If Russia wasn’t getting absolutely curb-stomped by the Ukrainian counteroffensive rn, I’m sure that they would be grinning at the greatest investment they ever made in helping Trump get elected in 2016, funding repeated propaganda (e.g. Tenet Media) to give him license to weaken NATO and the transatlantic and transpacific alliances.

The Executive Orders that Trump passes can be reversed with the stroke of a pen, but the international relations that he’s torched will take decades to reform, if at all.

Trump is so vile that he doesn’t even need any more incentive to betray and belittle our allies; he doesn’t even that shit for the love of the game, as the guy is a genuine bully and pile of excrement.

I seem to remember every single Republican losing their collective minds when Democrats on Twitter used their free speech to express their lack of respect or admiration for Charlie Kirk; they all said that Democrats were purposefully using inflammatory rhetoric to instigate political violence.

Now, this is one of many, many examples, and while no one in MAGA cares about being consistent and avoiding hypocrisy, I still feel a need to point this out, as any time one of your dipshit MAGA family members (if you are unfortunate enough to have any) whines about how violent Democrats are, you can just show them posts like this.

Also, how utterly destroyed are we as a country that someone could type this out and post it without feeling an incredible swell of disgust and revulsion?

Even if the president wasn’t a demented, kleptocratic, sexually predatory asshole, I would still find a statement crazy that you have to stand with a president 100% of the time in order to be patriotic.

Crazy times we live in.

Bess Truman famously was not fond of Harry’s decision to accept FDR’s offer to come on as his vice presidential pick for the 1944 election.

On top of the Vice Presidency (while largely a powerless role in and of itself) involving a lot of travel and diplomatic obligations, FDR’s extremely poor health was the elephant (or should I say, donkey) in the room, and any person selected by FDR as his VP was essentially guaranteed to become President in the next four years.

Bess’ time in the White House was much more reserved and quiet than most First Ladies, with Bess being averse to hosting guests and socializing.

Are there any other First Ladies with a notable dislike of the White House/their husband’s decision to become President?

Bro missed his ex-wife so much that Augustus banned him from seeing her again :(

I specifically chose these four emperors (Vespasian, Hadrian, Diocletian, and Constantine) because I felt that they are the exemplars of extremely competent administration, adaptability to domestic and geopolitical shifts, and overall, excellence.

Of all the emperors, I think the one who had by far the most impressive rise to power, consolidation of power and authority, and finally, legacy, was none other than the piss taxer himself: VESPASIAN!!

I am often left aghast at how rarely Vespasian is brought up in conversations regarding the 2nd best emperor of Rome.

Given his humble beginnings as a mule farmer, the hoops he had to jump through in the civil wars and the year of four emperors, along with helping Rome achieve one of its most significant victories in the First Jewish War (along with constructing one of the most famous structures in human history: the Flavian amphitheater), I can easily say that Vespasian is easily an S tier emperor.

Also, he was the first emperor since the beginning of the principate to be succeeded by a direct biological heir with Titus.

Vespasian brought Rome back from the brink of collapse, and his 10 years were dedicated to rebuilding Rome’s infrastructure and institutions.

Imo, one of the few nearly perfect emperors who really embodied the Augustan style of leadership once the civil war was over.

Like Augustus, Vespasian espoused humility and restraint, he focused heavily on infrastructure and public works as a method of propaganda, and he even constructed a “Temple of Peace”, obviously calling back to Augustus’ altar of peace.

I’m interested in who y’all think can be called a worthy continuation of Augustus’ reign.

As far as I can tell, there was very little to no precedent in Rome for someone to be adopted by someone else’s will and testament, as the religious ceremony involving adoption required the participation of the adoptive father and the adoptee. Julius Caesar would have known this, and obviously didn’t expect to die when he did. That being said, Caesar was wise to change his will In 45 BCE, making sure that Octavian could benefit from the symbolic power of being his primary heir.

In Dr. Adrian Goldsworthy’s book, Augustus: First Emperor of Rome, he makes the case that while Julius Caesar didn’t legally adopt Octavian, per se (this was impossible after death according to him), that making Octavian primary heir, along with desiring Octavian to take on Caesar’s name, was de facto the same thing.

Can we then assume that Julius Caesar would have adopted Octavian in his life?

