Post by: bones129 on June 18, 2015, 01:52:41 AM
FWIW, I don't think it will ever happen, or should happen.
Post by: star seed 7 on June 18, 2015, 07:21:15 AM
Post by: Kat Kid on June 18, 2015, 07:28:53 AM
Post by: Kat Kid on June 18, 2015, 07:31:43 AM
Post by: Kat Kid on June 18, 2015, 07:32:37 AM
Post by: Kat Kid on June 18, 2015, 07:42:37 AM
"That person was wrong. I am nice. I have great friends, I get along great with all sorts of people, I have great everything."
Post by: CNS on June 18, 2015, 08:35:34 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Cartierfor3 on June 18, 2015, 08:58:03 AM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on June 18, 2015, 10:03:06 AM
Post by: Jabeez on June 18, 2015, 10:12:31 AM
His lack of filter is very refreshing, but it disqualifies him to be president.Rather than his ridiculous opinions?
Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
Post by: Spracne on June 18, 2015, 10:18:45 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on June 18, 2015, 10:23:19 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on June 18, 2015, 10:24:57 AM
If the first debates even allow this guy on stage... :flush: So annoying.
Oh, they will.
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on June 18, 2015, 10:30:45 AM
His lack of filter is very refreshing, but it disqualifies him to be president.Rather than his ridiculous opinions?
Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
Everyone has ridiculous opinions, he just lets everyone know them up front, unlike most politicians.
Post by: Brock Landers on June 18, 2015, 10:44:24 AM
Post by: CNS on June 18, 2015, 11:10:18 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Dub on June 18, 2015, 11:50:12 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on June 19, 2015, 10:36:34 AM
Post by: renocat on June 19, 2015, 06:51:26 PM
Post by: 0.42 on June 20, 2015, 04:46:00 PM
Post by: ChiComCat on June 20, 2015, 05:00:33 PM
If the first debates even allow this guy on stage... :flush: So annoying.
Oh, they will.
From what I hear, the 'pub debates max at the 10 candidates that are polling the best. Tough to say Trump cracks the top 10, but there will be some ridiculous candidates up there.
Post by: star seed 7 on June 20, 2015, 05:16:53 PM
Post by: wetwillie on June 20, 2015, 06:15:32 PM
Post by: CNS on June 20, 2015, 07:26:09 PM
Imagine how many golf courses he can build as the commander of the fiercest army in the world.Yes. Those awesome man made islands in dubai? Yep, new front nine on Trump Persian Palace.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: ChiComCat on June 20, 2015, 08:11:02 PM
he will absolutely be in the top 10. easily. there is zero question on that
I dunno - he had to pay people to go to his announcement rally. I think there are 6 candidates with spots locked into a debate and another tier that will have a few people left out.
Walker
Carson
Rubio
Bush
Perry
Paul
Trump
Christie
Huckabee
Jindal
Pataki
Cruz
Santorum
Post by: star seed 7 on June 20, 2015, 08:18:08 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on June 20, 2015, 08:19:14 PM
Post by: CNS on June 20, 2015, 08:22:21 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: bones129 on June 21, 2015, 02:18:22 AM
Post by: 8manpick on June 21, 2015, 07:03:10 AM
Post by: wetwillie on June 21, 2015, 08:42:39 AM
Post by: SdK on June 22, 2015, 01:40:01 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on June 22, 2015, 08:07:53 AM
though, the "establishment" (including fox) will do everything they can to try and exclude rand and trump
I don't think so. The debates with Trump will be a ratings bonanza for them.
Post by: renocat on June 22, 2015, 08:34:11 AM
Post by: 0.42 on June 22, 2015, 10:20:39 AM
Trump is like a guzzied-up wore at a church picnic. Some people look lustily at her, but no one would touch her with a ten foot pole.
satisfy your id, renocat
Post by: ChiComCat on June 25, 2015, 11:59:32 AM
Quote
Last week, in his speech announcing a run for president, Trump deplored immigrants from Mexico who "have lots of problems" and are "bringing those problems to us."
"They're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime, they're rapists," he said, adding, "and some, I assume, are good people."
:D
Post by: steve dave on June 25, 2015, 12:05:16 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on June 25, 2015, 06:36:09 PM
steve dave is very pro-trump-candidacy
And anti Trump Presidency
Do you guys remember how great third party Ross Perot was? Like, he legitimately was on the ballot and stuff. Used lots of graphs etc. was great
Post by: star seed 7 on June 25, 2015, 06:48:49 PM
Post by: ShellShock on June 26, 2015, 07:56:03 AM
Unfortunately, he's Donald Trump and has a tower full of skeletons.
Post by: star seed 7 on June 26, 2015, 09:23:58 AM
He gets it and will turn us around.
lol
Post by: Institutional Control on June 26, 2015, 09:33:46 AM
Post by: CNS on June 26, 2015, 09:37:27 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on June 26, 2015, 09:53:32 AM
Post by: CNS on June 26, 2015, 10:02:37 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on June 26, 2015, 03:21:51 PM
Looks like he is polling 2nd right now in New Hampshire. These debates are going to be a lot of fun.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on June 26, 2015, 03:24:31 PM
Post by: CNS on June 26, 2015, 05:04:51 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: star seed 7 on June 26, 2015, 06:18:56 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on June 26, 2015, 07:58:51 PM
Has he even filed yet? I mean dicks in for now, everyone.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Yeah, he's officially in.
Post by: cfbandyman on June 27, 2015, 02:52:05 PM
Luked? Great letter though by the Donald. Guy doubles down on his crazy.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on June 29, 2015, 04:39:44 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on June 29, 2015, 04:54:18 PM
Quote from: ksuw
What a hit piece by the liberal media :curse:
Post by: renocat on June 29, 2015, 06:19:54 PM
Post by: nicname on June 29, 2015, 11:36:40 PM
Post by: bones129 on June 30, 2015, 12:52:31 AM
Post by: CNS on June 30, 2015, 10:04:20 AM
I mean, it would be super awesome if he did something like a one hour special where he was being put through staged challenges(similar to the ones on the apprentice, but more relevant to running America) and where he sits on the other side of the Apprentice desk/table, and instead of him in the big chair, it's America and we all Twitter vote at the end of it.
Post by: Yard Dog on June 30, 2015, 01:50:51 PM
I hope he is loud as possible through the primary, loses, then decides that the GOP was conspiring against him and that the American voters really want him. Then, I hope he runs as an independent(is this even possible?) and buys a bunch of tv time, like Ross Perot, and puts together hour long prime time specials(maybe with a panel of ppl from his past Apprentice shows) discussing why he is such a good option.
I mean, it would be super awesome if he did something like a one hour special where he was being put through staged challenges(similar to the ones on the apprentice, but more relevant to running America) and where he sits on the other side of the Apprentice desk/table, and instead of him in the big chair, it's America and we all Twitter vote at the end of it.
Would watch.
Post by: renocat on July 06, 2015, 01:37:12 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on July 06, 2015, 01:51:02 PM
It appears Donald Trump took another big brain laxative and stupid verbal diarrhea all over himself. He tweeted Jeb likes illegal aliens because she is a Mexican, source MSN.com. There is no place for this kind of remark. Disagree with policy, but do not atrack a man's family. To me this shows he is not fit to be President. If he would call Putin's woman a trashy whore, we could have nuke dumped on NY. He is a loud mouth bafoon.
Unless her name is Michelle.... then's it's ok, right?
Post by: Institutional Control on July 06, 2015, 03:03:30 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.dailykos.com%2Fimages%2F152478%2Flarge%2FScreen_Shot_2015-07-06_at_8.39.51_AM.png%3F1436197324&hash=efb30a03504bda10516da819dbaacd8d6dda4855)
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.dailykos.com%2Fimages%2F152482%2Flarge%2FScreen_Shot_2015-07-06_at_8.40.10_AM.png%3F1436197325&hash=a449dc1d7ee811b3370f39e9e945af6c4dd631c6)
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.dailykos.com%2Fimages%2F152480%2Flarge%2FScreen_Shot_2015-07-06_at_8.40.25_AM.png%3F1436197324&hash=464e7ba95b006e0d8f9970346f92724bc8ad72e4)
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.dailykos.com%2Fimages%2F152481%2Flarge%2FScreen_Shot_2015-07-06_at_8.41.00_AM.png%3F1436197325&hash=ee468700552d8a168e5058ab6956b8b3c13387fe)
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.dailykos.com%2Fimages%2F152479%2Flarge%2FScreen_Shot_2015-07-06_at_8.41.17_AM.png%3F1436197324&hash=db3e96da79e3542b29df021f104726d8d3558579)
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 06, 2015, 03:15:23 PM
Post by: ShellShock on July 06, 2015, 03:26:44 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 06, 2015, 03:30:08 PM
Blast me if you will, but I can stand behind quite a bit of what The Donald is saying. His basic running principle is that he doesn't GAF about anyone or anything. He's a heat seeking missile set to restart the US. The world needs more blunt people like him.
I think the world has enough racist hypocrites.
Post by: steve dave on July 06, 2015, 03:32:26 PM
Post by: ShellShock on July 06, 2015, 03:36:46 PM
Blast me if you will, but I can stand behind quite a bit of what The Donald is saying. His basic running principle is that he doesn't GAF about anyone or anything. He's a heat seeking missile set to restart the US. The world needs more blunt people like him.
I think the world has enough racist hypocrites.
So you openly support illegal immigration?
Post by: steve dave on July 06, 2015, 03:37:32 PM
Blast me if you will, but I can stand behind quite a bit of what The Donald is saying. His basic running principle is that he doesn't GAF about anyone or anything. He's a heat seeking missile set to restart the US. The world needs more blunt people like him.
I think the world has enough racist hypocrites.
So you openly support illegal immigration?
LOL
Post by: steve dave on July 06, 2015, 03:39:10 PM
Post by: CNS on July 06, 2015, 03:42:06 PM
Blast me if you will, but I can stand behind quite a bit of what The Donald is saying. His basic running principle is that he doesn't GAF about anyone or anything. He's a heat seeking missile set to restart the US. The world needs more blunt people like him.
Just because ppl say what they think at that time, it doesn't mean they have a plan. I mean, it is super easy to knock crap down. Rebuilding takes actual ability.
Post by: ShellShock on July 06, 2015, 03:45:00 PM
RATM, you've got two (ONLY TWO) options in this world. You can either think donald trump is a racist hypocrite or you can openly support illegal immigration. choose your side wisely bro because there is literally zero middle ground here.
I wasn't meaning to take two hard stances on issues, just sparking some light debate. There are certain things that I don't agree with The Donald about. I'm really anxious for the televised debates though as those will bring millions of viewers just to see his plan.
Blast me if you will, but I can stand behind quite a bit of what The Donald is saying. His basic running principle is that he doesn't GAF about anyone or anything. He's a heat seeking missile set to restart the US. The world needs more blunt people like him.
Just because ppl say what they think at that time, it doesn't mean they have a plan. I mean, it is super easy to knock crap down. Rebuilding takes actual ability.
Completely agree! I want to see his plan to build things back up. He's already told us his plan to BID.
Post by: ShellShock on July 06, 2015, 03:46:02 PM
Blast me if you will, but I can stand behind quite a bit of what The Donald is saying. His basic running principle is that he doesn't GAF about anyone or anything. He's a heat seeking missile set to restart the US. The world needs more blunt people like him.
I think the world has enough racist hypocrites.
So you openly support illegal immigration?
LOL
But for the record, I'm very against illegal immigration and the messes and problems it causes...
Post by: CNS on July 06, 2015, 03:47:16 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 06, 2015, 03:47:54 PM
Post by: Spracne on July 06, 2015, 03:51:24 PM
Post by: Spracne on July 06, 2015, 03:53:04 PM
Post by: ShellShock on July 06, 2015, 04:59:40 PM
He publicly declared Mexico is our enemy. This sounds good to you?
I declare them our enemy as well if we keep turning a blind eye to the crap that is currently happening.
I support legalizing immigration.
I support legal immigration also. Key word: legal
We have processes in place right now for every single human to become a legal citizen of the USofA. Problem is, less than 20% of our immigrants take the legal route.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 06, 2015, 05:07:56 PM
He publicly declared Mexico is our enemy. This sounds good to you?
I declare them our enemy as well if we keep turning a blind eye to the crap that is currently happening.I support legalizing immigration.
I support legal immigration also. Key word: legal
We have processes in place right now for every single human to become a legal citizen of the USofA. Problem is, less than 20% of our immigrants take the legal route.
Actually, most humans have no path at all, short of winning a lottery. I think we should eliminate limits and offer green cards (not citizenship) to anyone who can find a steady job here for as long as they can hold onto that job. There shouldn't be a "line" for people to have to stand in. We need as many workers as our economy demands, and the government should get out of the way.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 06, 2015, 05:14:49 PM
Post by: sys on July 06, 2015, 05:17:42 PM
We have processes in place right now for every single human to become a legal citizen of the USofA.
complete and utter bullshit.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 06, 2015, 05:32:41 PM
Post by: CNS on July 06, 2015, 07:29:58 PM
Can you guess the political affiliation of most of then small biz owners that I personally know that hire undocumented workers for cash wages?He publicly declared Mexico is our enemy. This sounds good to you?
I declare them our enemy as well if we keep turning a blind eye to the crap that is currently happening.I support legalizing immigration.
I support legal immigration also. Key word: legal
We have processes in place right now for every single human to become a legal citizen of the USofA. Problem is, less than 20% of our immigrants take the legal route.
Pubs can't have it both ways.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Frankenklein on July 06, 2015, 07:50:18 PM
Pubs make lots of jobs for everyone,even the Chinese.Can you guess the political affiliation of most of then small biz owners that I personally know that hire undocumented workers for cash wages?He publicly declared Mexico is our enemy. This sounds good to you?
I declare them our enemy as well if we keep turning a blind eye to the crap that is currently happening.I support legalizing immigration.
I support legal immigration also. Key word: legal
We have processes in place right now for every single human to become a legal citizen of the USofA. Problem is, less than 20% of our immigrants take the legal route.
Pubs can't have it both ways.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: CNS on July 06, 2015, 08:19:59 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: nicname on July 06, 2015, 08:36:53 PM
Post by: steve dave on July 07, 2015, 08:45:22 AM
To be fair to Trump, and I may be way off base here, but I'm guessing the U.S. has made actual enemies out of a number of countries for far worse than what Mexico has (or, I guess, hasn't) been doing.
ultimately (and this is where I say it) there's not a way to go around something without being the worst
Post by: Asteriskhead on July 07, 2015, 08:51:11 AM
I think I am beginning to understand ksuw's "low information voter" thing
ksuw doesn't understand what low information voting means.
Post by: 0.42 on July 07, 2015, 12:25:20 PM
conservatives should love Trump because he is their Id
it's @ShellShock
Post by: ShellShock on July 07, 2015, 12:32:57 PM
conservatives should love Trump because he is their Id
it's @ShellShock
Id?
Post by: star seed 7 on July 07, 2015, 12:55:46 PM
Post by: CNS on July 07, 2015, 01:04:37 PM
conservatives should love Trump because he is their Id
it's @ShellShock
Id?
Google that with Freud.
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on July 07, 2015, 01:59:07 PM
Post by: CNS on July 07, 2015, 02:00:42 PM
Post by: Asteriskhead on July 07, 2015, 08:47:48 PM
conservatives should love Trump because he is their Id
it's @ShellShock
Id?
jesus christ
Post by: cfbandyman on July 07, 2015, 09:07:19 PM
I hope he is loud as possible through the primary, loses, then decides that the GOP was conspiring against him and that the American voters really want him. Then, I hope he runs as an independent(is this even possible?) and buys a bunch of tv time, like Ross Perot, and puts together hour long prime time specials(maybe with a panel of ppl from his past Apprentice shows) discussing why he is such a good option.
I mean, it would be super awesome if he did something like a one hour special where he was being put through staged challenges(similar to the ones on the apprentice, but more relevant to running America) and where he sits on the other side of the Apprentice desk/table, and instead of him in the big chair, it's America and we all Twitter vote at the end of it.
:pray: x 1000
Post by: ChiComCat on July 08, 2015, 02:39:01 PM
Quote
In a separate interview with NBC News, Trump blasted the conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer, who called Trump a "rodeo clown."
Krauthammer uses a wheelchair because of a spinal injury.
"And then I get called by a guy that can't buy a pair of pants, I get called names? Give me a break," he said.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/08/politics/donald-trump-illegal-immigrant-workers/index.html
I don't know why they bury the lead here but I love that quote :drool:
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 08, 2015, 02:43:27 PM
Post by: ChiComCat on July 08, 2015, 02:45:54 PM
Post by: CNS on July 08, 2015, 02:48:26 PM
Post by: lopakman on July 08, 2015, 02:51:21 PM
These debates can't get here soon enough.
:popcorn:
Post by: steve dave on July 08, 2015, 07:52:31 PM
Post by: CNS on July 08, 2015, 08:03:28 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 08, 2015, 08:12:33 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 08, 2015, 08:17:04 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 08, 2015, 08:24:10 PM
also texans rough ridin' love talking about texas, christ
Post by: ShellShock on July 08, 2015, 09:31:50 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 08, 2015, 09:37:19 PM
Post by: Spracne on July 08, 2015, 09:41:27 PM
i didn't even know perry was running again.
also texans rough ridin' love talking about texas, christ
Hey, have you seen this new research? Interesting!! http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/06/americas-future-california-or-texas/
Post by: wetwillie on July 08, 2015, 09:41:51 PM
Post by: ShellShock on July 08, 2015, 09:42:05 PM
:lol:
yuck it up all you want...in fact, you should yuck it up all the way to the Hilary 2016 thread
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2Fp6YzU0PrWlAFG%2Fgiphy.gif&hash=51e8dbb202ed4a04b7ca2310504ddf8272ad3e0c)
Post by: star seed 7 on July 08, 2015, 09:43:52 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 08, 2015, 09:44:13 PM
Oh wow you actually are on team trump.
:lol:
Post by: ShellShock on July 08, 2015, 09:45:08 PM
Oh wow you actually are on team trump.
If there was a better conservative option, I would be torn. I don't think he's the best candidate in the world, but he's what we need this time around. Nothing has worked for the US very well since Clinton, so i'm willing to give him a shot.
Side Note: I also really like Ben Carson. He's just not a legitimate contender IMO against Bush, Trump, Cruz, etc. I would love it if he would be on the ticket with Trump though. I think they're at polar opposite ends of the conservative agenda, which would make a really strong team.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 08, 2015, 09:45:59 PM
Post by: CNS on July 08, 2015, 09:52:45 PM
Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk
Post by: OK_Cat on July 08, 2015, 09:53:43 PM
Post by: ShellShock on July 08, 2015, 10:04:33 PM
Omg shell shock :lol:
So who do you have as the top two conservative options then wise guy?
Post by: OK_Cat on July 08, 2015, 10:10:31 PM
Post by: ShellShock on July 08, 2015, 10:12:00 PM
:lol:
*Crickets*
Thats what I thought OKC...
Post by: OK_Cat on July 08, 2015, 10:14:35 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on July 08, 2015, 10:18:25 PM
Oh wow you actually are on team trump.
If there was a better conservative option, I would be torn. I don't think he's the best candidate in the world, but he's what we need this time around. Nothing has worked for the US very well since Clinton, so i'm willing to give him a shot.
Side Note: I also really like Ben Carson. He's just not a legitimate contender IMO against Bush, Trump, Cruz, etc. I would love it if he would be on the ticket with Trump though. I think they're at polar opposite ends of the conservative agenda, which would make a really strong team.
Dude.
Post by: renocat on July 08, 2015, 10:33:20 PM
Post by: ShellShock on July 09, 2015, 07:36:47 AM
Tell me more about how trump will save us
Still no word from you on "legitimate" contenders...
Post by: ShellShock on July 09, 2015, 07:40:23 AM
Trump = buttfoon. I don't consider him a conservative after giving Hillary campaign money. He is suckling air away from real leaders who would be good Presidents. He is a type of guy who asks his turds if they love him after taking a crap. All old wonderhair is doing is riling up the rabied brained teapartyers. He speaks and they get so mad they spaz uncontrollablely, their eyes bug out, froth at the mouth, gnaw on wood, and masturbate to the star spangled banner.
That donation was made to the Clinton Foundation which does multiple things and wasn't directly toward the campaign. Plus, that was years ago and old news...not relevant.
It's about time the tea partyers get riled up!
Post by: star seed 7 on July 09, 2015, 07:41:26 AM
Post by: steve dave on July 09, 2015, 07:55:56 AM
Post by: OK_Cat on July 09, 2015, 08:15:53 AM
Tell me more about how trump will save us
Still no word from you on "legitimate" contenders...
I won't deny that trump is your most legitimate contender
:lol:
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 09, 2015, 08:31:46 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 09, 2015, 08:47:03 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 09, 2015, 08:52:14 AM
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/619116301705969664
Didn't he make some joke about how krauthammer can't even put on his own pants? :lol:
Yes. He's a treasure trove, and he's just getting started.
Post by: lopakman on July 09, 2015, 08:55:57 AM
:lol:
Post by: steve dave on July 09, 2015, 09:00:18 AM
Post by: steve dave on July 09, 2015, 09:02:07 AM
Post by: steve dave on July 09, 2015, 09:03:03 AM
Post by: ShellShock on July 09, 2015, 09:03:38 AM
what sort of rationalizations go through the mind of a trump voter? like, yes, this guy would be great as the leader of the free world. I really think this is the electable republican candidate that can finally win the popular vote.
I think it's the fact that he just doesn't rough ridin care about what usual politicians care about. He's not tied to oil or the middle east like Bush and he's not a completely incompetent moron like Obama.
EDITED FOR GRAMMAR.
Post by: CNS on July 09, 2015, 09:11:43 AM
Post by: CNS on July 09, 2015, 09:12:23 AM
Post by: lopakman on July 09, 2015, 09:27:11 AM
Post by: CNS on July 09, 2015, 09:34:04 AM
Man, I think I would go with Sam :surprised:
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 09, 2015, 09:36:16 AM
Honest question: Trump or Brownback?
Man, I think I would go with Sam :surprised:
third party
Post by: CNS on July 09, 2015, 09:52:51 AM
Third party.... :lol:
Post by: steve dave on July 09, 2015, 10:05:41 AM
Honest question: Trump or Brownback?
Man, I think I would go with Sam :surprised:
well, the economy would be shittier under sam but he'd be less likely to have us involved in a nuclear stand off on day one so I guess sam. honestly though, we'd probably just have a military coup if trump somehow won the election.
Post by: renocat on July 09, 2015, 10:17:02 AM
Post by: ChiComCat on July 09, 2015, 10:22:48 AM
I was undecided but when he said eff mexicans it resonated with me. I want this guy at the helm.
This is what I was thinking. I am hoping that a majority of the right isn't racist, just that when you split them into 12 segments the racist segment is the largest.
Post by: 8manpick on July 09, 2015, 10:23:31 AM
Post by: CNS on July 09, 2015, 10:26:50 AM
Post by: steve dave on July 09, 2015, 10:39:50 AM
The idea of putting a successful biz owner in place as president seems dumb.
he's declared bankruptcy multiple times. that's not really a good plan for the us economy fwiw.
Post by: CNS on July 09, 2015, 10:45:19 AM
Trump could probably guide us right through that and then document it all through a three season tv show.
Post by: ChiComCat on July 09, 2015, 10:47:16 AM
We could just set up a new country(same ppl and stuff, just call it a diff name) then let the old one declare bankruptcy. Boom! China is a sucker and we are out of debt.
Trump could probably guide us right through that and then document it all through a three season tv show.
The new country would be called Trump America tho
Post by: ShellShock on July 09, 2015, 11:22:40 AM
The idea of putting a successful biz owner in place as president seems dumb.
he's declared bankruptcy multiple times. that's not really a good plan for the us economy fwiw.
How's that any different that what our government has been doing for years?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 09, 2015, 11:25:52 AM
The idea of putting a successful biz owner in place as president seems dumb.
he's declared bankruptcy multiple times. that's not really a good plan for the us economy fwiw.
How's that any different that what our government has been doing for years?
We haven't defaulted on any of our debts.
Post by: CNS on July 09, 2015, 11:29:08 AM
The idea of putting a successful biz owner in place as president seems dumb.
he's declared bankruptcy multiple times. that's not really a good plan for the us economy fwiw.
How's that any different that what our government has been doing for years?
One involves paying money on loans you agreed to. One involves rough ridin' over those who you agreed to borrow money from and paying them either nothing or pennies on the dollar.
Post by: 8manpick on July 09, 2015, 11:54:12 AM
The idea of putting a successful biz owner in place as president seems dumb.
he's declared bankruptcy multiple times. that's not really a good plan for the us economy fwiw.
How's that any different that what our government has been doing for years?
One involves paying money on loans you agreed to. One involves rough ridin' over those who you agreed to borrow money from and paying them either nothing or pennies on the dollar.
So, basically the same thing?
Post by: steve dave on July 09, 2015, 11:59:31 AM
The idea of putting a successful biz owner in place as president seems dumb.
he's declared bankruptcy multiple times. that's not really a good plan for the us economy fwiw.
How's that any different that what our government has been doing for years?
it's exactly the opposite
Post by: star seed 7 on July 09, 2015, 01:08:52 PM
Post by: MeatSauce on July 09, 2015, 01:13:44 PM
^^here's one of those low info voters KSUW! absolutely despises.The idea of putting a successful biz owner in place as president seems dumb.
he's declared bankruptcy multiple times. that's not really a good plan for the us economy fwiw.
How's that any different that what our government has been doing for years?
Post by: Spracne on July 09, 2015, 01:16:58 PM
The idea of putting a successful biz owner in place as president seems dumb.
he's declared bankruptcy multiple times. that's not really a good plan for the us economy fwiw.
How's that any different that what our government has been doing for years?
Check out John Jacob Astor over here!
Post by: ShellShock on July 09, 2015, 05:44:38 PM
The idea of putting a successful biz owner in place as president seems dumb.
he's declared bankruptcy multiple times. that's not really a good plan for the us economy fwiw.
How's that any different that what our government has been doing for years?
One involves paying money on loans you agreed to. One involves rough ridin' over those who you agreed to borrow money from and paying them either nothing or pennies on the dollar.
No, the actual difference is that private business can't raise their own debt ceiling like a bunch of idiots.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 09, 2015, 05:46:37 PM
The idea of putting a successful biz owner in place as president seems dumb.
he's declared bankruptcy multiple times. that's not really a good plan for the us economy fwiw.
How's that any different that what our government has been doing for years?
One involves paying money on loans you agreed to. One involves rough ridin' over those who you agreed to borrow money from and paying them either nothing or pennies on the dollar.
No, the actual difference is that private business can't raise their own debt ceiling like a bunch of idiots.
Sure they can, unless they have bad credit. Hell, I can call the number on the back of any of my credit cards and raise my debt ceiling if I need to.
Post by: ShellShock on July 09, 2015, 05:58:32 PM
The idea of putting a successful biz owner in place as president seems dumb.
he's declared bankruptcy multiple times. that's not really a good plan for the us economy fwiw.
How's that any different that what our government has been doing for years?
One involves paying money on loans you agreed to. One involves rough ridin' over those who you agreed to borrow money from and paying them either nothing or pennies on the dollar.
No, the actual difference is that private business can't raise their own debt ceiling like a bunch of idiots.
Sure they can, unless they have bad credit. Hell, I can call the number on the back of any of my credit cards and raise my debt ceiling if I need to.
You're talking consumer/personal instead of business. Business debt doesn't exactly work like that...I see your rational though.
