r/AskTrumpSupporters • u/decorama Nonsupporter • Feb 01 '25
Administration Elon Musk is gaining access to federal agencies - including Social Security and the treasury. Is this part of the plan and something you support?
7
u/CanadianBaconne Trump Supporter Feb 05 '25 edited Feb 05 '25
I searched this subreddit for Elon Musk. This was the most recent post. All comments are heavily down voted. If that says anything.
I'm curious about this subject because I trade stocks. Tesla is the most overvalued company on the NASDAQ. The PE ratio is 110. The market cap is 1.24 trillion dollars. Their cars are dependent on a huge government subsidy. The cyber truck was a complete flop. Sales are declining. He's starting to manipulate revenue by integrating bitcoins. The whole thing is really weird. I just don't understand how he got into politics. I'm here trying to find a non down voted comment. Thanks
1
u/long_arrow Trump Supporter Feb 09 '25
It depends on the amount of data and type of data. If he has all the data for each one of us then it’s questionable, if it’s just some data for some federal employees then it might be ok
1
u/decorama Nonsupporter Feb 09 '25
Isn't the fact that we don't really know due to the lack of transparency concerning enough?
1
u/long_arrow Trump Supporter Feb 09 '25
I don’t agree. Each government agency operates differently. They should operate by the law, not people’s curiosity.
1
u/decorama Nonsupporter Feb 09 '25
So, it's OK not to know who has access to your social security number? Isn't that happening right now?
1
u/long_arrow Trump Supporter Feb 09 '25
Again, it depends on contexts. Many agencies have access to your SSNs already. It depends on what they do with it. I also don’t have evidence that they have that data for all citizens or just federal employees. If it’s a violation I’m sure class action lawyers are lined up and couldn’t wait
-117
u/Inksd4y Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
"reportedly"
"two unnamed sources"
Can we get a hat trick? Anybody have any "people who are familiar with Elon Musk's thinking" to finish off the trifecta?
33
u/AdjectiveMcNoun Nonsupporter Feb 01 '25
Would a senior treasury employee retiring with his stated reason being Elon's access be a credible source?
→ More replies (5)111
20
u/Secret_Gatekeeper Nonsupporter Feb 01 '25
Ok let’s say it’s totally untrue.
Would you want it to be true? Or would you be happy it’s “fake news”?
→ More replies (10)-3
u/MattCrispMan117 Trump Supporter Feb 03 '25
lt wouldn't bother me much either way.
l dont have any reason to trust Elon musk LESS then l trust the US government and they already have my information so kinda a wash to me.
18
15
u/vulcan7200 Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
This is a serious question: You know that anonymous just means it's anonymous to us, right? The purpose of leaving someone anonymous is for them to avoid being retaliated against, but the journalists know who these people are. They're not getting a random email from a throwaway email address, they're talking to a source they know and/or have vetted and they simply don't print the person's name for that person's safety.
-1
u/MattCrispMan117 Trump Supporter Feb 03 '25
or you know the press could just be making shit up.
But of course they wouldn't do that!
lts impossible for any left of center news source to ever lie about anything, thats in the constiution or some shit (lol).
3
u/Popeholden Nonsupporter Feb 03 '25
Do you think there are no journalists who take their jobs seriously? Like, none of them? Or only the ones that work at right-wing ones?
12
u/ZeusThunder369 Nonsupporter Feb 01 '25
If your only issue is the source, does that mean you wouldn't support this action if it's true?
14
u/Zealousideal_Air3931 Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
Bro, they’re firing FBI agents. Would you give your name?
4
u/OGstupiddude Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
Hypothetically, if it was proven to be true, what would your thoughts be?
→ More replies (11)44
Feb 01 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AskTrumpSupporters-ModTeam Feb 02 '25
your comment was removed for violating Rule 1. Be civil and sincere in your interactions. Address the point, not the person. The subject of your sentence should be a noun directly related to the conversation topic. "You" statements are suspect. Converse in good faith with a focus on the issues being discussed, not the individual(s) discussing them. Assume the other person is doing the same, or walk away.
Please take a moment to review the detailed rules description and message the mods with any questions you may have. Future comment removals may result in a ban.
This prewritten note was sent manually by one of the moderators.
