There you go again.

If you don't like Mike Rogers, that is fine. If you think he is just as bad as a terrorist supporting socialist, that is your opinion you are free to have

What people are calling you out for is your continued attempt to distort the facts. His saying that he hopes the voters keep Rogers away from Washington is the exact same thing as saying don't vote for him.

Kvetch said:

---

Dimond1968 said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

Dimond1968 said:

---

AgDad121619 said:

---

Dimond1968 said:

---

What's strange to me is Tucker is putting America first. No more wars, fixing a country that is frankly dying. Doing all this before we do other things. The actual MAGA playtime before the NEOCONS took over.

---

yes you are so right - endorsing Muslim DSA candidates is 100% America first

---

He didn't endorse him. He said Mike Rogers is awful and it's easy to see why Mike Rogers is going to lose.

---

So your position is that Tucker didn't endorse El Sayed when he said he would not vote for Mike Roger's at gunpoint and stated that El Sayed was the one with America First positions?

Do you agree with the assessment that El Sayed has the better, America First positions? Elections are between two people, so it's a binary choice.

---

Elections aren't binary. You can say Mike Rogers is a NEOCON who has cheererd on every American stupid war. And also not be for the socialist running against Rogers. Republicans need to learn NEOCON ideas are over. Just because NEOCONS are in power now doesn't make it a lasting messsge. Conservative youths by large numbers are done with neo conservative politics. Tucker is right to pick up on this.

---

Elections are binary unless you are a radical accelerationist that thinks somehow we'd be better off letting the socialist destroy our country so we can start over. Which is about the stupidest position to hold.

So you can either have the "neocon" who will vote with the Republicans, or you can have the Muslim DSA radical who thinks America is the bad guy. It's binary.

Republicans are far from perfect, but they're a hell of a lot better than the alternative that you keep dancing around.

---

Tucker is sending a clear messsge. No more middle eastern wars of choice. That is the future of Republican politics. Go read a poll. Conservative. Kids are done with neo conservative politics. The Trump administration is the last gasp of globalist neocon war mongering. Tucker got out in front on this. If it takes a few socialist winning to get the neocons out. Good. Will all be better off by the 2030s when the GOP gets on board.

Im Gipper said:

---

There you go again.

If you don't like Mike Rogers, that is fine. If you think he is just as bad as a terrorist supporting socialist, that is your opinion you are free to have

What people are calling you out for is your continued attempt to distort the facts. His saying that he hopes the voters keep Rogers away from Washington is the exact same thing as saying don't vote for him.

---

It's called winning the long term. Just continuing to vote for neocons because they vote with republicans is crazy. You have to send a message.

Neoconservativism is done. They've lost the youth. They're losing the non-Foxnews watchers. Their only remaining play is to call people antisemitic and socialist. These threads always devolve into ad hominem attacks. Its quite a sight.

Not only was this a needless war, it was completely mismanaged.

Queso1 said:

---

Neoconservativism is done. They've lost the youth. They're losing the non-Foxnews watchers. Their only remaining play is to call people antisemitic and socialist. These threads always devolve into ad hominem attacks. Its quite a sight.

Not only was this a needless war, it was completely mismanaged.

---

You don't know if it was needless. Trump hates war. Why would he enter into it with iran unless the intel was bad, real bad?

Queso1 said:

---

Neoconservativism is done. They've lost the youth.

---

So, you're in your mid-20's, then?

Quote:

---

These threads always devolve into ad hominem attacks. Its quite a sight.

---

Ironic in a post calling anyone who isn't your brand of MAGA a "Neocon".

Amazing isn't it?

ts5641 said:

---

Queso1 said:

---

Neoconservativism is done. They've lost the youth. They're losing the non-Foxnews watchers. Their only remaining play is to call people antisemitic and socialist. These threads always devolve into ad hominem attacks. Its quite a sight.

Not only was this a needless war, it was completely mismanaged.

---

You don't know if it was needless. Trump hates war. Why would he enter into it with iran unless the intel was bad, real bad?

---

Obviously the lady that gave him 300 million. That's what she wanted. That's what he said. He literally said all she wants to talk about is Israel. He said she cares more about Israel then the United States. He said that money comes with strings attached. Just have to connect the dots.