Post by: steve dave on July 09, 2015, 06:13:53 PM
Post by: wetwillie on July 09, 2015, 06:14:44 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 09, 2015, 06:25:03 PM
Post by: sys on July 09, 2015, 07:08:14 PM
Post by: steve dave on July 09, 2015, 07:42:55 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F15%2F07%2F09%2Fe20b6b76bf7e84dcf499e00834bd5f05.jpg&hash=f250deaa4a458a5885aadafccde8cb5f97159cc8)
Post by: Dub on July 09, 2015, 08:28:34 PM
Post by: steve dave on July 09, 2015, 08:32:39 PM
Post by: wetwillie on July 09, 2015, 08:56:22 PM
Post by: CNS on July 09, 2015, 09:21:02 PM
Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk
Post by: renocat on July 10, 2015, 12:16:52 AM
Post by: CNS on July 10, 2015, 08:47:01 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: CNS on July 10, 2015, 09:18:31 AM
This guy will start WWIII with in 6 months of winning.
Now that he has money from the top 5 oil ppl locked up, he may actually get the primary.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 10, 2015, 11:57:08 AM
Post by: renocat on July 10, 2015, 12:23:16 PM
Trump told Anderson Cooper that he would bomb Iraq's oil fields and give them to Exxon Mobile and the other "top 5 oil companies", then put a small ring of our troops around them. He also said that Iraqis wouldn't be mad about it because "there are no Iraqis". He noted that they are fragmented into so many groups that there is no Iraq. That may be true, but every single one of them would be pretty upset about taking their sole resource and giving it to a foreign company.Laxitive brains just shot another 5 foot projectile out of his mouth. We laugh at his hyperboly but foreign nuts will not. I agree he start a war. Let's say he does not, what oil company wants a destroyed oil field. What about the little peon oil companies? They love since Mexicans work for them.
This guy will start WWIII with in 6 months of winning.
Now that he has money from the top 5 oil ppl locked up, he may actually get the primary.
Post by: puniraptor on July 10, 2015, 02:23:58 PM
Post by: ShellShock on July 10, 2015, 02:39:36 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F15%2F07%2F09%2Fe2ed42b60467fa56fbdfcd31f5fa9a66.jpg&hash=a517ccac91f439c06d144bf05784d8468341fc79)
This :thumbs:
Post by: puniraptor on July 10, 2015, 02:51:49 PM
he only has a chance at winning the election if the shellshocks of his fanbase stop freaking everyone else out tho.
Post by: sys on July 10, 2015, 03:04:31 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 10, 2015, 03:18:57 PM
Post by: CNS on July 10, 2015, 03:23:22 PM
I say eff it, I can't think of anything more America than a tabloid celebrity reality show silver spoon rich guy being elected president. maybe if he were also a movie star and pro athlete.The thing that would make this more American would be if the election was turned into a Big brother type actual reality show and we the people (and a panel of experts/judges including Brittney, the drummer from journey, Vanilla Ice, and the guy who played Face on A-Team) voted candidates off weekly, with twitter and on line voting, after they face off head to head in some arbitrary unrelated contest along with some short personal weekly bio/story about their great aunts cancer.
he only has a chance at winning the election if the shellshocks of his fanbase stop freaking everyone else out tho.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: ShellShock on July 10, 2015, 03:49:58 PM
shellshock, would you mind explaining if bombing iraq and giving their bombed oil to exxon is a good idea and also if it's even different from what the us government and the trump organization already do?
I hadn't heard of this until just now. The answer is no though...I don't support the mindless bombing of the oil fields. I do think that we're almost doing that already though via gulf war and war right now don't you?
Post by: 0.42 on July 10, 2015, 03:53:58 PM
conservatives should love Trump because he is their Id
it's @ShellShock
Id?
i mean i feel like this got overlooked
Post by: ShellShock on July 10, 2015, 03:56:18 PM
conservatives should love Trump because he is their Id
it's @ShellShock
Id?
i mean i feel like this got overlooked
Yeah, I looked it up. No, I don't agree with the theory.
Post by: puniraptor on July 10, 2015, 03:57:06 PM
Post by: 0.42 on July 10, 2015, 04:20:05 PM
I don't agree with the theory.
No it's a fact
Post by: wetwillie on July 10, 2015, 04:22:01 PM
Post by: CNS on July 10, 2015, 04:36:49 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: sys on July 10, 2015, 05:59:05 PM
I hadn't heard of this until just now. The answer is no though...I don't support the mindless bombing of the oil fields. I do think that we're almost doing that already though via gulf war and war right now don't you?
well, that didn't work very well.
Post by: steve dave on July 10, 2015, 06:00:54 PM
Post by: steve dave on July 10, 2015, 06:01:34 PM
Post by: sys on July 10, 2015, 06:03:02 PM
It's a delicate rough ridin' flower
i got greedy.
Post by: ShellShock on July 10, 2015, 10:14:36 PM
I don't agree with the theory.
No it's a fact
No, it's a set of principles and models. It's not a fact as there are no definite ways to prove concepts of the mind.
Post by: steve dave on July 10, 2015, 10:45:22 PM
Post by: renocat on July 11, 2015, 09:14:35 AM
Post by: wetwillie on July 11, 2015, 09:57:08 AM
Post by: CNS on July 11, 2015, 10:27:19 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: star seed 7 on July 11, 2015, 10:01:39 PM
Trump told Anderson Cooper that he would bomb Iraq's oil fields and give them to Exxon Mobile and the other "top 5 oil companies", then put a small ring of our troops around them. He also said that Iraqis wouldn't be mad about it because "there are no Iraqis". He noted that they are fragmented into so many groups that there is no Iraq. That may be true, but every single one of them would be pretty upset about taking their sole resource and giving it to a foreign company.
This guy will start WWIII with in 6 months of winning.
Now that he has money from the top 5 oil ppl locked up, he may actually get the primary.
so i still have no idea if this post was 100% fabricated by cns or if trump actually said these things but how great is it that a guy that COULD imaginably have said these things is running for president :lol:
Post by: renocat on July 11, 2015, 11:09:24 PM
Post by: ChiComCat on July 12, 2015, 12:34:24 AM
Post by: renocat on July 12, 2015, 08:43:36 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 13, 2015, 08:23:29 AM
Trump told Anderson Cooper that he would bomb Iraq's oil fields and give them to Exxon Mobile and the other "top 5 oil companies", then put a small ring of our troops around them. He also said that Iraqis wouldn't be mad about it because "there are no Iraqis". He noted that they are fragmented into so many groups that there is no Iraq. That may be true, but every single one of them would be pretty upset about taking their sole resource and giving it to a foreign company.
This guy will start WWIII with in 6 months of winning.
Now that he has money from the top 5 oil ppl locked up, he may actually get the primary.
so i still have no idea if this post was 100% fabricated by cns or if trump actually said these things but how great is it that a guy that COULD imaginably have said these things is running for president :lol:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/10/politics/donald-trump-fact-check-bomb-oil-fields-iraq/
This headline is incredible.
Post by: steve dave on July 14, 2015, 08:49:47 AM
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/donald-trump-kick-el-chapo-a-article-1.2290555
Post by: CNS on July 14, 2015, 08:50:54 AM
Post by: Institutional Control on July 14, 2015, 10:27:25 AM
Post by: ShellShock on July 14, 2015, 12:18:44 PM
"Whats wrong with a candidate that wants to secure the borders, balance the budget and create real jobs?"
The answer, absolutely nothing. Is he brash and abrasive? Yes. Does he piss off pretty much everyone? Yes. Will he follow through with the plan he has set out? You bet your ass.
All joking aside guys, The Donald is picking up some real steam from conservatives for his hard stance on big ticket items. I have heard this from multiple people that I know working in DC that are also really plugged into the election. (Source rating: All of them work for other GOP candidate camps)
Post by: star seed 7 on July 14, 2015, 12:23:15 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on July 14, 2015, 12:23:49 PM
From the article:
"Whats wrong with a candidate that wants to secure the borders, balance the budget and create real jobs?"
The answer, absolutely nothing. Is he brash and abrasive? Yes. Does he piss off pretty much everyone? Yes. Will he follow through with the plan he has set out? You bet your ass.
All joking aside guys, The Donald is picking up some real steam from conservatives for his hard stance on big ticket items. I have heard this from multiple people that I know working in DC that are also really plugged into the election. (Source rating: All of them work for other GOP candidate camps)
I believe you and I'm excited.
Post by: CNS on July 14, 2015, 01:20:19 PM
From the article:
"Whats wrong with a candidate that wants to secure the borders, balance the budget and create real jobs?"
The answer, absolutely nothing. Is he brash and abrasive? Yes. Does he piss off pretty much everyone? Yes. Will he follow through with the plan he has set out? You bet your ass.
All joking aside guys, The Donald is picking up some real steam from conservatives for his hard stance on big ticket items. I have heard this from multiple people that I know working in DC that are also really plugged into the election. (Source rating: All of them work for other GOP candidate camps)
Some of the issue is the how. For example: He wants to protect the border by building a wall and making MX pay for it. I mean, I would love to have a vacation house in Miami and make you pay for it.
How is he going to create jobs? I mean, I guess we will need a eff load of weapons to protect ourselves from the repercussions of his dumbassery, but other than that, I have no clue.
How is he going to balance the budget?
Also, was he joking when interviewed by Anderson Cooper with regard to Iraq?
Post by: chuckjames on July 14, 2015, 01:56:57 PM
Post by: ShellShock on July 14, 2015, 02:32:16 PM
Really illustrates how stupid conservatives are
On the flip side, it really shows how little libtards care about the bigger picture of this country.
I mean, they've got gay marriage, they've got more government handouts and they've got Obama as POTUS, so you'd think we won't hear a mouse fart out of them for the rest of this term. What semi-controversial issue will they latch onto next?!?!
Post by: steve dave on July 14, 2015, 02:36:44 PM
Really illustrates how stupid conservatives are
On the flip side, it really shows how little libtards care about the bigger picture of this country.
I mean, they've got gay marriage, they've got more government handouts and they've got Obama as POTUS, so you'd think we won't hear a mouse fart out of them for the rest of this term. What semi-controversial issue will they latch onto next?!?!
illegal immigration or gun control hopefully
Post by: CNS on July 14, 2015, 02:53:02 PM
Post by: steve dave on July 14, 2015, 02:56:56 PM
Post by: CNS on July 14, 2015, 03:00:16 PM
Post by: Kat Kid on July 14, 2015, 03:00:31 PM
It is Bush's election to lose and Rubio or Kasich to lose the VP nod. Rubio seems unlikely at first, but going all-in on Florida is probably not a bad move electorally.
Post by: CNS on July 14, 2015, 03:01:49 PM
Post by: ShellShock on July 14, 2015, 03:16:55 PM
Post by: Asteriskhead on July 14, 2015, 03:18:45 PM
Really illustrates how stupid conservatives are
On the flip side, it really shows how little libtards care about the bigger picture of this country.
I mean, they've got gay marriage, they've got more government handouts and they've got Obama as POTUS, so you'd think we won't hear a mouse fart out of them for the rest of this term. What semi-controversial issue will they latch onto next?!?!
illegal immigration or gun control hopefully
it's too bad that it won't be tax reform.
Post by: ShellShock on July 14, 2015, 03:19:20 PM
Really illustrates how stupid conservatives are
On the flip side, it really shows how little libtards care about the bigger picture of this country.
I mean, they've got gay marriage, they've got more government handouts and they've got Obama as POTUS, so you'd think we won't hear a mouse fart out of them for the rest of this term. What semi-controversial issue will they latch onto next?!?!
illegal immigration or gun control hopefully
it's too bad that it won't be tax reform.
:thumbs:
Post by: star seed 7 on July 14, 2015, 03:23:19 PM
Really illustrates how stupid conservatives are
On the flip side, it really shows how little libtards care about the bigger picture of this country.
I mean, they've got gay marriage, they've got more government handouts and they've got Obama as POTUS, so you'd think we won't hear a mouse fart out of them for the rest of this term. What semi-controversial issue will they latch onto next?!?!
Look how much this guy hates gays :lol:
Post by: star seed 7 on July 14, 2015, 03:29:18 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 14, 2015, 04:57:39 PM
Post by: CNS on July 14, 2015, 05:28:13 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: ShellShock on July 14, 2015, 05:33:10 PM
Privacy is more important, imo. Also, need a guy who wants to gut money from politics. That is the most important thing a politician could do, imo.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I agree with this. I think that taking money from big time politics is the reason why we need a business mind running the helm instead of a politician. He has no personal interest in how much politicians make because it doesn't touch him at all. While he's a bit radical with execution and conveying his thoughts, most of his platform is pretty spot on fundamentally.
Post by: Asteriskhead on July 14, 2015, 05:36:18 PM
Privacy is more important, imo. Also, need a guy who wants to gut money from politics. That is the most important thing a politician could do, imo.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I agree with this. I think that taking money from big time politics is the reason why we need a business mind running the helm instead of a politician. He has no personal interest in how much politicians make because it doesn't touch him at all. While he's a bit radical with execution and conveying his thoughts, most of his platform is pretty spot on fundamentally.
He sees the presidential office as the best way to pad his pockets by influencing policy. How can you not see that? He's got a track record of bankrupting businesses in this fashion (setting his personal gain as the highest priority).
Post by: CNS on July 14, 2015, 05:42:27 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Dub on July 14, 2015, 05:43:28 PM
Quote
Dear Michael,
As you know, I have been a tremendous supporter of women's golf. When others wanted nothing to do with it, and many thought that the LPGA tour was a thing of the past and had absolutely no future, I stuck with the tour and with the ladies, many of whom I have gotten to know and respect—not only for their great talent but for being wonderful people. I defended the LPGA Tour for years. In many cases, because all of my seventeen clubs are very successful (with most of them being high end private), I had enormous pushback from my members. I would, and do, allow LPGA players to use and practice at my facilities, free of charge, with members not being thrilled. The good news is that last week, prior to the immense support I am now getting for being right on the issue of illegal immigration, many of the women came to my defense. Natalie Gulbis, Suzann Pettersen and others were wonderful in stating the good I have done for women's golf. Their words of support were very much appreciated by me.
Unfortunately, their Commissioner – you—who I do not even know, put out a nasty statement "At the current time, plans are to continue to stage the RICOH Women's British Open at Turnberry. With just three weeks until the championship, a change in venue for this prestigious major simply isn't feasible without significantly diminishing the event. By no means, however, does this decision suggest support for Mr. Trump's comments" (which have proven correct). You never called me to tell me this, as common decency would have dictated, but rather just put it out to the media. As you have heard, and as Univision and NBC are finding out, I am a "plus 5" at contracts. You have an absolutely binding contract to play the great Turnberry Ailsa course but, based on your rude comment to the press, please let this letter serve to represent that, subject to a conversation with me on the details, I would be willing to let you play the Women's British Open, in two weeks, at another course rather than magnificent Turnberry (which I own). I think you have done an extraordinary disservice to women's golf, but in no way will that diminish my respect for the women on the LPGA tour or their great golfing talent.
Please contact me at your earliest convenience to discuss my releasing the LPGA from its obligations under the contract. Obviously, you will have to move quickly!
Sincerely, Donald J. Trump.
P.S. Apparently, the American public disagrees with you in that I have just gone to #1 and #2 in the polls.
:D
... he copy/pasted two polls at the end of the letter
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on July 14, 2015, 05:57:22 PM
Dan Carlin did a podcast with a guy who is running a PAC called Wolf-Pac specifically trying to get an amendment to get rid of the corporatation= a person and revise contribution laws. I am all for it.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I'm all for this as long as it treats labor unions in the same way.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 14, 2015, 06:00:20 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on July 14, 2015, 06:21:47 PM
It's so adorable how much JD hates unions :lol:
Libs throw the "HATE" word around so casually. I do dislike unions, though. They have simply outlived their usefulness in the USofA.
Post by: ShellShock on July 14, 2015, 06:22:54 PM
http://golfweek.com/documents/2015/jul/13/trumps-letter-lpga-commissioner-whan/QuoteDear Michael,
As you know, I have been a tremendous supporter of women's golf. When others wanted nothing to do with it, and many thought that the LPGA tour was a thing of the past and had absolutely no future, I stuck with the tour and with the ladies, many of whom I have gotten to know and respect—not only for their great talent but for being wonderful people. I defended the LPGA Tour for years. In many cases, because all of my seventeen clubs are very successful (with most of them being high end private), I had enormous pushback from my members. I would, and do, allow LPGA players to use and practice at my facilities, free of charge, with members not being thrilled. The good news is that last week, prior to the immense support I am now getting for being right on the issue of illegal immigration, many of the women came to my defense. Natalie Gulbis, Suzann Pettersen and others were wonderful in stating the good I have done for women's golf. Their words of support were very much appreciated by me.
Unfortunately, their Commissioner – you—who I do not even know, put out a nasty statement "At the current time, plans are to continue to stage the RICOH Women's British Open at Turnberry. With just three weeks until the championship, a change in venue for this prestigious major simply isn't feasible without significantly diminishing the event. By no means, however, does this decision suggest support for Mr. Trump's comments" (which have proven correct). You never called me to tell me this, as common decency would have dictated, but rather just put it out to the media. As you have heard, and as Univision and NBC are finding out, I am a "plus 5" at contracts. You have an absolutely binding contract to play the great Turnberry Ailsa course but, based on your rude comment to the press, please let this letter serve to represent that, subject to a conversation with me on the details, I would be willing to let you play the Women's British Open, in two weeks, at another course rather than magnificent Turnberry (which I own). I think you have done an extraordinary disservice to women's golf, but in no way will that diminish my respect for the women on the LPGA tour or their great golfing talent.
Please contact me at your earliest convenience to discuss my releasing the LPGA from its obligations under the contract. Obviously, you will have to move quickly!
Sincerely, Donald J. Trump.
P.S. Apparently, the American public disagrees with you in that I have just gone to #1 and #2 in the polls.
:D
... he copy/pasted two polls at the end of the letter
He's got some moxie! :gocho:
Post by: ShellShock on July 14, 2015, 06:29:29 PM
"Your boss isn't the most favorable guy in the office, but he's your boss for a reason...and Trump is a boss."
Post by: wetwillie on July 14, 2015, 06:49:12 PM
Post by: Asteriskhead on July 14, 2015, 07:34:52 PM
Post by: CNS on July 14, 2015, 07:38:51 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Spracne on July 14, 2015, 07:53:55 PM
Post by: Spracne on July 14, 2015, 07:55:55 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on July 14, 2015, 08:10:15 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: bubbles4ksu on July 14, 2015, 08:23:12 PM
I don't believe in media conspiracies, but if I did, I would wonder whether or not the rise of Trump is actually encouraged/facilitated by Democratic agents.Oh this is definitely part of Trump's current media presence. I was going to say the same thing about Walker. Insidery types are guessin' that the Obama administration is purposely attacking Scott Walker because they know that anyone Barry attacks will win huge support from the most losery conservatives and it will drain the GOP base. Giving Trump early attention does the same thing.
Post by: CNS on July 14, 2015, 08:28:36 PM
The Donald has my primary vote, no doubt.Oh, definitely
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: steve dave on July 15, 2015, 07:51:49 AM
I don't believe in media conspiracies, but if I did, I would wonder whether or not the rise of Trump is actually encouraged/facilitated by Democratic agents.Oh this is definitely part of Trump's current media presence. I was going to say the same thing about Walker. Insidery types are guessin' that the Obama administration is purposely attacking Scott Walker because they know that anyone Barry attacks will win huge support from the most losery conservatives and it will drain the GOP base. Giving Trump early attention does the same thing.
this is very lol and accurate.
Barry O: Jump
The Far Right: eff YOU! How high?
Post by: Asteriskhead on July 15, 2015, 08:10:32 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on July 15, 2015, 08:18:14 AM
i want to see sanders and trump debate each other.
Would be comedy gold. If not I'd like to see their counterparts on SNL do it.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 15, 2015, 08:19:58 AM
i'd actually consider trump if he was able to win election as governor of new york or get elected to the house or senate for a term or two. I mean surely you can see that someone with no political experience running the highest political office in the country is a recipe for absolute disaster right?
I don't see experience being a real issue at all. I like most politicians a lot less after they gain experience. I just don't like him because of his foreign policy and his immigration policy. It's also not good that he holds grudges and can't keep his mouth shut when he needs to.
Post by: steve dave on July 15, 2015, 08:53:45 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 15, 2015, 09:53:15 AM
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on July 15, 2015, 11:15:44 AM
Post by: ShellShock on July 17, 2015, 12:35:27 PM
Post by: treysolid on July 17, 2015, 12:45:46 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic5.businessinsider.com%2Fimage%2F555246276da8114c57fe49d6-480%2Fdonald-trump-make-america-great.png&hash=72013530c7b7218f8c283b80b0172b4ee70bc713)
he fails the boehner test. too orange to be president.
Post by: CNS on July 17, 2015, 01:13:21 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/17/politics/donald-trump-summer-surge/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/17/politics/donald-trump-summer-surge/index.html)
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 17, 2015, 01:26:44 PM
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/621781334592241665
Post by: star seed 7 on July 17, 2015, 01:38:37 PM
Post by: renocat on July 17, 2015, 02:05:26 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on July 17, 2015, 02:08:48 PM
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/621780913161113600
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/621781334592241665
McCain is just as crazy when he's back in AZ to campaign.
Post by: 0.42 on July 17, 2015, 02:26:49 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on July 17, 2015, 02:33:58 PM
you don't say
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0lwusMxiHc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0lwusMxiHc)
Post by: 0.42 on July 17, 2015, 02:41:11 PM
Post by: renocat on July 18, 2015, 12:33:49 PM
Post by: 0.42 on July 18, 2015, 11:42:05 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 18, 2015, 11:46:48 PM
Post by: wetwillie on July 18, 2015, 11:55:20 PM
Post by: Tobias on July 19, 2015, 12:00:50 AM
Post by: Spracne on July 19, 2015, 12:34:20 AM
Scuttles into an underwater volcano on purpose.
Post by: bones129 on July 19, 2015, 12:38:14 AM
In a far-off corner of the ocean Trump
Scuttles into an underwater volcano on purpose.
:popcorn:
Post by: ChiComCat on July 19, 2015, 12:50:29 AM
Post by: OK_Cat on July 19, 2015, 08:45:53 AM
Post by: wetwillie on July 19, 2015, 09:47:59 AM
Post by: CNS on July 19, 2015, 10:22:21 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: GregKSU1027 on July 19, 2015, 12:56:47 PM
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
Post by: star seed 7 on July 19, 2015, 12:58:59 PM
Post by: sys on July 19, 2015, 02:13:41 PM
Post by: CNS on July 19, 2015, 02:36:00 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: renocat on July 19, 2015, 10:39:28 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 19, 2015, 11:52:09 PM
his plan back then to get rid of the deficit was to implement a one time tax or like 15 or 20 percent on anyone with a worth over 10 million (-primary residence).
Post by: CNS on July 20, 2015, 01:15:56 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 20, 2015, 01:30:44 PM
It's not even about John McCain anymore, guys. Nothing to see here.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 20, 2015, 11:47:09 PM
Each of the following statements was made by Donald Trump OR Zapp Brannigan.
• "We know nothing about them, their language, their history or what they look like. But we can assume this. They stand for everything we don’t stand for".
• “You know, it doesn’t really matter what they write as long as you’ve got a young and beautiful piece of ass”.
• "Show me someone without an ego, and I'll show you a loser".
• "Now, like all great plans, my strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it."
• "If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards".
• “Sorry losers and haters, but my I.Q. is one of the highest—and you all know it! Please don’t feel so stupid or insecure. It’s not your fault”.
• “These guys are total losers, they had their story stolen right from under their bad complexions”
• “She is unattractive both inside and out. I fully understand why her former husband left her for a man- he made a good decision”
• “She is an extremely unattractive woman, I refuse to say that because I always insist on being politically correct”.
• “Your face has been declared a weapon of mass disgusting.”
• “I’ve never heard of such a brutal and shocking injustice that I cared so little about.”
https://np.reddit.com/r/AdviceAnimals/comments/3dwcpt/thanks_trump_we_havent_seen_this_crazy_since/ct9f3sv
Post by: cfbandyman on July 21, 2015, 09:09:11 AM
Donald Trump is the real life Zapp Brannigan
Each of the following statements was made by Donald Trump OR Zapp Brannigan.
• "We know nothing about them, their language, their history or what they look like. But we can assume this. They stand for everything we don’t stand for".
• “You know, it doesn’t really matter what they write as long as you’ve got a young and beautiful piece of ass”.
• "Show me someone without an ego, and I'll show you a loser".
• "Now, like all great plans, my strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it."
• "If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards".
• “Sorry losers and haters, but my I.Q. is one of the highest—and you all know it! Please don’t feel so stupid or insecure. It’s not your fault”.
• “These guys are total losers, they had their story stolen right from under their bad complexions”
• “She is unattractive both inside and out. I fully understand why her former husband left her for a man- he made a good decision”
• “She is an extremely unattractive woman, I refuse to say that because I always insist on being politically correct”.
• “Your face has been declared a weapon of mass disgusting.”
• “I’ve never heard of such a brutal and shocking injustice that I cared so little about.”
https://np.reddit.com/r/AdviceAnimals/comments/3dwcpt/thanks_trump_we_havent_seen_this_crazy_since/ct9f3sv
Well I know without checking those are Zapp Brannigan's, but wow, the rest are tough.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 21, 2015, 01:41:18 PM
Post by: puniraptor on July 21, 2015, 01:52:18 PM
Post by: Spracne on July 21, 2015, 01:54:48 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 21, 2015, 01:55:59 PM
More like Scott Runner... (is that sposed to be Scott Walker?)
I think it's Rubio.
Post by: Dub on July 21, 2015, 01:56:41 PM
Quote
Donald Trump gave out Lindsey Graham's personal cell number to America
Quote
Speaking in front of hundreds at a rally in South Carolina on Tuesday, Donald Trump read a number he said people could use to reach South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham's private cell phone.
:D
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 21, 2015, 02:01:41 PM
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/623561467779006464
Post by: Dub on July 21, 2015, 02:11:10 PM
Post by: renocat on July 21, 2015, 02:12:28 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 21, 2015, 02:13:30 PM
When is the first debate? This train's moving too quick and I'm worried it's going to derail before we get to see him at one.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-trump-surges-to-big-lead-in-gop-presidential-race/2015/07/20/efd2e0d0-2ef8-11e5-8f36-18d1d501920d_story.html
No way he falls out of the top 10 before the debates. He's going to win the early primaries if about a dozen other republicans don't drop out.
Post by: puniraptor on July 21, 2015, 02:20:25 PM
i have independently verified this using an algorithmic measurement of internet memes from the last 239 years.
Post by: 'taterblast on July 21, 2015, 02:21:41 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 21, 2015, 02:22:41 PM
i've grown so numb to politics that i actually want to see Trump as the 'publican candidate
I'd want to see that if the dems had a better candidate than Hillary.
as far as i can tell, the most important trait that the "conservative" voters want to see in a president is the complete refusal to ever admit a mistake, ever admit a failure, or ever apologize.
i have independently verified this using an algorithmic measurement of internet memes from the last 239 years.
also never bow
Post by: puniraptor on July 21, 2015, 02:23:50 PM
i've grown so numb to politics that i actually want to see Trump as the 'publican candidate
it would certainly spice things up.
i would like to see it come down to trump vs sanders. may the best man win.
Post by: 'taterblast on July 21, 2015, 02:26:43 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on July 21, 2015, 03:09:26 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 21, 2015, 03:13:26 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on July 21, 2015, 03:47:49 PM
i think i'd rather him go up against someone i don't like, which would give me the ability to avidly root for him. now i just have to figure out who i don't like out of the democrat candidates.
all of them. :dunno:
Post by: puniraptor on July 21, 2015, 04:29:46 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 21, 2015, 04:45:14 PM
Post by: Dub on July 21, 2015, 05:11:03 PM
Who do you think Trump would pick as his running mate. I'm leaning toward Ann Coulter.
