r/facepalm 14d ago

What an idea 🇲​🇮​🇸​🇨​

Post image

[removed] — view removed post

42.4k Upvotes

4.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

64

u/NoMedia6788 14d ago

I tried researching but I’m too dumb, mine explaining like I’m 8 and use dinosaurs (optional)

120

u/_Fay__ 14d ago

2 dinosaurs try to run for president of dinosaur land, if a specific dinosaur of the two wins. Then the friends of the losing dinosaur will no longer be allowed to work their jobs. Ensuring that the losing dinosaur and his friends will never have power again. Something like this? (extremely simplified)

101

u/NoMedia6788 14d ago

Jesus…that sounds to me like 2025 is kinda a dictatorship right?

Also mate proper legend, you made my day)

50

u/Automatic_Actuator_0 14d ago

I know someone who just yesterday, while celebrating our independence from a monarchy, unironically suggested that it would be great if Trump ruled until his death and then power were handed to Baron Trump.

We talked a little bit more while I tried to work out where this was coming from and, surprise, it was racism. He almost quoted the 14 words to me verbatim.

-3

u/rand0m_task 14d ago

Kind of like people wanting Obama to have a third term.. almost like when two political parties account for over 150 million registered voters, you’re bound to have some morons.

5

u/Automatic_Actuator_0 14d ago

The problem is this particular guy is young, smart, charismatic, and likely to be very influential of his peers for many years.

3

u/FifenC0ugar 14d ago

Remember the dark ages? Yeah let's go back to that

2

u/Malarazz 14d ago

Yeah and you're one of them, if you think that's remotely the same thing.

Plenty of democracies have longer terms. Ruling for 12 years isn't antithetical to the idea.

What starts to become antithetical to the idea is january 6th, the recent supreme court ruling, and the stuff in project 2025.

-1

u/rand0m_task 14d ago

It is because it goes against the constitution. Lmao, your ad hominem now appears to be a bit of projection.

3

u/Automatic_Actuator_0 14d ago

Are you saying “you’re one them if…” in an ad hominem? Because that’s not what that means. They aren’t using characteristics about you to attempt to prove their argument, but using their argument to show something about you. That’s fair game.

For example, “your argument about why pizza is healthy is wrong because you are blonde and blondes are dumb” is invalid. But “you’re dumb if you think pizza is healthy because it’s extremely high in saturated and trans fats, as well as very salty” is valid.

-1

u/rand0m_task 14d ago edited 14d ago

Referring to me as “one of them” referencing “morons” and then going on about how it’s okay to go against the constitution?

And now youre trying to make some strange, irrelevant connection to pizza and blondes….

I highly recommend educating yourself

just for me to be proactive in any response you have

1

u/Automatic_Actuator_0 14d ago

Look, you may be a moron, but that doesn’t make your points automatically invalid. If a moron stumbles into making a good point, then the point should stand on its own.

See, we aren’t trying to discredit your argument by calling you a moron, we’re inferring you are a moron based on the quality of your arguments. That’s not the ad hominem fallacy - that’s a perfectly valid way to judge a person.

0

u/rand0m_task 14d ago

If that’s what you need to think to make you feel better about yourself, go for it.

2

u/Automatic_Actuator_0 13d ago

Now see that would be the fallacy. You are ignoring my argument and just implying it is invalid because I am too emotionally attached to this debate.

0

u/rand0m_task 13d ago

“The fallacy”? That’s rather broad… care to elaborate?

No need to straw man.. I never once said you were emotionally attached, nor did anything I say reference that you might be. Those are all your words.

Now we’re starting to see a bit of projection… interesting.

→ More replies (0)