My seen based president in the world.

My seen based president in the world.


And now all the men of Mississippi are cursed with Minnie cox.


Underrated comment!


Get this to top !!


Wtf is this title. Holy shit dude...




It's why people have to repost, literally too dumb to put words together


Cocaine is a helluva drug.


I thought I was having a stroke


The bestest


I'm trying hard to have it make any sense and I just can't.


I feel like I'm seeing more and more titles that make me think I'm having a stroke


I'm wondering if it isn't either AI that hasn't worked out all the kinks yet, or someone who doesn't speak English as a first language, or a second really.


ESL is a big part of my theory, as is russian AI bots, or of course theres the chance that people are just becoming illiterate from too much texting and memeing


Came here to say this.




The subreddit r/randomtitlegenerator does not exist. Maybe there's a typo? If not, consider [creating it](/subreddits/create?name=randomtitlegenerator). --- ^🤖 ^this ^comment ^was ^written ^by ^a ^bot. ^beep ^boop ^🤖 ^feel ^welcome ^to ^respond ^'Bad ^bot'/'Good ^bot', ^it's ^useful ^feedback. [^github](https://github.com/Toldry/RedditAutoCrosspostBot)


Having a title that resembles vomit is a great way to attract comments.


Is this a horangutan glue split?


repost bots aren't perfect


One possible explanation for the wording of the title is if English is a second language for the poster.


Maybe, not everyone learn English as their first language. Yep sometimes English speaking people forget that the world has more that 1 language


It do?


Can’t you read. Dude is saying this is the best president. Pretty clear to me.


How did you get that out of 'seen based'?


Based president in the world…. For someone whose language isn’t english best might sound like based and he spelled it phonetically


Ah ha! That makes sense.


Oh wow is that what he meant?!?! Oh my God you are so smart!!!


Apparently 21 people at this point , maybe more would disagree.


It's to avoid a title repost. Because bots flag down identical posts, other bots need to spew random bullshit in order to get through the filter. Nothing but lose-lose here.


"My seen based president"?


Can we get a translation for us literate older folk?


I'm a younger folk and have no clue


Yea I have no clue what it’s supposed to mean


Based can mean “good, true, unique or courageous” - still no idea what the title means.


I thought based meant like you are high on cosine or crack.


Are you thinking of freebasing? It’s a way of smoking certain drugs


Second best?


Based means based in reality. Rest is ?????


I know. I think its a new form of grunting.


Alright, u/Extra_Case1047 Try again—what the hell did you *mean* to type as the title? You weren’t in a race, so why this hurried title?


This seen, am president based. Based! In world. Seen.


I laughed more than I should have probably. That was good.


So dooooo.


You’ve been watching too much next generation…


Here's my theory, do with it what you will: my seen => my vision => my opinion. "Based" might be a misspelling of best. Which would bring us to: "(In) my opinion, best president in the world." This theory was brought to you by THC.


“Based” can also be slang for something being politically agreeable




Am not known that, my seen too




I normally cant write that bad even


Case in point


Teddy loved underdogs. He was one.


Well said.




Her parents were wilding when it came to naming her


I applaud what she did, but like Imagine popping a small human out of your vag and you decide to name it after a small penis


Did you have a stroke?


Teddy was an incredible person and president, only really hurt by the fact that yeah he was a war monger, and his foreign policy.... was.... uhh not great. Domestic policy though, he was incredibly awesomely progressive.


National Parks!


Ken Burns National Park documentary is absolutely fascinating, but also quite frustrating because you will see the intense resistance from certain political parties that wanted to do nothing but develop and Destroy some of the most beautiful unique precious Landscapes on the planet all for monetary benefit


I wasn't intending to make this political.