The winner of the upcoming The Apprentice: VP Edition.
Post by: CNS on July 21, 2015, 07:21:59 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: bones129 on July 21, 2015, 07:30:35 PM
Post by: jmlynch1 on July 21, 2015, 07:49:32 PM
Wow, I thought the ego thing was the one I felt most confident was trump.Donald Trump is the real life Zapp Brannigan
Each of the following statements was made by Donald Trump OR Zapp Brannigan.
• "We know nothing about them, their language, their history or what they look like. But we can assume this. They stand for everything we don’t stand for".
• “You know, it doesn’t really matter what they write as long as you’ve got a young and beautiful piece of ass”.
• "Show me someone without an ego, and I'll show you a loser".
• "Now, like all great plans, my strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it."
• "If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards".
• “Sorry losers and haters, but my I.Q. is one of the highest—and you all know it! Please don’t feel so stupid or insecure. It’s not your fault”.
• “These guys are total losers, they had their story stolen right from under their bad complexions”
• “She is unattractive both inside and out. I fully understand why her former husband left her for a man- he made a good decision”
• “She is an extremely unattractive woman, I refuse to say that because I always insist on being politically correct”.
• “Your face has been declared a weapon of mass disgusting.”
• “I’ve never heard of such a brutal and shocking injustice that I cared so little about.”
https://np.reddit.com/r/AdviceAnimals/comments/3dwcpt/thanks_trump_we_havent_seen_this_crazy_since/ct9f3sv
Well I know without checking those are Zapp Brannigan's, but wow, the rest are tough.
Post by: ShellShock on July 22, 2015, 08:18:28 AM
...some food for thought
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 22, 2015, 08:22:52 AM
I heard a great quote today from Glenn Beck: "If the Republicans are that concerned about Trump's popularity then they should have defunded Obama's Amnesty, passed a strong bill to seal the borders, and reject Obama's Trade Deals and the deal with Iran. They haven't done any of that because they are spineless politicians who represent and pander to every special interest other than the American People."
...some food for thought
Yeah, when the rubber meets the road, most politicians just aren't willing to keep their campaign promises by crashing the economy and going to war. We need a president who will say what needs to be said and who will bomb those brown people after he ensures diplomacy fails.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 22, 2015, 08:30:28 AM
Post by: OK_Cat on July 22, 2015, 09:14:58 AM
Post by: Dub on July 22, 2015, 10:57:22 AM
What a wonderful ride
It's beautiful. There's almost something new daily. What a joy.
Post by: Panjandrum on July 22, 2015, 12:00:12 PM
I mean it will be like watching a torpedo hit the Republican candidacy in slow motion, on television.
Post by: OK_Cat on July 22, 2015, 12:06:28 PM
I hope our pub bros realize that he won't win so they are supporting him for the IRL lol's
Post by: cfbandyman on July 22, 2015, 12:15:24 PM
Post by: cfbandyman on July 22, 2015, 12:20:02 PM
Post by: CNS on July 22, 2015, 03:13:32 PM
Post by: ShellShock on July 23, 2015, 09:42:18 AM
Post by: Institutional Control on July 23, 2015, 09:50:13 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 23, 2015, 09:50:41 AM
If it really does go down as a Trump v Hilary in the general, how lopsided do you think the final numbers tally up?
I think Hillary would win 55-45.
Post by: ChiComCat on July 23, 2015, 10:28:27 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 23, 2015, 10:48:15 AM
Post by: cfbandyman on July 23, 2015, 01:45:15 PM
If it really does go down as a Trump v Hilary in the general, how lopsided do you think the final numbers tally up?
I think Hillary would win 55-45.
I'd imagine it similar to Nixon's 1972 election where he (and in this case she Hillary) would win 520-17. Not because Hillary is that great a candidate Trump is literally that bad of one.
Post by: CNS on July 23, 2015, 02:20:00 PM
God damnit the d's need to find an actual candidateTrump may be the only way Bernie Sanders would ever have a shot.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 23, 2015, 02:30:20 PM
God damnit the d's need to find an actual candidateTrump may be the only way Bernie Sanders would ever have a shot.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Sanders can't beat Clinton, though.
Post by: ChiComCat on July 23, 2015, 02:34:58 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on July 23, 2015, 03:01:58 PM
Post by: puniraptor on July 23, 2015, 03:26:15 PM
Hillary won't be the nominee.
me and john dougie FEEL THE BERN 4 lyfe
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 23, 2015, 03:28:13 PM
Hillary won't be the nominee.
I agree that she has a tougher road than most think right now. She's easily the most likely nominee out of that field, though.
Post by: CNS on July 23, 2015, 03:32:30 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on July 23, 2015, 04:10:46 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 23, 2015, 04:18:11 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on July 23, 2015, 04:20:36 PM
Post by: renocat on July 23, 2015, 04:48:24 PM
God damnit the d's need to find an actual candidatesmooch trump's crap launcher and tell him he is beautiful, and will be the demonater
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on July 23, 2015, 06:23:40 PM
Hillary won't be the nominee.
I agree that she has a tougher road than most think right now. She's easily the most likely nominee out of that field, though.
The field is going to expand within the next few months as Hillary continues to drop in the polls. The media will start turning on her when the first pretty face comes along.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 23, 2015, 06:34:11 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on July 23, 2015, 08:18:39 PM
Unions and the media, two things JD obsessively hates :lol:
I don't hate them. Libs have changed the definition of hate.
I disagree with the way they operate.
Post by: Tobias on July 23, 2015, 08:24:01 PM
Post by: puniraptor on July 23, 2015, 09:32:59 PM
#FEELTHEBERN
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on July 23, 2015, 10:26:52 PM
Sounds like John Doug hates the free market.
#FEELTHEBERN
Just the opposite. I think there is COLUSION within the media and unions. They are pretty much hard line liberals. You would think it should be about 50-50 since that's how the country plays out in most elections.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 23, 2015, 10:38:43 PM
Post by: michigancat on July 24, 2015, 02:12:33 PM
Post by: Brock Landers on July 24, 2015, 02:13:59 PM
Post by: TownieCat on July 24, 2015, 02:44:56 PM
:sdeek:
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 24, 2015, 02:48:48 PM
Post by: renocat on July 24, 2015, 03:07:27 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 24, 2015, 03:10:34 PM
Post by: renocat on July 24, 2015, 03:14:41 PM
The tea partiers just got a swift Trump stomp to their wallies. This group favors load up every illegal alien they can find and ship them out. Trump said he likes a merit system to choose the wants to keep. How is this different than others plans from Jeb or Marco? My nut tea party cousin want to put a minefield along the border.
The tea partiers just got a swift Trump stomp to their wallies. This group favors load up every illegal alien they can find and ship them out. Trump said he likes a merit sy as temperature to choose the wants to keep. How is this different than others plans from Jeb or Marco? My nut tea party cousin want to put a minefield along the border.
Post by: puniraptor on July 28, 2015, 09:11:19 AM
i hope shellshock doesnt hurt anyone when he finds out that trump is a universal healthcare enthusiast
Post by: 0.42 on July 28, 2015, 09:54:01 AM
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/28/donald-trump-lawyer-threatens-reporter?CMP=fb_us (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/28/donald-trump-lawyer-threatens-reporter?CMP=fb_us)
Post by: Dub on July 28, 2015, 10:02:43 AM
omg :lol:
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/28/donald-trump-lawyer-threatens-reporter?CMP=fb_us (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/28/donald-trump-lawyer-threatens-reporter?CMP=fb_us)
Trump's lawyers have to be amazing with everything that happens to him in business and personally. I'd take that man's threats seriously.
Post by: 8manpick on July 28, 2015, 10:48:10 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 28, 2015, 11:15:32 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 28, 2015, 11:25:01 AM
Trumps business model is based entirely on lawsuits and bankruptcies
it's sad
Post by: steve dave on July 28, 2015, 12:58:32 PM
Post by: treysolid on July 28, 2015, 01:37:24 PM
Trump's lead is getting really big. I'm starting to think he might win even after some of the other guys drop out.
There's no way. Every other 'Pub candidate hates trump to their core. When they start folding, they'll endorse non-trump candidates and their base will follow suit.
Post by: 0.42 on July 28, 2015, 02:41:13 PM
barry h. (hussein) obama mentions trumps enormous lead in all the polls every chance he gets :lol:
confirmed stud move
Post by: Dub on July 28, 2015, 05:19:07 PM
Quote
Sarah Palin serving in a Trump administration? 'I'd love that,' he says
:pray: :pray: :pray: :pray: :pray: :pray: :pray:
Post by: Panjandrum on July 29, 2015, 01:23:09 PM
Trump's lead is getting really big. I'm starting to think he might win even after some of the other guys drop out.
There's no way. Every other 'Pub candidate hates trump to their core. When they start folding, they'll endorse non-trump candidates and their base will follow suit.
Their bases have already gone over to Trump. Except Rick Santorum's. I think his base will probably just sit that one out and pray for Judgement Day.
Post by: Yard Dog on July 30, 2015, 08:50:37 AM
Trump's lead is getting really big. I'm starting to think he might win even after some of the other guys drop out.
There's no way. Every other 'Pub candidate hates trump to their core. When they start folding, they'll endorse non-trump candidates and their base will follow suit.
Their bases have already gone over to Trump. Except Rick Santorum's. I think his base will probably just sit that one out and pray for Judgement Day.
I'm hoping / expecting the fervor to die down when we actually get some debates going. I still believe that a good amount of people who actually vote in primaries will be educated enough to follow the debates and make an educated decision. Just because someone calls up a voter in Iowa and asks who they would vote for if the election was today doesn't mean they will actually show up to the polls or keep that opinion for six months.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 30, 2015, 08:53:32 AM
Post by: Asteriskhead on July 30, 2015, 09:06:06 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on July 30, 2015, 09:19:22 AM
The serious GOP candidates are auditioning for the kochs over the next few weeks. things will change soon.
I realize that is supposed to be a dig, but considering I have a very high opinion of the Koch brothers, I'd have to say this is a good thing.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 30, 2015, 09:39:40 AM
Post by: AbeFroman on July 30, 2015, 09:52:13 AM
High opinion of the Koch bros. :lol:
Post by: michigancat on July 30, 2015, 11:05:54 AM
They have a lot of potentially dangerous views, as well. But still, they aren't all bad.
Post by: Yard Dog on July 30, 2015, 11:44:39 AM
Koch brothers do a lot of good things. seriously. example: http://time.com/3686797/charles-koch-criminal-justice/
They have a lot of potentially dangerous views, as well. But still, they aren't all bad.
The amount of money they give in charitable giving every year is pretty spectacular too. They are genuinely good people. It is crazy that they are targeted so regularly with character assassination. I can't think of any other private American citizen who gets torn down so publicly. I don't agree that their views are dangerous, but I do think that to achieve some of their goals we need smarter politicians. . .not dolts like Brownback.
Post by: michigancat on July 30, 2015, 11:46:42 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on July 30, 2015, 11:51:02 AM
Their views on the environment are potentially damaging IMO.
Are you referring to fracking? Or the fact they don't think carbon emissions are causing global warming?
Post by: michigancat on July 30, 2015, 11:51:26 AM
YesTheir views on the environment are potentially damaging IMO.
Are you referring to fracking? Or the fact they don't think carbon emissions are causing global warming?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 30, 2015, 11:52:02 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 30, 2015, 11:54:10 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 30, 2015, 11:57:53 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on July 30, 2015, 12:07:12 PM
The amount of money they donate to political campaigns is potentially damaging.
Those stats are misleading. They don't donate a ton to political campaigns as much as issue advocacy which is very different. The rich guys on the left donate a lot more directly to candidates.
They also want basically full deregulation which would leave us looking like china in 10 years, but they may make a few extra bucks so who cares right?
They don't want full deregulation. They want a society where the federal government's only purposes are protecting individual property and rights, protecting national security, and enforcing the rule of law. They are not a big fan of corporate welfare. The biggest myth is that they want subsidies so they can make more money, when in actuality they are against government subsidies which would cost them more money in the long run.
Interesting video explaining the concept above: https://youtu.be/ffJFNEujeL4
Post by: Yard Dog on July 30, 2015, 12:15:35 PM
YesTheir views on the environment are potentially damaging IMO.
Are you referring to fracking? Or the fact they don't think carbon emissions are causing global warming?
Well they are right about global warming:
http://debatewise.org/debates/455-co2-does-not-cause-global-warming/
The most recent studies point to CFCs (Chlorofluorocarbons) not CO2.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 30, 2015, 12:17:41 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 30, 2015, 12:23:03 PM
Post by: steve dave on July 30, 2015, 12:40:21 PM
Post by: CNS on July 30, 2015, 12:44:04 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Yard Dog on July 30, 2015, 12:55:41 PM
Trump will kick taints in KS during the primary. He will win a landslide of both the actual Pubs, as well as the intentionally incorrectly registered party members voting in pub primary.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
How far down the list is Kansas in the primary order? There is a very limited chance he is still winning by then. Though since he is loaded he probably won't quit after losing a bunch of states like he should.
The real question is when Trump bows out, will his endorsement be a kiss of death to whichever candidate he bestows it on?
Post by: CNS on July 30, 2015, 01:08:49 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 30, 2015, 01:11:39 PM
Trump will kick taints in KS during the primary. He will win a landslide of both the actual Pubs, as well as the intentionally incorrectly registered party members voting in pub primary.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Kansas has caucuses instead of primaries. That makes it harder to vote, imo. I wouldn't vote for him, but I'm not sure if I will care enough to show up on a Saturday morning and go through that.
Post by: 8manpick on July 30, 2015, 01:31:52 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on July 30, 2015, 01:39:10 PM
Nope, his independent candidacy will be, though.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I'm going to be really pissed if he runs independent. Mainly because he would just be stealing votes from the pub candidate.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 30, 2015, 01:42:24 PM
Nope, his independent candidacy will be, though.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I'm going to be really pissed if he runs independent. Mainly because he would just be stealing votes from the pub candidate.
He was a democrat as recently as 1999. Maybe the powers that be are behind this just to make sure Hillary wins. :jeffy:
Post by: Yard Dog on July 30, 2015, 02:05:16 PM
Nope, his independent candidacy will be, though.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I'm going to be really pissed if he runs independent. Mainly because he would just be stealing votes from the pub candidate.
He was a democrat as recently as 1999. Maybe the powers that be are behind this just to make sure Hillary wins. :jeffy:
As outlandish as that sounds I had definitely had that thought. Trump is the definition of cronyism, so maybe Hillary has made him some promises if he will come in and disrupt her opponent's ability to gain traction. Could all be a part of the Cloward-Piven strategy.
More on the Cloward-Piven strategy: http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/the-obama-clinton-cloward-piven-baton/
Post by: ChiComCat on July 30, 2015, 02:14:54 PM
Nope, his independent candidacy will be, though.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I'm going to be really pissed if he runs independent. Mainly because he would just be stealing votes from the pub candidate.
He was a democrat as recently as 1999. Maybe the powers that be are behind this just to make sure Hillary wins. :jeffy:
As outlandish as that sounds I had definitely had that thought. Trump is the definition of cronyism, so maybe Hillary has made him some promises if he will come in and disrupt her opponent's ability to gain traction. Could all be a part of the Cloward-Piven strategy.
More on the Cloward-Piven strategy: http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/the-obama-clinton-cloward-piven-baton/
Chuck Norris: Roundhousing Cloward and Piven right in their stupid throats
Post by: 8manpick on July 30, 2015, 02:15:17 PM
Post by: ChiComCat on July 30, 2015, 02:19:56 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 30, 2015, 02:30:35 PM
Nope, his independent candidacy will be, though.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I'm going to be really pissed if he runs independent. Mainly because he would just be stealing votes from the pub candidate.
He was a democrat as recently as 1999. Maybe the powers that be are behind this just to make sure Hillary wins. :jeffy:
As outlandish as that sounds I had definitely had that thought. Trump is the definition of cronyism, so maybe Hillary has made him some promises if he will come in and disrupt her opponent's ability to gain traction. Could all be a part of the Cloward-Piven strategy.
More on the Cloward-Piven strategy: http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/the-obama-clinton-cloward-piven-baton/
That is a coward-driven strategy and I'm glad Chuck won't stand for it.
Post by: puniraptor on July 30, 2015, 02:43:17 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 30, 2015, 03:35:44 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 30, 2015, 03:36:40 PM
Post by: renocat on July 30, 2015, 06:52:08 PM
Post by: Asteriskhead on July 30, 2015, 07:39:43 PM
Post by: renocat on July 30, 2015, 09:37:45 PM
Post by: CNS on July 30, 2015, 09:46:02 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: CNS on July 30, 2015, 09:51:03 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: wetwillie on July 30, 2015, 10:01:57 PM
Post by: CNS on July 30, 2015, 10:03:45 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: 0.42 on July 31, 2015, 10:58:48 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 31, 2015, 01:47:55 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on August 02, 2015, 09:55:47 AM
Post by: CNS on August 02, 2015, 10:33:12 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: renocat on August 02, 2015, 09:50:33 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on August 03, 2015, 08:34:48 AM
Trump said today Obama has done nothing much for blacks. He should have bit his tongue, ol' diarrhea brains stated since the President has doNE such a poor job we will not have a black president for generations. What a racist stance. I would vote for any conservative who is a minority or a woman.
Would you vote for a Democrat over Trump?
Post by: renocat on August 03, 2015, 11:18:10 AM
Post by: Dub on August 03, 2015, 11:42:52 AM
Post by: steve dave on August 03, 2015, 12:18:30 PM
Post by: steve dave on August 03, 2015, 12:19:49 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on August 03, 2015, 12:24:32 PM
Also, expect Barry Hussein to say something like, "and congratulations to Donald Trump for his amazing surge in the polls post debate" with the biggest smile on his face you've ever seen.
No, the plan is for Barry to scoff at The Donald to ensure he gets the nomination.
Post by: Panjandrum on August 03, 2015, 12:28:59 PM
The fact that Donald Trump is going to be the Republican nominee for President is (hopefully) going to help course correct the Republican party.
Post by: Panjandrum on August 03, 2015, 12:35:55 PM
Post by: CNS on August 03, 2015, 02:21:10 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: wetwillie on August 03, 2015, 02:46:03 PM
Post by: CNS on August 03, 2015, 03:21:19 PM
I do think it hilarious that a guy that barely got out of HS is #2 in the race now.
Someone said that trump was inevitable with the tea party lean in the GOP, well walker is as tp as it gets.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: renocat on August 04, 2015, 09:13:46 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on August 04, 2015, 09:14:51 AM
I think trump might fear walker, or at least concerned about him. My fear with walker is he seems to be infected with Brownbackitis.
Whomever is controlling this sock, try harder. That is not what renocat would say.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 04, 2015, 09:17:32 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on August 04, 2015, 09:29:23 AM
It's 100 percent consistent with renocats moderate conservative views
Perhaps, though attacking Brownback is more of a lib thing, but it is definitely not structured the way he would speak.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 04, 2015, 10:08:30 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on August 04, 2015, 10:10:01 AM
As usual, you have no idea what you're talking about
Seven, try harder with your sock, that's all I'm saying.
Post by: Institutional Control on August 04, 2015, 10:14:56 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hp3dzTW523I
Post by: ChiComCat on August 04, 2015, 10:38:28 AM
It's 100 percent consistent with renocats moderate conservative views
Perhaps, though attacking Brownback is more of a lib thing, but it is definitely not structured the way he would speak.
If attacking Brownback was just a lib thing, he would have won reelection in a landslide
Post by: Asteriskhead on August 04, 2015, 11:23:00 AM
As usual, you have no idea what you're talking about
Seven, try harder with your sock, that's all I'm saying.
seven is a lowercase cat, and you're a dunce.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 04, 2015, 11:43:22 AM
Post by: Dub on August 04, 2015, 12:24:40 PM
Quote
Trump: I would shut down government over Planned Parenthood
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said Monday he believes Republicans should shut down the government rather than fund Planned Parenthood, the health services group that is facing scrutiny after undercover videos of its officials emerged.
:D
Post by: star seed 7 on August 04, 2015, 12:29:57 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on August 04, 2015, 12:50:52 PM
http://imgur.com/gallery/LK8sE
Post by: CNS on August 04, 2015, 04:43:46 PM
Someone needs to Spreadshirt Pumped about Trump, or Pumped for Trump, or something like that.
Post by: wetwillie on August 04, 2015, 06:44:42 PM
I would be so pumped about Trump(TM) if I was a hard core Pub.
Someone needs to Spreadshirt Pumped about Trump, or Pumped for Trump, or something like that.
Instead of a veto people will call it the Trump card.
Post by: CNS on August 05, 2015, 10:25:53 AM
Post by: Spracne on August 05, 2015, 10:28:26 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on August 05, 2015, 01:12:42 PM
I would be so pumped about Trump(TM) if I was a hard core Pub.
Someone needs to Spreadshirt Pumped about Trump, or Pumped for Trump, or something like that.
Are there hardcore pubs on this thread? I'd be interested to know their opinion of Trump.
Post by: renocat on August 05, 2015, 02:18:21 PM
Post by: steve dave on August 05, 2015, 02:51:52 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 05, 2015, 03:07:58 PM
Post by: steve dave on August 05, 2015, 03:31:47 PM
Would love a Trump/Walker presidency where Walker has active roll in scheming crap up and the Donald goes to the bully pulpit and just Executes the hell out of the plan like the Boss that he is.
not sure if serious but there are legitimately people in the good ole USA that would love this exact thing.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 05, 2015, 03:48:08 PM
Would love a Trump/Walker presidency where Walker has active roll in scheming crap up and the Donald goes to the bully pulpit and just Executes the hell out of the plan like the Boss that he is.
not sure if serious but there are legitimately people in the good ole USA that would love this exact thing.
What evidence do you have of this :shakesfist:
Post by: SdK on August 05, 2015, 03:53:49 PM
I think trump might fear walker, or at least concerned about him. My fear with walker is he seems to be infected with Brownbackitis.No. This is a break from the normal Reno.
Post by: Karlen on August 05, 2015, 06:05:59 PM
Post by: 0.42 on August 05, 2015, 07:42:03 PM
Now I just see it as it is, a giant crap show that our political system has become.
Which is why it's funny
Post by: Karlen on August 05, 2015, 09:14:35 PM
Post by: wetwillie on August 05, 2015, 10:14:47 PM
Now I just see it as it is, a giant crap show that our political system has become.
Which is why it's funny
Please refrain from non serious discourse in the pit
Post by: CNS on August 06, 2015, 10:11:34 AM
But it's not
It is sad as hell, but probably necessary that Trump is doing what he is. Necessary, not in the way that he will right our ship, but in that he could possibly show the country how absolutely low the political system has sunk if he is a legitimate lead. I mean, if a guy like Trump can't do that, we are all in big trouble.
Post by: cfbandyman on August 06, 2015, 10:33:55 AM
Post by: chuckjames on August 06, 2015, 11:35:14 AM
I'm so excited for tonight guise :excited:
Its not gonna live up to the hype. The Philosopher King (Trump) will say one absurd thing. They will infer BA-ROCK is a muslim, taxes will be called a threat to civilization, the Iran deal will be called a surrender, and the government will need to be shut down to defund planned parenthood. Its rather easy to predict.
Post by: Yard Dog on August 06, 2015, 03:35:49 PM
Post by: CNS on August 06, 2015, 03:52:56 PM
Post by: ShellShock on August 06, 2015, 04:14:52 PM
But it's not
It is sad as hell, but probably necessary that Trump is doing what he is. Necessary, not in the way that he will right our ship, but in that he could possibly show the country how absolutely low the political system has sunk if he is a legitimate lead. I mean, if a guy like Trump can't do that, we are all in big trouble.
You just basically summed up why the Tea Party is backing Trump. The point is that we don't need a politician to run the government and a businessman is what can help right the ship.
Most importantly though for the longevity and integrity of our political system, is the absolute need for term limits to be implemented on political offices.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 06, 2015, 04:19:24 PM
Post by: CNS on August 06, 2015, 04:25:18 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 06, 2015, 04:28:43 PM
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on August 07, 2015, 03:28:28 PM
:lol: :lol:
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 07, 2015, 03:41:00 PM
http://www.ew.com/article/2015/08/07/donald-trump-night-roxbury
:lol: :lol:
Don't try to get me to love him more, I can't.
Post by: 0.42 on August 07, 2015, 08:36:48 PM
https://twitter.com/MaerRoshan/status/629820869611618305
Post by: steve dave on August 07, 2015, 09:06:27 PM
Post by: Cire on August 07, 2015, 10:14:39 PM
Post by: bones129 on August 07, 2015, 10:57:48 PM
Post by: michigancat on August 09, 2015, 09:57:25 PM
https://twitter.com/lukeoneil47/status/630422737580883968
Post by: Yard Dog on August 10, 2015, 08:02:40 AM
I wasn't sure where to put this
https://twitter.com/lukeoneil47/status/630422737580883968
It is bothering me more than it probably should that he spelled it "too".
Post by: michigancat on August 10, 2015, 09:43:02 AM
I'm not surprised that you didn't find humor in thatI wasn't sure where to put this
https://twitter.com/lukeoneil47/status/630422737580883968
It is bothering me more than it probably should that he spelled it "too".
Post by: Dub on August 18, 2015, 11:14:31 AM
Quote
Post-debate, Trump pulls clear of competition
Quote
The survey finds Trump with the support of 24% of Republican registered voters. His nearest competitor, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, stands 11 points behind at 13%. Just behind Bush, retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson has 9%, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker 8%, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul 6%, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, former tech CEO Carly Fiorina and Ohio Gov. John Kasich all land at 5%, with former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee rounding out the top 10 at 4%.
Post by: CNS on August 18, 2015, 11:16:26 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 18, 2015, 11:28:00 AM
Post by: wetwillie on August 18, 2015, 11:44:02 AM
Post by: renocat on August 19, 2015, 10:38:54 PM
Post by: 0.42 on August 19, 2015, 11:20:12 PM
Post by: bones129 on August 20, 2015, 12:49:18 AM
renocat, you'll be a #1 Trump supporter yet
And that's a surprise on any level?
Post by: Dub on August 20, 2015, 11:06:53 AM
Quote
Trump: Yes I'd scare the Pope
Picture this: Trump and the Pope, face-to-face. And the Pope tells the mogul that capitalism can be toxic. How would Trump reply?
"I'd say, 'ISIS wants to get you,'" Trump said, when asked by Cuomo about that hypothetical scenario.
"You know that ISIS wants to go in and take over the Vatican? You have heard that. You know, that's a dream of theirs, to go into Italy," Trump said.
Cuomo, taken aback, asked if Trump would actually scare the Pope, who is coming to the U.S. for his first visit next month.
"I'm gonna have to scare the Pope because it's the only thing," Trump said. "The Pope, I hope, can only be scared by God. But the truth is -- you know, if you look at what's going on -- they better hope that capitalism works, because it's the only thing we have right now. And it's a great thing when it works properly."
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 20, 2015, 11:24:50 AM
Post by: puniraptor on August 20, 2015, 11:29:29 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 20, 2015, 11:37:44 AM
he is hanging out with a live bald eagle (doesnt look pissed though)
I can make even the goofiest looking baldy look crazy pissed when I shop it.
Post by: ednksu on August 20, 2015, 01:40:26 PM
Post by: CNS on August 20, 2015, 01:53:32 PM
Post by: cfbandyman on August 22, 2015, 06:28:20 AM
If nothing else, Deez Nuts would work great under a the main candidate, as a VP.