I guess it could have been some severe threat but it's doubtful. Even more doubtful it was a threat against us. Trump for his bad actually tells the truth if you listen and he said what Addleson wants she gets. Now maybe Addleson didn't want to attack Iran but I bet she did. That was Israel position all along for 20 years and like Trump said she represents them. Does it seem strange that you have the Epstien stuff you have a powerful Israel lobby then you have us attacking Iran?

Do you people ever have anything other than "it's the Jews" as a response?

It is one of the laziest responses in history to blame one group of people for every single problem since the dawn of time.

You think critics of the Iran war blame the state of Israel for problems since the dawn of time?

Queso1 said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

Queso1 said:

---

Aggie Dad Sip said:

---

Tucker Carlson has been a self absorbed coin operated carnival barking windbag for 30 years. It's crazy how many people have ever taken him seriously.

---

Perhaps he is. But his present positions share more with pre-2025 MAGA than where MAGA is today.

---

No, they don't. Maybe you never understood what MAGA meant. I don't agree with everything Trump has done, but it's all very well in line with what he has always defined MAGA as being.

---

I invite you to do some research on the core principles of MAGA and tell me how the war in Iran and favoritism of elites jives with it.

---

Peace through strength involves the strength part. Trumps whole "no new wars" stance was predicated on being strong enough to deter them, not dogmatic pacifism. Iran posed a threat, and he decided to act. It's 100% within the realm of what MAGA has always been.

I know you can't see past the Israel of it, but at the very least you can accept that Trump is narcissistic enough he wouldn't have torpedoes his legacy on wars for no good reason. I appreciate a leader that is willing to actually protect American interests.

But I'm sure you and your fellow travelers are more in the know about the state of Irans nuclear program. I'm sure this was really just a result of Jewish donors and cynical military-industrial complex demands.

I'd recommend you do your research. Trump has held the same position on Iran for 40 years. This conflict is completely in line with MAGA. Sorry you misinterpreted what MAGA meant.

And yet here we are bragging about sub $3 gas.

Coming from the bot that enters every thread with the same canned response(s) - if you don't like the war or how the Don has handled things with the government of Israel, you're a Jew hater or if you're tired of the US foreign policy doctrine in the ME, you're a communist/socialist. The shtick is old. You're the Laura Loomer of this forum.

Dimond1968 said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

Dimond1968 said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

Dimond1968 said:

---

AgDad121619 said:

---

Dimond1968 said:

---

What's strange to me is Tucker is putting America first. No more wars, fixing a country that is frankly dying. Doing all this before we do other things. The actual MAGA playtime before the NEOCONS took over.

---

yes you are so right - endorsing Muslim DSA candidates is 100% America first

---

He didn't endorse him. He said Mike Rogers is awful and it's easy to see why Mike Rogers is going to lose.

---

So your position is that Tucker didn't endorse El Sayed when he said he would not vote for Mike Roger's at gunpoint and stated that El Sayed was the one with America First positions?

Do you agree with the assessment that El Sayed has the better, America First positions? Elections are between two people, so it's a binary choice.

---

Elections aren't binary. You can say Mike Rogers is a NEOCON who has cheererd on every American stupid war. And also not be for the socialist running against Rogers. Republicans need to learn NEOCON ideas are over. Just because NEOCONS are in power now doesn't make it a lasting messsge. Conservative youths by large numbers are done with neo conservative politics. Tucker is right to pick up on this.

---

Elections are binary unless you are a radical accelerationist that thinks somehow we'd be better off letting the socialist destroy our country so we can start over. Which is about the stupidest position to hold.

So you can either have the "neocon" who will vote with the Republicans, or you can have the Muslim DSA radical who thinks America is the bad guy. It's binary.

Republicans are far from perfect, but they're a hell of a lot better than the alternative that you keep dancing around.

---

Tucker is sending a clear messsge. No more middle eastern wars of choice. That is the future of Republican politics. Go read a poll. Conservative. Kids are done with neo conservative politics. The Trump administration is the last gasp of globalist neocon war mongering. Tucker got out in front on this. If it takes a few socialist winning to get the neocons out. Good. Will all be better off by the 2030s when the GOP gets on board.