I do think that there is somewhat of an important distinction. Octavian wasn’t considered legally adopted by Julius Caesar until he had it ratified by the people following his election to the consulship after the Battle of Forum Gallorum.

Citation from Goldsworthy’s (amazing) book (pages 124-125):

On 19 August 43 bc Caesar was elected consul at the age of nine-
teen years, ten months and twenty-six days. There was no precedent
for anyone so young ever holding the offi ce and the youth was
proud of this claim to uniqueness. His colleague was Julius Caesar’s
nephew Quintus Pedius. It seems doubtful that there were any other
candidates, but all the formality of a proper election was preserved
as the Roman people filed through the saepta. Quite possibly the
selection was genuinely popular, although his legions were camped
on the Campus Martius itself to help clarify the voters’ thoughts.
After winning the vote, Caesar performed the traditional sacrifices
and it was claimed that twelve vultures flew overhead – the same
omen the myths said was seen by Romulus when he founded
the City. Soon afterwards the Roman people met again, this time to vote
into law confirmation of his full adoption by Julius Caesar. Other
laws followed, including one reversing the amnesty of 17 March
44 bc and declaring the dictator’s murder a crime.

Edit: To offer my own thoughts on the matter (although I’d love to hear conflicting viewpoints), I largely agree with u/quirinus97 and their very well-said reply.

It may just be a hunch, but I think that Caesar sensed the growing tension and unease in the Senate, while also understanding how dangerous his planned Parthian and Dacian expedition were going to be. While I think he anticipated living at least 5-10 years longer than he did, Caesar was an extremely intelligent man, and knew that he could ultimately die of a myriad of causes. Additionally, he didn’t want to repeat the chaos and tyranny of Sulla, who after leaving power, left no heir to carry forward the reforms that he made to the state.

Additionally, Caesar had no other legitimate, living heirs to the best of my knowledge, as his daughter, Julia, died in childbirth while married to Pompey.

I further agree with u/quirinus that the adoption of Octavian would have been only granted to him if Caesar felt that Octavian could handle it.

To be completely honest, I’m not sure what decision Caesar would have made. He no doubt understood the boundless intelligence, cunning, adaptability, and potential of the boy, but they were polar opposites, physically. Part of being a traditional Roman man of virtuus was leading men into battle and fighting with courage.

Octavian was a poor commander and utterly incapable of combat, and Caesar seeing this side of Octavian in Parthia might have given him second thoughts. Thus, while I believe that Caesar was planning on adopting Octavian IF he passed all of his tests, that outcome was not a certainty whatsoever.

I will say, one of the more ironic, and honestly, humorous moments in Roman history has to be the saga between Cicero and Octavian.

While I have a lot of respect for Cicero’s oratory and service to the state, he made a pretty poor miscalculation in underestimating, and ultimately, enabling Octavian in his rise to power.

It’s no surprise that Cicero’s arch enemy by this time was Marc Antony, who had asserted himself as the true heir to the legacy of Julius Caesar.

As such, Cicero wanted to use Octavian as a counterweight against the “tyranny” of Antony (hence Cicero’s fiery Philippics in excoriation of him).

Apparently, Cicero had said of Octavian the famous words: laudandum adolescentem, ornandum, tollendum.

The english meaning of the phrase being, “praised, honored, and uplifted/discarded”. The phrase carried a double meaning, and according to Adrian Goldsworthy’s biography on Augustus, Augustus: First Emperor of Rome (pg 122), Octavian had learned that Cicero uttered this phrase, and was repeating it around camp in anger.

That lack of respect for Octavian’s intelligence would soon be Cicero’s downfall, as he couldn’t have dreamt that the 20 year old Octavian would join Antony and Lepidus in the triumvirate and embark on the mass executions in the proscriptions that would ultimately take his life.

This fat fucking bitch calling someone else a fat pig is fucking hilarious.

I would say this even if Trump was aligned with my politics: he’s a disgusting slob. This dude is actually a greasy, slimy, obese weirdo.

This whole speech he gave was pathetic and childish, and only shows that Donny has very low emotional maturity.

Also, fuck Benny Johnson, the Russian plant.