I mean he was racist as fuck too


Not exactly true he was the first president to ever invite a black person to dine with him at the White House and got so much shit for it


Tr had somewhat typical views of black people in some ways. But he did say something to the effect that their "inferiority" as a basis for denying them the vote was due in part to lack of education. I believe he stated that if they could be educated and raised out of poverty he would support giving them that right. Before mentioning "literacy tests" that were a contrivance to keep black Americans from voting, remember that black voters during Reconstruction were unduly influenced by outsiders, simply because most of them were not educated and didn't know better (through lack of, not intelligence, but knowledge). It's possible, or probable, that TR knew about this history.


He also wasn’t much a fan of Native Americans. ‘Not all are better dead, but 9/10 are. And I don’t wanna look into the 10th’


BuT HES rAcIsT!¡


He was.


He was obviously more racially progressive than most other mainstream white politicians of the period but I mean, that’s not only not saying much but he was also demonstrably extremely racist otherwise.


No more than the average white person at the time.






I had a fucking stroke reading this title.




Ok, I thought I was high and old. Not understanding the new societally correct lingo, but no the Op is high.


I’m reading his bio now. He almost always put principle over party and prejudice. Started out as a rich boy and dandy and became a Rough Rider then president. I’m a Democrat and this is the type of Republican I’d support.


This is what Republicans are supposed to be. Mid-century the parties sort of flipped. This is a true Republican. It's why Arnold Schwarzenegger is a Republican; he believes in the old, genuine Republican party, not so much the current party.


If you're referring to the parties switching ideologies, that never happened. What did happen was blacks started voting democrat in the 1930s due to the new deal, and whites started voting republican in the 1970s and 1980s due to the democrat party becoming the party of "acid, amnesty, and abortions".


Theodore is a perfect example of why using “Democrat” and “Republican” to describe past presidents can be misleading. Because what the parties stand for changed over time. In this case, an accurate title would be calling him a *progressive* president. Looking at his policies (environmentalism, police reform, workers rights), were he to run in the modern day it’s very plausible. he’d have run as a Democrat. You’d support him because for all intents and purposes many of his policies were in line with the current Democratic party’s


Be careful though because the man still has his issues. The country of Panama exists today because he just decided he wanted it to exist so he could build a canal which thousands died constructing. It’s also good to keep in mind that the man was horribly horribly racist.


The part of the bio that struck me the most so far (I’m towards the beginning) is how cruel he was with a gun. Loved nature, birds, etc and as many as he could every chance he got (normal for the time even now in some places). His trip out west later in life was mainly so he could kill one of the last bison in the area before they died out (and he spent days running one down). In one incident when he was angry and riding a horse he decided to shoot a neighbors dog he didn’t like.


So true. If you’re interested, the book The True Flag by Stephen Kinzer is super interesting and goes into how Teddy was a vicious imperialist.


Also Roosevelt was a Brown belt in judo. Hell of a guy.


Roosevelt was a product of his times. He did some wonderful things for America and our people but mostly our White people. It makes me sad because he is a hero of mine because of the ways he overcame adversities in his life.


Maybe English is his/her second language?


The title is intended to be annoying as fuck right?


Back when Republicans weren't shitheads


He was one of the greats.


You realize dems have always been the party of racism and slavery, right? They defended slavery in the civil war, they created the KKK, they creat Jim Crow laws, they opposed the civil rights act, they even just elected a guy who voted to defend segregation.


> You realize dems have always been the party of racism and slavery, right? The parties switched politics over the course of the last century. The New Deal was a major part of that. I agree Biden is garbage, but to say that today's Democrats are the same as Democrats in the 1860's is poignantly false. Source: I literally teach American history


