becoming a thing of the past.
Tomorrow is a brand new day!
Personally, I really thought that once George W. Bush was out of the picture, officials would finally learn their lesson, but boy, was I wrong.

Actually, the fact that out of all the crooks in the party, only Ivo Sanders and some insignificant party treasurer got convicted—while the rest of the guys walking around with suitcases like they're Bačić are now sitting in high-ranking positions like the chairman of the majority caucus—is living proof that the judiciary is totally independent.

I’ll give Ivo Sanders one thing in his defense: he claimed he was defending everyone. That's what he told me.
So, you could say the whole party is just full of idiots and sycophants.

Anyway, are you still feeling proud about voting for such a criminal organization?

Christian Torres3 said:Just going to double down on what I've already said.

I'm taking this opportunity to remind you all—I did tell you 😁

Charles Fox10 said:As the legal successor and the political entity responsible for all its past leaders and members, the Republican Party owes the Treasury 18.4 million dollars—an actual fine for everything they've pilfered.
What a bunch of crooks.🤦

And if that were the case, I’d be the first one to forgive them. But I have a bad feeling we could add at least another zero to that number, and we'd still be talking about much more than just millions.

By the way, you missed something in your title.

Rachel Barrett8 said:I guess it’s up to us to forgive them and kick them out of the country.

Where do I sign? I can open an account right now and wire them some funds just to cover their travel expenses.

Carol Newman2 said:I honestly don't get why opposition leaders are celebrating this.

No Republican voter is going to stop supporting the Republican Party just because of this ruling.

The Republican Party stole the money, and then they used it to win the election again.

Why? Because the opposition is a pathetic, fractured mess. They can't even agree on basic principles, let alone find a way to bridge their differences and kick the Republican Party out of the White House.

Of course they won't, since most of those people are either part of the inner circle or family members. But at least the opposition will finally have something solid to throw in their faces whenever they start acting up—they can point out that they've been legally declared a criminal organization.
Kudos to the judges who put this verdict together.

silentsurfer3 said:It’s not exactly a huge victory, I guess—but as of today, I feel pretty justified calling them straight-up criminals.

Given the state of things around here lately, it actually feels like quite a relief.

Terry Hernandez10 said:Gordan Jandroković hit the nail on the head during his recent segment on Fox News—if this isn't related to the Republican Party, then none of their history matters either, including everything from thirty years ago. They love to cherry-pick the good stuff while pretending the scandals and failures never happened; you can't just edit out the bad parts when it suits your narrative.

Quinn:

“They will continue to claim the symbolic legacy of President Franjo Harmon and the prestige of being the party that led the nation during independence, acting as if none of that has anything to do with what transpired ten or fifteen years later. It’s absurd,” notes Gordan Jandroković.

But honestly, they don't have a leg to stand on. I mean, how many people from that era are actually out there screaming about it today? Not many.

Emily Smith6 said:unknown: “We aren’t a corrupt party”

unknown:

"The Supreme Court didn't rule that the Republican Party is a corrupt entity or a criminal organization," claimed unknown (Republican Party). "The Supreme Court ruled that there was liability due to the actions of a specific individual within the party, rather than the Republican Party itself, its members, or its officials," he added.

Listen to this guy... such a joke. 🙄

crimsonwolf26 said:🤣🤣🤣
Looks like hollowmason64 has been counting down the days until this happened.

Look, if we’re being honest, this isn't going to change the minds of the shameless crowd who keeps voting for them—the same people who backed them back in 2011 when all this mess first started. That's just the sad reality of it.
At least now, anyone can call them out for what they really are, and there will actually be some legal ground to stand on when you do.

We already know what's coming. We've heard it from Andrej Plenković himself: their go-to line will be that "this has nothing to do with the current Republican Party"🤣, but the bottom line is that people can finally give them a piece of their mind without hesitation.
Honestly, that alone makes it worth celebrating.😎

It’s officially final!!!!!!!

🙏 🙏 🙏

Of course, their big-shot boss has suddenly vanished from the public eye 😁

Justin Foster45 said:I hate to disappoint you, but I don't set the expiration dates; time and points just accumulate naturally.

Honestly, what are you even trying to achieve with this thread?
You claim you aren't here to complain about bans, yet here you are, clearly bothered by them.
I'm happy to explain how the rules work, even though we both know why you got flagged. The only difference is that you seem to think you're somehow above the rules and shouldn't be penalized.

If you think I have a personal vendetta against you, feel free to ask the Simpsons how many times I've handed her a ban. Meanwhile, I constantly get DMs saying she's my favorite and that I should let her slide.
Or any other female user who doesn't know when to stop.