One could write endless volumes on when, why, and how the Roman Republic fell. While some say that the Republic was doomed as early as the end of the Second Punic War (as Sallust did), others think that the Republic had a chance up until the ides of March, 44 BC.

Regardless of when one wants to pin the “point of no return” for the decline of the Republic, I can think of no better example than the fate of possibly the most famous tribune of the plebs, Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus.

Tiberius evidently had massive shoes to fill, as his grandfather was none other than Scipio Africanus, conqueror of Carthage and victor over Hannibal.

His initial attempt at the corsus honorum was disastrous, as under the command of the consul, Gaius Hostilius Mancinus, Tiberius served as a military tribune after being elected to the quaestorship in 37 BC. The Numantine campaign (in Hispania) was an unmitigated calamity. The legions barely escaped with their lives, only surviving due to Tiberius’ father’s previous relationship with the Celtiberians, who only allowed Tiberius to ask for a peace treaty as a result of his father’s previous good will.

However, Tiberius was utterly humiliated and maligned in Rome for what was seen as a pitiful and unfathomably weak surrender to meet barbarian tribes. The Roman Senate refused to honor the peace deal, and Mancinus was sent back to the Arevaci in chains for his failure. Tiberius’ own brother in law, Scipio Aemilianus, victor of the Third Punic War, had to intervene to shield Tiberius from suffering any punishment for this failure.

I feel like this would have been the death blow to so many Romans, but Tiberius was an ambitious young man who wasn’t content to accept the poor lot he had been dealt.

Tiberius wasn’t someone who originally branded himself as a populist, per se. His father’s gens, the Sempronii, were indeed plebeian, but they were one of the more ancient and wealthy families in Rome. Tiberius’ mother, Cornelia, was ofc from the Cornelii gens, an extremely prestigious patrician gens of distinguished consuls and praetors.

Tiberius was no fool, though. He saw the cracks in the dam that was the Roman Republic. Ever since the end of the Punic Wars, Rome had become the undisputed masters of the Mediterranean Sea, and all the wealth and trade therein. While this sounds great on its face, Tiberius saw the problems this produced.

The ager publicus, or the public lands, were in theory supposed to be a way for all Romans, including those who weren’t well off, to have their own plot of land to till, at minimal expense.

However, ever since the Punic Wars, Roman Magistrates and Senators became ungodly wealthy, and as such, started to buy up every square inch of the public land, building vast latifundias that produced untold amounts of crops for sale, making the rich even richer.

Additionally, the Punic Wars produced hundreds of thousands of slaves that the Romans imported, meaning that free laborers were left without jobs, forced to go to the city of Rome for work. The conditions in the city were incredibly poor, with disease and fires breaking out constantly.

Tiberius saw this chaos, and he realized at once that this couldn’t be allowed to stand. The Senate had once again abused their wealth and influence to subjugate the laborers, merchants, field hands, and urban poor. As with the struggle of the orders, they hemmed and hawed at every damned turn.

So, Tiberius didn’t follow the typical corsus honorum, pursuing the aedilship. He went for the tribune of the plebs, the primary legislative body of Rome since the third century BC.

What Tiberius proposed was honestly an extremely nice and agreeable resolution for both the senate and people of Rome, especially since there was already a law that explicitly limited the amount of land a single person could own, passed way back in 367 BC. The elite simply ignored it (so much for respecting the Res publica).

Tiberius’ agrarian law of 133 BC simply enforced the limits of the buying of land that had already been on the books, and not only that, but it offered compensation to the wealthy for any land forfeited to the state!!!! I’m sorry for the bold lettering, but this was unquestionably a fair bill imo. These senators and wealthy aristocrats were technically breaking the law, so the fact that Tiberius was going to offer them compensation was insanely generous.

But of course, the senate wouldn’t have it, despite Tiberius Gracchus being a duly elected tribune of the plebs. They got one of their own plants (Marcus Octavius) in the tribunate, and despite the legislation being widely favored by the people, he incessantly cast his power of veto against the bill.

As such, Tiberius put forward a vote in the tribunician assembly to remove Marcus Octavius from office, and the vote passed.

This earned him the hatred and venom of the senate, and upon casting out Marcus Octavius, I think that this was the moment that they had devised the ultimate treachery.