---

Tucker flip flops every 15 seconds depending on how the wind is blowing that day. One day "Trump may be the antichrist" the next day he "never said that."

I know the "everyone I don't like is a neocon" crowd thinks that they have some silent majority, but you don't. You're the same as the socialists in the Democrat party, a small, vocal minority that has inordinate influence on national party politics because elections are won on the margins. Polling at every level bears this out, and your ideas about socialists winning is about the dumbest calculus I've ever heard. There will be nothing left to save in 10 years if they gain power and keep expanding the social programs that are actually bankrupting this country. Foreign wars have nothing on social security and entitlement programs when it comes to this country's problems.

Queso1 said:

---

And yet here we are bragging about sub $3 gas.

---

Who is bragging about gas prices? Gas prices suck right now. It's a price I'm willing to pay in the short term for long-term security. Exports out of the straight are basically back to pre-war levels, and we have a pro-energy administration. Gas prices should come down in the future barring unforeseen changes.

You know what would really be stupid? Spiking gas prices and then not finishing the job because Queso1 doesn't think you're being true to MAGA.

This is not the gotcha you think it is.

BlackGold said:

---

Coming from the bot that enters every thread with the same canned response(s) - if you don't like the war or how the Don has handled things with the government of Israel, you're a Jew hater or if you're tired of the US foreign policy doctrine in the ME, you're a communist/socialist. The shtick is old. You're the Laura Loomer of this forum.

---

Pot, meet kettle.

Queso1 said:

---

You think critics of the Iran war blame the state of Israel for problems since the dawn of time?

---

You act like we don't have a long posting archive here. Technically no, A =/= B in your equation, but every single one of the vocal war critics has detailed why they are against it, and it has to do at some level with JewAnon conspiracy theories or just straight up antisemitism. Whether it is correlation or causation makes no difference in the particulars here. One can theoretically be one without the other, it just doesn't seem to happen in the vocal posters on this board.

You make some pretty serious allegations and reference a post archive. I can't speak for others, but I think your allegations should be backed by evidence. Why don't you cite a past post where someone here has said something about a Jewish conspiracy or anything antisemitic.

I know you're not going to find anything from me - my posts have specifically addressed the actions of a state actor. But, I would be interested to see a post that was allowed to remain on this site that was antisemitic. Not that my opinion matters, but I wholeheartedly disavow any antisemitic posts.

But I think we all know what's going on here. Several posters have conflated opposition to a state actor's actions with a racist ideology. It's a pathetic cheap shot and they should be called out for it.

Dimond1968 said:

---

Who is paying Tucker? The reason I reject this idea is there is no way Glenn Greenwald or Max Blumenthal both as connected as you get would go on a show to just be used. Too many good people like Dave Smith or Megan Kelly love Tucker. Who is paying him?

---

Stop it.

Queso1 said:

---

You make some pretty serious allegations and reference a post archive. I can't speak for others, but I think your allegations should be backed by evidence. Why don't you cite a past post where someone here has said something about a Jewish conspiracy or anything antisemitic.

I know you're not going to find anything from me - my posts have specifically addressed the actions of a state actor. But, I would be interested to see a post that was allowed to remain on this site that was antisemitic. Not that my opinion matters, but I wholeheartedly disavow any antisemitic posts.

But I think we all know what's going on here. Several posters have conflated opposition to a state actor's actions with a racist ideology. It's a pathetic cheap shot and they should be called out for it.

---

You in particular are more on the conspiracy theory side of things, it's just that most of your conspiracies happen to involve AIPAC and Israel influence over everything. Maybe you are into other conspiracies, too, but those are the only ones I've seen here, so forgive me if the only ones you seem to care about involve the Jews.

I get it, I have family and friends that have their particular brands of distrust, and some are more reasonable than others. But when it gets to one particular group that gets the focus, to the disregard of all others, it's hard not to come to that conclusion.

I do enjoy a good "conspiracy" - kind of hard not to since 2020. 2020 pretty destroyed my trust in our systems. However, religion or ethnicity of people has nothing to do with it. I think that's a key distinction.

Apart from our involvement in the middle east, I don't think I ever discuss Israel. It would be odd not to, considering they are a major political player in the area.