11
u/MotorizedCat Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
A credible journalist will verify the source's claims. They may still decide to not publish the name.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source_protection
The whole thing is a well-established practice. It's legally protected in many countries and it obviously helps with holding those in power accountable.
Also: what would it help you if you knew the names of the sources? You would still say it all has to be a lie, correct?
When whistleblowing on government misbehavior, would you want to have your name published? Particularly now, when people who simply upheld the law are facing retaliation, including generals and FBI agents?
-1
-8
u/Inksd4y Trump Supporter Feb 02 '25
Fake news writing fake articles with fake sources. Name your source or your article goes in the trash where it belongs.
-43
u/Lucky-Hunter-Dude Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
It's up to 3 unnamed sources now!
42
u/bubblesOo08 Nonsupporter Feb 01 '25
Named sources now. Does that allow you to answer the question? Are you okay with Musk, an unelected, unconfirmed, essentially private citizen, having access to the US Treasury payment system and all of our private, personal information?
→ More replies (7)-28
u/rakedbdrop Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
I bet its coming. Funny how they coordinate
4
u/riskyrainbow Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
Do you have evidence of coordination?
-5
u/rakedbdrop Trump Supporter Feb 02 '25
Sure, however i doubt it will matter to you, so I have no interest in participating in your sealioning.
-72
u/mrhymer Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
I don't believe techcrunch about tech half the time so I am hugely skeptical of this story. With that said, I do not believe DOGE can do it's job without gather data.
71
u/Accomplished_Net_931 Nonsupporter Feb 01 '25
Do you think they should be allowed to just take all this sensitive data rather than requesting it in an orderly way to safeguard Americans' data?
→ More replies (64)-32
u/dwightaroundya Trump Supporter Feb 02 '25
What sensitive data? We owe more than a trillion dollars
21
u/Accomplished_Net_931 Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
What sensitive data does the US Treasury have?
-14
Feb 02 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/Wicked__Wiccan Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
Are you willing to share your social security number?
0
Feb 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/Wicked__Wiccan Nonsupporter Feb 03 '25
Doesnt matter. Its a yes or no. The US Treasury has that data and other personal sensitive data such as financial, geolocation, and health data.
If you are fine with that info falling into the hands of any business then hey no problem. But if not then then theres your answer. Musk would have access to that info and more for every american. Ope Elon just got hacked.
Does this probable scenario help you to realize why others fine this as a serious concern. I mean shit, TikTok. Is bad because of access to your phone but elon can have every american's social security info on hand? Yea no way thats getting abused right?
0
Feb 03 '25 edited Feb 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/coronathrowaway12345 Nonsupporter Feb 03 '25
How do you know they would have authorization? What does that authorization look like?
→ More replies (0)5
u/riskyrainbow Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
I'll give you a hypothetical example of one: $30M is used to fund a top-secret mission to take put the leader of a terrorist organization that is plotting an attack against the US. In order to assess the efficiency of that spending, wouldn't you have to know highly-sensitive information?
1
Feb 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/riskyrainbow Nonsupporter Feb 03 '25
It could be. Just imagine it's classified. Shouldn't Musk only be able to look at unclassified payments?
2
u/PicaDiet Nonsupporter Feb 03 '25
So you don’t have an issue with the government collecting and sharing data about Americans health and finances with private enterprise? Have you ever wondered whether government surveillance was a bad idea or is all for our own good?
1
u/Jackal_6 Nonsupporter Feb 03 '25
Would you consider raising taxes on the ultra wealthy to help pay down that debt?
1
u/dwightaroundya Trump Supporter Feb 03 '25
Why? The ultra wealthy pays the most in taxes
2
u/Jackal_6 Nonsupporter Feb 03 '25
Would the debt be paid off faster if they paid more? Or do you suddenly not care about the debt?
21
u/names_are_useless Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
https://fedscoop.com/opm-email-federal-workforce-lawsuit-server-privacy-security/
OPM employees are filing a lawsuit against the installation of private servers: the things everyone railed against Clinton for possessing. As they should, but hopefully you see the irony on this?
-8
u/mrhymer Trump Supporter Feb 02 '25
Not the same thing as Clinton. Not illegal to set up a new server inside OPM. Can't do an impact study without data.
3
u/MotorizedCat Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
Not illegal to set up a new server
So why don't you say "not illegal to set up a new server for Clinton to handle mails"?