Tiberius received threats against his life, and as such, wanted to run again for the office of tribune of the plebs in order to maintain his status as sacrosanctitas (granting him sacred status against any physical attacks). He wanted to go further in his reforms and to create a lasting mark on the state of politics.

However, this wasn’t to be. In the voting assembly, the senators stormed the Capitoline Hill and beat him and his supporters to death. He wasn’t even given the base dignity of a proper burial, but disgustingly thrown into the Tiber like a rotting animal carcass. The boundless hatred and vitriol the Senate had for the people was never more apparent than on that fateful day.

Tiberius’ brother, Gaius Gracchus, would carry on his reforms, but he too would meet a violent end.

In the story of Tiberius, I find a very tragic, and in all candor, infuriating saga.

Was Tiberius Gracchus tribune for purely selfless reasons? Almost certainly not. Few if any politicians are, but in his tribune office, he had diagnosed a real problem that required actual redress.

However, once again, the senate, in their ignorance and apathy, jammed their fingers in their old, crusty ears, refusing even to humor the slightest reforms.

THIS was the Republic’s undoing. Stodgy, decrepit, old aristocrats who, rather than enable reforms to ease the burdens of the populace and maintain a peaceful and mutually beneficial relationship, only hardened in their obstinacy and apathy.

Cicero shouldn’t have been surprised by the second triumvirate that was his undoing, because his lot armed the rancorous men with the blades that would be the senate’s undoing. As he extended his old, wrinkly neck to the man who took his life, I wonder if Cicero, in all his wisdom and fortitude of thought, pondered on these matters. His endeavors in the Senate were those in defense of an ailed, sick bull, only standing on the illusions of past glories long past.

Edit: u/DueAd9005 reminded me also of the bequeathing of Pergamum and its riches to Rome, which was also an issue of contention between Tiberius Gracchus and the Senate.

Second edit: u/Potential-Road-5322 has pointed out that the archaeological evidence doesn’t support Tiberius Gracchus’ claims, and I thank them for that important clarification!

Still, I think that the spirit of my post stands. For all the supposed “honor” and “piety” that the Senate gave to Rome’s laws and customs, they ran roughshod over the laws when they were inconvenient.

Whether the senate liked it or not, as far as I know (at least according to Plutarch), there were no official laws (only customs) barring running for a second term as tribune.

Yet, rather than try through some other means to stop Tiberius, the senate lost any semblance of moral high ground when they murdered him in cold blood. In feigning fear of tyranny in the Gracchi, the senatorial class had revealed the avarice of their order.

I understand why he did it (the second triumvirate needed funds to raise legions to fight various military campaigns), but I always found it unfair how Roman historians (other than maybe Tacitus) somewhat glossed over Octavianus’ permissiveness and enabling of the proscriptions that brought about the end of titans like Cicero; yet, they excoriate Sulla (who arguably had more political justification for it after Marius essentially committed an act of treason) as a bloody and merciless tyrant for essentially doing the exact same thing.

I think Julius Caesar would have quite liked almost everything about Octavianus’ rise to power other than his proscriptions, as Caesar didn’t seem to have the stomach to do that sort of thing to Romans whose only crime was being too wealthy.

Love Augustus and his reforms, but the second triumvirate certainly wasn’t a rosy part of Roman history.

I’ve been going over written and documentary materials on the histories of Julius Caesar and Augustus, and I’ve been keeping a mental log of how Caesar and Augustus (I know Augustus has the same name as Caesar, but I use these names for simplicity) were similar and different in their leadership styles and impacts on the state.

It goes without saying that Caesar clearly expected great things to come from the then young Octavian, as Caesar made a point to change his will in 45 BC, making Octavian his primary heir and inheritor of 2/3rds of his estate after getting time to take him under his wing in his campaign against the Pompeian holdouts.

That being said, do you believe that Augustus’ specific program of proscriptions, his heavy reliance on Marcus Agrippa, his initial moderation in dealing with the conspirators, and eventual massacre of them, and finally, Augustus’ emphasis on peace and stability over military conquest (given that Augustus signed a peace treaty with Parthia, despite Caesar having wanted to invade it) would have please Caesar? When Augustus asked, “have I played my part in the comedy of life well?”, do you think Caesar would say, “Yes.”?