No they didn't. If you really do teach history, then you should do more research. The Democratic party was the party of the Dixie-crat all the way through the 1960s. If the racist Democrats switched from Democrat to Republican, then the black switch would have had to have happened in the 1970s and 80s when blacks saw that "hey, racists are moving from there to here, so I am going to move from here to there.", but that isn't what happened. What actually happened was that blacks started voting democrat in the 1930s, in the span of 4 years, they went from voting 15% democrat to 70% democrat. They moved to the Democratic party because of the New Deal and they had nothing to do with racism. Democrats realized they could get the black vote by offering them jobs, welfare, and retirement programs. Whites however, began switching to the republican party in the 70s and 80s. FDR blocked anti-lynching laws and kept domestic service and agricultural labor (which is where blacks primarily worked) out of the New Deal. That proves my point that blacks switched parties not because of race, but because they were essentially bribed with things like the New Deal and welfare. FDR moved to shore up black support and silence foreign propaganda about the treatment of blacks in America after we entered WW2.  Only then did he order the Justice Department to pass anti-lynching laws and to finally begin enforcing longstanding anti-peonage laws aimed at ending forced labor in the South. He didn't do it because he believed in it, he did it to save face and garner support. http://www.pbs.org/tpt/slavery-by-another-name/themes/fdr/ https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/why-did-fdrs-new-deal-harm-blacks The Democratic Party itself, which was launched leftward in the 1970s, becoming, as the contemporary phrase had it, the party of "acid, amnesty, and abortion." Among other things, the Democrats absorbed a civil rights movement that was itself expanding, and thus diluting, its agenda to include economic redistributionism, opposition to the Vietnam War, and Black Power." The DNC adopted these policies only after the Civil Rights movement passed and civil liberties were already granted to minorities. They adopted these things in the 70s, which was after the civil rights movement. They would have to be extremely foolish not to support rights already given to people. They would automatically lose tens of millions of potential voters. They would never win again if they didn't officially adopt these policies. While Lyndon Johnson pushed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 with the backing of some northern Democrats, Republicans voted in far higher percentages for the bill than Democrats did. This was also true of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Neither would have passed with just Democratic votes. The main opposition to both bills came from Democrats.


You're acting like it was a single event that caused them to flip and that was it. It was much more gradual. In the 1860's, Republicans were liberal and Democrats were conservative. This is well-documented, and even the [House of Representatives](https://history.house.gov/Exhibitions-and-Publications/BAIC/Historical-Essays/Temporary-Farewell/Party-Realignment/) itself has record of this. There's a reason we call it the political *spectrum*. Don't misrepresent history just to suit your ignorance. The party realignment happened. Unless you think Republicans today are liberal somehow. I like how when you ignorant shits are wrong, your answer is that I must be bad at what I do rather than simply accepting that you're wrong. The amount of schooling required to teach history, the tests, the endorsements, et cetera, dwarfs whatever google-fu you've employed here, especially considering you're just copy/pasting arguments you've repeated over and over again as long as 8 months ago.


Blacks went from voting 17% democrat to 75% democeat in 4 years in the 1930s. As for your claims about reps being liberal and dems being conservative, again, that never happened. Your source only proves what i said about blacks starting to vote dem in the 30s. Don't misinterpret history just to suit your ignorance. The parties never switched. As for your last paragraph, effort =/= qualified. Put crap into a crap system, you'll get crap out. Whites voted dem due to the democrat party becoming the party of “acid, amnesty, and abortion”. Neither blacks going from republican to democrat, nor whites going from democrat to republican, had anything to do with race or some ideological switch. At the time, there was 1 Republican from Texas, the rest were Democrats.  Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina, Louisiana, Florida, Texas, Tennessee, Virginia, North Carolina, Arkansas all had 2 Democrat senators, except for Texas that had 1 Dem and 1 Rep. The Peripheral South—Florida, Texas, Tennessee, Virginia, North Carolina, and Arkansas—contained many growing, urbanizing "New South" areas and much smaller black populations. Race loomed less large in its politics. In the more rural, and poorer, Deep South—Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina, and Louisiana —black communities were much larger, and racial conflict was much more acute in the 1950s and '60s. Tellingly, the presidential campaigns of Strom Thurmond, Goldwater, and Wallace all won a majority of white votes in the Deep South but lost the white vote in the Peripheral South. There isn't a single shred of evidence that the parties switched ideologies. Maybe you should have learned some critical thinking skills instead of how to regurgitate what you were told.