Would be perfect VP for Trump. "These losers over here don't know what they are talking about. I had a conference with my Presidential staff, which is the best Presidential Staff in the history of America, and Deez Nuts about how to best proceed with building the wall between America and Mexico. I am fully confident that my decision to make Mexico pay for the wall will work and if Mexico doesn't like this they can talk to Deez Nuts"
Post by: steve dave on August 22, 2015, 06:45:28 AM
Post by: renocat on August 22, 2015, 07:25:43 AM
Do you guys know how bad I need a Trump Biden debate? BadLow Blow Joe Biden vs the Bombastic Badass Weird Uncle Donald. It could be the best girlie slapping, name calling, bissy fit fight ever.
Post by: MakeItRain on August 22, 2015, 12:46:05 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 22, 2015, 02:53:47 PM
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/08/white-power-trumps-alabama-pep-rally-brings-out-folks-who-want-to-shoot-illegals-at-the-border/
(https://i.imgur.com/NI6DSf5.jpg)
i certainly don't get that feeling from this picture
Post by: renocat on August 27, 2015, 11:01:14 PM
Post by: bones129 on August 28, 2015, 12:05:20 AM
Post by: 0.42 on August 28, 2015, 01:08:39 AM
Post by: bones129 on August 28, 2015, 01:10:31 AM
you have a very vivid imagination renocat and it consumes every fiber of your being. embrace it.
It's clear that he does this.
Post by: Yard Dog on August 28, 2015, 07:50:28 AM
Trump is getting covered a lot. A LOT.
A conspiracy theorist might say that the liberal media is giving him all the attention so that the other candidates don't have a fair shot at the nomination. Their strategy to keep a Dem in the white house.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 28, 2015, 08:14:47 AM
Post by: steve dave on August 28, 2015, 12:01:35 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on August 28, 2015, 01:48:33 PM
This election season has been very fun guys
Considering all we've gotten is one debate. . .there is a whole heck of a lot of season to go. :popcorn:
Post by: CNS on August 28, 2015, 02:06:31 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 28, 2015, 02:08:52 PM
I feel like the initial Dem debate could be as meaninglessly limp as the 'Pubs was a crap show.
I'm sure it will be fun to watch, too.
Post by: CNS on August 28, 2015, 02:13:15 PM
I feel like the initial Dem debate could be as meaninglessly limp as the 'Pubs was a crap show.
I'm sure it will be fun to watch, too.
Sanders will be fired up, but it won't matter, and everyone else will be extremely forgettable, i bet.
Post by: steve dave on August 28, 2015, 02:32:55 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 28, 2015, 02:41:01 PM
If uncle joe is in this thing he'll put people in body bags
yes, I am imagining it in my head right now.
Post by: renocat on August 29, 2015, 07:40:40 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 29, 2015, 08:28:19 PM
Post by: renocat on August 29, 2015, 09:42:51 PM
Who/what is wudWeird Uncle Donald - WUD
Post by: star seed 7 on August 29, 2015, 10:06:33 PM
Post by: renocat on August 29, 2015, 10:50:45 PM
oh thanks, i'll be using that as well, with your permissionHonored to have a bbs maestro use this.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 29, 2015, 11:03:15 PM
Post by: cfbandyman on August 30, 2015, 11:57:44 AM
:Woohoo:
I'm pretty sure this party train is going to 2016
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 30, 2015, 12:09:59 PM
I suppose in the "journalism" circles the many sins of a progressive socialist war monger and liar are forgiven as long as he/she takes the right policy positions.
Sad, but predictable.
Post by: cfbandyman on August 30, 2015, 12:43:56 PM
So I've read in places that the activist foreign and domestic "journalists" are saying that Trump represents American arrogance. I don't necessarily disagree, but I'd simply ask them what the Clinton machine represents.
I suppose in the "journalism" circles the many sins of a progressive socialist war monger and liar are forgiven as long as he/she takes the right policy positions.
Sad, but predictable.
W/e Hillary would do, Trump would be 100x worse. Don't try to even put the two of them in the same conversation. Cause what Trump would mean to at least me in a unmitigated disaster that'd make Bush's lies about Iraq and w/e Hillary did or did not do in Libya look pedestrian.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 30, 2015, 01:02:45 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 30, 2015, 01:24:13 PM
Post by: wetwillie on August 30, 2015, 01:36:56 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 30, 2015, 03:06:19 PM
Post by: CNS on August 30, 2015, 06:20:12 PM
They are both equally bad and america deserves better.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 30, 2015, 11:13:11 PM
Trump would still be worseI really like you, but you lie sometimes :Ugh:
Post by: MakeItRain on August 31, 2015, 12:33:57 AM
They are both equally bad and america deserves better.
One has racial rhetoric so bad that people are beating up people in their name, others screaming "white power" at his political rallies. The other mishandled some emails.
One is so ignorant to the policies of this country and so devoid of plans for what he's going to do that his policy revelations are limited to calling other people stupid. The other was the secretary of state.
Yep, peas in a pod.
Post by: bones129 on August 31, 2015, 12:40:34 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on August 31, 2015, 08:07:00 AM
They are both equally bad and america deserves better.
One has racial rhetoric so bad that people are beating up people in their name, others screaming "white power" at his political rallies. The other mishandled some emails.
One is so ignorant to the policies of this country and so devoid of plans for what he's going to do that his policy revelations are limited to calling other people stupid. The other was the secretary of state.
Yep, peas in a pod.
This is the ole' tallest midget debate. I don't care if they are comparable, neither would be a good president.
Post by: 8manpick on August 31, 2015, 08:31:15 AM
They are both equally bad and america deserves better.
One has racial rhetoric so bad that people are beating up people in their name, others screaming "white power" at his political rallies. The other mishandled some emails.
One is so ignorant to the policies of this country and so devoid of plans for what he's going to do that his policy revelations are limited to calling other people stupid. The other was the secretary of state.
Yep, peas in a pod.
This is the ole' tallest midget debate. I don't care if they are comparable, neither would be a good president.
Tossing around slurs like that, yard dog is surely voting for Trump
Post by: Yard Dog on August 31, 2015, 09:11:45 AM
They are both equally bad and america deserves better.
One has racial rhetoric so bad that people are beating up people in their name, others screaming "white power" at his political rallies. The other mishandled some emails.
One is so ignorant to the policies of this country and so devoid of plans for what he's going to do that his policy revelations are limited to calling other people stupid. The other was the secretary of state.
Yep, peas in a pod.
This is the ole' tallest midget debate. I don't care if they are comparable, neither would be a good president.
Tossing around slurs like that, yard dog is surely voting for Trump
Absolutely not. I think it is extra unfortunate for the democrats that they don't have any candidates that seem presidential. Let's hold off on discussing policy for just a second. Part of the intangibles that are important for a president are there ability to be respected at home and abroad as leaders. Besides Hillary's history of rolling over for foreign leaders, none of the democrat candidates seem presidential in the slightest. I don't see Bernie striking fear in the heart of anyone with his demeanor and accent. And Biden is a looney. Good luck against the rise of a foreign power with any of those knuckleheads at the helm.
On the pubs side there are a few people who at least cover the intangibles. We all know for sure that Trump comes across as an ass and looks like an idiot. He doesn't have the intangibles to be respected as a world leader. I will never vote for Donald Trump.
Post by: CNS on August 31, 2015, 09:16:48 AM
I think it is way too early to say she just mishandled some emails. If it ends up that is indeed all that happened, I still wouldn't want someone that careless as president.They are both equally bad and america deserves better.
One has racial rhetoric so bad that people are beating up people in their name, others screaming "white power" at his political rallies. The other mishandled some emails.
One is so ignorant to the policies of this country and so devoid of plans for what he's going to do that his policy revelations are limited to calling other people stupid. The other was the secretary of state.
Yep, peas in a pod.
Also, I expect there to be something significant that comes out of the email issue simply based on the facts that she said she used it for work, and didn't juggle two email accts, and the fact that as Sec of State there is no way she didn't handle sensitive and confidential conversations/info during her time serving.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 31, 2015, 10:31:54 AM
I guess everyone over at the White House and back at State must have been super jelly . . . "man, the SOS got her own domain and everything".
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 31, 2015, 10:51:47 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 31, 2015, 11:10:54 AM
Trump going evangelical is almost too good to be imagined for the pure humor it will create.
Yes, it's terrific. He's a lot like Sarah Palin, really.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/08/donald-trump-bible-great-um-lets-not-get-specifics
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 31, 2015, 11:16:35 AM
You've got a Democratic party who's top candidate is most synonymous with the word "liar" in a survey, and yet the other Democratic candidates are starting to blow their lid over the fact that the DNC is protecting Clinton at seemingly all costs. It's good to be the Clinton's I suppose.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 31, 2015, 11:18:43 AM
It is an interesting study. You've got a Republican party that has no idea what to do with Trump.
You've got a Democratic party who's top candidate is most synonymous with the word "liar" in a survey, and yet the other Democratic candidates are starting to blow their lid over the fact that the DNC is protecting Clinton at seemingly all costs. It's good to be the Clinton's I suppose.
No one has ever disputed that it is good to be the Clinton's
Post by: star seed 7 on August 31, 2015, 11:20:01 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 31, 2015, 11:20:13 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on August 31, 2015, 11:21:59 AM
Can somebody dig up the video of when Hillary tried to go all Southern Baptist African American when she spoke to the church gathering back during the 2008 campaign?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWRoEpYuHwI
Starts at the :34 mark.
haha WHAT??
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 31, 2015, 11:22:26 AM
Can somebody dig up the video of when Hillary tried to go all Southern Baptist African American when she spoke to the church gathering back during the 2008 campaign?
Bill perfected that crap
Post by: star seed 7 on August 31, 2015, 11:24:19 AM
WE'VE COME TOO FAR!!! :lol:
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 31, 2015, 11:24:41 AM
Can somebody dig up the video of when Hillary tried to go all Southern Baptist African American when she spoke to the church gathering back during the 2008 campaign?
Bill perfected that crap
Bill was truly a good ol' boy from Arkansas who was mentored by Dixiecrats, of course he could pull that off.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 31, 2015, 11:28:17 AM
Rush played that everyday for like a month straight
WE'VE COME TOO FAR!!! :lol:
we are going back RIGHT THERE. Especially is you can squeeze Trump in to Perot's body. albeit, he is quite a bit dumber than Perot.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 31, 2015, 11:46:22 AM
:lol:
Post by: star seed 7 on August 31, 2015, 11:50:03 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 31, 2015, 11:51:17 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on August 31, 2015, 12:59:43 PM
https://twitter.com/elliosch/status/637345383434330112/photo/1 (https://twitter.com/elliosch/status/637345383434330112/photo/1)
:lol:
Um, what am I watching?
Post by: star seed 7 on August 31, 2015, 01:25:28 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on August 31, 2015, 05:38:23 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 31, 2015, 09:30:28 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 31, 2015, 09:38:14 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 31, 2015, 09:43:04 PM
palin interviews trump :love:
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 31, 2015, 09:51:54 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 31, 2015, 09:55:32 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 31, 2015, 10:01:37 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 31, 2015, 10:12:06 PM
Post by: renocat on August 31, 2015, 11:14:19 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on September 01, 2015, 09:10:05 AM
oh yeah, i think john dougie has talked about him a few times
Moderates study all of the candidates.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 01, 2015, 10:01:35 AM
oh yeah, i think john dougie has talked about him a few times
Moderates study all of the candidates.
Has he actually announced tho?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 01, 2015, 10:08:51 AM
oh yeah, i think john dougie has talked about him a few times
Moderates study all of the candidates.
Has he actually announced tho?
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/dem-primaries/omalley-dnc-debbie-schultz-awkward-debates
He announced a long time ago. He's also completely right to criticize the DNC for only holding 4 debates. They are doing everything they can to ensure that Hillary gets nominated.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 01, 2015, 10:35:21 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on September 01, 2015, 10:40:02 AM
oh yeah, i think john dougie has talked about him a few times
Moderates study all of the candidates.
Has he actually announced tho?
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/dem-primaries/omalley-dnc-debbie-schultz-awkward-debates
He announced a long time ago. He's also completely right to criticize the DNC for only holding 4 debates. They are doing everything they can to ensure that Hillary gets nominated.
With this current field four debates is plenty. I can't imagine multiple debates in Iowa and New Hampshire, there is no reason. Right now only Bernie Sanders will even have the numbers and money to stay in after New Hampshire. If this truly turns into a long-term two horse race and/or if Biden joins they can easily add debates. But no one is clamoring for hearing from Lincoln Chaffee in more than four debates.
Post by: sys on September 01, 2015, 10:42:05 AM
Post by: ChiComCat on September 01, 2015, 10:46:19 AM
someone needs to join the race. this field is ridiculous.
I wish they would but can't imagine why someone would. I would not want to get into the battle royale that is the 'pub primary nor go against the Hillary machine, unless I am a pretty established candidate (Biden would have a shot)
Post by: CNS on September 01, 2015, 10:58:12 AM
*I haven't even looked at names
Post by: wetwillie on September 01, 2015, 01:02:53 PM
Post by: michigancat on September 01, 2015, 01:04:14 PM
https://youtu.be/Oeju2SG7UMA
palin interviews trump :love:
wow, that legitimately looks like an Onion production. :love:
Post by: OK_Cat on September 01, 2015, 01:09:07 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 01, 2015, 01:11:32 PM
So trump is talking about how he loves the bible now? Lol what a pro
It's very personal, don't ask him about it.
So stud
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 01, 2015, 02:05:24 PM
Post by: Asteriskhead on September 01, 2015, 02:26:42 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on September 01, 2015, 02:57:57 PM
Trumps new found religion might be down there with the average Dem's heartfelt concern with the plight of the poor and disadvantaged . . . once they've voted.
Accurate. :thumbsup:
Post by: MakeItRain on September 01, 2015, 10:40:21 PM
Trumps new found religion might be down there with the average Dem's heartfelt concern with the plight of the poor and disadvantaged . . . once they've voted.
Please explain how the democratic party can simultaneously be the welfare party, wealth redistributing socialists, and not care about the poor and disadvantaged? That's an amazing trick.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 01, 2015, 10:45:18 PM
Trumps new found religion might be down there with the average Dem's heartfelt concern with the plight of the poor and disadvantaged . . . once they've voted.
Please explain how the democratic party can simultaneously be the welfare party, wealth redistributing socialists, and not care about the poor and disadvantaged? That's an amazing trick.
It's the same way a President can travel to the Arctic to talk about Global Climate Change after just having approved Alaskan Oil Drilling. It's politics.
Post by: MakeItRain on September 01, 2015, 10:52:21 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 01, 2015, 10:57:24 PM
Talking about something else doesn't answer my question, thanks I'm good.
LOL. Why are there growing numbers in minority communities asking why they supported Obama? It's a multi-faceted issue, rife with politics and getting elected again and again. But hey, you're good.
Post by: Tobias on September 01, 2015, 10:58:37 PM
Please explain how the democratic party can simultaneously be the welfare party, wealth redistributing socialists, and not care about the poor and disadvantaged? That's an amazing trick.
why do people drive in parkways and park in driveways?
Post by: MakeItRain on September 01, 2015, 11:09:25 PM
Talking about something else doesn't answer my question, thanks I'm good.
LOL. Why are there growing numbers in minority communities asking why they supported Obama? It's a multi-faceted issue, rife with politics and getting elected again and again. But hey, you're good.
How did we get diverted to talking about "minority communities" when we were previously discussing the poor and disadvantaged? I'm not poor and disadvantaged, nor do I live in a "minority community" but I'm disappointed in Obama because he wasn't strong enough in pushing a more liberal agenda and he capitulated far too much to conservatives. Now that we're done with that will you ever tell me how democrats can redistribute wealth and simultaneously be accused of not caring about the poor and disadvantaged? If they are giving poor people rich people's money it would appear to me that they care for the poor and disadvantaged more than the people who don't want to give them anything, seems very common sense-y, dax.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 02, 2015, 06:45:11 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on September 02, 2015, 08:37:12 AM
Trumps new found religion might be down there with the average Dem's heartfelt concern with the plight of the poor and disadvantaged . . . once they've voted.
Please explain how the democratic party can simultaneously be the welfare party, wealth redistributing socialists, and not care about the poor and disadvantaged? That's an amazing trick.
Because they run on the lie that their changes will actually help the poor when in fact in the long term it will hurt them. The funny thing is that the shortsighted liberals just eat that stuff up. I WANT FREE STUFF NOW! I DONT CARE ABOUT HOW IT WILL HURT ME IN THE FUTURE!
Post by: husserl on September 02, 2015, 09:32:14 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on September 02, 2015, 10:39:10 AM
Trumps new found religion might be down there with the average Dem's heartfelt concern with the plight of the poor and disadvantaged . . . once they've voted.
Please explain how the democratic party can simultaneously be the welfare party, wealth redistributing socialists, and not care about the poor and disadvantaged? That's an amazing trick.
Because they run on the lie that their changes will actually help the poor when in fact in the long term it will hurt them. The funny thing is that the shortsighted liberals just eat that stuff up. I WANT FREE STUFF NOW! I DONT CARE ABOUT HOW IT WILL HURT ME IN THE FUTURE!
So is it your contention that supposed income redistribution and social programs are actually ruses to harm poor people by keeping them poor? The best way to help the disadvantaged is to do nothing and we will rid the country of crippling wealth disparity and homelessness just by those people being forced to go it alone?
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 02, 2015, 10:45:39 AM
Post by: CNS on September 02, 2015, 12:49:38 PM
I have also heard many a pub say that welfare, assistance, etc is designed to keep ppl poor.
Post by: ShellShock on September 02, 2015, 01:34:57 PM
Idk, I have heard many a pub say that doing nothing for them is exactly what the poor need to bootstrap themselves.
I have also heard many a pub say that welfare, assistance, etc is designed to keep ppl poor.
It's hampering their desire and need to contribute to society. Why work when you can just be poor, collect $$ and not give an F? For years i've been an advocate of cutting those programs and using those millions, if not billions, in other ways to promote ways to get people off the street and back to work.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 02, 2015, 01:42:12 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 02, 2015, 01:42:54 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on September 02, 2015, 06:47:14 PM
Idk, I have heard many a pub say that doing nothing for them is exactly what the poor need to bootstrap themselves.
I have also heard many a pub say that welfare, assistance, etc is designed to keep ppl poor.
It's hampering their desire and need to contribute to society. Why work when you can just be poor, collect $$ and not give an F?
Holy eff! Does this stupidity also extend to farmers who receive subsidies?
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on September 03, 2015, 01:36:31 AM
Idk, I have heard many a pub say that doing nothing for them is exactly what the poor need to bootstrap themselves.
I have also heard many a pub say that welfare, assistance, etc is designed to keep ppl poor.
It's hampering their desire and need to contribute to society. Why work when you can just be poor, collect $$ and not give an F?
Holy eff! Does this stupidity also extend to farmers who receive subsidies?
Yes. Cutting subsidies and loosening regulations on farming and crop markets would provide a much more robust and innovative industry. Farmers seem content with the status quo.
Post by: MakeItRain on September 03, 2015, 02:54:09 AM
Idk, I have heard many a pub say that doing nothing for them is exactly what the poor need to bootstrap themselves.
I have also heard many a pub say that welfare, assistance, etc is designed to keep ppl poor.
It's hampering their desire and need to contribute to society. Why work when you can just be poor, collect $$ and not give an F?
Holy eff! Does this stupidity also extend to farmers who receive subsidies?
Yes. Cutting subsidies and loosening regulations on farming and crop markets would provide a much more robust and innovative industry. Farmers seem content with the status quo.
If farm subsidies went away Syngenta, Monsanto, and Pioneer would own every farm in America within the first 15 minutes after they expired.
Post by: steve dave on September 03, 2015, 08:28:59 AM
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/09/why-do-evangelicals-support-donald-trump/403591/
Quote
The answer seems to be the growing anti-establishment sentiments held by many evangelical Christians. (After all, the Tea Party movement draws “disproportionate support” from their ranks.) Not only are conservative Christians solidly Republican, they are also fierce traditionalists who feel that their values are increasingly under assault by modern society.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 03, 2015, 08:43:42 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 03, 2015, 08:53:06 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 03, 2015, 09:03:31 AM
Dax Voters Registration (Party): Unaffiliated
Post by: star seed 7 on September 03, 2015, 09:13:21 AM
Post by: CNS on September 03, 2015, 09:13:59 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 03, 2015, 09:16:22 AM
Not everything is about you dax
Liar
Post by: MakeItRain on September 03, 2015, 09:31:17 AM
The hilarious thing is Trump really doesn't have a value system that's anywhere close in line with supposedly evangelical values. Trump is saying some things that need to be said and that of course is causing a leftist progressive meltdown who in their own right have absolutely zero tolerance for any views or opinions that don't align firmly with their own and they are easily the largest collective of straight line voters in the populace. But Trump is going to fade away IMO.
What the hell does any of this have to do with "leftist progressives?" Did Trump win the Republican nomination overnight?
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 03, 2015, 09:33:09 AM
The hilarious thing is Trump really doesn't have a value system that's anywhere close in line with supposedly evangelical values. Trump is saying some things that need to be said and that of course is causing a leftist progressive meltdown who in their own right have absolutely zero tolerance for any views or opinions that don't align firmly with their own and they are easily the largest collective of straight line voters in the populace. But Trump is going to fade away IMO.
What the hell does any of this have to do with "leftist progressives?" Did Trump win the Republican nomination overnight?
:lol:
Post by: Institutional Control on September 03, 2015, 09:45:21 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on September 03, 2015, 11:57:28 AM
Evangelicals flocking to Trump
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/09/why-do-evangelicals-support-donald-trump/403591/QuoteThe answer seems to be the growing anti-establishment sentiments held by many evangelical Christians. (After all, the Tea Party movement draws “disproportionate support” from their ranks.) Not only are conservative Christians solidly Republican, they are also fierce traditionalists who feel that their values are increasingly under assault by modern society.
easily the dumbest demographic in American politics
Post by: sys on September 03, 2015, 01:48:46 PM
Post by: 8manpick on September 03, 2015, 04:01:21 PM
Are these KSU-w's low information voters?Evangelicals flocking to Trump
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/09/why-do-evangelicals-support-donald-trump/403591/QuoteThe answer seems to be the growing anti-establishment sentiments held by many evangelical Christians. (After all, the Tea Party movement draws “disproportionate support” from their ranks.) Not only are conservative Christians solidly Republican, they are also fierce traditionalists who feel that their values are increasingly under assault by modern society.
easily the dumbest demographic in American politics
Post by: ShellShock on September 03, 2015, 04:50:09 PM
The hilarious thing is Trump really doesn't have a value system that's anywhere close in line with supposedly evangelical values. Trump is saying some things that need to be said and that of course is causing a leftist progressive meltdown who in their own right have absolutely zero tolerance for any views or opinions that don't align firmly with their own and they are easily the largest collective of straight line voters in the populace. But Trump is going to fade away IMO.
What the hell does any of this have to do with "leftist progressives?" Did Trump win the Republican nomination overnight?
If you've been paying attention to the polls and projections, Trump is killing it. He's up nationally by 14% or something ridiculous like that. Once the rest of the nobodies fall out, his lead will be unreachable by Carson or Jeb. Ideally, once Carson decides that he hasn't raised enough money and doesn't really stand a chance anymore, he and Trump will run on the same ticket and it won't even be a contest by general election time.
Post by: CNS on September 03, 2015, 04:56:52 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 03, 2015, 04:59:05 PM
Trump attracts crazies. There are not enough crazies to win a Gen elect.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I don't even think there are enough to win a primary, unless 4 or more candidates stay in the race for a long period of time.
Post by: MakeItRain on September 03, 2015, 05:54:17 PM
The hilarious thing is Trump really doesn't have a value system that's anywhere close in line with supposedly evangelical values. Trump is saying some things that need to be said and that of course is causing a leftist progressive meltdown who in their own right have absolutely zero tolerance for any views or opinions that don't align firmly with their own and they are easily the largest collective of straight line voters in the populace. But Trump is going to fade away IMO.
What the hell does any of this have to do with "leftist progressives?" Did Trump win the Republican nomination overnight?
If you've been paying attention to the polls and projections, Trump is killing it. He's up nationally by 14% or something ridiculous like that. Once the rest of the nobodies fall out, his lead will be unreachable by Carson or Jeb. Ideally, once Carson decides that he hasn't raised enough money and doesn't really stand a chance anymore, he and Trump will run on the same ticket and it won't even be a contest by general election time.
Cool bro! I don't know what that has to do with what either dax or I posted but thank you for dropping some truth bombs on all our asses.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on September 03, 2015, 09:07:19 PM
Are these KSU-w's low information voters?Evangelicals flocking to Trump
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/09/why-do-evangelicals-support-donald-trump/403591/QuoteThe answer seems to be the growing anti-establishment sentiments held by many evangelical Christians. (After all, the Tea Party movement draws “disproportionate support” from their ranks.) Not only are conservative Christians solidly Republican, they are also fierce traditionalists who feel that their values are increasingly under assault by modern society.
easily the dumbest demographic in American politics
Is that same as low IQ?
Post by: 8manpick on September 03, 2015, 09:16:11 PM
Idk, they aren't my low info votersAre these KSU-w's low information voters?Evangelicals flocking to Trump
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/09/why-do-evangelicals-support-donald-trump/403591/QuoteThe answer seems to be the growing anti-establishment sentiments held by many evangelical Christians. (After all, the Tea Party movement draws “disproportionate support” from their ranks.) Not only are conservative Christians solidly Republican, they are also fierce traditionalists who feel that their values are increasingly under assault by modern society.
easily the dumbest demographic in American politics
Is that same as low IQ?
Post by: bones129 on September 04, 2015, 01:04:32 AM
Post by: wetwillie on September 04, 2015, 06:44:37 AM
When The Donald is confronted with specific and critical issues, he will fold. His answers will be garbage and too vague. He's having fun now. For him, it's like a video game he can somehow manipulate. That's not reality. He won't be the 'pub nominee.
Name three viable candidates to win the nomination not named donald trump.
Post by: Yard Dog on September 04, 2015, 08:29:57 AM
When The Donald is confronted with specific and critical issues, he will fold. His answers will be garbage and too vague. He's having fun now. For him, it's like a video game he can somehow manipulate. That's not reality. He won't be the 'pub nominee.
Name three viable candidates to win the nomination not named donald trump.
Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, Carly Fiorina
Post by: Yard Dog on September 04, 2015, 08:31:10 AM
The hilarious thing is Trump really doesn't have a value system that's anywhere close in line with supposedly evangelical values. Trump is saying some things that need to be said and that of course is causing a leftist progressive meltdown who in their own right have absolutely zero tolerance for any views or opinions that don't align firmly with their own and they are easily the largest collective of straight line voters in the populace. But Trump is going to fade away IMO.
What the hell does any of this have to do with "leftist progressives?" Did Trump win the Republican nomination overnight?
If you've been paying attention to the polls and projections, Trump is killing it. He's up nationally by 14% or something ridiculous like that. Once the rest of the nobodies fall out, his lead will be unreachable by Carson or Jeb. Ideally, once Carson decides that he hasn't raised enough money and doesn't really stand a chance anymore, he and Trump will run on the same ticket and it won't even be a contest by general election time.
A lot of people talk about this, but very rarely if ever do other candidates for president run as the VP candidate.
Post by: renocat on September 04, 2015, 12:25:56 PM
Post by: CNS on September 04, 2015, 12:29:52 PM
Post by: CNS on September 04, 2015, 02:03:31 PM
Trump when asked about ISIS, Hezbollah, and other terrorist orgs and their leaders.
This guy is the best.