I'm comfortable with my position on Israel and I won't apologize for it. It just gets a little much whenever someone says something critical that the routine response is "it's the joos". I think it's a pathetic response akin to white leftists playing the race card.

ETA: I also am suspect of pharma, academia, defense contractors, neocons, and the Dutch.

Quatar is a CIA stronghold

Tucker saying he wishes Hitler had won World War II was absolutely on my 2026 bingo card pic.twitter.com/ln3pVWye5A

— Eitan Fischberger (@EFischberger) October 2, 2026

Rapier108 said:

---

Do you people ever have anything other than "it's the Jews" as a response?

It is one of the laziest responses in history to blame one group of people for every single problem since the dawn of time.

---

We are talking about Trump. He said exactly what I said he took 300 million with strings attached and all they want to talk about is Israel.

It's lazy to not put it together when it's in your face. Or it's not arguing in good faith if you can't see how a normal person would see Trump raking in 300 million probably more and then doing exactly what that country has wanted us to do for 25 years. Was Trump lying? Just another coincidence? If you notice your automatically antisemitic.

If you were president, how would you handle Iran?

Dimond1968 said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

Dimond1968 said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

Didn't "endorse" El Sayed out tells people not to vote for Rogers. A distinction without a difference.


Why are Tucker fan boys so disingenuous or some times plain dishonest?

---

Tucker never said a thing about don't vote for Mike Rogers. Only how terrible Mike Roger's is. That's a big difference. And he is an awful candidate. At some point it's okay to say that.

---

we hope that the good people of Michigan keep this man far away from Washington

Maybe Tucker meant "take away Rogers' car keys."

There is ZERO difference between this and saying "we hope Michiganders don't vote for Rogers"


As I said above....

---

Nobody wants Mike Rogers. How is this hard to understand? Tucker is right to call out the neocons. That doesn't mean any of us like the socialist. But we aren't holding back on Mike Rogers lust for war which is just as bad as socialism.

---

No one wanted war with Iran. Attacking Iran was a necessity.

But run along and welcome some socialism / communism / antisemitism.

Brutal exchange: Tucker Carlson incorrectly tells Jacob Rees-Mogg that Russia has "a much larger economy" than Britain.

It doesn't: by GDP, Britain's is about $4.0 trillion and Russia's about $2.5 trillion.

Corrected, Carlson retreats to "GDP is not the only measure," then to… pic.twitter.com/nKTKLrIQzj

— Max 📟 (@MaxNordau) October 3, 2026

The fact that JD and Kevin Roberts won't disavow Tucker is beyond weird at this juncture.

Fun fact.

Texas has a GDP of $2.9 trillion (2025)

Russia's economy truly sucks.

This trio has to be more ******ed than the actual Three Stooges.

All Carlsons love you, Candace. And fervently reject cancel culture, genocide, and shameless liars like Jaimee.

— Buckley Carlson (@buckleycarlson) October 3, 2026

Tucker got called out to his face on the "NATO expansion" myth, in real time, and starting squirming.

It is simultaneously satisfying and embarrassing to watch.

Tucker might be the most repulsive figure in American public life. pic.twitter.com/Db3WQ6kXAG

— Joshua Reed Eakle 🗽 (@JoshEakle) October 3, 2026

Complete POS terrorist water carrying soy boy.

🚨🚨 Tucker Carlson plays dumb about "From the river to the sea": "Which I don't say, but I don't know why you wouldn't say that."

The river is the Jordan and the sea is the Mediterranean. "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" is a call for the Arab-Islamic… pic.twitter.com/yzH3DGjYIa

— Max 📟 (@MaxNordau) October 3, 2026

Rees-Mogg is like kryptonite to Tucker's usual annoying debate style. It's really fun to watch!

I'm disappointed in Tucker, but at least he sits for an interview. How many propagandists in left wing media do that? I don't recall seeing a 60 Minutes reporter sit for an interview and defend their statements.

bobbranco said:

---

Fun fact.

Texas has a GDP of $2.9 trillion (2025)

Russia's economy truly sucks.

---

Rees Mogg basically comparing Russia to sub Saharan Africa and watching Tucker struggle with it was hilarious.