> As for your claims about reps being liberal and dems being conservative, again, that never happened. So you think liberals were behind the Confederacy. >Don't misinterpret history just to suit your ignorance. The parties never switched. Yes they did and I provided proof. That you didn't read. >There isn't a single shred of evidence that the parties switched ideologies. You didn't even read the article from the House of fucking Representatives. How droll. >Maybe you should have learned some critical thinking skills instead of how to regurgitate what you were told. I regurgitate what I read in my primary sources I studied while in college for my degree. You know, *actual* research. I actually *read* the book *Slavery By Another Name* By Douglas A Blackmon, whose site you attempted to use to justify the claim that the parties never flipped, which ultimately wasn't even the point of the link you provided, just how the New Deal impacted African Americans. It doesn't even refute my point. I said the New Deal was a *part* of the realignment, not the *cause* of it. You work on your reading comprehension and I'll work on my "critical thinking," mkay pumpkin? You also ignore that words change meaning over time, which is unsurprising. The Republicans were enacting liberal policies, such as integrating African Americans. By *their* definition, that's what "conservative" meant. Today, it is 100% a liberal standpoint. Remind me which side is upset at the tearing down of Confederate monuments? Here's a hint: it's not Democrats.


Dems were absolutely behind the confederacy. That's why you had Democrats like Senator John C. Calhoun invented a new justification for slavery, slavery as a “positive good.” For the first time in history, Democrats insisted that slavery wasn’t just beneficial for masters; they said it was also good for the slaves. http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/slavery-a-positive-good/ http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/162250  You provided 0 proof of the parties switching, all you did was provide a source that said what i said, which is that blacks started voting dem in the 30s for the new deal. I read your link, it provides 0 evidence. As for "words changing", you're making strawman arguments. The parties' ideologies never switched. As for tearing down statues, nice red herring but I'll chase a bit. If you want to take down statues, then shouldn't we also dismantle the democratic party, which was founded by a violent racist? Should we ban the donkey as a symbol for the democratic party? Which party just elected a guy who voted to dedend segregation? Hint: it's not Republicans.


>Dems were absolutely behind the confederacy. I didn't say Democrats. I said liberals. The two are not the same thing, and if you knew what you were talking about, you'd know this. >As for "words changing", you're making strawman arguments. That's actually not what a strawman argument is. A strawman is a weak or imaginary opposition (such as an argument or adversary) set up only to be easily confuted. I did not do this, I relied upon an actual linguistic principle, lexical drift. >I read your link, it provides 0 evidence. You mean aside from the annotated bibliography at the bottom that provides evidence? Here, I'll even paste it below for you so you have no excuse: >166 Fauntroy, Republicans and the Black Vote: 41, 42–55. See also Nancy Weiss’s treatment in Farewell to the Party of Lincoln: Black Politics in the Age of FDR (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1983): 209–235. >167 Sherman, The Republican Party and Black America from McKinley to Hoover, 1896–1933: 256. A significant break between the black elite and the Republican Party occurred in the aftermath of the August 1906 Brownsville affair. A garrison of African-American soldiers stationed near Brownsville, Texas, were accused (on the basis of scant evidence) of several shootings in the town. Three companies of black troops (167 enlisted men) were discharged without honor by recommendation of the U.S. Army command. President Theodore Roosevelt swiftly approved the findings. When Republican Senator Joseph B. Foraker of Ohio (a would-be contender for the 1908 party’s presidential nomination) rose to defend the accused and criticized the White House, Roosevelt bristled and refused to reconsider the case. Aside from the injustice to the dishonorably discharged troops, the most lasting legacy was the alienation of a number of young black leaders, including Mary Church Terrell and Archibald Grimke. >168 Lewis L. Gould, Grand Old Party: A History of the Republicans (New York: Random House, 2003): 224–225. >169 Annual Report of the NAACP (1926): 32; cited in Sherman, The Republican Party and Black America from McKinley to Hoover, 1896–1933: 224. >170 For more on Hoover and African Americans, see Sherman, The Republican Party and Black America from McKinley to Hoover, 1896–1933: 224–259. >171 For an insightful analysis of Hoover’s southern strategy, see Donald J. Lisio, Hoover, Blacks & Lily-Whites: A Study of Southern Strategies (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1985). >172 Sherman, The Republican Party and Black America from McKinley to Hoover, 1896–1933: 232. >173 Ibid., 258. Here, have some more sourcing from me: >Drawing on a sample of more than 40,000 Southern whites and historical census records, we show that whites who currently live in counties that had high concentrations of slaves in 1860 are today on average more conservative and express colder feelings toward African Americans than whites who live elsewhere in the South. [Source](https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/msen/files/slavery.pdf) Shut, and I mean this with the utmost sincerity, all the way up. Cope.


