> In a fireworks-filled public confrontation unlike any seen between an American president and foreign leader in modern times, Mr. Trump and Mr. Vance castigated Mr. Zelensky for not being grateful enough for U.S. support in its war with Russia and sought to strong-arm him into making a peace deal on whatever terms the Americans dictate.
Jebus, how do you screw up a photo op?
Buch of children in the US executive branch.
I suppose they think they look “strong” but it looks more insecure and incompetent to me.
The intended audience is eating this up. If you go to conservative spaces, NATO now is considered a rip off, the EU was apparently designed to hurt the US, Zelensky is a dictator, etc.
/r/conservative is truly interesting. Not American, but i guess that most past us president would cream at the vague thought of making Russia loose soldiers and equipment with just helping a third country, without loosing soldiers
/r/conservative party no longer exists. It's maga now. And maga is aligned with and promoted by russia. With the goal of diminishing US world influence, dismantle NATO etc etc the opposite of Reagan era conservatives.
That sub is heavily moderated to remove all dissension from whatever Trump's view is at the moment. It's not a representative sample of the conservative side of America.
If /r/conservative is not representative of conservative side of America, and the conservatives control the US Congress , I am puzzled that not one of the conservatives has pushed back on annexation of Canada or Greenland . Not One.
The voting public is not the extremely online, totally batshit, completely cognitively owned by the GRU, republican activist and acolytes as well as Republican elected and leadership.
I agree, but it's the conservative voting public that reliably returns these people to office even though many of them have a long track record of frothy rhetoric and legislative hyperconformity. This kind of aggressively loudmouthed conservatism has been a fixture in Congress since the Tea Party and arguably back to when Newt Gingrich was speaker. IT's not at all a new phenomenon.
Now, voters may not like this and feel trapped by the way the primary system works and so on, but the reality is taht they keep giving in to the partisans.
The other side is made up of and cares about the wellbeing of people they don’t like (people of color, lgbtqia, traditionally oppressed people, disabled people, etc.)
That’s it: extinction burst because winning because of attributes you inherited wasn’t working.
Also, real easy to say “shit sucks”. Really hard to actually make things that don’t suck.
That, plus a healthy dose of anti-intellectualism, is a ratchet to hell.
Do you think any trump voters are changing their mind about him though? Are their conservatives that would vote against Trump right now if they could? I don't think so personally
r/conservative members are banned after disagreeing with trump more than a few times. To stay members, they LITERALLY must excuse anything Trump does. Thus no matter what, they will find a way to support him out of fear of being banned and thus not being real conservatives.
"In his blog Unqualified Reservations, which he wrote from 2007 to 2014, and in his later newsletter Gray Mirror, which he started in 2020, he argues that American democracy is a failed experiment[5] that should be replaced by an accountable monarchy, similar to the governance structure of corporations.[6] In 2002, Yarvin began work on a personal software project that eventually became the Urbit networked computing platform. In 2013, he co-founded the company Tlon to oversee the Urbit project and helped lead it until 2019.[7]
Yarvin has been described as a "neo-reactionary", "neo-monarchist" and "neo-feudalist" who "sees liberalism as creating a Matrix-like totalitarian system, and who wants to replace American democracy with a sort of techno-monarchy".[8][9][10][11] He has defended the institution of slavery, and has suggested that certain races may be more naturally inclined toward servitude than others.[12][13] He has claimed that whites have higher IQs than black people, but does not consider himself a white nationalist. He is a critic of US civil rights programs, and has called the civil rights movement a "black-rage industry".[14]
Yarvin has influenced some prominent Silicon Valley investors and Republican politicians, with venture capitalist Peter Thiel described as his "most important connection".[15] Political strategist Steve Bannon has read and admired his work.[16] U.S. Vice President JD Vance "has cited Yarvin as an influence himself."[17][18][19] Michael Anton, the State Department Director of Policy Planning during Trump's second presidency, has also discussed Yarvin's ideas.[20] In January 2025, Yarvin attended a Trump inaugural gala in Washington; Politico reported he was "an informal guest of honor" due to his "outsize influence over the Trumpian right."[21]"
The best case against this are people formerly from Trump's inner circle who say he really has no ideal or political agenda except for himself.
You are right though. There is nothing "conservative" about the current "conservative" party. It is 100% pure reactionary. The only principles are opposition to what "the opposition" wants.
Yarvin has stated he absolutely is not the person on top. That he’s not cut out to be that person. His role is the philosopher; more a priest than prince.
Those tend to get killed pretty quickly, unless they are completely willing to subjugate themselves to the person on the top.
Either Yarvin is so ignorant of history that he’s barely worth listening to, or he is actively malevolent, and intentionally deceptive, OR he has absolutely no qualms about bending his “philosophy” to the whims of whoever happens to control the executioner.
It’s a great quote and true if Sam Altman is any example. I don’t know Yarvin but he has pretty much explicitly said and taken actions which suggest he’s not interested in ruling. He’s written many thousands of words why he wouldn’t be a good ruler.
Yarvin doesn't want all the bother of trying to become a monarch (a lifetime quest), but I'm sure you can think of historical advisers to royalty that have made themselves indispensable to several generations of rulers.
Yeah, I watched as much of the video as I could, and I can totally see this playing well with all the conservatives I know. JD Vance and Trump come off as strong, and Zelensky comes off as weak.
It's funny, I mean I don't know the exact divide between MAGA and trad Republicans, but the trad Republicans I know have been the ones to turn pro-Russia. There definitely seems to be a split in /r/conservative.
Jebus, how do you screw up a photo op?
Buch of children in the US executive branch.
I suppose they think they look “strong” but it looks more insecure and incompetent to me.