The absolute best
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: MakeItRain on September 04, 2015, 02:49:00 PM
Stupid media. A big New York Times article stipulates that since WUD is from NY and has been divorced, that this will be his undoing. People who support him do not give an inverted butt hole about this kind stuff. Plain talk and pragmatism is his strength. The opposite of obama is desired.
Do you think Trump is the opposite of Obama?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 04, 2015, 03:22:16 PM
Post by: renocat on September 04, 2015, 03:56:01 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on September 04, 2015, 05:11:14 PM
Trump is a red blooded meat eating wife smooching American. Obama despises the America god helped us create unlike the one he wants the humanist state to create.
I mean it's pretty well documented that Obama is an American who kisses his wife, attends church, and eats meat :dunno: he did marry an American citizen, can't say the same for WUD. Your boy Trump also was not truthful about belonging to a church, so there's that.
Yeah, you're right maybe they are opposite but not how you thought.
Post by: renocat on September 04, 2015, 07:43:46 PM
Post by: Canary on September 04, 2015, 07:54:51 PM
Obama is a American in name only. He is a global satanist that has done everything he can to take us from top dog nation to little yiping chichaua that whizzes all over himself when another dog growls. Weaken military, lies to allies, dilutes our culture, and imports foreigners to destroy us from within. Ten visits to church in 7 years whoopee, plus his assult on traditional values. He has never done squiddlyshit either. Meat? That have barbecue pile of lean cuisine varmits crap ain't meat. It must cover you whole plate - that's meat Trump style.If you believe we were "top dog nation" with out last administration you weren't paying attention.
Post by: cfbandyman on September 06, 2015, 09:33:16 AM
Post by: renocat on September 06, 2015, 09:30:50 PM
Post by: ShellShock on September 07, 2015, 09:17:13 PM
When The Donald is confronted with specific and critical issues, he will fold. His answers will be garbage and too vague. He's having fun now. For him, it's like a video game he can somehow manipulate. That's not reality. He won't be the 'pub nominee.
Name three viable candidates to win the nomination not named donald trump.
Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, Carly Fiorina
:lol: This list is laughable at best...
Post by: Cartierfor3 on September 07, 2015, 09:39:35 PM
Post by: wetwillie on September 07, 2015, 09:47:56 PM
most of my friends are Evangelicals and I dont' know one person who is supporting trump
Carson probably gets those folks
Post by: Cartierfor3 on September 07, 2015, 09:49:23 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on September 08, 2015, 08:17:42 AM
When The Donald is confronted with specific and critical issues, he will fold. His answers will be garbage and too vague. He's having fun now. For him, it's like a video game he can somehow manipulate. That's not reality. He won't be the 'pub nominee.
Name three viable candidates to win the nomination not named donald trump.
Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, Carly Fiorina
:lol: This list is laughable at best...
Not nearly as laughable as Hillary, Bernie, and Biden. Give me a break.
Post by: stunted on September 08, 2015, 08:32:47 AM
:love:
Smashes her, then gives her his book :lol:
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on September 08, 2015, 09:14:52 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on September 08, 2015, 09:42:17 AM
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/19/democrats-petition-obama-to-block-donald-trumps-na/
Quote
“Trump’s recent and repeated remarks disparaging women, Mexican-Americans, and other Latinos are hateful, divisive and completely inaccurate,” the letter said.
“We understand that the Department of Interior rightly prohibits the display of racist or insensitive emblems on lands it controls,” it continued. “In accordance with this policy and in keeping with the Department’s recent efforts to bar the Washington Redskins’ logo on public lands, we urge you to use all available authorities under current law to prevent the Trump name from being prominently displayed at the new hotel.
“The Trump name and logo have come to serve as a divisive reminder of Donald Trump’s reprehensible words. To allow his name to be conspicuously displayed at the heart of our nation’s capital would send a message of exclusion and intolerance to millions of Latinos in the District and across the country, including workers at the site itself,” the letter concluded.
Post by: SdK on September 08, 2015, 10:30:39 AM
Post by: ShellShock on September 08, 2015, 11:16:42 PM
When The Donald is confronted with specific and critical issues, he will fold. His answers will be garbage and too vague. He's having fun now. For him, it's like a video game he can somehow manipulate. That's not reality. He won't be the 'pub nominee.
Name three viable candidates to win the nomination not named donald trump.
Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, Carly Fiorina
:lol: This list is laughable at best...
Not nearly as laughable as Hillary, Bernie, and Biden. Give me a break.
I'll give you that one!
Post by: treysolid on September 08, 2015, 11:18:50 PM
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/09/antivirus-mogul-john-mcafee-makes-his-bid-to-run-for-president-official/ (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/09/antivirus-mogul-john-mcafee-makes-his-bid-to-run-for-president-official/)
Post by: Asteriskhead on September 09, 2015, 08:02:22 AM
Trump is bragging that he is spending his money, and not beholden to big donors and this makes him better than others. So does this limit the presidency to the rich bastard class? I hope someone beats him, but I would vote for him over hillary, I guess. It galls me that issues are not driving the election. Rabid dog stupid tea party zealots are ruining the republican party of Lincoln and hillbilly Americans.
:lol:
Post by: gatoveintisiete on September 09, 2015, 12:06:23 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on September 10, 2015, 02:17:44 PM
Post by: CNS on September 10, 2015, 02:25:04 PM
Post by: CNS on September 10, 2015, 02:26:51 PM
Quote
Donald Trump is now the first or second choice for half of GOP voters
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 10, 2015, 05:09:06 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on September 10, 2015, 05:12:37 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 10, 2015, 05:16:48 PM
While I don't agree with much of what Trump says, it really has been a study in how closed minded most ProgLibs are . . . if you're not in lockstep with ProgLib ideals, they pretty much don't want to hear it. But hey, everybody else . . . keep an open mind.
Oh dax :lol:
Post by: gatoveintisiete on September 10, 2015, 05:18:59 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 10, 2015, 05:24:32 PM
Everything seems to be overlooked do to the fact that unlike any politician in recent memory, Trump can't be bought and is tapping into simple concepts that Americans have been for for a long time. If he sticks to these issues, he can't lose.
:love:
Post by: 8manpick on September 10, 2015, 05:27:34 PM
You mean :D ?Everything seems to be overlooked do to the fact that unlike any politician in recent memory, Trump can't be bought and is tapping into simple concepts that Americans have been for for a long time. If he sticks to these issues, he can't lose.
:love:
Post by: Cartierfor3 on September 10, 2015, 05:29:07 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 10, 2015, 05:31:07 PM
You mean :D ?Everything seems to be overlooked do to the fact that unlike any politician in recent memory, Trump can't be bought and is tapping into simple concepts that Americans have been for for a long time. If he sticks to these issues, he can't lose.
:love:
just noticed that! :D
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 10, 2015, 05:35:53 PM
I mean, how is this seriously even a thing.
We have a lot of dumbasses in this country.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 10, 2015, 05:38:18 PM
It's really an even bigger travesty that Hillary is even a thing, but the DNC is apparently determined to fly aircover for her.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 10, 2015, 05:40:00 PM
Post by: steve dave on September 10, 2015, 05:41:12 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 10, 2015, 05:41:37 PM
Sad, but instead of being outraged by this, the majority of Dem lemmings will remain outraged by Trump.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/253196-dnc-chair-closes-door-on-more-debates
Post by: steve dave on September 10, 2015, 05:42:55 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 10, 2015, 05:44:12 PM
I don't think outraged is the word I'd use Dax. Maybe, like, dumbfounded. And that goes for moderates as well.
Many are outraged and meltdown at every non PC thing Trump says.
Post by: Cartierfor3 on September 10, 2015, 05:44:26 PM
Post by: CNS on September 10, 2015, 06:53:09 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: treysolid on September 10, 2015, 07:53:17 PM
I don't think outraged is the word I'd use Dax. Maybe, like, dumbfounded. And that goes for moderates as well.
Many are outraged and meltdown at everynon PCrough ridin' insane thing Trump says.
mexicans are all criminals and rapists and their government is sending them here
let's build a 1900 mile long wall and make Mexico pay for it.
lets bomb all the oil fields in Iraq and Syria and then just give them to major oil companies
any other rough ridin' insanity that i forgot?
never mind the fact that he's been super vague about healthcare reform, education, tax reform and all the other issues that actually matter.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 10, 2015, 07:55:16 PM
Post by: wetwillie on September 10, 2015, 07:55:47 PM
Post by: treysolid on September 10, 2015, 08:06:02 PM
Do you really believe that Trump actually believes that? LOL
i don't know what the eff he believes. you don't either, so don't act like you do. maybe at one point in time the real trump was different from the trump persona that he created, but i think that his persona has become so bloated that it's consumed him completely.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 10, 2015, 08:06:48 PM
Post by: steve dave on September 10, 2015, 08:22:59 PM
Okay, meltdown then.
Nobody is melting down, or angry, or any of those things. Everyone is laughing and WTF'ing about this being the Republican party candidate. It's very absurd, you have to admit that.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 10, 2015, 08:23:23 PM
Post by: treysolid on September 10, 2015, 08:26:16 PM
While I don't agree with much of what Trump says, it really has been a study in how closed minded most ProgLibs are . . . if you're not in lockstep with ProgLib ideals, they pretty much don't want to hear it. But hey, everybody else . . . keep an open mind.
this is the single most laughable thing i think you've ever typed on this blog. "hey everybody, the racist guy who wants to bomb oil fields and thinks of women as brainless sex receptacles has something important to say! listen up!"
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 10, 2015, 08:30:28 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on September 10, 2015, 08:34:01 PM
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/bobby-jindal-slams-donald-trump-egomaniacal-madman-carnival/story?id=33666609
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/ben-carson-attacks-donald-trumps-faith-trump-fires/story?id=33654680
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/10/politics/jeb-bush-donald-trump-carly-fiorina/
http://www.newsmax.com/t/newsmax/article/678572
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 10, 2015, 08:35:21 PM
Post by: treysolid on September 10, 2015, 08:35:55 PM
i'm illuminating the mystery of "ProgLib closed-mindedness" regarding Trump for you, dax. Most reasonable people have already dismissed him as a serious candidate because the things he says are rough ridin' crazy.
you're welcome for the explanation.
Post by: MakeItRain on September 10, 2015, 08:48:16 PM
Hillary is only a thing because there is nobody of note running against her.
Hillary is a thing because she has worked in politics for 45 years. She is a former Secretary of State, former Senator, she is a part of a political dynasty, she lived in the white house while being involved in policy for eight years. The only thing that she doesn't have that every atypical presidential candidate has is a crank. You can call her a liar or whatever but comparing her candidacy to a guy who has only addressed foreign policy with "I will be so good at the military, your head will spin" is rough ridin' insane. Anyone who asks why is Hillary a candidate when cornered about Trump is either a gigantic rough ridin' moron or a misogynist, there's no other explanation.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on September 10, 2015, 08:51:15 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on September 10, 2015, 08:53:55 PM
I didn't say other people weren't outraged as well.
There is no ProgLib outrage about his candidacy because it is amazing news for Democrats. Bernie Sanders is the biggest beneficiary of Trump winning the Republican nomination because the question of electability disappears in the general election. So other than him being a deplorable human I am cheering my ass off for him.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on September 10, 2015, 08:56:03 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on September 10, 2015, 09:01:04 PM
Well there certainly isn't a Berniebutthurt thread is there.
You republicans better get one started because he's definitely going to win New Hampshire and if he wins Iowa as well it will be over.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on September 10, 2015, 09:05:39 PM
Well there certainly isn't a Berniebutthurt thread is there.
You republicans better get one started because he's definitely going to win New Hampshire and if he wins Iowa as well it will be over.
The American people will elect him president or choose someone else, no biggie.
Post by: renocat on September 10, 2015, 09:10:12 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 10, 2015, 09:12:29 PM
Post by: treysolid on September 10, 2015, 09:16:47 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 10, 2015, 09:24:50 PM
Post by: treysolid on September 10, 2015, 09:36:05 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on September 10, 2015, 09:43:46 PM
Hillary is only a thing because there is nobody of note running against her.
Hillary is a thing because she has worked in politics for 45 years. She is a former Secretary of State, former Senator, she is a part of a political dynasty, she lived in the white house while being involved in policy for eight years. The only thing that she doesn't have that every atypical presidential candidate has is a crank. You can call her a liar or whatever but comparing her candidacy to a guy who has only addressed foreign policy with "I will be so good at the military, your head will spin" is rough ridin' insane. Anyone who asks why is Hillary a candidate when cornered about Trump is either a gigantic rough ridin' moron or a misogynist, there's no other explanation.
pretty much. Its like, yeah I don't like the idea of Hillary Clinton for president, but I understand her campaign, and why others would vote for her. see, supporting Hillary isn't my perspective, but I get it.
I don't get how Donald Trump for president is a thing. I'd rather vote for Triumph the Insult Comic Dog
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 10, 2015, 09:47:45 PM
Post by: treysolid on September 10, 2015, 09:59:45 PM
You were painting with a much broader brush earlier Trey. That's okay, typical.
yep, i'm just a typical ProgLib marching in lockstep with all my lemming brethren, dax. no need to listen to me.
Post by: wetwillie on September 10, 2015, 10:09:05 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on September 11, 2015, 12:50:56 AM
Trump won't be the candidate if that helps everyone.
Have you been following the polls? I don't mean who is leading in Iowa, but the trends, the supposed issues. He is somehow making gains with women, people are viewing him as more trustworthy with each passing day; it's crazy. Ben Carson emerging also helps him because frankly Carson is Trump without the insults. One likely two of the traditional canidates need to emerge to make this uncomfortable for Trump and Carson. It's even starting to look like that Trump may be scandal proof so if the establishment is holding on to some bombshell it better be a big one because his supporters don't seem to care.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 11, 2015, 05:18:05 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 11, 2015, 05:36:29 AM
But at least in my social media world the liberal meltdown is quite funny. Now with threats about ramifications regarding friendship etc etc if anyone votes for Trump.
I'm thinking, well, we're over a year away from the elections, and months away from the convention, but reality won't stop a good meltdown.
Post by: steve dave on September 11, 2015, 06:13:20 AM
Post by: wetwillie on September 11, 2015, 07:05:59 AM
Trump won't be the candidate if that helps everyone.
Have you been following the polls? I don't mean who is leading in Iowa, but the trends, the supposed issues. He is somehow making gains with women, people are viewing him as more trustworthy with each passing day; it's crazy. Ben Carson emerging also helps him because frankly Carson is Trump without the insults. One likely two of the traditional canidates need to emerge to make this uncomfortable for Trump and Carson. It's even starting to look like that Trump may be scandal proof so if the establishment is holding on to some bombshell it better be a big one because his supporters don't seem to care.
So it is your prediction that trump wins the nomination?
Post by: star seed 7 on September 11, 2015, 07:30:29 AM
Post by: michigancat on September 11, 2015, 07:44:40 AM
Post those in the political Facebook/Twitter thread Dax!Yes!
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 11, 2015, 08:34:14 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 11, 2015, 08:45:22 AM
Post those in the political Facebook/Twitter thread Dax!Yes!
I can't find the one from this morning, one my high school classmates, a very nice person but a total ProgLib drama queen, just a real jackboot for the ProgLib agenda 'liked' a post from one of their friends where their friend posted that if anyone who was a 'friend' of of her's voted for Trump, then they would be 'unfriended'. They also posted some article about how Trump hates women, which might be true, and it had a picture of Donald with 3 Hooters Girls.
Post by: michigancat on September 11, 2015, 08:47:12 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 11, 2015, 08:57:20 AM
Now that's what I call #outrage
outrage is in the high of the non outrager cRusty.
The ProgLib camp is so defensive these days.
Post by: Yard Dog on September 11, 2015, 08:59:34 AM
Well there certainly isn't a Berniebutthurt thread is there.
You republicans better get one started because he's definitely going to win New Hampshire and if he wins Iowa as well it will be over.
Are you referring to the primary here? The interesting thing at this point is that none of the republicans have mentioned Bernie in their speeches. I think that if Bernie is the dem nominee, then he will struggle to win the main election. I just don't think he will connect with anyone in the middle or the right. He definitely has all the far lefties, but unless he is running against Trump, I don't think that anything is over if he wins a few states in the primary.
I think as we have a few more debates and hopefully some Pub candidates start dropping out, we will have more time to show the general electorate that Trump actually has zero plans for his presidency and that there are better candidate options.
I'm also looking forward to the first democratic debate, I'd like to see how civil Bernie and Hillary are with each other. I think that it is possible that Hillary has some dirt on Bernie that she is saving for when things heat up. The Clinton machine will destroy all who stand in its way!
Post by: star seed 7 on September 11, 2015, 09:17:17 AM
Now that's what I call #outrage
outrage is in the high of the non outrager cRusty.
The ProgLib camp is so defensive these days.
lol
Post by: steve dave on September 11, 2015, 09:17:51 AM
Post by: AbeFroman on September 11, 2015, 09:32:52 AM
Trump vs. Clinton (or Biden)
Post by: steve dave on September 11, 2015, 09:34:56 AM
Sanders is less likelier to be the Dem candidate than Trump is to be the Repub.
Trump vs. Clinton (or Biden)
I know, I'm just saying it would be very weird. would actually be the first time a 3rd party candidate could run on a moderate platform and maybe have some success.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 11, 2015, 09:57:33 AM
a Trump v. Sanders general election would be so lol for the moderates (like sd). what the eff am I supposed to do here? I guess Sanders because he's less likely to have us in a nuclear war his first month in office and probably won't replace a nuclear physicist with sarah palin as the head of the dept of energy. but, he's going to try to reduce my take home by like 50% so that sucks. unless I get universal healthcare for free and don't pay property taxes or something.
Sanders would have to get support from congress to actually implement any of the ideas that make him hard to vote for. The idea of Trump selecting cabinet members, appointing supreme court justices, and interacting with other world leaders is pretty scary.
Post by: Yard Dog on September 11, 2015, 09:58:08 AM
a Trump v. Sanders general election would be so lol for the moderates (like sd). what the eff am I supposed to do here? I guess Sanders because he's less likely to have us in a nuclear war his first month in office and probably won't replace a nuclear physicist with sarah palin as the head of the dept of energy. but, he's going to try to reduce my take home by like 50% so that sucks. unless I get universal healthcare for free and don't pay property taxes or something.
If Sanders wins I dont think you can every expect not to pay taxes for something.
Is anyone else worried that if he is president for 8 years he will be in his mid eighties? Bernie is the same age as LHC Bill Snyder for heavens sake!
Post by: Yard Dog on September 11, 2015, 09:59:44 AM
a Trump v. Sanders general election would be so lol for the moderates (like sd). what the eff am I supposed to do here? I guess Sanders because he's less likely to have us in a nuclear war his first month in office and probably won't replace a nuclear physicist with sarah palin as the head of the dept of energy. but, he's going to try to reduce my take home by like 50% so that sucks. unless I get universal healthcare for free and don't pay property taxes or something.
Sanders would have to get support from congress to actually implement any of the ideas that make him hard to vote for. The idea of Trump selecting cabinet members, appointing supreme court justices, and interacting with other world leaders is pretty scary.
So in this scenario we just hope for a lame duck presidency for four years and hope nothing happens abroad that would require military action?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 11, 2015, 10:02:01 AM
a Trump v. Sanders general election would be so lol for the moderates (like sd). what the eff am I supposed to do here? I guess Sanders because he's less likely to have us in a nuclear war his first month in office and probably won't replace a nuclear physicist with sarah palin as the head of the dept of energy. but, he's going to try to reduce my take home by like 50% so that sucks. unless I get universal healthcare for free and don't pay property taxes or something.
Sanders would have to get support from congress to actually implement any of the ideas that make him hard to vote for. The idea of Trump selecting cabinet members, appointing supreme court justices, and interacting with other world leaders is pretty scary.
So in this scenario we just hope for a lame duck presidency for four years and hope nothing happens abroad that would require military action?
We would still have the largest, best funded military in the world under Sanders, and by a considerable margin. But yeah, I think with any presidency, we should always hope for nothing that rocks the boat too much and no need for military action.
Post by: CNS on September 11, 2015, 10:06:27 AM
Trump won't be the candidate if that helps everyone.
A poll earlier this week showed that a majority of pubs choose him as either their top one or two. Also, same radio show I was listening to said that another poll polled who would get pub votes if the field was just trump, carson, or bush. Trump 44%
Post by: gatoveintisiete on September 11, 2015, 10:09:05 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 11, 2015, 10:13:24 AM
Trump won't be the candidate if that helps everyone.
A poll earlier this week showed that a majority of pubs choose him as either their top one or two. Also, same radio show I was listening to said that another poll polled who would get pub votes if the field was just trump, carson, or bush. Trump 44%
Yeah, it really explains a lot about why the republican party is where it is today.
Post by: Yard Dog on September 11, 2015, 10:15:07 AM
Trump won't be the candidate if that helps everyone.
A poll earlier this week showed that a majority of pubs choose him as either their top one or two. Also, same radio show I was listening to said that another poll polled who would get pub votes if the field was just trump, carson, or bush. Trump 44%
Am I the only one who mistrust polls? How many people do they poll? I have heard generally these polls are about 1000 people. How varied are the sources? Depending on how they collect their information, if someone isn't answering their phone or taking an online survey their opinion is lost. It seems like it is really easy to take a poll with the right people to give yourself the results you want.
Post by: MakeItRain on September 11, 2015, 10:16:09 AM
Trump won't be the candidate if that helps everyone.
Have you been following the polls? I don't mean who is leading in Iowa, but the trends, the supposed issues. He is somehow making gains with women, people are viewing him as more trustworthy with each passing day; it's crazy. Ben Carson emerging also helps him because frankly Carson is Trump without the insults. One likely two of the traditional canidates need to emerge to make this uncomfortable for Trump and Carson. It's even starting to look like that Trump may be scandal proof so if the establishment is holding on to some bombshell it better be a big one because his supporters don't seem to care.
So it is your prediction that trump wins the nomination?
I really don't know I am stunned that we are at this point, he does something weekly that would have killed anyone else's campaign in either party. You cannot ignore the polls and trends at this point.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 11, 2015, 10:17:03 AM
Trump won't be the candidate if that helps everyone.
A poll earlier this week showed that a majority of pubs choose him as either their top one or two. Also, same radio show I was listening to said that another poll polled who would get pub votes if the field was just trump, carson, or bush. Trump 44%
Am I the only one who mistrust polls? How many people do they poll? I have heard generally these polls are about 1000 people. How varied are the sources? Depending on how they collect their information, if someone isn't answering their phone or taking an online survey their opinion is lost. It seems like it is really easy to take a poll with the right people to give yourself the results you want.
If you do that, your results won't be accurate, and people will stop hiring you to conduct polls.
Post by: Yard Dog on September 11, 2015, 10:19:16 AM
Unless the people hiring you to conduct polls really like the results you are getting.Trump won't be the candidate if that helps everyone.
A poll earlier this week showed that a majority of pubs choose him as either their top one or two. Also, same radio show I was listening to said that another poll polled who would get pub votes if the field was just trump, carson, or bush. Trump 44%
Am I the only one who mistrust polls? How many people do they poll? I have heard generally these polls are about 1000 people. How varied are the sources? Depending on how they collect their information, if someone isn't answering their phone or taking an online survey their opinion is lost. It seems like it is really easy to take a poll with the right people to give yourself the results you want.
If you do that, your results won't be accurate, and people will stop hiring you to conduct polls.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 11, 2015, 10:20:31 AM
Unless the people hiring you to conduct polls really like the results you are getting.Trump won't be the candidate if that helps everyone.
A poll earlier this week showed that a majority of pubs choose him as either their top one or two. Also, same radio show I was listening to said that another poll polled who would get pub votes if the field was just trump, carson, or bush. Trump 44%
Am I the only one who mistrust polls? How many people do they poll? I have heard generally these polls are about 1000 people. How varied are the sources? Depending on how they collect their information, if someone isn't answering their phone or taking an online survey their opinion is lost. It seems like it is really easy to take a poll with the right people to give yourself the results you want.
If you do that, your results won't be accurate, and people will stop hiring you to conduct polls.
Why would they like inaccurate results? That makes it harder for them to adjust and win elections.
Post by: MakeItRain on September 11, 2015, 10:22:09 AM
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/
Post by: Yard Dog on September 11, 2015, 10:26:08 AM
Man yard dog never disappoints. Do you read anything beyond tweets and Facebook posts? Take a half an hour or so and check this out.
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/
I got all of that information and speculation about polls by listening to NPR. So, yes, I do "read stuff beyond tweets and facebook posts"
Quote
For a typical public opinion survey, a randomly selected sample of about 1,000 registered voters age 18 and over is interviewed over five or six days. The polls are conducted at the Polling Institute on West Woods Road, close to the Mount Carmel and York Hill Campuses.
^ seems super accurate
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 11, 2015, 10:35:06 AM
Post by: wetwillie on September 11, 2015, 10:38:15 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on September 11, 2015, 11:04:33 AM
A sample size of 1000 should yield accurate results with a 95% confidence level and a confidence interval of about +/- 3%.
Just did a quick google search and there are 1.2 million registered voters in Iowa. But I am sure asking 1000 of them who they would vote for is super accurate.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 11, 2015, 11:12:03 AM
Next he's going to tie polls to christian persecution
Post by: Yard Dog on September 11, 2015, 11:19:19 AM
A republican that doesn't believe in science, interesting.
Next he's going to tie polls to christian persecution
Which republican ITT doesn't believe in science? I do. The NPR segment I was referencing talked about the difficulty to actually poll people in their entire demographic range.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 11, 2015, 11:21:53 AM
A sample size of 1000 should yield accurate results with a 95% confidence level and a confidence interval of about +/- 3%.
Just did a quick google search and there are 1.2 million registered voters in Iowa. But I am sure asking 1000 of them who they would vote for is super accurate.
It is accurate enough to predict results to with a margin of error of 3%, 95% of the time.
Post by: Institutional Control on September 11, 2015, 11:28:52 AM
A sample size of 1000 should yield accurate results with a 95% confidence level and a confidence interval of about +/- 3%.
Just did a quick google search and there are 1.2 million registered voters in Iowa. But I am sure asking 1000 of them who they would vote for is super accurate.
It is accurate enough to predict results to with a margin of error of 3%, 95% of the time.
And 60% of the time it works every time.
Post by: MakeItRain on September 11, 2015, 12:25:48 PM
Man yard dog never disappoints. Do you read anything beyond tweets and Facebook posts? Take a half an hour or so and check this out.
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/
I got all of that information and speculation about polls by listening to NPR. So, yes, I do " read stuff beyond tweets and facebook posts"
Never change yard dog :ROFL: also no one believes that you listen to NPR but find all of those batshit crazy facebook posts "interesting."
Post by: Yard Dog on September 11, 2015, 12:40:04 PM
Man yard dog never disappoints. Do you read anything beyond tweets and Facebook posts? Take a half an hour or so and check this out.
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/
I got all of that information and speculation about polls by listening to NPR. So, yes, I do " read stuff beyond tweets and facebook posts"
Never change yard dog :ROFL: also no one believes that you listen to NPR but find all of those batshit crazy facebook posts "interesting."
I realize listening to NPR is not reading. Any halfway intelligent individual would understand I was making the statement that I am not getting my news from facebook and Twitter like you suggest.
So you are saying that because of your opinion on politics it is impossible that I listen to NPR? I have a lengthy commute everyday and NPR's All Things Considered never disappoints. I am not lying that I heard them discuss polling on NPR.
Dissenting opinions are also not automatically "bigoted" or "batshit crazy". Those talking points only make the person using them seem ignorant and uneducated. It is important as well rounded individuals to understand what all sides of an issue are, not just saying "lalala" with your fingers in your ears.