If you knew how to read, you would see I've been talking about dems the entire time. As for strawman argument, you're fighting an argument i never made while claiming i made it. That's absolutely what it is. As for your copy and paste of the bibliography, now i understand the disconnect. When i say evidence, i mean historical evidence showing the party swtiched, not someone's opinion about history. As for your census records: "colder feelings towards African Americans..." what does that even mean, and what was the method to get this? You just tried to use a poll as evidence. I mean this in all seriousness, you really need to learn how to think. Or you could just start with passing 2nd grade.


> There isn't a single shred of evidence that the parties switched ideologies. No, but the people with those ideologies became Republicans. Try again, fash troll.


Again, that is a lie. The people with those ideologies stayed dem, i already weny through this. Learn how to read "fash troll". At the time, there was 1 Republican from Texas, the rest were Democrats.  Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina, Louisiana, Florida, Texas, Tennessee, Virginia, North Carolina, Arkansas all had 2 Democrat senators, except for Texas that had 1 Dem and 1 Rep.The Peripheral South—Florida, Texas, Tennessee, Virginia, North Carolina, and Arkansas—contained many growing, urbanizing "New South" areas and much smaller black populations. Race loomed less large in its politics. In the more rural, and poorer, Deep South—Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina, and Louisiana —black communities were much larger, and racial conflict was much more acute in the 1950s and '60s. Tellingly, the presidential campaigns of Strom Thurmond, Goldwater, and Wallace all won a majority of white votes in the Deep South but lost the white vote in the Peripheral South.


> Again, that is a lie. Only in lala land


No, it's called reality, although i know you don't know what that is


sir this is a wendy’s


Oh shit, just don't look into what he called Native Americans or how he straight up kicked them out of their homes and further perpetuated the ongoing genocide. I don't go so far as to think that the only good Indians are dead Indians, but I believe nine out of every ten are, and I shouldn't like to inquire too closely into the case of the tenth. - Teddy Roosevelt [source](https://www.google.com/amp/s/static.theintercept.com/amp/as-teddy-roosevelts-statue-falls-lets-remember-how-truly-dark-his-history-was.html)


People like you are why North Korea defectors say the US, specifically the education system, resembles North Korea


How so? Wouldn’t an authoritarian state not want to educate their people about the Genocides of other people? You just couldn’t think of anything else to say could you?


Actually I was referring to anti-Western sentiment and collective guilt


The past is the past, so long as we learn from it, and unfortunately, history tends to repeat itself. At least this time the battle field is a little more even.


"The battle field is a little more even." What are you talking about? ​ As for the past, you don't have to make everything into a guilt trip. If someone says they like America, that doesn't mean you have to go into some tirade about bad things America has done in the past.


What would the Natives had done if they just had a few Kalashkinovs or some Improvised Explosive Devices? America had its own Jihad, they called it “Manifest Destiny”, and by the end of it 50 million people were dead along with 60 million Bison, and what we got was a Railroad and a Dust Bowl. Times have changed, and this is what I mean by an “even playing field”. We are not so defenseless anymore, we have had 300 years of fighting to learn from, the Military sent The Navajo to the Bloodiest battles of the Pacific, and “Colored Troops” as Suicide Squads. We have learned a lot, we were Marines, we were Soldiers, we fought to survive since the moment Steel first cut our Mothers Earth. And now we have friends, a lot more than we did before, and they are all well learnt in the Civilized mans way of war. So now we all wait, for the next Justified Genocide, for the next ethnic cleansing, the next “Manifest Destiny”, and this time we are not alone.