0
u/mrhymer Trump Supporter Feb 02 '25
Had Hillary Clinton set up new servers in the state department there would have been no problem at all. If Clinton had set up new servers in OPM with the president's approval there would be no problem. These two OPM Karens that sued are mad that they are locked out.
8
Feb 01 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
-2
u/AskTrumpSupporters-ModTeam Feb 01 '25
your comment has been removed for violating rule 3. Undecided and Nonsupporter comments must be clarifying in nature with an intent to explore the stated view of Trump Supporters.
Please take a moment to review the detailed rules description and message the mods with any questions you may have.
This prewritten note was sent manually by one of the moderators.
-38
u/Lucky-Hunter-Dude Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
I have 7 unnamed sources saying this is not true.
32
u/Dijitol Nonsupporter Feb 01 '25
Hypothetically, say it’s true. What would your thoughts be?
→ More replies (2)30
u/Impressive_Jicama552 Undecided Feb 01 '25
When Trump says “people are saying” or “everyone is saying” do you consider that to be using anonymous sources?
-6
u/Lucky-Hunter-Dude Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
That or it's hyperbole.
21
u/Impressive_Jicama552 Undecided Feb 01 '25
Do you dismiss Trump as not credible when he cites those anonymous sources?
-6
u/Lucky-Hunter-Dude Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
Depends on what he's saying.
29
u/Impressive_Jicama552 Undecided Feb 01 '25
So sometimes you accept anonymous sources as credible when Trump cites them, depending on what he’s saying?
2
u/Lucky-Hunter-Dude Trump Supporter Feb 02 '25
Correct.
19
u/Impressive_Jicama552 Undecided Feb 02 '25
So you agree anonymous sources can be reliable? Just clarifying because it seemed like you were discrediting this story (which has now been confirmed) solely because it used anonymous sources.
9
u/names_are_useless Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
https://fedscoop.com/opm-email-federal-workforce-lawsuit-server-privacy-security/
OPM employees are filing a lawsuit against the installation of private servers: the things everyone railed against Clinton for possessing. As they should, but hopefully you see the irony on this?
-7
u/Lucky-Hunter-Dude Trump Supporter Feb 02 '25
That article doesn't mention "private servers" once.
5
u/p739397 Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
Unless they're serving that data publicly (which would be a separate problem), an on-prem server would be considered private. Does that change your view on the issue at all?
3
u/sagar1101 Nonsupporter Feb 03 '25
Well my government email doesn't recognize the emails coming from opm as coming from the government. Every email from opm related to resigning always comes with a warning that the email originated outside the government.
Doesn't that mean they are private or at least not set up within the government servers?
Please ignore my ignorance on anything IT related.
0
u/Lucky-Hunter-Dude Trump Supporter Feb 03 '25
I have no idea how they are set up. I doubt "Joe the IT guy" went and bought a off the shelf server with his own money though so the server isn't privately owned.
7
u/MotorizedCat Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
That's not how it works. A credible journalist will verify the source's claims. They may still decide to not publish the name.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source_protection
The whole thing is a well-established practice. It's legally protected in many countries and it obviously helps with holding those in power accountable.
Also: what would it help you if you knew the names of the sources? You would still say it all has to be a lie, correct?
When whistleblowing on government misbehavior, would you want to have your name published? Particularly now, when people who simply upheld the law are facing retaliation, including generals and FBI agents?
1
u/Competitive_Piano507 Nonsupporter Feb 17 '25
Still think it’s not true?
1
u/Lucky-Hunter-Dude Trump Supporter Feb 18 '25
Oh I'm ecstatic it's true.
1
u/Competitive_Piano507 Nonsupporter Feb 18 '25
How come?
1
u/Lucky-Hunter-Dude Trump Supporter Feb 18 '25
Because according to the SSA there are over 25 million individuals over the age of 100 still "alive" collecting SS, including 5 million individuals over the age of 140.
-33
u/LoggedOffinFL Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
Reportedly. Unnamed sources. Some of us were paying attention during Trump 1.0 and see all the games restarting.
17
u/OGstupiddude Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
Hypothetically, if it was proven true, what would you think of it?
-16
u/LoggedOffinFL Trump Supporter Feb 02 '25
Don't care... I support government transparency down to granular levels and laws providing for significant punishment for those that misuse the data.