Post by: steve dave on September 11, 2015, 01:03:46 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 11, 2015, 01:14:18 PM
Man yard dog never disappoints. Do you read anything beyond tweets and Facebook posts? Take a half an hour or so and check this out.
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/
I got all of that information and speculation about polls by listening to NPR. So, yes, I do " read stuff beyond tweets and facebook posts"
Never change yard dog :ROFL: also no one believes that you listen to NPR but find all of those batshit crazy facebook posts "interesting."
I realize listening to NPR is not reading. Any halfway intelligent individual would understand I was making the statement that I am not getting my news from facebook and Twitter like you suggest.
So you are saying that because of your opinion on politics it is impossible that I listen to NPR? I have a lengthy commute everyday and NPR's All Things Considered never disappoints. I am not lying that I heard them discuss polling on NPR.
Dissenting opinions are also not automatically "bigoted" or "batshit crazy". Those talking points only make the person using them seem ignorant and uneducated. It is important as well rounded individuals to understand what all sides of an issue are, not just saying "lalala" with your fingers in your ears.
I enjoyed this coming from yardy considering he has one of the lowest understanding of "issues" from even an elementary level of anyone on this blog
Post by: sys on September 11, 2015, 01:19:10 PM
Post by: renocat on September 11, 2015, 01:21:30 PM
Post by: CNS on September 11, 2015, 01:39:24 PM
Post by: puniraptor on September 11, 2015, 02:03:51 PM
There are a lot of dumb ppl in the country. When those dumb ppl hear someone constantly referred to as "fantastic", "Very smart", "Incredible", etc, they start believing it. Even if the primary source is the person describing themselves.
dumb people really dont care about those adjectives. all they care about is never admitting failures and never apologizing and never bowing.
Post by: 8manpick on September 11, 2015, 02:21:07 PM
Post by: puniraptor on September 11, 2015, 02:27:13 PM
Yard dog would make a poor statistician
but easily a top 15 republican presidential candidate
Post by: ShellShock on September 14, 2015, 09:24:11 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 14, 2015, 09:28:55 AM
Post by: CNS on September 14, 2015, 09:55:03 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 14, 2015, 10:05:29 AM
I will be surprised if walker could find his way out of a wet paper bag, let alone a presidential election.
If a union or abortion was happening at the bag exit, he'd find it and stop it
Post by: Yard Dog on September 14, 2015, 10:07:39 AM
I will be surprised if walker could find his way out of a wet paper bag, let alone a presidential election.
If a union or abortion was happening at the bag exit, he'd find it and stop it
As he should.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 14, 2015, 10:10:27 AM
I will be surprised if walker could find his way out of a wet paper bag, let alone a presidential election.
If a union or abortion was happening at the bag exit, he'd find it and stop it
As he should.
Typical big government republican
Post by: MakeItRain on September 14, 2015, 10:13:41 AM
Word on the street is that Christie, Kasich and Walker will be dropping out of the race as early as next week.
Wut? Isn't walker polling 3rd or 4th and why would anyone float dropping out a week before they actually do it and before the next debate?
Post by: Yard Dog on September 14, 2015, 10:20:01 AM
I will be surprised if walker could find his way out of a wet paper bag, let alone a presidential election.
If a union or abortion was happening at the bag exit, he'd find it and stop it
As he should.
Typicalbiglimited government republican
FYIP (fixed your ignorant post)
Post by: CNS on September 14, 2015, 10:22:52 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 14, 2015, 10:23:26 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on September 14, 2015, 10:24:41 AM
Limited, yet sturdily involved in all things in your bedroom.
Absolutely not. You can do whatever you want in there. The government has no say on that. I have never heard a republican propose legislative action against what happens in anyone's bedroom.
Post by: Yard Dog on September 14, 2015, 10:26:25 AM
Yup, limiting the rights of citizens government is more accurate
No not really, limited regulation. That's what we're after. Not a heap ton of it. Less taxes across the board and less departments wasting money and being completely ineffective. I support giving more power to state governments who truly know what their local citizens need. Not some blanketed legislation that is tries to please everyone and is thus ideal for no one.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 14, 2015, 10:27:09 AM
Limited, yet sturdily involved in all things in your bedroom.
Absolutely not. You can do whatever you want in there. The government has no say on that. I have never heard a republican propose legislative action against what happens in anyone's bedroom.
:lol:
Post by: star seed 7 on September 14, 2015, 10:29:27 AM
Yup, limiting the rights of citizens government is more accurate
No not really, limited regulation. That's what we're after. Not a heap ton of it. Less taxes across the board and less departments wasting money and being completely ineffective. I support giving more power to state governments who truly know what their local citizens need. Not some blanketed legislation that is tries to please everyone and is thus ideal for no one.
Have you seen state government in action? :lol:
Post by: Yard Dog on September 14, 2015, 10:39:20 AM
Yup, limiting the rights of citizens government is more accurate
No not really, limited regulation. That's what we're after. Not a heap ton of it. Less taxes across the board and less departments wasting money and being completely ineffective. I support giving more power to state governments who truly know what their local citizens need. Not some blanketed legislation that is tries to please everyone and is thus ideal for no one.
Have you seen state government in action? :lol:
Yes, and given any authority by the federal government they wouldn't have to play patsy to the national base. Currently they have to try and make statements nationally to try and force policy change so they can even run efficiently. With out that road block you would see a lot more bipartisanship directed specifically at improving the state.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 14, 2015, 10:45:03 AM
Post by: CNS on September 14, 2015, 10:50:42 AM
Limited, yet sturdily involved in all things in your bedroom.
Absolutely not. You can do whatever you want in there. The government has no say on that. I have never heard a republican propose legislative action against what happens in anyone's bedroom.
You remember the one thread that one time where you learned what Sodomy is?
Post by: Yard Dog on September 14, 2015, 10:57:28 AM
Limited, yet sturdily involved in all things in your bedroom.
Absolutely not. You can do whatever you want in there. The government has no say on that. I have never heard a republican propose legislative action against what happens in anyone's bedroom.
You remember the one thread that one time where you learned what Sodomy is?
I made a point to ask other people this weekend if I was alone in my misconstrued understanding of the term and I wasn't. You might laugh that off and say that it must be because all of my friends are rubes, but that is just not the case.
But thinking that sodomy is only in reference to anal sex means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of political debate. What is the argument? That anyone who has an opinion on how the government is run better know the definition of sodomy or they are idiots not worthy of discussing the economy, foreign policy, or the social agenda of the liberal left and conservative right?
Post by: CNS on September 14, 2015, 11:01:28 AM
Post by: Asteriskhead on September 14, 2015, 11:10:57 AM
Limited, yet sturdily involved in all things in your bedroom.
Absolutely not. You can do whatever you want in there. The government has no say on that. I have never heard a republican propose legislative action against what happens in anyone's bedroom.
You remember the one thread that one time where you learned what Sodomy is?
I made a point to ask other people this weekend if I was alone in my misconstrued understanding of the term and I wasn't. You might laugh that off and say that it must be because all of my friends are rubes, but that is just not the case.
But thinking that sodomy is only in reference to anal sex means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of political debate. What is the argument? That anyone who has an opinion on how the government is run better know the definition of sodomy or they are idiots not worthy of discussing the economy, foreign policy, or the social agenda of the liberal left and conservative right?
no, you and your friends are idiots.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 14, 2015, 11:11:30 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 14, 2015, 11:14:13 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 14, 2015, 11:27:47 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 14, 2015, 12:00:30 PM
Eff'em!
(it was a dumb law)
Post by: star seed 7 on September 14, 2015, 12:03:14 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 14, 2015, 12:10:48 PM
States have continually shown they aren't mature enough to make their own laws
Yep, when I want to see maturity and common sense in laws and regulations, the Federal Government is the first stop along the way.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 14, 2015, 12:12:10 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 14, 2015, 12:13:20 PM
Our Lord and savior the federal government
All hail the momma teat . . . and let us suckle on her common sense and maturity, all 18 bazzillion pages worth!!
Post by: treysolid on September 14, 2015, 11:24:16 PM
Post by: CNS on September 15, 2015, 09:46:03 AM
Quote
LOS ANGELES – Right after his "Dancing with the Stars" debut, Gary Busey told FOX411 how much he believes in the Presidential candidacy of his former "Celebrity Apprentice" boss Donald Trump.
The actor is bullish on the billionaire businessman's controversial campaign, saying on Monday night, "I know him personally. I know him professionally. He's a great guy. He's sharp. He's fast. He can change the country after the last eight years."
Post by: Institutional Control on September 15, 2015, 09:48:48 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 15, 2015, 09:54:14 AM
Post by: 8manpick on September 15, 2015, 09:58:45 AM
I think Gary is trying to get himself a cabinet position.Ambassador to Colombia
Post by: renocat on September 15, 2015, 11:50:21 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 15, 2015, 12:14:20 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on September 16, 2015, 01:10:54 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on September 16, 2015, 02:07:06 PM
https://youtu.be/jIMsKvbHN3g
Post by: star seed 7 on September 16, 2015, 02:13:03 PM
Seems like everyone that actually knows him loves him.
Yeah, this is interesting. I've heard a lot of "celebrities" that have met or worked with him talk about how nice a dude he is and a good friend.
Post by: CNS on September 16, 2015, 02:16:06 PM
I bet is sucks to work for him, but I bet he parties with the best of them.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 16, 2015, 02:25:22 PM
I find it pretty interesting, considering his persona during the campaign
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on September 16, 2015, 06:02:59 PM
I bet he is awesome to party with. I mean, the guy would totally go over the top to impress and show how much money and power he has.
I bet is sucks to work for him, but I bet he parties with the best of them.
I'm staying at the Trump Las Vegas right now and I can tell you all of the employees here have met him and say he's a great guy to work for. They say he's a great tipper and remembers their names. They love him. Lots of immigrants, too.
Post by: steve dave on September 16, 2015, 06:16:58 PM
:rolleyes:I bet he is awesome to party with. I mean, the guy would totally go over the top to impress and show how much money and power he has.
I bet is sucks to work for him, but I bet he parties with the best of them.
I'm staying at the Trump Las Vegas right now and I can tell you all of the employees here have met him and say he's a great guy to work for. They say he's a great tipper and remembers their names. They love him. Lots of immigrants, too.
Trump LV, Woof
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on September 16, 2015, 06:34:20 PM
:rolleyes:I bet he is awesome to party with. I mean, the guy would totally go over the top to impress and show how much money and power he has.
I bet is sucks to work for him, but I bet he parties with the best of them.
I'm staying at the Trump Las Vegas right now and I can tell you all of the employees here have met him and say he's a great guy to work for. They say he's a great tipper and remembers their names. They love him. Lots of immigrants, too.
Trump LV, Woof
It's business, fellow moderate. Would rather be at the Cosmo.
Post by: MakeItRain on September 16, 2015, 07:17:11 PM
:rolleyes:I bet he is awesome to party with. I mean, the guy would totally go over the top to impress and show how much money and power he has.
I bet is sucks to work for him, but I bet he parties with the best of them.
I'm staying at the Trump Las Vegas right now and I can tell you all of the employees here have met him and say he's a great guy to work for. They say he's a great tipper and remembers their names. They love him. Lots of immigrants, too.
Trump LV, Woof
Real sweet guy
http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2015/09/donald-trump-black-employees-were-hidden
Post by: MakeItRain on September 16, 2015, 07:20:05 PM
http://deadspin.com/tom-brady-says-it-would-be-great-if-donald-trump-beco-1731177907
Post by: wetwillie on September 16, 2015, 07:20:52 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on September 16, 2015, 08:16:38 PM
:rolleyes:I bet he is awesome to party with. I mean, the guy would totally go over the top to impress and show how much money and power he has.
I bet is sucks to work for him, but I bet he parties with the best of them.
I'm staying at the Trump Las Vegas right now and I can tell you all of the employees here have met him and say he's a great guy to work for. They say he's a great tipper and remembers their names. They love him. Lots of immigrants, too.
Trump LV, Woof
Real sweet guy
http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2015/09/donald-trump-black-employees-were-hidden
Lol, I'm sure they replaced black floor cleaning people with white floor cleaning people. Or, did they simply stop normal maintenance while the owner came through?
Post by: MakeItRain on September 18, 2015, 03:31:56 AM
http://www.vox.com/2015/9/17/9349405/trump-muslims-obama-rally
Post by: ShellShock on September 18, 2015, 08:33:25 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on September 18, 2015, 08:46:40 AM
You guys, I can't wait until debates actually start talking about real issues instead of people trying to attack The Donald to raise their stake and him having to consistently defend himself. Just focus on presenting who you are instead of tearing others down. If there was a decent candidate besides Trump and Carson, it wouldn't even be a contest at this point.
I feel like that happened a lot in this last debate. :dunno: It is hard when almost every question they ask is routed through Donald first. Any idea how they will choose who the participants are in the next debate?
Post by: steve dave on September 18, 2015, 08:48:58 AM
Post by: CNS on September 18, 2015, 09:55:09 AM
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/16/how-the-tea-party-got-hijacked-by-trump-s-troll-party.html
Quote
The Troll Party’s central characteristic is an ever tightening spiral of self-reinforcing and self-referential purity tests that makes communicating with anyone beyond the febrile and furious a nearly impossible task.
Pretty perfect description
Post by: Yard Dog on September 18, 2015, 10:00:54 AM
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/16/how-the-tea-party-got-hijacked-by-trump-s-troll-party.htmlQuoteThe Troll Party’s central characteristic is an ever tightening spiral of self-reinforcing and self-referential purity tests that makes communicating with anyone beyond the febrile and furious a nearly impossible task.
Pretty perfect description
And extremely destructive. Like the author mentions, it is often frustrating to stand up for conservative ideals when you have to stand shoulder to shoulder with these extremist nitwits. The biggest downfall of the GOP was not squashing this in its infancy.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 18, 2015, 10:04:05 AM
Post by: DQ12 on September 18, 2015, 12:37:52 PM
Post by: steve dave on September 18, 2015, 12:44:28 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on September 18, 2015, 01:06:54 PM
I don't believe that Joe Biden isn't in there
I watched his interview on the Late Show with Stephen Colbert and he told a story about how he broke down in tears at an event because they mentioned his son. He doesn't think he is emotionally strong enough to support a run for president.
Post by: gatoveintisiet on September 18, 2015, 03:11:57 PM
Post by: steve dave on September 18, 2015, 03:15:05 PM
Oh dear......, looks like Donald's post debate numbers are in and his lead has increased. :lol:
:lol:
Post by: star seed 7 on September 18, 2015, 03:15:37 PM
Post by: CNS on September 18, 2015, 03:17:45 PM
Post by: renocat on September 18, 2015, 03:42:19 PM
Post by: 0.42 on September 18, 2015, 04:19:12 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on September 18, 2015, 04:22:45 PM
Post by: CNS on September 18, 2015, 04:28:44 PM
Something tells me Trump's poll numbers aren't going to translate into nearly as many votes in the primaries. But we'll see (assuming his numbers are still high when we finally get there).
Did you see my post last week. I don't remember which poll it was, but there was a poll that narrowed the pub field to Bush, Carson, and Trump and Trump got 44%.
Also, same poll ppl found that a majority of pubs had him as either their #1 or #2.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 18, 2015, 05:30:22 PM
Post by: wetwillie on September 18, 2015, 06:20:53 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on September 19, 2015, 12:53:03 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 19, 2015, 12:55:42 PM
Post by: steve dave on September 19, 2015, 01:42:27 PM
Post by: renocat on September 19, 2015, 03:05:54 PM
And here's the republican nominee. The you're fired guy who declares bankruptcy all the time. The party needs to disband and start over.Amen
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on September 20, 2015, 11:07:05 PM
And here's the republican nominee. The you're fired guy who declares bankruptcy all the time. The party needs to disband and start over.
It's refreshing to know that if you formed a corporation and it was not making enough money, you would sell your house and cars and all possessions to pay off the corporate debt rather than file chapter 11 reorganization. I want to loan you money.
Post by: MakeItRain on September 20, 2015, 11:47:04 PM
I remember Hilary making inauguration plans in early 2008.
LOL, no you don't. I volunteered for the Clinton campaign in New Hampshire in 2008 and never ever did she feel like the presumed nominee. She led early but never had a comfortable lead over John Edwards and Barack Obama. She finished third in Iowa and going into New Hampshire her candidacy looked dead in the water before she rallied by winning New Hampshire (I stopped volunteering for her campaign after Iowa) and doing fairly decent on Super Tuesday.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 23, 2015, 08:36:58 AM
Post by: steve dave on September 23, 2015, 08:46:32 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on September 23, 2015, 09:39:36 AM
And here's the republican nominee. The you're fired guy who declares bankruptcy all the time. The party needs to disband and start over.
It's refreshing to know that if you formed a corporation and it was not making enough money, you would sell your house and cars and all possessions to pay off the corporate debt rather than file chapter 11 reorganization. I want to loan you money.
You should stick to loaning money to the broke dicks who continue to run into the bankruptcy courts.
Post by: steve dave on September 23, 2015, 02:57:43 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 23, 2015, 03:01:47 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 23, 2015, 03:13:56 PM
Post by: CNS on September 23, 2015, 03:29:06 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.boingboing.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F09%2FCO5fgVJUAAA7uco.jpg&hash=4d3d13c8cd5e64065ee62f775a9477053a5ca1e1)
This isn't going to end well for her.
Post by: puniraptor on September 23, 2015, 03:33:59 PM
Caitlyn Trump
thats it
Post by: renocat on September 23, 2015, 05:58:12 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 28, 2015, 03:55:56 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/28/politics/donald-trump-tax-plan/index.html?eref=rss_latest
It is basically the same plan as Jeb Bush's, only with deeper cuts on the top brackets and corporations. This is going to help him greatly with the establishment republicans.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 28, 2015, 04:18:39 PM
Post by: bones129 on September 29, 2015, 12:17:45 AM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on September 29, 2015, 08:41:46 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 29, 2015, 08:46:41 AM
Doesn't half the country already pay an effective rate of 0%, with many of them getting credits that actually give them a negative rate? Maybe those credits will go away.
No, it's a little more than 40%. Trump and Bush want to make that number greater than 50%, which is great for pretty much anyone making less than $100,000. It's also great for those making more than $200,000 because the top bracket would get dropped substantially. The people between $100,000-$200,000 would see a cut under Bush, but deductions get capped, so it probably wouldn't be all that substantial. I'm not sure how Trump wants to handle deductions. He probably doesn't know, either.
Post by: renocat on October 13, 2015, 10:48:01 PM
Post by: bones129 on October 14, 2015, 12:36:17 AM
Trump will host SNL 11-7. It will be their best ratings.
What a coup for SNL. How about they offer him a gazillion dollars to shave his head, he accepts, and they publicize the deal in advance? It would be the highest rating ever, commercial time would sell at an all-time rate, anticipating people tuning in to see just how money hungry and shallow Donald is. And he'll walk away with a grin and a wink. True Trump.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 14, 2015, 01:35:35 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on October 14, 2015, 01:43:20 PM
I love that donald retweets this stuff.
Post by: lopakman on October 14, 2015, 03:10:35 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 14, 2015, 03:50:31 PM
Everything about this campaign is just so amazing.
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on October 14, 2015, 05:30:51 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 14, 2015, 06:00:28 PM
Post by: lopakman on October 15, 2015, 08:33:50 AM
Post by: renocat on October 17, 2015, 09:37:40 AM
Post by: steve dave on October 17, 2015, 10:51:49 AM
Post by: CNS on October 17, 2015, 10:53:29 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: star seed 7 on October 17, 2015, 12:16:01 PM
It's interesting to me to see what things finally garner negative reactions from the right. Like, Carson said he doesn't believe in evolution or gravity and nobody bats an eye. Trump says bush caused 9/11 and now we've got some raised eyebrows.
What's that have to do with being president? You liberals have such weird tests
Post by: wetwillie on October 17, 2015, 12:24:39 PM
Post by: renocat on October 18, 2015, 09:55:23 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 27, 2015, 10:39:27 AM
Post by: renocat on November 11, 2015, 05:25:00 PM
Post by: CNS on November 11, 2015, 05:43:33 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: renocat on November 12, 2015, 09:31:59 AM
Post by: renocat on November 13, 2015, 08:13:45 AM
Post by: 0.42 on November 13, 2015, 01:32:00 PM
After his tirade in Ft. Dodge IA last night, I will never vote for this nut.
You'll vote for him and like it renocat
Post by: chuckjames on November 13, 2015, 01:48:35 PM
After his tirade in Ft. Dodge IA last night, I will never vote for this nut.
I honestly don't see what the big deal is, he called out Carson for all the stupid stuff he has said.
Post by: bones129 on November 15, 2015, 12:50:37 AM
After his tirade in Ft. Dodge IA last night, I will never vote for this nut.
I honestly don't see what the big deal is, he called out Carson for all the stupid stuff he has said.
I think there was much more to it than just Don's attack on Carson, Chuck. Don was on an all over the board tirade.
Post by: Kat Kid on November 15, 2015, 11:23:56 AM
Doesn't half the country already pay an effective rate of 0%, with many of them getting credits that actually give them a negative rate? Maybe those credits will go away.
I've never seen exactly how it is calculated, because payroll taxes would be more than their income taxes, so not sure if that is all that is claimed or not.
Post by: massofcatfan on November 17, 2015, 02:23:50 PM
I have been slowlying warming to WUD until he said George II let 9/11 happen. Did Roosevelt let Pearl Harbor happen? This is big fatal mistake to me that throws ice on any support from me for Trump. Better though than MG.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8932197/Pearl-Harbour-memo-shows-US-warned-of-Japanese-attack.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8932197/Pearl-Harbour-memo-shows-US-warned-of-Japanese-attack.html) :horrorsurprise:
Post by: star seed 7 on November 17, 2015, 08:46:16 PM
https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/3soqbc/a_mosaic_of_donald_trump_made_with_500_dick_pics/?
NSFW NSFW NSFW NSFW NSFW NSFW NSFW NSFW NSFW NSFW NSFW NSFW
Post by: sys on November 17, 2015, 09:24:13 PM
Quote
I took to referring to him as a “short-fingered vulgarian” in the pages of Spy magazine. That was more than a quarter of a century ago. To this day, I receive the occasional envelope from Trump. There is always a photo of him—generally a tear sheet from a magazine. On all of them he has circled his hand in gold Sharpie in a valiant effort to highlight the length of his fingers. I almost feel sorry for the poor fellow because, to me, the fingers still look abnormally stubby. The most recent offering arrived earlier this year, before his decision to go after the Republican presidential nomination. Like the other packages, this one included a circled hand and the words, also written in gold Sharpie: “See, not so short!” I sent the picture back by return mail with a note attached, saying, “Actually, quite short.”
http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2015/10/graydon-carter-donald-trump
Post by: star seed 7 on November 20, 2015, 12:25:58 PM
Certainly knows his supporters
Post by: gatoveintisiete on November 20, 2015, 02:27:12 PM
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/trump-says-he-would-certainly-implement-muslim-database-n466716Says pissypants7
Certainly knows his supporters
Post by: star seed 7 on November 20, 2015, 02:30:44 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on November 23, 2015, 08:53:48 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on November 23, 2015, 09:08:37 AM
Post by: steve dave on November 23, 2015, 09:13:40 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/11/22/fox-news-poll-trump-gains-carson-slips-cruz-and-rubio-climb-in-gop-race.html
Post by: michigancat on November 23, 2015, 09:20:50 AM
widening his lead.I know there's a long way to go but my God this link combined with all the others
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/11/22/fox-news-poll-trump-gains-carson-slips-cruz-and-rubio-climb-in-gop-race.html
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 23, 2015, 09:21:40 AM
widening his lead.I know there's a long way to go but my God this link combined with all the others
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/11/22/fox-news-poll-trump-gains-carson-slips-cruz-and-rubio-climb-in-gop-race.html
It's demoralizing.
Post by: wetwillie on November 23, 2015, 09:22:08 AM
Post by: steve dave on November 23, 2015, 09:25:10 AM
WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE?!
Quote from: Fox News
the Tea Party, white evangelical Christians, and talk radio listeners.
Post by: star seed 7 on November 23, 2015, 09:27:42 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 23, 2015, 09:29:46 AM
I'm going with about 3%
On the other side, hillary is running away with the nomination, is a well documented liar and criminal, says idiotic crap all the time, and nobody seems to care.
I guess trump wins the relevance category by about 100 miles. Given the last two elections, that does not bode well for hillary. There's a record number of uninformed morons voting for president.
Post by: michigancat on November 23, 2015, 09:38:39 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 23, 2015, 09:08:26 PM
Hilary's not quite on Trump's level when it comes to saying stupid crap.
You have a well demonstrated perverted idea of what is and is not stupid crap, politically speaking. She does, however, possess a better vocabulary.
Post by: MakeItRain on November 24, 2015, 03:10:44 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on November 24, 2015, 03:44:15 PM
This 9/11 thing is a complete farce. Trump lies then doubles down on the lie without proving evidence :blah: Ben Carson lies then apologizes because he was confused :rolleyes: the Governor of New Jersey is afraid of Donald so he doesn't correct the lie :nono: thankfully Marco called a spade a spade and flat out said that Trump is once again lying :Woot:
I think "1000s" is a typical Trump exageration, but there is evidence that at least some in the New Jersey muslim community were seen celebrating the 9/11 attacks.
Here is a good explanation of the controversy and the evidence. http://www.steynonline.com/7313/jersey-sure (http://www.steynonline.com/7313/jersey-sure)
Post by: MakeItRain on November 24, 2015, 04:26:33 PM
This 9/11 thing is a complete farce. Trump lies then doubles down on the lie without proving evidence :blah: Ben Carson lies then apologizes because he was confused :rolleyes: the Governor of New Jersey is afraid of Donald so he doesn't correct the lie :nono: thankfully Marco called a spade a spade and flat out said that Trump is once again lying :Woot:
I think "1000s" is a typical Trump exageration, but there is evidence that at least some in the New Jersey muslim community were seen celebrating the 9/11 attacks.
Here is a good explanation of the controversy and the evidence. http://www.steynonline.com/7313/jersey-sure (http://www.steynonline.com/7313/jersey-sure)
Without getting into what muslims supposedly did or didn't do, this isn't a question of numbers but it was muslims allegedly celebrating to Trump himself seeing thousands of muslims celebrating. Not only that but if he saw this why are we just now hearing about it from him? He's been on television nearly everyday since 09/11/01 yet the first anyone heard about him seeing this is some rando political rally 14 years later? Saying that a few muslims celebrated is whatever because it can't really be proven or dispelled, Trump flat lied.
Post by: OK_Cat on November 24, 2015, 04:35:22 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on November 24, 2015, 04:44:27 PM
This 9/11 thing is a complete farce. Trump lies then doubles down on the lie without proving evidence :blah: Ben Carson lies then apologizes because he was confused :rolleyes: the Governor of New Jersey is afraid of Donald so he doesn't correct the lie :nono: thankfully Marco called a spade a spade and flat out said that Trump is once again lying :Woot:
I think "1000s" is a typical Trump exageration, but there is evidence that at least some in the New Jersey muslim community were seen celebrating the 9/11 attacks.
Here is a good explanation of the controversy and the evidence. http://www.steynonline.com/7313/jersey-sure (http://www.steynonline.com/7313/jersey-sure)
Without getting into what muslims supposedly did or didn't do, this isn't a question of numbers but it was muslims allegedly celebrating to Trump himself seeing thousands of muslims celebrating. Not only that but if he saw this why are we just now hearing about it from him? He's been on television nearly everyday since 09/11/01 yet the first anyone heard about him seeing this is some rando political rally 14 years later? Saying that a few muslims celebrated is whatever because it can't really be proven or dispelled, Trump flat lied.