1) that's not what jihad means 2) "we are not so defenseless anymore" who is we? 3) you sound like an Elizabeth Warren keyboard warrior who is trying to sound tough and get ready to fight in some LARPing event lol


1. Jihad means “holy war”, Manifest Destiny was a holy war. All Natives were infidels. 2. Every Infidel. 3. *Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe. It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it, that mental lying has produced in society. When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind, as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime.* -Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason *We did not think of the great open plains, the beautiful rolling hills, the winding streams with tangled growth, as 'wild'. Only to the white man was nature a 'wilderness' and only to him was it 'infested' with 'wild' animals and 'savage' people. To us it was tame. Earth was bountiful and we were surrounded with the blessings of the Great Mystery.* *Not until the hairy man from the east came with brutal frenzy heaped injustices upon us and the families we loved did it become “wild” for us. When the very animals of the forest began to flee from his approach, then it was that for us the “Wild West” began.* -Luther Standing bear From, *Land of the Spotted Eagle* *There are many humorous things in the world, among them the white man's notion that he is less savage than the other savages* -Mark Twain. There are plenty of other freedom fighters for you to choose from, none the less, actions speak louder than words. So just wait and listen.




Cox was actually appointed by President Benjamin Harrison, and re-appointed by McKinley before her situation deteriorated and ended up in front of then-Pres Roosevelt. The back story provides an example of why Affirmative Action-type programs can actually a big benefit over the long term…https://postalmuseum.si.edu/research-articles/the-history-and-experience-of-african-americans-in-america%E2%80%99s-postal-service/minnie


Thanks for the link! Had to scroll way too far down for this because of all the title gore comments. I was curious how a Black woman got a seemingly cushy government job in what I assume was probably one of the most racist time/place in the first place. Makes much more sense now.


Thank you.


Yeah tell me again how racist Teddy was.


Really fuckin racist


Teddy was a real conservative. The right today would say that she was fired for job performance and refuse to do anything about it.


The left would be the ones firing her


Sorry, could you remind me how you identify yourself and also how you felt about the BLM protests last summer?


So you think people's opinions are only valid if they are a certain skin color or sex? That sounds racist and sexist


I meant left or right you idjit


"How you identify yourself". Sure thing idjit


No, I’m literally asking you. How do you identify yourself, left or right and how did you feel about BLM?


He's a far-right nutjob spreading misinformation. If you argue with him and bring sources, he'll just tell you they aren't sources and then will dance around saying you aren't bringing evidence. Also he looks like Charlie Kirk fucked a potato. Literally.


Oof just found his insta. I hope he grows out of this when his frontal lobe develops. And if he’s an adult god help us all


He just spent the last half hour trying to convince me I'm a racist for using the term "African Americans." he had this whole embarrassing backwards logic to it, too. It was bizarre.


What is it with leftists being unhinged and stalking people you don't like? You realize that is creepy and something insane people do, right?


^ this guy stalks and harasses people he doesn't like. He has been DMing me and even looked up my Instagram Just so everyone knows.


I just challenge people who spread misinformation. This guy deserves it. He could block me at any time and yet chooses not to. He is choosing this.


I think both those questions are irrelevant as they have nothing to do with the topic


It’s completely relevant. We’re talking about what actions the left or right would take. I identify as left and I assume that you identify as right but didn’t want to posit that for the argument without you saying so. The post is about social justice by Roosevelt and BLM is the best recent example of a social justice movement so your stance will be very telling of attitudes on the right towards social equality. I also suspect that you believe that the right are the ones in position of making social change based on your comments about the actions of the left. However, last summer was a direct counter example to your point as we had leftists out in the street trying to enact social change while the right was at home trying to call in the National guard. Also, you are the one who automatically assumed race and gender when I asked you about your identity.