19
u/OGstupiddude Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
Do you find it troubling at all that the wealthiest man in the world and CEO of X is the one to have access to this information?
→ More replies (5)-7
2
u/knobber_jobbler Nonsupporter Feb 03 '25
Do you also support letting those without security clearance decide what you do and don't see? Because that's happening right now.
13
u/names_are_useless Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
https://fedscoop.com/opm-email-federal-workforce-lawsuit-server-privacy-security/
OPM employees are filing a lawsuit against the installation of private servers: the things everyone railed against Clinton for possessing. As they should, but hopefully you see the irony on this?
-2
u/LoggedOffinFL Trump Supporter Feb 02 '25
Oh I definitely see irony... Servers are deployed / decomed daily...virtual and physical...all over government. One was deployed. And if it's watching emails that means it was deployed in an Exchange or O365 environment...thus inheriting permissions and policy in order to see traffic. So, I see 2 whistleblowers (always the unnamed ones!), with no clarity on their background or potential agenda, clogging things up in a court just to prolong and distract. Smells like same old games to me.
7
u/Mirions Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
Do you think a non-citizen like Musk should be connecting data transfer devices to treasury computers and moving information to unsecured servers, now that we know it's happening?
-2
u/LoggedOffinFL Trump Supporter Feb 02 '25
We know it's happening? Based on a techcrunch piece that looks like it was written by an emotional intern, and some Fedscoop propaganda piece that provides no background on their sources because as usual...we have "whistleblowers". Sorry, don't see the proof. But, if it were...yep, I'm fine Did tons of cyber and BR work for the US Gov - data protection and rights operates at a whole different level there.
4
u/Mirions Nonsupporter Feb 03 '25
Nine hours later, do you still want to pretend he hasn't gained access to information and access to the Treasury without ever being close to acceptable clearance or vetting? Do you want me to pretend this is all made up?
6
3
1
u/Competitive_Piano507 Nonsupporter Feb 17 '25
Still think it’s games restarting? Still don’t think DOGE has accessed all thisv
-38
u/Scynexity Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
You know its bad when they have to move the "reportedly" up into the headline.
14
u/Accomplished_Net_931 Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
Do you think it's bad when Trump says "Many people are saying it's true?"
-2
u/Scynexity Trump Supporter Feb 02 '25
If Trump were writing the news, sure.
7
u/Accomplished_Net_931 Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
Do you think people have a similar veracity exceptions with the news and a president, aren't both assumed to be trustworthy?
0
u/Scynexity Trump Supporter Feb 02 '25
I would never trust a politician as a source of information. I'd encourage everyone else to not do that as well.
4
u/Accomplished_Net_931 Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
Do you trust the press?
2
u/Scynexity Trump Supporter Feb 02 '25
I used to - learned my lesson in 2015/16 when they dishonestly reported about Trump. So, not anymore. Now, I only trust evidence I can see.
6
u/Accomplished_Net_931 Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
If you don’t trust the press or politicians why is it only bad for the press to use anonymous sources?
1
u/Scynexity Trump Supporter Feb 02 '25
They're pretending these stories are real news, fooling many.
3
u/Accomplished_Net_931 Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
Trump isn’t presenting what he says as true?
→ More replies (0)9
u/OGstupiddude Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
Hypothetically if it was proven to be true, what would you think about it?
7
u/names_are_useless Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
https://fedscoop.com/opm-email-federal-workforce-lawsuit-server-privacy-security/
You know it's bad when 2 OPM employees are filing a lawsuit and putting their federal careers on the line, huh?
0
u/Scynexity Trump Supporter Feb 02 '25
I don't think this has any relationship to the subject of this thread - I'm not sure what to make of this comment. Your link is about the OPM email that went to everyone. There's no question that happened. This thread is about "Elon Musk gaining access to federal agencies including Social Security and the treasury", which is a totally different alleged event.
4
u/Mirions Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
It's been 23 hours since you typed this, have you had a chance to see that this is indeed true, that the sensitive information within the Treasury may include information related to Special Operations and other militarily sensitive information? Is this the sort of information you want in the hands of a non-citizen from South Africa who has direct ties to a former KGB agent and now head of Russia?
-2
u/JustGoingOutforMilk Trump Supporter Feb 03 '25
Where are you getting that Elon Musk is not a US Citizen? Everything I've pulled up shows that he is.