Based on what we know of Caesar, while we can never fully infer the thoughts of events never to come in his life, I think he would have been satisfied with some reservations. Napoleon wrote that Caesar’s system only worked because of the quality of the man occupying the highest office (that being dictator perpetuo). I think the same thing goes for Augustus. As Nero and Commodus showed, the system had a very difficult time surviving bad princeps. Additionally, I think Caesar would have been disgusted with the proscriptions (given his tendency for clemency), and especially, the barbaric killing of Cicero. I can’t imagine that he would have personally liked Augustus’ decision to kill Caesarion either (although he might have understood it from a political perspective).

Remember, Hasan doesn’t like liberal democracy or the values of enlightenment. He explicitly lauds the likes of Stalin, Mao, Lenin, and Castro.

Republicans call us communists and socialists. They’re obviously incorrect, but disgusting assholes like Hasan will do everything in their power to shift the Democratic Party to what Republicans are disingenuously framing us as.

I actually am so fucking disgusted that Hasan is being accepted and sucked up to by so many left leaning orgs. He’s transparently an empty suit for the worst ideologies next to MAGA fascism.

Genuinely sickens me to see him have the following that he does.

He will gleefully enable the MAGA terror if it means the death of NATO and the elevation of authoritarian communism and oligarchy at the hands of China and Russia.

Finally.

Finally.

FUCKING finally.

I am so elated for when Ossoff gets into office and uses the bully pulpit and his DOJ to rip the MAGA right a new asshole.

I want every financial record, every text, every email, and every travel log of Republicans gone over with a fine tooth comb to find even the smallest act of impropriety.

I want a president who will stop treating Trump as uniquely bad compared to his allies.

Ossoff is that candidate, and he has the ability to do transformative things to rectify the country’s course for years to come.

I love Biden (top 10 POTUS for me), but he made the mistake that Lincoln made in the early aftermath of the Civil War.

There is no reconciliation to be had with seditious reprobates. Their movement must be defunded, disbanded, and made untenable. Biden offered a mercy and good will that was utterly undeserved.

Barring the fact that Trump is yet again making a disgusting attack on what is supposed to be one of America’s strongest allies, I’m actually fucking disgusted with Meghan McCain for her repeated, blatant betrayal of her father, John McCain, shamelessly sucking Trump’s dick.

For those of you who don’t remember, Trump, a draft dodger, said that McCain wasn’t a war hero, but a loser, because “heroes don’t get caught”. John McCain was in a Vietnamese POW camp for 5 years iirc.

Imagine having your father slandered and debased day after day by Trump (who constantly railed on McCain in his first term), and having the shamelessness and lack of spine to lick his orange asshole whenever he posts some dementia-brain drivel.

Disgraceful.

FUCK THESE VILE, SEDITIOUS, UNDEMOCRATIC PIECES OF EXCREMENT.

I legitimately hope that these ppl all have the most miserable lives, hate their families, and feel utterly empty and alone inside.

This is fucking sickening. I am revolted by the contemptuous agents of the Republican Party who so brazenly delegitimize democratic elections in the interest of their cult leader.

I highly recommend this video, where Sen Adam Schiff goes in painstaking detail over the utter fraudulence and corruption of Trump.

I’m tired of civility. I’m tired of manners and fair minded speech. I want Democrats to get vitriolic like never before. I want every Republican who alleged election fraud to have their career and life ruined through suspension from Congress and criminal charges.

I want their names erased from all public records, their memories damned, their bank accounts emptied, and their name disgraced.

This cannot be allowed to be the new norm if our country is to survive.

Ossoff has the “it” factor that a presidential nominee will need to take on the Republican nominee.

It can’t be overstated how frustrating it is when people don’t hold Republicans’ feet to the fire when questioning them or interviewing them. Additionally, the criticism of Republicans almost always boils down to their incompetence, but Democrats often neglect to emphasize how plainly EVIL Republicans are.

Ossoff doesn’t do that. He goes for the jugular in his messaging, and shit like this is exactly what we fucking need.

Republicans don’t hold anything back, and their remarks aren’t even truthful. They make up the shit they spew.

Ossoff doesn’t have to lie. Democrats don’t have to lie. Republicans are evil, and we can prove it.

If he’s at the top of the ticket, I genuinely think he can help reform the Democratic messaging strategy for years to come.