If your actual goal is to get me removed as a moderator, there isn't much I can do. There are people above me who are perfectly capable of deciding if my moderation is fair or if it's time for me to step down.

Look, let's get one thing straight—I am not being difficult. I already mentioned that I’ve never actually complained about the cardboard packaging before. Honestly, I haven't even complained about yours, even though I sent you a pretty direct message in your inbox explaining exactly where I stood on them.
I don't really bother arguing with the mods about bans or warnings. I already touched on my reasons for that in my very first post, but honestly, it just feels like a losing battle. One day you get hit with a penalty, the next time you slide by unnoticed, and everything seems fine. At the end of the day, this is just an online forum. It’s not like someone is going to show up at my house in Chicago and beat me over the head with a ruler because of some digital slap on the wrist. There's no physical danger here, so there's really no point in fighting to "defend" myself. Besides, every moderator seems to have their own version of the rules anyway, so you can explain yourself all you want, but you're probably just talking to a brick wall.
I honestly don't doubt for a second that you’ve got a perfectly valid excuse ready to go for everything, but since you asked, I’d actually be really curious to hear your take on that last thing.
I was thinking it might be fun to dive into why you felt like that was directed at you and why it hit such a nerve.

Look, I honestly don't care how many warnings or bans you're handing out to people, and frankly, that’s the kind of answer you're going to get from every single moderator on this site. At the end of the day, what happens with someone else's disciplinary record isn't your business.
At least try to be consistent for once instead of making excuses like, "Oh, look at how much I gave her..."
I can only tell you this much—and it’s an easily verifiable fact: in all the ten years or more I've been hanging around this Gossip thread, I don't think anyone has ever been shut down or kicked out quite as fast as you were. It’s pretty unprecedented, really.
It’s pretty wild to think about—you’ve managed to rack up four bans and 160 penalty points on me in just about two months of posting.
I mean, looking back at the last ten years and all those dozens of mods who have come and gone... I’ve definitely had some run-ins with people where things got pretty messy. I remember dealing with Tupelo once, and honestly, nobody has ever shut me down quite like that. It was so blunt and happened so fast. When you get ghosted or dismissed that hard after such a short interaction, it really feels like one thing—it feels like you were just targeted.

Regarding the whole situation about removing you from the moderation team—honestly, I don't really have a horse in this race. It doesn't affect my life one way or another, and I truly don't care who ends up holding the reins. To me, it’s all pretty much the same.
What I’m really getting at is that I want you to just... lose it a little bit. Go off the rails. Get a little "unhinged."
Look, that PDF was around long before you showed up, and it’ll still be here long after you're gone. Same goes for this thread. Just like every other moderator who held down the fort before you, you're expected to respect the rules we all agreed on years ago and maintain the same style of communication we've used with each other all this time.
Look, I don't think you were brought on as a moderator just because we’re all being difficult and need someone to clean up our communication style. Honestly, if that were the case, they would have handled things differently. It feels more like you were stepped into this role simply because someone else moved on, and they needed a steady hand to fill the gap.
Look, you really need to stop killing the PDF uploads and sanitizing the thread just because something doesn't sit right with you. If the rest of us aren't having any issues when we're calling each other idiots or getting heated and talking trash during a debate, then you definitely shouldn't be stepping in to police it either.
We always managed to find our way back to the line and just settle down together.
Look, if you’re planning on actually respecting—I’m struggling to find a better way to put this, honestly—the way we all used to communicate and handle things before you showed up, then I don't really have an issue with you staying on as a moderator.
Look, if you’re going to keep jumping down my throat like this... honestly, I don't have the energy to go back and forth with you anymore, whether it's here or anywhere else. I've got much more important and interesting things to do with my life. I'm heading off to finish up some paperwork on my laptop, so you can stay here and deal with those few people who actually enjoy your attitude. Have fun talking to them; I'll be back once you've moved on.

And just one last thing—it’s actually pretty wild how you can clearly see how much you blew me off, yet there isn't a single moment where it crosses your mind to think, "Hey, maybe I went a little too far."

Larry Walker24 said:hollowmason64 - marry me🙂

Better sign those prenuptial ☕

Rachel Young3 said:Who's actually reporting this? Total garbage... ☕

I honestly never understood that whole reporting culture... you show up to an argument, realize you don't like the vibe, and then just hit the report button.🙄
If I don't like the tone of a conversation, I just move on...