I agree that he likely exaggerated, both in numbers and probably that he eye-witnessed it. I've said many times that Trump is a buffoon. But to suggest that there is no evidence - as the Washington Post "fact checker" did - of Muslims celebrating the 9/11 attacks in Jersey, is ridiculous. The Washington Post itself reported it shortly after 9/11. Other newspapers did, too.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on November 24, 2015, 05:45:47 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on November 24, 2015, 05:49:50 PM
Either way he should admit he was mistaken, and move on.
Post by: CNS on November 25, 2015, 03:11:15 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on November 26, 2015, 08:03:54 AM
Post by: CNS on November 26, 2015, 09:41:49 AM
Post by: steve dave on November 27, 2015, 10:07:19 AM
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-ecstasy-of-donald-trump/417870/
Post by: gatoveintisiete on November 27, 2015, 11:26:29 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on November 27, 2015, 12:05:31 PM
everyone quoted in this article gets a vote
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-ecstasy-of-donald-trump/417870/
How do we fix that?
Post by: steve dave on November 27, 2015, 12:09:11 PM
everyone quoted in this article gets a vote
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-ecstasy-of-donald-trump/417870/
How do we fix that?
better public education
Post by: MakeItRain on November 27, 2015, 12:25:46 PM
everyone quoted in this article gets a vote
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-ecstasy-of-donald-trump/417870/
“I’m against the anchor babies" :facepalm:
The dude is so comfortable he can stand in front of cameras and make fun of the physically handicapped. I can say without reservation at this point that anyone who supports this boob is a horrible person, worst of the worst.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on November 27, 2015, 01:13:17 PM
everyone quoted in this article gets a vote
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-ecstasy-of-donald-trump/417870/
“I’m against the anchor babies" :facepalm:
The dude is so comfortable he can stand in front of cameras and make fun of the physically handicapped. I can say without reservation at this point that anyone who supports this boob is a horrible person, worst of the worst.
Don't you want America to be great again? , especially since it sucks so bad right now?
Post by: CNS on November 27, 2015, 01:27:34 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on November 27, 2015, 01:48:19 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on November 27, 2015, 01:53:29 PM
This 9/11 thing is a complete farce. Trump lies then doubles down on the lie without proving evidence :blah: Ben Carson lies then apologizes because he was confused :rolleyes: the Governor of New Jersey is afraid of Donald so he doesn't correct the lie :nono: thankfully Marco called a spade a spade and flat out said that Trump is once again lying :Woot:
I think "1000s" is a typical Trump exageration, but there is evidence that at least some in the New Jersey muslim community were seen celebrating the 9/11 attacks.
Here is a good explanation of the controversy and the evidence. http://www.steynonline.com/7313/jersey-sure (http://www.steynonline.com/7313/jersey-sure)
Without getting into what muslims supposedly did or didn't do, this isn't a question of numbers but it was muslims allegedly celebrating to Trump himself seeing thousands of muslims celebrating. Not only that but if he saw this why are we just now hearing about it from him? He's been on television nearly everyday since 09/11/01 yet the first anyone heard about him seeing this is some rando political rally 14 years later? Saying that a few muslims celebrated is whatever because it can't really be proven or dispelled, Trump flat lied.
I agree that he likely exaggerated, both in numbers and probably that he eye-witnessed it. I've said many times that Trump is a buffoon. But to suggest that there is no evidence - as the Washington Post "fact checker" did - of Muslims celebrating the 9/11 attacks in Jersey, is ridiculous. The Washington Post itself reported it shortly after 9/11. Other newspapers did, too.
If he watched it on tv, it was televised and should be easy to locate. Otherwise, liar
Post by: gatoveintisiete on November 27, 2015, 04:15:04 PM
Cat27 is one of those blame america first people :frown:
7libs agrees that America sucks right now, not sure who to blame tho. :frown:
Post by: lopakman on November 27, 2015, 04:45:19 PM
It does however baffle me that people seriously think he'd be a good fit for president. The guy's diplomatic skills....or complete lack of would get us in WW3 by Dec 2016 which we'd lose by Jan 2017. I mean eff he'd piss so many people off Britain might invade us again.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on November 27, 2015, 05:13:35 PM
Trump is great entertainment. He speaks his mind, and doesn't worry about the pc crap. If you don't like him, don't watch him.
It does however baffle me that people seriously think he'd be a good fit for president. The guy's diplomatic skills....or complete lack of would get us in WW3 by Dec 2016 which we'd lose by Jan 2017. I mean eff he'd piss so many people off Britain might invade us again.
He says what is on his mind, which appears to be huge lies
Post by: lopakman on November 27, 2015, 05:26:18 PM
Trump is great entertainment. He speaks his mind, and doesn't worry about the pc crap. If you don't like him, don't watch him.
It does however baffle me that people seriously think he'd be a good fit for president. The guy's diplomatic skills....or complete lack of would get us in WW3 by Dec 2016 which we'd lose by Jan 2017. I mean eff he'd piss so many people off Britain might invade us again.
He says what is on his mind, which appears to be huge lies
Yep, in the one particular situation you are referring too he should have lied less obviously, like most politicians do.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on November 27, 2015, 06:08:54 PM
This 9/11 thing is a complete farce. Trump lies then doubles down on the lie without proving evidence :blah: Ben Carson lies then apologizes because he was confused :rolleyes: the Governor of New Jersey is afraid of Donald so he doesn't correct the lie :nono: thankfully Marco called a spade a spade and flat out said that Trump is once again lying :Woot:
I think "1000s" is a typical Trump exageration, but there is evidence that at least some in the New Jersey muslim community were seen celebrating the 9/11 attacks.
Here is a good explanation of the controversy and the evidence. http://www.steynonline.com/7313/jersey-sure (http://www.steynonline.com/7313/jersey-sure)
Without getting into what muslims supposedly did or didn't do, this isn't a question of numbers but it was muslims allegedly celebrating to Trump himself seeing thousands of muslims celebrating. Not only that but if he saw this why are we just now hearing about it from him? He's been on television nearly everyday since 09/11/01 yet the first anyone heard about him seeing this is some rando political rally 14 years later? Saying that a few muslims celebrated is whatever because it can't really be proven or dispelled, Trump flat lied.
I agree that he likely exaggerated, both in numbers and probably that he eye-witnessed it. I've said many times that Trump is a buffoon. But to suggest that there is no evidence - as the Washington Post "fact checker" did - of Muslims celebrating the 9/11 attacks in Jersey, is ridiculous. The Washington Post itself reported it shortly after 9/11. Other newspapers did, too.
If he watched it on tv, it was televised and should be easy to locate. Otherwise, liar
Again, I think Trump is a buffoon, so I'm not getting too wrapped up in this. I just think it's hilariou that the WaPo "fact checker" said there was "no evidence" of any NJ Muslims cheering 9/11 - when it was reported by the WaPo. :lol:
Post by: steve dave on November 27, 2015, 06:11:28 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on November 27, 2015, 08:04:24 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on November 27, 2015, 09:21:37 PM
This 9/11 thing is a complete farce. Trump lies then doubles down on the lie without proving evidence :blah: Ben Carson lies then apologizes because he was confused :rolleyes: the Governor of New Jersey is afraid of Donald so he doesn't correct the lie :nono: thankfully Marco called a spade a spade and flat out said that Trump is once again lying :Woot:
I think "1000s" is a typical Trump exageration, but there is evidence that at least some in the New Jersey muslim community were seen celebrating the 9/11 attacks.
Here is a good explanation of the controversy and the evidence. http://www.steynonline.com/7313/jersey-sure (http://www.steynonline.com/7313/jersey-sure)
Without getting into what muslims supposedly did or didn't do, this isn't a question of numbers but it was muslims allegedly celebrating to Trump himself seeing thousands of muslims celebrating. Not only that but if he saw this why are we just now hearing about it from him? He's been on television nearly everyday since 09/11/01 yet the first anyone heard about him seeing this is some rando political rally 14 years later? Saying that a few muslims celebrated is whatever because it can't really be proven or dispelled, Trump flat lied.
I agree that he likely exaggerated, both in numbers and probably that he eye-witnessed it. I've said many times that Trump is a buffoon. But to suggest that there is no evidence - as the Washington Post "fact checker" did - of Muslims celebrating the 9/11 attacks in Jersey, is ridiculous. The Washington Post itself reported it shortly after 9/11. Other newspapers did, too.
If he watched it on tv, it was televised and should be easy to locate. Otherwise, liar
Again, I think Trump is a buffoon, so I'm not getting too wrapped up in this. I just think it's hilariou that the WaPo "fact checker" said there was "no evidence" of any NJ Muslims cheering 9/11 - when it was reported by the WaPo. :lol:
Jesus, you can't be that dense. People saying they saw something isn't evidence that it happened. I saw KSUW raping a turkey, news at 10.
Post by: wetwillie on November 27, 2015, 09:26:12 PM
This 9/11 thing is a complete farce. Trump lies then doubles down on the lie without proving evidence :blah: Ben Carson lies then apologizes because he was confused :rolleyes: the Governor of New Jersey is afraid of Donald so he doesn't correct the lie :nono: thankfully Marco called a spade a spade and flat out said that Trump is once again lying :Woot:
I think "1000s" is a typical Trump exageration, but there is evidence that at least some in the New Jersey muslim community were seen celebrating the 9/11 attacks.
Here is a good explanation of the controversy and the evidence. http://www.steynonline.com/7313/jersey-sure (http://www.steynonline.com/7313/jersey-sure)
Without getting into what muslims supposedly did or didn't do, this isn't a question of numbers but it was muslims allegedly celebrating to Trump himself seeing thousands of muslims celebrating. Not only that but if he saw this why are we just now hearing about it from him? He's been on television nearly everyday since 09/11/01 yet the first anyone heard about him seeing this is some rando political rally 14 years later? Saying that a few muslims celebrated is whatever because it can't really be proven or dispelled, Trump flat lied.
I agree that he likely exaggerated, both in numbers and probably that he eye-witnessed it. I've said many times that Trump is a buffoon. But to suggest that there is no evidence - as the Washington Post "fact checker" did - of Muslims celebrating the 9/11 attacks in Jersey, is ridiculous. The Washington Post itself reported it shortly after 9/11. Other newspapers did, too.
If he watched it on tv, it was televised and should be easy to locate. Otherwise, liar
This actually might have legs.
Again, I think Trump is a buffoon, so I'm not getting too wrapped up in this. I just think it's hilariou that the WaPo "fact checker" said there was "no evidence" of any NJ Muslims cheering 9/11 - when it was reported by the WaPo. :lol:
Jesus, you can't be that dense. People saying they saw something isn't evidence that it happened. I saw KSUW raping a turkey, news at 10.
Post by: star seed 7 on November 27, 2015, 10:53:48 PM
Post by: steve dave on November 28, 2015, 06:46:12 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on November 28, 2015, 07:29:43 AM
Again, I think Trump is a buffoon, so I'm not getting too wrapped up in this. I just think it's hilarious that the WaPo "fact checker" said there was "no evidence" of any NJ Muslims cheering 9/11 - when it was reported by the WaPo. :lol:
Jesus, you can't be that dense. People saying they saw something isn't evidence that it happened. I saw KSUW raping a turkey, news at 10.
If you really don't think it was inappropriate and biased for a "fact checker" not to at least mention that these allegations were reported in several major publications, including his own, you're the one being dense.
In fact, now that the fact checker has been called out on it, he has updated his piece to do exactly that, and is now focusing on whether such protests actually occurred and how many people participated, which is a more honest inquiry.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on November 30, 2015, 04:17:07 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on December 01, 2015, 10:55:07 AM
Post by: Cire on December 01, 2015, 01:38:51 PM
Post by: CNS on December 01, 2015, 02:21:34 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on December 01, 2015, 02:29:22 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on December 01, 2015, 06:19:35 PM
Yup, a single black minister endorsed trump. Pretty significant development. :thumbs:
Did he even do that? He said he is not racist, is that what goes for an endorsement these days? South Carolina, SMDH.
Post by: star seed 7 on December 01, 2015, 06:23:27 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on December 02, 2015, 07:16:11 AM
Post by: The Big Train on December 07, 2015, 04:18:38 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F15%2F12%2F07%2F93c4a06885be8d7263e52d5a705fe0d8.jpg&hash=c91b362064b5384842ab76ed9c90096c7624e289)
Post by: CNS on December 07, 2015, 04:24:30 PM
Post by: steve dave on December 08, 2015, 06:22:48 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on December 08, 2015, 08:46:54 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on December 08, 2015, 10:49:57 AM
Post by: Dub on December 08, 2015, 12:00:16 PM
"Since I am self-funding my campaign, I don’t have to worry about being politically correct! President Obama has fought ISIS in a politically correct manner and look where it has gotten us! If we don’t talk about and address our country’s issues - we will never solve them!"
No I don't follow him. Yes, someone I know liked the status along with 26k other people in 8 minutes.
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on December 08, 2015, 12:04:28 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/27/donald-trumps-surge-is-heavily-reliant-on-less-educated-americans-heres-why/
Great headline. It could have been "Working Poor Most Affected by Illegal Immigration Support Trump", but I guess that isn't demeaning enough.
Post by: The Big Train on December 08, 2015, 12:24:10 PM
Post by: 8manpick on December 08, 2015, 01:46:48 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/27/donald-trumps-surge-is-heavily-reliant-on-less-educated-americans-heres-why/
Great headline. It could have been "Working Poor Most Affected by Illegal Immigration Support Trump", but I guess that isn't demeaning enough.
Also could have said "Trump's Surge is Heavily Reliant on Racist and Xenophobic Americans". All of them seem to be accurate. :dunno:
Post by: 8manpick on December 08, 2015, 01:48:58 PM
Post by: steve dave on December 08, 2015, 02:00:37 PM
Quote from: a real life thing the front runner for the GOP nomination said
We're losing a lot of people because of the internet. We have to see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what's happening. We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that internet up in some ways. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people.
Post by: sys on December 08, 2015, 02:02:22 PM
Post by: steve dave on December 08, 2015, 02:06:15 PM
Quote
Slowly getting a list of who would be exempt from Donald Trump's ban: Muslim world leaders, Muslim members of the US military and athletes.
Quote
On how his plan would work, Trump says: A customs agent "would say 'Are you Muslim?'" And if answer is yes, traveler would be turned away
Post by: stunted on December 08, 2015, 02:19:55 PM
Donald Trump is rich George Zimmerman
:love:
2 alpha as eff peas in a pod
Post by: 0.42 on December 08, 2015, 02:25:33 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on December 08, 2015, 04:33:28 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/27/donald-trumps-surge-is-heavily-reliant-on-less-educated-americans-heres-why/
Great headline. It could have been "Working Poor Most Affected by Illegal Immigration Support Trump", but I guess that isn't demeaning enough.
What working poor people are affected by illegal immigration and how?
Post by: sys on December 08, 2015, 04:51:15 PM
What working poor people are affected by illegal immigration and how?
pretty much any poor person that want to work. by competition for jobs.
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on December 08, 2015, 05:08:25 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/27/donald-trumps-surge-is-heavily-reliant-on-less-educated-americans-heres-why/
Great headline. It could have been "Working Poor Most Affected by Illegal Immigration Support Trump", but I guess that isn't demeaning enough.
What working poor people are affected by illegal immigration and how?
What sys said. Are you under the assumption that illegal immigrants don't/can't work because it's illegal?
Post by: ednksu on December 08, 2015, 05:12:02 PM
Donald Trump is rich George ZimmermanGeorge Zimmerman is a fat eff racist who lucked into 15 minutes of bloody fame. Trump is something far worse, harkening to a streak of American fascism we've had for decades.
Post by: treysolid on December 08, 2015, 05:36:04 PM
I'll just leave this here...
http://digg.com/video/darth-trump-vader (http://digg.com/video/darth-trump-vader)
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on December 08, 2015, 09:52:36 PM
http://www.wsj.com/articles/new-york-city-officials-to-hold-anti-trump-rally-1449606639?mod=e2tw
Possibly worse, because they are elected. You can't stop the Donald from running for president.
Regardless, what a collection a buffoons.
Post by: MakeItRain on December 08, 2015, 09:56:18 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/27/donald-trumps-surge-is-heavily-reliant-on-less-educated-americans-heres-why/
Great headline. It could have been "Working Poor Most Affected by Illegal Immigration Support Trump", but I guess that isn't demeaning enough.
What working poor people are affected by illegal immigration and how?
What sys said. Are you under the assumption that illegal immigrants don't/can't work because it's illegal?
No you're both right but those jobs that illegals take can certainly be had by anyone who wants them. I've seen countless stories from harvesters in California that feel they have to use illegals to do their work because others won't. I know the work that illegals do in rural Kansas and I know for a fact those jobs are available to people who want to do that. It's much easier to get government assistance than to do back breaking work for a penance of what you can get by not doing that job while seeking out something more reliable.
If you're willing to pick fruit, clean toilets, or gut cows you will have absolutely no problem finding work in this country, none.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on December 08, 2015, 09:58:08 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/27/donald-trumps-surge-is-heavily-reliant-on-less-educated-americans-heres-why/
Great headline. It could have been "Working Poor Most Affected by Illegal Immigration Support Trump", but I guess that isn't demeaning enough.
What working poor people are affected by illegal immigration and how?
All of them, because math
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on December 08, 2015, 11:39:45 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/27/donald-trumps-surge-is-heavily-reliant-on-less-educated-americans-heres-why/
Great headline. It could have been "Working Poor Most Affected by Illegal Immigration Support Trump", but I guess that isn't demeaning enough.
What working poor people are affected by illegal immigration and how?
What sys said. Are you under the assumption that illegal immigrants don't/can't work because it's illegal?
No you're both right but those jobs that illegals take can certainly be had by anyone who wants them. I've seen countless stories from harvesters in California that feel they have to use illegals to do their work because others won't. I know the work that illegals do in rural Kansas and I know for a fact those jobs are available to people who want to do that. It's much easier to get government assistance than to do back breaking work for a penance of what you can get by not doing that job while seeking out something more reliable.
If you're willing to pick fruit, clean toilets, or gut cows you will have absolutely no problem finding work in this country, none.
All of those jobs once paid enough to support a family.
Post by: sys on December 08, 2015, 11:47:46 PM
No you're both right but those jobs that illegals take can certainly be had by anyone who wants them. I've seen countless stories from harvesters in California that feel they have to use illegals to do their work because others won't. I know the work that illegals do in rural Kansas and I know for a fact those jobs are available to people who want to do that. It's much easier to get government assistance than to do back breaking work for a penance of what you can get by not doing that job while seeking out something more reliable.
If you're willing to pick fruit, clean toilets, or gut cows you will have absolutely no problem finding work in this country, none.
excess labor drives wages down.
Post by: chuckjames on December 09, 2015, 12:09:38 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/27/donald-trumps-surge-is-heavily-reliant-on-less-educated-americans-heres-why/
Great headline. It could have been "Working Poor Most Affected by Illegal Immigration Support Trump", but I guess that isn't demeaning enough.
Also could have said "Trump's Surge is Heavily Reliant on Racist and Xenophobic Americans". All of them seem to be accurate. :dunno:
Or Trump's Surge reliant on people who take from the government but aren't smart enough to realize that.
Post by: steve dave on December 09, 2015, 01:30:47 PM
A new poll indicates that 68% of my supporters would vote for me if I departed the GOP & ran as an independent. https://t.co/ztP5d2ctZl
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 8, 2015
Post by: CNS on December 09, 2015, 01:31:12 PM
Post by: steve dave on December 09, 2015, 01:33:24 PM
He def has the pubs by the balls for now.
yep. party needs to split, and the longer they wait the more by the balls he has them. a center-right party won't win this year, but it's really the only hope a moderate conservative has long term.
Post by: steve dave on December 09, 2015, 01:35:02 PM
— Jeb Bush (@JebBush) December 8, 2015
probably too late Jeb
Post by: sys on December 09, 2015, 01:35:11 PM
Post by: steve dave on December 09, 2015, 01:37:09 PM
anything that provides hope of killing the two party system is a good thing. go trump.
yeah, I agree at this point
Post by: CNS on December 09, 2015, 02:38:20 PM
anything that provides hope of killing the two party system is a good thing. go trump.
yeah, I agree at this point
Of all the people who could inspire a relevant third party, society may choose the Donald. :Ugh:
The leader we need, not the leader we want.
Post by: chuckjames on December 09, 2015, 05:13:10 PM
Post by: michigancat on December 09, 2015, 05:25:08 PM
anything that provides hope of killing the two party system is a good thing. go trump.
yeah, I agree at this point
trump has no hope of killing a two party system tho
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on December 09, 2015, 06:39:32 PM
What would the trump party be called?
The wigs
Post by: MixBerryCrunch on December 09, 2015, 06:55:06 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on December 09, 2015, 07:07:20 PM
I'm bored and flipping between the three major cable news stations and it's pretty obvious Fox and the Republican brass hate the crap out of Trump. Did not know that.
We landed on the moon?!?
Post by: MixBerryCrunch on December 09, 2015, 07:16:24 PM
I'm bored and flipping between the three major cable news stations and it's pretty obvious Fox and the Republican brass hate the crap out of Trump. Did not know that.
We landed on the moon?!?
Indeed. Multiple times. And that is a great movie.
Post by: MakeItRain on December 09, 2015, 08:51:30 PM
Post by: CNS on December 09, 2015, 08:54:32 PM
What would the trump party be called?Really Important People Party. It would be amazing.
Post by: Institutional Control on December 09, 2015, 09:17:54 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: sonofdaxjones on December 10, 2015, 07:03:52 AM
Trump has to be a Clinton plant.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on December 10, 2015, 08:09:16 AM
http://www.dailynewsbin.com/news/bob-dole-slams-donald-trump-says-president-obama-is-a-very-good-man/23192/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Those comments! :lol:
Post by: OK_Cat on December 10, 2015, 08:34:00 AM
I hope the Clinton campaign is sending huge love over to Trump for making everyone, well, excluding DemLemmings, forget what a total disaster and pathological liar she is.
Trump has to be a Clinton plant.
Saying that Trump is a plant is just hiding the fact that there are a lot of registered republicans who are super racist and trashy. Hopefully the rest of you will stop the madness at election time
Post by: sonofdaxjones on December 10, 2015, 09:05:53 AM
Post by: CHONGS on December 10, 2015, 09:12:47 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on December 10, 2015, 09:14:31 AM
They asked them if they support Trump's anti-muslim policy and they said yes. Then when they were told world leaders are looking down on the US because of it and that it might give us trouble with our allies none of them changed their minds on supporting it. These people are blind followers no matter what he says. :facepalm:
Interesting article that is a little more "kind" as to why Trump is so popular:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/15/i-asked-psychologists-to-analyze-trump-supporters-this-is-what-i-learned/
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on December 10, 2015, 09:15:12 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on December 10, 2015, 11:21:29 AM
Post by: sys on December 10, 2015, 11:44:28 AM
Trump rarely attacks the total failure that is Hillary Clinton.
she went to his wedding.
Post by: Institutional Control on December 12, 2015, 12:03:22 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F15%2F12%2F12%2Fefc379643d45bdc2392610f74047d62d.jpg&hash=57c950bf5302cfbd7053a85c788ef39d3d14a67f)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on December 12, 2015, 12:13:19 PM
Post by: steve dave on December 12, 2015, 12:16:45 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on December 14, 2015, 10:06:53 AM
I'm not going to lie, I'm much more interested and entertained by Trump than the Cruz/Sanders of the world.
On your personal scale of what a president should be / how he should act / how he can be an effective leader, how important is entertainment value?
Post by: Dugout DickStone on December 14, 2015, 10:09:16 AM
I'm not going to lie, I'm much more interested and entertained by Trump than the Cruz/Sanders of the world.
On your personal scale of what a president should be / how he should act / how he can be an effective leader, how important is entertainment value?
trump had better hope it is 99%
Post by: steve dave on December 14, 2015, 12:32:00 PM
I'm not going to lie, I'm much more interested and entertained by Trump than the Cruz/Sanders of the world.
On your personal scale of what a president should be / how he should act / how he can be an effective leader, how important is entertainment value?
Zero, but that has nothing to do with who I'd put on my television station if I was a for profit broadcaster
Post by: Dub on December 14, 2015, 12:42:47 PM
This thing actually going to happen? :facepalm:
Post by: stunted on December 16, 2015, 01:25:20 PM
Post by: Cire on December 16, 2015, 01:43:47 PM
Post by: steve dave on December 16, 2015, 01:49:30 PM
people are saying "eff it, these other guys are all the exact same I'm voting for the Donald"
I think that is the case a lot. Also a lot of the right is more concerned with who makes the left mad/offended/etc than what is actually good for them and their country. A generic candidate could say "eff Muslim obama" during a public debate and instantly get a 10% share of the GOP vote. That may actually be a conservative %.
Post by: CNS on December 17, 2015, 09:09:53 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on December 17, 2015, 09:25:59 AM
Post by: steve dave on December 18, 2015, 12:03:35 PM
http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/263713-poll-30-percent-of-republicans-want-to-bomb-country-from
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a40618/ppp-poll-republicans/
Post by: renocat on December 18, 2015, 12:08:58 PM
Post by: CNS on December 18, 2015, 01:24:12 PM
Post by: OK_Cat on December 18, 2015, 04:55:55 PM
HAHAHHAHAHAHA
http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/263713-poll-30-percent-of-republicans-want-to-bomb-country-from
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a40618/ppp-poll-republicans/
'I just don't understand why trump is leading. How could that happen?'
Post by: wetwillie on December 18, 2015, 06:06:23 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 12, 2016, 08:35:07 AM
ps I like to think of this :billdance: as The Donald.
Post by: CNS on January 12, 2016, 10:34:20 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 12, 2016, 05:16:51 PM
America is pretty great right now.Hur hur hur..... :cheers:
Post by: star seed 7 on January 12, 2016, 05:28:27 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 12, 2016, 05:44:19 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on January 12, 2016, 05:51:07 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 12, 2016, 05:56:35 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on January 12, 2016, 05:58:35 PM
Mainly the end or catch the "highlights".
On infowars?
Post by: sonofdaxjones on January 12, 2016, 06:00:39 PM
Mainly the end or catch the "highlights".
On infowars?
Nope, Rachel Maddow.
Post by: star seed 7 on January 12, 2016, 06:07:44 PM
Post by: steve dave on January 15, 2016, 08:32:06 AM
Quote
And certainly what Barack Obama was doing with the executive order—he doesn’t want to get people together! You know? The old-fashioned way where you get Congress.... You get the Congres, you get the Senate. You get together. You do legislation. He just writes out an executive order. Not supposed to happen that way.
Post by: Tobias on January 15, 2016, 08:33:23 AM
Post by: Tobias on January 15, 2016, 08:33:52 AM
Post by: steve dave on January 15, 2016, 08:35:09 AM
Post by: Asteriskhead on January 15, 2016, 08:35:23 AM
it's like when charlie day goes all country lawyer
:love:
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on January 15, 2016, 08:36:04 AM
it's like when charlie day goes all country lawyer
This makes me want to see it now.
Post by: steve dave on January 15, 2016, 08:38:56 AM
it's like when charlie day goes all country lawyer
tobias just painted a brain mural of exactly what it was like
Post by: chuckjames on January 15, 2016, 02:08:54 PM
:'bye cruel world:
Post by: steve dave on January 15, 2016, 02:40:26 PM
Trump now leads in the betting markets. http://predictwise.com/
:'bye cruel world:
woof
Post by: steve dave on January 18, 2016, 03:17:02 PM
Quote
We’re going to get Apple to build their damn computers in this country instead of other countries.
:love:
Post by: Tobias on January 18, 2016, 03:40:31 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 18, 2016, 10:00:18 PM
QuoteWe’re going to get Apple to build their damn computers in this country instead of other countries.
