Hey libs: You do know that if all of your political enemies are endorsing a candidate, that means you should oppose that candidate, right?
If George W Bush endorses Kamala I will be voting for Trump as harm reduction. “George W Bush is evil” is quite possibly the most solid anchor in my political belief system, and if he supports someone that’s enough for me to vote for literally anyone running against that person.
if he supports someone
Libs are amnesiacs. Libs made a lot of fuss that ex office holders like Dubya weren’t invited to the RNC. As if that fact actually matters. Very quietly, behind the scenes - Dubya continues to be horrible. He did his bit to get Brett Kavanaugh onto the supreme court. Libs either don’t know that or don’t care or “forgot”.
1500 and 1600 upvotes for ‘Plz Bush Cheney endorse our smol bean candidate’
George Bush was quite literally the most openly evil president of my lifetime and that is saying something at this point. Him not having been tried and hung for crimes against humanity is an indictment against America, and him endorsing anything means you should RUN the other way.
Ask any liberal and they’ll say he’s a goodan a and wish the republicans were still like him
Democracy is when both parties have republican endorsement
How pathetic, they’re fully embracing being the moderate republicans.
MFW Democrats are primarily DINOS (because NRINOS or not-republican-in-name-only doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue).
Bush/Cheney
moderate republicans
Forgive me for my ignorance as a Spanish person, but how in the fuck is “Illegal invasion of Iraq… I mean Ukraine” guy a moderate? And didn’t Cheney literally get a Christian Bale movie portraying how comically evil he is?
Like, didn’t these guys used to be called neocons? To distinguish them from the less openly bloodthirsty “moderate republicans”?
neocons
That’s the exact term, yes. The Bush Doctrine was the apex of their ideology. Neocons were known for advocating interventionist wars and eventually “preliminary strikes.” Reagan’s administration and the Republican Revolution of '94 (when Republicans took the majority in both the house and senate) are also considered neoconservative.
Do libs ever think for a second about how it’s not a good look to be endorsed by war criminals? Is the logic here “wow famous person from the other side of politics is endorsing my candidate which means we can win them over” with no recognition of the mass graves her dad made sure to fill in the name of Halliburton? Or is it even worse, that they do consider the human cost, but think that somehow the 2024 election is so important that those crimes pale in comparison and it makes sense to welcome Hitler into the resistance?