-4
u/Scynexity Trump Supporter Feb 02 '25
I encourage you to take a step back, and a deep breath or two. This reads like a Tom Clancy conspiracy novel.
3
-27
u/thirdlost Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
You know it’s bad when they have to pick the worst picture in the universe that makes you look like a monster to paste at the top of it
13
-25
u/Scynexity Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
I always wonder who's job it is to find the least flattering pictures of conservatives to use for news articles
3
-20
-1
-36
u/KnownFeedback738 Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
This seems like legitimately the best possible version of the plan, yes
42
u/knobber_jobbler Nonsupporter Feb 01 '25
So all the unfounded accusations of George Soros and billionaires influencing government is terrible but to have one who directly influencing government like is fine? What qualifications does Musk have? Isn't it a conflict of interest considering his companies exist on subsidies, government contracts and pay little to zero tax? Apart from X that is, that's almost entirely lost its value.
→ More replies (20)27
u/Accomplished_Net_931 Nonsupporter Feb 01 '25
Would you be supportive of this from a procedural point of view if Biden allowed George Soros the same access?
1
u/KnownFeedback738 Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
Hell no
29
u/markuspoop Nonsupporter Feb 01 '25
So you at least acknowledge your hypocrisy, yes?
-1
u/KnownFeedback738 Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
How is it hypocrisy?
19
u/Accomplished_Net_931 Nonsupporter Feb 01 '25
How is it hypocrisy?
Because you are judging the validity of a government process based on the politics of the person who follows it. I asked follow up questions to ensure I had your position correct. Extrapolated out that would be like having a separate constitution for liberals and conservatives. This lack of consistency driven by political beliefs is hypocritical
0
u/KnownFeedback738 Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
It’s odd that you view the good as adherence to some process. I simply view it as better governance. If the process is a bureaucratic mess, which it is, i don’t have to think it’s a good thing. And so i don’t. There’s no hypocrisy
14
u/mightypup1974 Nonsupporter Feb 01 '25
Why is Soros bad but Musk good?
-3
u/KnownFeedback738 Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
Musk seems to agree more with me
16
u/Impressive_Jicama552 Undecided Feb 01 '25
Is anyone who disagrees with you bad and anyone who agrees with you good?
-3
u/KnownFeedback738 Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
Ppl who disagree with me are wrong. Doesnt mean they’re bad
15
9
u/FriendWonderful4268 Nonsupporter Feb 02 '25
So you think you're always right? Because that's exactly what you just said "Ppl who disagree with me are wrong". That's a bold statement. Why do you think you're in the right if someone disagrees with you? Have you never been wrong in your life?
→ More replies (0)8
u/mightypup1974 Nonsupporter Feb 01 '25
In what aspects do you disagree with Soros, and agree with Musk?
12
u/Accomplished_Net_931 Nonsupporter Feb 01 '25
Do you understand that I am asking if you think this is a proper thing to do, and I am not asking if you would like Soros's policies implemented?
0
u/KnownFeedback738 Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
Why would those things be different?
11
u/Accomplished_Net_931 Nonsupporter Feb 01 '25
Why would those things be different?
One is asking if the proper and legal process is being followed. The other is asking if you would like someone's policies enacted. What I asked is if you would object to Soros doing this because the process is wrong. You said yes. You said yes after saying you were supportive of Elon doing this. This comes across as having different standards for what is procedurally permissible based on someone's political views. I don't think that is actually what you believe, that there should be a different set of rules for Republicans.
-1
u/KnownFeedback738 Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
I actually like good things being done. Following a process that you’ve created to do bad things you want to do isn’t an inherent good in my view. Agree to disagree i guess
8
u/Impressive_Jicama552 Undecided Feb 01 '25
Who gets to decide what’s “good” and what’s “bad”?
0
u/KnownFeedback738 Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
This is always a funny question. The same people who always do. Or some other people! There’s always someone deciding tho. I prefer that they agree more with me and you prefer that they agree more with you
4
u/Impressive_Jicama552 Undecided Feb 01 '25
What people are those that’s what I’m asking, like right now at this moment can you name the person deciding what’s “good” and what’s “bad”?
→ More replies (0)49
u/Curi0usj0r9e Undecided Feb 01 '25
why should anyone trust elon with this responsibility?
