Yeah, but he’s been punched in the head a lot.
If these dumbshits didn’t have total power over our lives, it would be funny.
“Trump will win” a race he’s not in?
Well, that settles is then. If Iron Mike says so, it must be true. (/s…obviously)
Didn’t Demented say that he wasn’t on the ticket? Must be big corruption if he wins.
Mike Tyson’s political analysis is something I never thought I’d read about.
Didn’t realize Tyson was an asshole, but then again I knew he was an intuitive.
You didn’t know he was a rapist? He went to jail for it and everything.
He’s a multi time rapist, womanizer, abusive POS.
He’s the classic tough guy that a lot of young POC look up to unfortunately. He’s definitely not your “normal” slimy Republican stereotype, but Trump has cast quite the wide net of fascism and conservativism. A lot of people who would have never called themselves outright Republicans or conservatives (often call themselves not political 🤦), now are happy to join this fascist circus.
Honestly, this pairing makes way too much sense.
Disturbing truth about Mike Tyson we’ve ‘collectively all forgotten’
Regardless of the point you want to make, don’t link news.com.au as a source and expect it to be considered reliable.
Mike Tyson may well be an absolute pig of a human being, but news.com.au won’t reliably demonstrate anything except what they want the housing market to do. It’s a real estate corporation with a news website and about as biased as they come.
Seriously, though, how could he lose? He controls all 3 branches of government, the justice department, and the military. He gleefully and openly breaks the law with total impunity. He has the financial backing of every techbro and oligarch in the land. His rollout of AI-powered systems of surveillance and oppression is unchecked.
Americans have not gotten any smarter in the last couple of years. If the intelligent minority couldn’t stop Trump when he was out of power, deeply unpopular, and beset with legal problems, what chance do they have now?
Nope, you losers are stuck with this fucker until he dies and Miller takes over. USA is over - you live in Gilead now.
You may be right about Trump but the cult dies with him. These cults never are able to sustain beyond the personality. The only exception is religious cults because God is the personality.
What a fucking idiot. How does a president “win midterms”.
The only win trump would get would be not going to prison. If that’s the case, then this is just an admission that they know he’s a fucking criminal.
He loses if he loses his majority in congress. If he keeps it, he wins. Simple enough.
lol who’s gonna put him in prison? Democrats?
If that’s your bar for him winning, he already won.
It’s already been proven that brain injuries can make a person into a MAGAt moron. I mean look at fetterman.
“Trump continued to support Tyson before and after the boxer’s 1992 rape conviction”
Nuff said
Every single time there’s someone in the news for raping someone, it seems Trump is right there saying the rapist is a good person.
At some point you have to start wondering about his morals.
There is a whole set of files dedicated to this sort I’d thing.
The more I learn about this trump guy, the less I care for him.
You know what, I am also starting to get the inclination that this president fellow is not a good person.
I’m even starting to regret my vote for him…
It’s unusual this time because the rapist is black.
I didn’t know Trump was running in the midterms does that mean the US can be rid of him if he loses.
Dude with brains beaten to mush supports fellow rapist.
I think people should be required to take free, standardized, peer reviewed, fail-able, in person civics and humanities tests before being allowed to vote.
If you fail the tests, you don’t get to vote.
If you cannot agree with the majority of official historians about what really happened in the past, you are not informed enough to decide the future.
The last decade of American politics have shown that voting is intensely serious. It should not be taken so lightly as to allow barely adults or barely literate people to decide the fate of us all.
I know. I know that’s dangerous. I know that’s easy to get wrong and make something worse. I know that could be turned into an even more elitist society.
Access to information has never been cheaper and more available than it is today, so the elitism part is dispensed with.
I want it peer reviewed and standardized, and maybe even overseen by an international ethics board. That dispenses with a lot of the other problems.
In conjunction with ranked choice voting, I don’t see a better way.
We didn’t get here by being deliberate and gate keeping power.
We got here by being naive and letting power run amok.
Let’s be more deliberate and gatekeep power more. For all of us.
If you cannot agree with the majority of official historians about what really happened in the past, you are not informed enough to decide the future.
Hilarious, because the “majority of historians” would tell you what happens when you institute tests as a requirement to vote. (See also)
“Surely the leopards would never eat my face!” says person with juicy, delectable face.