Your entire comment had bigotry shown throughout it as you think anyone who disagrees with BLM automatically doesn't believe in social equality. The very premise of your argument is based on bad faith


That looks like deflection. Answer him. Go on.


^ this guy stalks and harasses people he doesn't like. He has been DMing me and even looked up my Instagram Just so everyone knows.


Cue the TR bj train!




What are you even getting on about?


Probably something about the reapers and the turian councilor dismissing that claim.


It’s too bad that son of bitch Wilson won the presidency in 1912.


Why the heck is this 94% upvoted? Crap title, not that interesting, and it gets posted all the time.




Looks like a repost. I've seen this image 3 times. First Seen [Here](https://redd.it/krlq9h) on 2021-01-06 98.44% match. Last Seen [Here](https://redd.it/mmnp30) on 2021-04-08 100.0% match *I'm not perfect, but you can help. Report [ [False Positive](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RepostSleuthBot&subject=False%20Positive&message={"post_id": "o19j8c", "meme_template": null}) ]* [View Search On repostsleuth.com](https://www.repostsleuth.com?postId=o19j8c&sameSub=false&filterOnlyOlder=true&memeFilter=true&filterDeadMatches=false&targetImageMatch=86&targetImageMemeMatch=96) --- **Scope:** Reddit | **Meme Filter:** False | **Target:** 86% | **Check Title:** False | **Max Age:** Unlimited | **Searched Images:** 228,301,854 | **Search Time:** 0.30294s


I had a stroke trying to read that title and fucking died


Lol “minnie cox” tsssss




I bet the title was an autocorrect from “most badassed…”


I this title when start have to by and then be for to go and see this.


The repost bot had a stroke, send help.


All your base are belong to us






Here, Mini cocks. 🤭


One of my favorite presidents. A real republican


Theo was the best


Ok I refuse to believe someone’s name was actually “Minnie Cox”


Hehe mine Cox lmao


Me and Minnie Cox are not so different


Title eyes seen good. 👍


That's a good story. A HIGHLY unfortunate name, though.


I think it’s just autocorrect changing “most” to “my seen”. It makes sense as “most based president in the world” (but is just a guess until OP confirms).


Not enough Americans can overlook Teddy's crusade against the Indians. What they fail to understand, is that they were savages and heathens, as Mr. Roosevelt himself pointed out often. When the Panamanians tried blocking our construction of the canal he said those "dirty little brown people" don't get a say in it. We need leaders like him with strong backbone. Men who aren't afraid of lefties screaming "racism". Mr. Trump is the closest we've gotten to a Teddy Roosevelt in well over a century.


Yup. Username checks out. Dear Sir/Madam/Otter, you are free to voice your opinions, but please note that whenever you espouse tired rhetoric about old, rich white dudes being the solution to all the world's problems, you will likely be savagely voted down. Perhaps this puzzles you, or perhaps you love the attention, but just know we're all here for you if you need a hug or some friendly advice. We understand you need help, so don't be afraid to reach out. Love from, A 'lefty'.


It's a troll account, probably from a "lefty" to make "righty"'s look bad


Trump couldn't carry TR's jockstrap. That absolute joke of a president is the worst thing Republicans have foisted upon our country since funding Osama Bin Laden against the Russians. Not that I have any hope for Democratic rule, agreeing as I do that a strong backbone is a legitimate requirement in leadership. But a strong backbone requires more than standing up to someone who accuses you of racism. It also requires the ability to reflect on your own experiences and empathize with the plight of others. A strong backbone is required in order to make your political base work toward actual improvements in our country rather than work toward making "others" feel less a part of this noble experiment. What I'd like in a leader is someone who is dignified enough and respected around the world, with the ability to chastise the more ignorant members of our society when they are stupid enough to reveal the inner racist by their comments or actions. Obama comes to mind. Also, Indians, the Mohawk tribes specifically, had a functioning democracy about 200 years before European settlers established footholds along the Atlantic ocean.


Too bad he was a homophobe or he wpuld get top 10 president