Jeremy Johnson18 said:That option definitely exists. 😁

Ah, so I guess I passed the test 🤣

Rachel Young3 said:Unbelievable! 🤣🤣🤣

Just admit you're talking about influencers 🎉

Look, we can laugh this off and admit it’s pretty ridiculous, but honestly, fashion sense aside, I can't believe a moderator felt so personally insulted that they had to drop a 45-point ban on the forum—and it lasts until the very end of the year, December 31st, 2021.
It might be "only" until the end of the year, though, since she didn't have the option to just burn me out by Easter.

admit it, you're just an influencer 🎉

:staring blankly:

Tyler Vaughn7 said:Do you honestly think the mods read every single little post on the boards they manage? Give me a break...🤣
Moderators aren't actually required to react to reported posts if they decide nothing was broken, so maybe the mod just thought you were being totally extra.
Personally, I think the female mods over at ZK are pretty decent enough.👍

Are you trying to tell me you haven't read every one of my wise observations? I'm offended 😳

Larry Martinez6 said:Justin Foster45 is probably the most chill moderator we've ever had on John Doe; they actually have a sense of humor and can laugh along with our cynical jokes, while still chipping in with their own 🤷

I honestly doubt they targeted you on purpose. It’s more likely someone just flagged your post, leaving them with no choice but to step in 🤷

No, she doesn't have to. Even if there’s a report, the moderator decides whether or not to act, but looking at it from my side, I can bet anything that my conversation partner hasn't reported me for any of those insults—not Hilda, not Kate.
Regarding this third insult charge, Zlee felt personally attacked because she saw herself in the description of an "ofarbane lujke."
So, she decided it deserved a 45-point penalty—lasting for four months.

Look, I’ve always had my own specific way of writing, and I've been here for over a decade, yet nobody has ever handed me a penalty like she did.
If I were to drop 135 points worth of "insults" on the John Doe boards during chat threads—and I mean really, within just two months of posting—well, after getting penalized back on April 30th, I was so fed up that I didn't want to write there on the 5th or the 6th, and if I remember correctly, she was already on the moderator list by August.
To be honest, at one point I thought I saw that she wasn't even on the mod list anymore, which is why I came back.

I mean, after more than ten years on Gossip, she's the only one who decides my writing style is worth being systematically penalized? Out of all the mods who managed that PDF?
I know I'm being subjective, but to me, it doesn't look like the core of the problem is me.

You care about a moderator who messes with you; I just care about not being harassed.
Please, tell me when anyone on John Doe has actually been penalized just because they wrote something stupid or some variation of it? Like, if we tell each other we're getting on each other's nerves, or whatever else?
God, it just sterilizes and kills the life out of the place.
That's exactly why we fought so hard nearly ten years ago—to get light moderation.

Justin Foster45 said:It’s because some topics don't belong in Gossip, or they're interesting enough to stand on their own.

A year ago on John Doe, the only thing people talked about was Gossip or maybe some influencers. People would just drop a comment on those random list threads and leave it at that.

Now we have Avaz, which stays pretty active, we have the Turks who are always at the top of the feed, and a few dedicated Gossip threads that meet the demand without cluttering up the main threads with debates over whether anyone actually cares. Most of these topics are opened because other users ask for them.

It's obvious you only show up for the Gossip and want everything tucked under one giant umbrella, but honestly, that doesn't make sense.

Edit: Aside from the topics themselves... I try to keep moderation light (Alex Harris2 would be the first to tell you I'm too easy), but my priority is listening to what the women on this forum actually want. I even started a thread for suggestions and feedback where everyone is welcome to contribute. So, telling me I'm just tailoring the forum to my own whims is pretty uncalled for.

No, it isn't off base, because some topics are discussed specifically because they are on Gossip, and others die out very quickly. Even Sevkin's thread sank to the bottom, and we ended up fighting on Gossip again just a few days ago.
And about that bolded part—some topics aren't meant for Gossip.
Who says? By whose standards? Yours and yours alone.
Honestly, there isn't some official list of approved discussion topics on Gossip, because it started as just a casual chat thread that eventually grew into what it is today: basically just a massive, ongoing conversation.
Just because I don't post in other threads doesn't mean I'm not lurking or at least glancing through them every now and then... It wasn't always the case on John Doe that Gossip was the only active spot; people used to post all over the place in other threads, which aren't interesting anymore, so new ones took their place.

And no, you definitely aren't "moderating lightly." Just because you think that's how you handle things doesn't make it true. Handing out bans on the main chat PDF—and I'm not just talking about yourself here—for someone calling another person an idiot or saying they're being stupid as hell? That isn't "light" moderation.
Because that kind of stuff used to slide by there just fine—until you showed up.

You keep throwing bans at me left and right. I haven't changed, and neither has my writing style (if anything, I’ve actually become more laid-back, like I always tried to be); it’s the person handing out the bans who changed.
So, where do you think the problem lies?