I want it peer reviewed and standardized, and maybe even overseen by an international ethics board. That dispenses with a lot of the other problems.
Ah, yes, sure.
Like an Ouroboros of irony that you reference low intelligence linked to authoritarian tendencies and then use that to justify an authoritarian measure you’re too unintelligent to understand the consequences of in order to gatekeep the unintelligent authoritarians.
And maybe just link a study you want to discuss instead of a screenshot of an LLM summary you asked it to vomit out for you.
Edit: Ironically, were this stupid shit ever implemented (fuck no is a competent democracy doing this), you’d probably end up with a death penalty situation, where competent historians, ethicists, etc. refuse to participate, just like competent medical professionals and pharmaceutical companies refuse to participate in the death penalty.
Quite the Vaushite take.
I think the problems of american politics isn’t because it’s too democratic, rather I think it’s that the US is:
- not a liberal democracy anymore
- stuck with a voting system that forces a two-party system and doesn’t allow for proportional representation
- electing the president directly instead of forming a multi-party coalition government that then elects the president
- allowing money to influence politics way too much
- running an education system barely worth its name
In short, the problem is not too much, but too little lived democracy. Allow the uniparty to fracture and the populace would be better able to pick and choose what they support.
I think there’s an important distinction between making voting accessible and ensuring that voters understand the institutions and decisions they’re being asked to influence.
We already accept that voting eligibility can be subject to legal qualifications, although the reasons for those qualifications differ. (I.E. children, people deemed legally mentally incompetent, US Residents who aren’t US Citizens, convicted felons in many states, people still serving prison sentences in many states, etc etc.)
My question is whether civic competence should have any place in that discussion.
If someone cannot explain the basic structure of government, distinguish established historical facts from misinformation, or demonstrate a basic understanding of the economic and political systems affected by elections, what consequences does that have for democratic decision-making?
You wouldn’t give someone a gun without them knowing how they work or what happens to people when they shoot them…
So why give them the power to decide which man controls all the people with guns in the whole government when they don’t understand that power or the government?
I am aware that requiring a test raises serious concerns about discrimination, abuse, and the right to political representation. But I think those concerns deserve examination alongside the consequences of widespread civic ignorance.
Even if we disagree about restricting eligibility, can we at least agree that improving civic knowledge is essential to a functioning democracy?
And that maybe civic knowledge should be required in schools, or in adult life perhaps before accepting Jury Duty or something… or at some point in a citizen’s existence before they step into a voting booth?
Even if we disagree about restricting eligibility, can we at least agree that improving civic knowledge is essential to a functioning democracy?
I can agree that a good measure of civic knowledge in the populace is absolutely a prerequisite. Now the question is does every voter need that? There my answer would be no. But should every citizen have been taught enough about civics in school to ensure at least a minimum breadth of civics knowledge in the populace? Yes.
I also think that a society needs a metaphorical buy-in from the populace. A populace that doesn’t feel they get to vote, demonizes the system that excludes them. We can see where that leads to in America, a low-trust society, where people do not trust the state, where the bureaucracy is seen as an enemy, oppressor, an occupying force. Removing the vote may guarantee a better result short term, but long term you’re just alienating a not inconsequential amount of the populace, creating a two-class society where the oppressed class will do anything in their power to hurt the system. And the US is already mostly there, because the people do not feel represented. I’d argue that many of the wrongs you’d want to correct with this are directly or indirectly caused by a lack of feeling to belong.
I am very much convinced that your solution is easier to implement in the rapidly autocratizing US. But I’m also convinced that my solution of more democracy would create a better, healthier, happier society. The most democratic countries in the world, are also the best educated and the happiest. https://www.v-dem.net/documents/75/V-Dem_Institute_Democracy_Report_2026_lowres.pdf
The system in the US is broken and you cannot fix it, by breaking it more, it has to be overhauled completely into something that guarantees representation, civic participation and engagement. And those three things would absolutely drop even lower the higher the hurdles for the smallest measure of representation, participation and engagement are.
Looks like he got a few too many head hits…
Oh boy, Tyson must be a pedophile. God damn there are too many of them in this country.
He is a convicted rapist
He served three years in prison.
It’s all the CTE’s Tyson racked up. His brain may as well be a baked potato.
It’s so weird how getting brain damage seems to make someone a conservative.
So true, how bout that “democrat” who sides with conservatives majority of the time; Fetterman.