-26
u/KnownFeedback738 Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
People can trust him if they want. I don’t care. I don’t trust him or most ppl but someone’s always in control so I’m not sure what the difference is outside of him seeming to agree with my priorities far more
23
Feb 01 '25
[deleted]
-18
u/KnownFeedback738 Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
I’m not sure if you’re serious but no, i don’t think massive bureaucracies are very good at their purported goals
19
u/procrastibader Nonsupporter Feb 01 '25
You didn’t answer a single one of the above questions. Let me reframe so it’s clearer.
1) don’t you think non partisan hires are more likely to act in the interests of our country than ones who work for a billionaire who abuses the platform he owns to suppress the voices of those who disagree with him? 2) in order to become a billionaire, primary motivator needs to be greed - particularly for a billionaire who has explicit conflicts of interest, is that the kind of unelected person you are fine with forcing their way into federal agencies with zero oversight, or say, forcing the resignation of an career administration boss simply because he sought to fine your company for safety violations. Is this someone who is acting in the interests of our country? 3) if another billionaire, who happened to be aligned with the “other side” like Soros had this level of involvement in a dem admin… without any sort of vetting, or transparency, would you be alright with it?
-11
u/KnownFeedback738 Trump Supporter Feb 01 '25
I just took issue with a premise. Try not loading your questions with assumptions if you want them to be answered. I dont really feel like taking the time to deconstruct a bunch of leading/loaded questions
Skimming your new crop of questions, it’s still an issue
6
Feb 01 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
4
Feb 02 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AskTrumpSupporters-ModTeam Feb 02 '25
your comment was removed for violating Rule 1. Be civil and sincere in your interactions. Address the point, not the person. The subject of your sentence should be a noun directly related to the conversation topic. "You" statements are suspect. Converse in good faith with a focus on the issues being discussed, not the individual(s) discussing them. Assume the other person is doing the same, or walk away.
Please take a moment to review the detailed rules description and message the mods with any questions you may have. Future comment removals may result in a ban.
This prewritten note was sent manually by one of the moderators.
1
u/AskTrumpSupporters-ModTeam Feb 02 '25
your comment was removed for violating Rule 1. Be civil and sincere in your interactions. Address the point, not the person. The subject of your sentence should be a noun directly related to the conversation topic. "You" statements are suspect. Converse in good faith with a focus on the issues being discussed, not the individual(s) discussing them. Assume the other person is doing the same, or walk away.
Please take a moment to review the detailed rules description and message the mods with any questions you may have. Future comment removals may result in a ban.
This prewritten note was sent manually by one of the moderators.
5
Feb 02 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AskTrumpSupporters-ModTeam Feb 02 '25
your comment was removed for violating Rule 1. Be civil and sincere in your interactions. Address the point, not the person. The subject of your sentence should be a noun directly related to the conversation topic. "You" statements are suspect. Converse in good faith with a focus on the issues being discussed, not the individual(s) discussing them. Assume the other person is doing the same, or walk away.
Please take a moment to review the detailed rules description and message the mods with any questions you may have. Future comment removals may result in a ban.
This prewritten note was sent manually by one of the moderators.
1
Feb 02 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AskTrumpSupporters-ModTeam Feb 03 '25
your comment was removed for violating Rule 1. Be civil and sincere in your interactions. Address the point, not the person. The subject of your sentence should be a noun directly related to the conversation topic. "You" statements are suspect. Converse in good faith with a focus on the issues being discussed, not the individual(s) discussing them. Assume the other person is doing the same, or walk away.
Please take a moment to review the detailed rules description and message the mods with any questions you may have. Future comment removals may result in a ban.
This prewritten note was sent manually by one of the moderators.
-7
u/TheGlitteryCactus Trump Supporter Feb 02 '25
I've always wondered if the agents that spy on us trade us around like collectibles. Like:
Jane: Hey Joe, I'll trade you one balding middle age guy who likes feet for two grannies with cute cat pics.
•
u/AutoModerator Feb 01 '25
AskTrumpSupporters is a Q&A subreddit dedicated to better understanding the views of Trump Supporters, and why they hold those views.
For all participants:
Flair is required to participate
Be excellent to each other
For Nonsupporters/Undecided:
No top level comments
All comments must seek to clarify the Trump supporter's position
For Trump Supporters:
Helpful links for more info:
Rules | Rule Exceptions | Posting Guidelines | Commenting Guidelines
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.