:love:
How much will iPads cost, $3000, maybe $4000?
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on January 18, 2016, 10:02:07 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 19, 2016, 11:23:24 AM
Post by: sys on January 19, 2016, 12:17:40 PM
Post by: steve dave on January 19, 2016, 12:18:17 PM
i'm starting to acknowledge that there is a real possibility that he could win. what an amazing thing.
it is amazingly amazing
Post by: DQ12 on January 19, 2016, 12:25:33 PM
If it's Bernie v. Donald then watch out.
Post by: wetwillie on January 19, 2016, 12:32:42 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on January 19, 2016, 12:34:27 PM
I don't think he can win against Hillary. I think he can win against Bernie.
If it's Bernie v. Donald then watch out.
Why in the world would you think that? The reason that Bernie is smashing him in polling is that Bernie expands the democratic electorate and Trump contracts the republican electorate.
Post by: DQ12 on January 19, 2016, 12:36:28 PM
I think Bernie is just about the only candidate that is less centrist than Donny T. I have no data to back that up other than my own opinion.I don't think he can win against Hillary. I think he can win against Bernie.
If it's Bernie v. Donald then watch out.
Why in the world would you think that? The reason that Bernie is smashing him in polling is that Bernie expands the democratic electorate and Trump contracts the republican electorate.
Post by: sys on January 19, 2016, 12:49:18 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on January 19, 2016, 01:06:57 PM
I think Bernie is just about the only candidate that is less centrist than Donny T. I have no data to back that up other than my own opinion.I don't think he can win against Hillary. I think he can win against Bernie.
If it's Bernie v. Donald then watch out.
Why in the world would you think that? The reason that Bernie is smashing him in polling is that Bernie expands the democratic electorate and Trump contracts the republican electorate.
You're right about that, but democrats really like that about Bernie, it's endearing and he's very popular with Democrats. His issue now is that the party thinks Hillary is more electable, it's the exact same issue Obama faced in '08. Trump is a divisive figure that even has large segments of his party repulsed. I still don't think there is any way he wins the nomination, I just don't see the path. Rubio, Christie, and Jeb will dominate the big blue states; Cruz will do well in heavily evangelical states. I just don't see where Donald fits in. Also bear in mind that the deeper we get into this process the heavier issues come in to play, when it comes to policy and where you stand on issues he is dead in the water.
Post by: ChiComCat on January 19, 2016, 01:12:51 PM
I honestly think Trump supporters don't fully know the difference between reality TV and an election.
Post by: cfbandyman on January 19, 2016, 01:18:26 PM
If it ends up being Hillary v Trump, the US will be divided beyond repair.
I honestly think Trump supporters don't fully know the difference between reality TV and an election.
I don't think they realize their own reality vs. what they think they see of themselves. It takes a pretty screwed up perception vs. reality to even consider the Donald.
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 19, 2016, 05:34:51 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on January 19, 2016, 05:50:10 PM
Post by: CNS on January 19, 2016, 07:30:46 PM
Post by: cfbandyman on January 19, 2016, 08:29:32 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 19, 2016, 09:54:27 PM
Well, you got JD at your service CNS
I'm just listening to what his supporters say.
Post by: MakeItRain on January 19, 2016, 10:22:57 PM
You guys don't realize what Obama has done to the perception of the presidency. It really makes no difference how delusional and unprepared the president is when elected, as long as they are more on your side as the other. Trump can absolutely win against Hillary or Bernie. I think Bernie has a better shot than Hillary, simply because she is a known remarkable liar. Trump and Bernie are at least perceived as truthful and genuine, whether they are or not.
Wow.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on January 19, 2016, 10:45:50 PM
You guys don't realize what Obama has done to the perception of the presidency. It really makes no difference how delusional and unprepared the president is when elected, as long as they are more on your side as the other. Trump can absolutely win against Hillary or Bernie. I think Bernie has a better shot than Hillary, simply because she is a known remarkable liar. Trump and Bernie are at least perceived as truthful and genuine, whether they are or not.
This is a pretty solid point, whether or not the libtards like it. Obama's 2008 campaign promises were equally as Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) as trumps. His rough ridin' campaign slogan was hope and change, for gawdsake
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 24, 2016, 11:08:14 AM
Post by: Institutional Control on January 25, 2016, 09:13:14 AM
Trump is polling really well with blacks and Hispanics, it's conceivable that after two successful Trump terms the Democrats could be the party of angry white men. :lol:
link please.
Post by: steve dave on January 25, 2016, 09:22:10 AM
Post by: CNS on January 25, 2016, 09:31:24 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on January 25, 2016, 11:01:02 AM
Post by: Emo EMAW on January 25, 2016, 11:43:32 AM
Who perceives trump as truthful and genuine? We need to identify those ppl and do a medical study on them.
Who perceives any of the candidates as truthful and genuine?
Post by: cfbandyman on January 25, 2016, 11:48:31 AM
I've fully relegated myself to the fact Donald is going to be president. This is scary and I blame Obama and, to a lesser extent, the current state of the two party system for a buffoon like Trump appearing like a credible candidate to the unwashed masses.
:lol: I bet you blame Obama for your wife cheating on you too.
Post by: CNS on January 25, 2016, 11:53:32 AM
Who perceives trump as truthful and genuine? We need to identify those ppl and do a medical study on them.
Who perceives any of the candidates as truthful and genuine?
JD mentioned that ppl perceived trump as such.
Post by: steve dave on January 25, 2016, 12:22:13 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 25, 2016, 12:44:07 PM
Who perceives trump as truthful and genuine? We need to identify those ppl and do a medical study on them.
Who perceives any of the candidates as truthful and genuine?
JD mentioned that ppl perceived trump as such.
Yes, as I said, his supporters do.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/23/politics/why-voters-support-donald-trump/ (http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/23/politics/why-voters-support-donald-trump/)
Quote
"He says what he means"
While many politicians master the art of communicating with the public early on -- what to say, what not to say, how not to say it and how to stay on message -- Trump seems to have chucked the politician's handbook.
But Trump, who announced his presidential bid without a prompter and without reading off a script, does not seem concerned with nuanced delivery. Some, like former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, have called his approach "a barking carnival act" and "a toxic mix of demagoguery, mean-spiritedness and nonsense," but others say it's refreshing.
"He says what he means. I honestly believe he's telling the truth," Susan DeLemus said, echoing a sentiment shared by all six supporters.
Trump himself, though, told CNN's Anderson Cooper in an interview Thursday that if he were to become president, he would change his tone.
When Camerota asked the group whether Trump's tone is presidential, Johnson said "Well, what's presidential anymore?"
"I mean we have a president sitting in the white house right now. He's taking so many vacations its costing the tax payers dollars," Johnson said. "What has he done for America?"
Trump, Johnson said, "will take us above that" and make "America the way we once were."
Post by: Ptolemy on January 25, 2016, 12:59:06 PM
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/538-cruz-clinton-trump-sanders-rubio-217901
If that happens, Trump may actually shoot his voters.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 25, 2016, 01:12:15 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 25, 2016, 02:04:54 PM
Trump supporters perceive him as truthful and genuine because he speaks at a 4th grade reading level.
Yes, this is a plus. He is picking up a lot of democrat voters.
Post by: MakeItRain on January 25, 2016, 02:37:31 PM
Trump is polling really well with blacks and Hispanics, it's conceivable that after two successful Trump terms the Democrats could be the party of angry white men. :lol:
Trump supporters perceive him as truthful and genuine because he speaks at a 4th grade reading level.
Yes, this is a plus. He is picking up a lot of democrat voters.
:ROFL: you guys, lol
Post by: Yard Dog on January 25, 2016, 02:56:54 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on January 25, 2016, 04:20:49 PM
They actually talked this morning on NPR about how a lot of people who are stumping for Trump were white middle class workers who were formerly democrats.
:lol: yeah, I bet
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on January 25, 2016, 08:51:06 PM
They actually talked this morning on NPR about how a lot of people who are stumping for Trump were white middle class workers who were formerly democrats.
Trump is a blue dog Democrat's wet dream, issue by issue.
Post by: OK_Cat on January 25, 2016, 08:53:27 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on January 25, 2016, 09:05:40 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on January 25, 2016, 09:09:32 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on January 27, 2016, 03:29:15 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 27, 2016, 07:31:11 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on January 27, 2016, 10:56:39 AM
I read this morning that this is like a consensus first pick missing the combine. It can't help him, but it might hurt him.
Post by: ChiComCat on January 27, 2016, 11:00:48 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on January 27, 2016, 11:02:51 AM
Fox should show Trump's live tweets during the debate
He should be too busy to tweet with his competing function raising money for the wounded warriors project.
Post by: renocat on January 27, 2016, 11:02:58 AM
Post by: CNS on January 27, 2016, 11:07:18 AM
Post by: CNS on January 27, 2016, 11:12:05 AM
Trump is showing everyone that he doesn't need the Republican Party or Fox News. If his numbers don't drop, he will have successfully made both his bitch.
Donald is really silverbacking this election cycle
It would be proving a point. I would imagine he is wanting to crush any thought of the party pushing for cruz or someone else.
Post by: star seed 7 on January 27, 2016, 11:13:00 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on January 27, 2016, 11:21:44 AM
The party wants cruz less than trump
But this isn't a two candidate race. The party doesn't want either of them.
Post by: Cire on January 27, 2016, 11:40:36 AM
Post by: Emo EMAW on January 27, 2016, 11:45:30 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on January 27, 2016, 03:12:29 PM
He's getting more publicity for not doing it than he would have by doing it. That's all.
And he is avoiding anyone who saved solid shots at him for the final debate. I do think he will look weaker when he is attacked because they cant pan to him and show his reaction. So when people say things that are actually bad about Trump you won't be distracted by his goofy face going "Only Donald! What a rascal!"
Post by: ShellShock on January 28, 2016, 09:07:18 AM
Now the piece of crap has dipped out of the debate using Megyn Kelly as an excuse for him not wanting to be exposed. Of course CalculaTED never one to let someone out grandstand him challenges Donald to a one-on-one debate. I am getting so close to registering as a Republican to do my part to keep these idiots as far away from Washington as possible. As gross as the possibility is, I'd rather have 4 more years of Marco W. Rodham Obama than a second of Donald or Rafael.
I'm assuming that you live in KS, so whether you switch or not, your vote really doesn't matter. KS is and always has been a red state and will always continue to be a red state probably for out entire lives. With that being said, if The Donald is the Republican candidate, you bet your ass that all 6 of KS's votes will be for him. At this point, there's no way that the Republican nomination isn't Donald...the other Republican candidates just don't know what the hell they're doing or how to successfully run a true presidential campaign.
Post by: DQ12 on January 28, 2016, 09:08:33 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on January 28, 2016, 09:09:48 AM
More please :crossfingers:
Post by: steve dave on January 28, 2016, 09:39:19 AM
Now the piece of crap has dipped out of the debate using Megyn Kelly as an excuse for him not wanting to be exposed. Of course CalculaTED never one to let someone out grandstand him challenges Donald to a one-on-one debate. I am getting so close to registering as a Republican to do my part to keep these idiots as far away from Washington as possible. As gross as the possibility is, I'd rather have 4 more years of Marco W. Rodham Obama than a second of Donald or Rafael.
I'm assuming that you live in KS, so whether you switch or not, your vote really doesn't matter. KS is and always has been a red state and will always continue to be a red state probably for out entire lives. With that being said, if The Donald is the Republican candidate, you bet your ass that all 6 of KS's votes will be for him. At this point, there's no way that the Republican nomination isn't Donald...the other Republican candidates just don't know what the hell they're doing or how to successfully run a true presidential campaign.
:lol:
Post by: mocat on January 28, 2016, 12:10:19 PM
Post by: ShellShock on January 28, 2016, 03:49:52 PM
Post by: mocat on January 28, 2016, 03:50:52 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on January 28, 2016, 04:13:02 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 28, 2016, 07:33:07 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on January 28, 2016, 08:43:08 PM
Post by: renocat on January 28, 2016, 09:26:13 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on January 29, 2016, 08:18:59 AM
How is the debate coward doing tonight?
I: cant believe he let Santorum and Huckabee come hang out.
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 29, 2016, 08:37:03 AM
Post by: ShellShock on January 29, 2016, 09:35:10 AM
shellshock if you could put into words what exactly you think people are laughing at, that would be great. tia
There's still a large group of people across this nation that truly don't believe that he's going to be the Republican nominee. They keep brushing it off like, "Oh, well once the votes start coming in, he'll go away." The people in denial are the ones laughing it off that won't be in a couple months.
Post by: star seed 7 on January 29, 2016, 09:37:12 AM
shellshock if you could put into words what exactly you think people are laughing at, that would be great. tia
Genius :D
Post by: Yard Dog on January 29, 2016, 10:26:23 AM
shellshock if you could put into words what exactly you think people are laughing at, that would be great. tia
There's still a large group of people across this nation that truly don't believe that he's going to be the Republican nominee. They keep brushing it off like, "Oh, well once the votes start coming in, he'll go away." The people in denial are the ones laughing it off that won't be in a couple months.
I think the idea is that he won't win a majority of delegates to the RNC convention. If this is the case, and no one else has a clear majority, a lot of people are speculating there might be a brokered convention allowing his delegates to switch to other teams.
It is also logical to note that as the bottom six start wearing down to one or two that his lead will shrink and/or disappear.
Post by: ShellShock on January 29, 2016, 04:07:49 PM
shellshock if you could put into words what exactly you think people are laughing at, that would be great. tia
There's still a large group of people across this nation that truly don't believe that he's going to be the Republican nominee. They keep brushing it off like, "Oh, well once the votes start coming in, he'll go away." The people in denial are the ones laughing it off that won't be in a couple months.
I think the idea is that he won't win a majority of delegates to the RNC convention. If this is the case, and no one else has a clear majority, a lot of people are speculating there might be a brokered convention allowing his delegates to switch to other teams.
It is also logical to note that as the bottom six start wearing down to one or two that his lead will shrink and/or disappear.
Quality post here! I think that this spring will be very, very interesting for the Republican Party.
Post by: Yard Dog on January 31, 2016, 06:41:15 PM
http://youtu.be/WpKiP_gmDS8
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: steve dave on February 01, 2016, 08:17:48 AM
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on February 01, 2016, 08:19:12 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 01, 2016, 08:46:38 AM
Post by: mocat on February 01, 2016, 09:04:43 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 01, 2016, 09:08:22 AM
It's more concerning to me that Cruz is in second than it is that Trump is winning. If Rubio were in second, at least I would be able to tell myself that Trump is only winning because all of the more reasonable candidates are splitting votes.
I agree. Like, the Republicans who aren't voting trump aren't voting for him because he's not enough of a conservative bad person for them. They need maximum conservative bad person, it's very interesting
Post by: mocat on February 01, 2016, 09:23:34 AM
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on February 01, 2016, 09:27:34 AM
Post by: SdK on February 01, 2016, 09:36:43 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJfH9O0w1WYReally? Wow.
Post by: MakeItRain on February 01, 2016, 09:52:57 AM
Post by: Dub on February 01, 2016, 10:21:42 AM
Quote
Since 1972, the Iowa caucuses have had a 43% success rate at predicting which Democratic candidate for president and a 50% success rate at predicting which Republican candidate for president will go on to win the nomination of their political party at that party's national convention
Post by: Dub on February 01, 2016, 10:26:11 AM
Only downfall is that he may actually win and start WWIII among other things.
Post by: Emo EMAW on February 01, 2016, 10:31:20 AM
Like I don't think Trump is as religious as he maybe is pretending to be. And if you subtract out the religion stuff from the recent/traditional Republican stance that's probably where I am.
Post by: IPA4Me on February 01, 2016, 10:41:58 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 06, 2016, 08:31:16 AM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi0.wp.com%2Fwww.powerlineblog.com%2Fed-assets%2F2016%2F02%2FTrump-Nope.jpg&hash=ad09eb6af8e092a89230c4dd5145ef468896cf06)
Post by: mocat on February 09, 2016, 08:48:11 AM
2) he irl called Cruz a "pussy"
Post by: gatoveintisiete on February 09, 2016, 09:12:21 PM
Post by: wetwillie on February 09, 2016, 09:19:57 PM
1) that nope poster is amazing
2) he irl called Cruz a "pussy"
Can you link the video of him calling Ted Cruz a pussy?
Post by: mocat on February 09, 2016, 09:22:24 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on February 09, 2016, 09:28:20 PM
Post by: mocat on February 09, 2016, 09:30:09 PM
Post by: wetwillie on February 09, 2016, 09:38:30 PM
Post by: mocat on February 09, 2016, 09:45:23 PM
Post by: bones129 on February 10, 2016, 12:44:12 AM
Post by: chum1 on February 10, 2016, 06:13:29 AM
Post by: Cire on February 10, 2016, 06:21:40 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: wetwillie on February 10, 2016, 06:22:51 AM
Post by: Emo EMAW on February 10, 2016, 08:33:38 AM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on February 10, 2016, 08:49:37 AM
I guess we're going to build a wall.
No, the Mexicans are building a wall.
This is how he gets out of actually doing it.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 10, 2016, 08:51:54 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 10, 2016, 09:28:35 AM
Post by: CNS on February 10, 2016, 09:35:14 AM
I thought we were building the wall, but Mexico was going to pay for it? Or maybe it's the Chinese.Yep, it's this, except the China part. We are tearing up the TPP but making China pay for the shredding service.
Post by: ShellShock on February 10, 2016, 09:57:14 AM
Nobody is actually crazy enough to elect Bernie the socialist in the general election.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 10, 2016, 10:05:28 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on February 10, 2016, 10:19:12 AM
Post by: CNS on February 10, 2016, 11:39:51 AM
Post by: sys on February 10, 2016, 11:45:27 AM
i can't even call clinton a guaranteed loser anymore. everyone running looks like a guaranteed loser, but someone has to win.
Post by: CNS on February 10, 2016, 11:54:27 AM
not sure that's true. i think he's looking at the candidates to see how much moderate/establishment space there is between them for him to occupy. would def. run against trump/sanders. would definitely sit it out against bush/clinton. hard decisions if there's one outsider candidate and one establishment candidate.
i can't even call clinton a guaranteed loser anymore. everyone running looks like a guaranteed loser, but someone has to win.
Bold part is such a sadly true thing. I really hate it.
As for Bloomberg, I think that is fair. He should get in no matter who is still standing between Bernie and Hill. Dan Carlin's latest podcast put it pretty well, imo, Bernie isn't doing well because of his stance(not fully anyway), but because Hillary is such a bad choice for most of the moderates. I agree with that. He went on to say that if there was another woman in the election that wasn't slimy seeming, that she would be smoking Hill. I agree with that too. I don't think that other candidate has to be a woman. I think I could be Bloomberg. Someone who doesn't have the "socialist" tag on them and someone who isn't a slimeball with a huge issue in getting voters to trust them. The good thing for him is that he doesn't need to rush. He could step in at the last legally allowed moment and do pretty well, I bet.
Post by: sys on February 10, 2016, 12:00:38 PM
Post by: ShellShock on February 10, 2016, 02:32:37 PM
The instant Bernie is out, Bloomie is in. Hill is a guarantee loser at this point, imo.
Both Bernie and Hill are guaranteed losers. I could see Bloomie making a fairly strong run as an independent.
Post by: Emo EMAW on February 11, 2016, 03:01:53 PM
Post by: CNS on February 11, 2016, 03:43:10 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on February 11, 2016, 03:46:14 PM
Post by: catastrophe on February 11, 2016, 04:37:00 PM
Would practically guarantee a Clinton presidency tho. :frown:
Post by: Yard Dog on February 11, 2016, 04:43:06 PM
I'm not sure I'd prefer any of them to be prez, but I think the ideal for debates would be Hillary vs Bush with Trump as independent. Trump would destroy Hillary (or at least get a really great sound byte / reaction) and the Bush/Trump exchanges would be mildly entertaining as well.
Would practically guarantee a Clinton presidency tho. :frown:
If we're talking pure comedy gold I think you want a Bernie, Trump, Jeb stage. I am imagining Bernie calling Jeb low energy, Bush calling Bernie a white haired ninny muggins, and Trump just watching making one of his six default facial expressions.
Post by: catastrophe on February 11, 2016, 04:51:24 PM
I'm not sure I'd prefer any of them to be prez, but I think the ideal for debates would be Hillary vs Bush with Trump as independent. Trump would destroy Hillary (or at least get a really great sound byte / reaction) and the Bush/Trump exchanges would be mildly entertaining as well.
Would practically guarantee a Clinton presidency tho. :frown:
If we're talking pure comedy gold I think you want a Bernie, Trump, Jeb stage. I am imagining Bernie calling Jeb low energy, Bush calling Bernie a white haired ninny muggins, and Trump just watching making one of his six default facial expressions.
I don't think you appreciate how great Trump is with women.
Edit: in a Trump/Clinton debate you can expect at least one bathroom joke.
Post by: star seed 7 on February 11, 2016, 04:56:25 PM
Post by: wetwillie on February 11, 2016, 05:00:04 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on February 12, 2016, 08:38:56 AM
Trump called Jeb low energy not Bernie
Exactly. That's why I think it would be hilarious for Bernie to pick up the standard and reinforce an already existing "doubt inducer" in the american voter's mind. Not to mention that Jeb can't make it through one thought with out stumbling over his words somewhere. Better yet, if you did a drinking game where you drank every time a word was mispronounced in a debate involving Bernie and Trump you'd be wasted 20 minutes in.
Post by: Yard Dog on February 12, 2016, 09:17:12 AM
http://www.youngcons.com/donald-trump-puts-blame-for-gop-betrayals-on-conservatives/
Quote
Shapiro is a rather sharp dude, and I think he’s on to something here.
I believe it’s critical for conservatives to stop equating “being angry, loud, and obnoxious,” with “being conservative.”
Anyone can be a loud, brash, Type-A personality. That’s not limited to the realm of politics or conservatism.
We need to be going after candidates who actually stand on principle, who know the Constitution, or at the very least, are able to articulate the conservative position on issues and why they agree or disagree.
Post by: catastrophe on February 12, 2016, 09:26:38 AM
Post by: chuckjames on February 12, 2016, 10:10:52 AM
Our guy is out here just crushing the "true conservatives".
Post by: chuckjames on February 12, 2016, 10:15:07 AM
No surprise here. Trump isn't really a conservative.
http://www.youngcons.com/donald-trump-puts-blame-for-gop-betrayals-on-conservatives/QuoteShapiro is a rather sharp dude, and I think he’s on to something here.
I believe it’s critical for conservatives to stop equating “being angry, loud, and obnoxious,” with “being conservative.”
Anyone can be a loud, brash, Type-A personality. That’s not limited to the realm of politics or conservatism.
We need to be going after candidates who actually stand on principle, who know the Constitution, or at the very least, are able to articulate the conservative position on issues and why they agree or disagree.
It's almost like working class Pubs are tired of voting against their own economic self interest. If you think your average white worker class voter cares what Buckley's idea of conservatism is, you're wrong.
Post by: Yard Dog on February 12, 2016, 10:16:36 AM
https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/698173115193372673
Our guy is out here just crushing the "true conservatives".
Those numbers seem way off. Real Clear Politics numbers:
Trump: 29.5%
Cruz: 21 %
Rubio: 17.8%
Carson: 7.8%
Bush: 4.3%
Kasich: 4%
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html
Post by: chuckjames on February 12, 2016, 10:20:38 AM
https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/698173115193372673
Our guy is out here just crushing the "true conservatives".
Those numbers seem way off. Real Clear Politics numbers:
Trump: 29.5%
Cruz: 21 %
Rubio: 17.8%
Carson: 7.8%
Bush: 4.3%
Kasich: 4%
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html
Well it's the first poll taken after NH..so I'm assuming Trump got a very nice boost from that.
Post by: sys on February 12, 2016, 10:24:17 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on February 12, 2016, 11:29:49 AM
yarddog just struggles with anything poll related. it's like a mental block with him.
I struggle with the idea that calling 400 people on the phone allows you to deduce with exact numbers how hundreds of thousands of people will vote.
That being said Real Clear Politics and Five38 tend to have the most accurate polls.
Post by: chuckjames on February 12, 2016, 11:33:03 AM
yarddog just struggles with anything poll related. it's like a mental block with him.
I struggle with the idea that calling 400 people on the phone allows you to deduce with exact numbers how hundreds of thousands of people will vote.
That being said Real Clear Politics and Five38 tend to have the most accurate polls.
The same 538 who has been claiming for 6 months that Trump couldn't get this far? 538 has good stuff sometimes, but Nate Silver's ability to predict things is vastly overblown.
Post by: sys on February 12, 2016, 12:01:03 PM
yarddog just struggles with anything poll related. it's like a mental block with him.
That being said Real Clear Politics and Five38 tend to have the most accurate polls.
neither rcp nor 538 conducts polls, for anyone following along at home.
Post by: sys on February 12, 2016, 12:01:56 PM
The same 538 who has been claiming for 6 months that Trump couldn't get this far?
that's not an accurate account of 538's trump prediction history.
Post by: wetwillie on February 12, 2016, 12:13:25 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 12, 2016, 12:29:01 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on February 12, 2016, 12:45:02 PM
yarddog just struggles with anything poll related. it's like a mental block with him.
That being said Real Clear Politics and Five38 tend to have the most accurate polls.
neither rcp nor 538 conducts polls, for anyone following along at home.
You are correct, I misspoke though you knew what I meant. Both provide information from existing polls as well as a grading system on which polls to trust. I trust the analysis that those two companies provide of the polls that are out there.
Post by: sys on February 12, 2016, 01:09:40 PM
I trust the analysis that those two companies provide of the polls that are out there.
:emawkid:
Post by: Institutional Control on February 12, 2016, 01:40:09 PM
I love yarddog.
Post by: chuckjames on February 12, 2016, 01:56:38 PM
The same 538 who has been claiming for 6 months that Trump couldn't get this far?
that's not an accurate account of 538's trump prediction history.
Yea you're probably right, I remember in the summer Nate gave Trump like a 5% chance. So I've always thought he undervalued Trump's chances.
Post by: Yard Dog on February 12, 2016, 02:29:58 PM
The same 538 who has been claiming for 6 months that Trump couldn't get this far?
that's not an accurate account of 538's trump prediction history.
Yea you're probably right, I remember in the summer Nate gave Trump like a 5% chance. So I've always thought he undervalued Trump's chances.
Was anyone last summer giving Trump a better than 5% chance?
Post by: renocat on February 12, 2016, 02:58:15 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on February 13, 2016, 10:57:09 AM
The same 538 who has been claiming for 6 months that Trump couldn't get this far?
that's not an accurate account of 538's trump prediction history.
Yea you're probably right, I remember in the summer Nate gave Trump like a 5% chance. So I've always thought he undervalued Trump's chances.
Was anyone last summer giving Trump a better than 5% chance?
:adios:
Post by: star seed 7 on February 13, 2016, 11:07:52 AM
Post by: CNS on February 13, 2016, 11:27:18 AM
Post by: renocat on February 13, 2016, 10:10:25 PM
Post by: bones129 on February 14, 2016, 01:15:11 AM
Juzt watch the xebate and Trump was an inverted ahole. He is not a conservative. He is an Arnold Trumpzenegger.
Trump is the only candidate in the race whose name includes "rump." Take it FWIW.
Post by: steve dave on February 14, 2016, 08:59:17 AM
Post by: steve dave on February 14, 2016, 08:59:48 AM
Post by: wetwillie on February 14, 2016, 09:02:30 AM
Post by: The Big Train on February 14, 2016, 09:02:41 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on February 14, 2016, 09:39:01 AM
I think he got boo'd for repeatedly attacking W, not for saying that, but whatevs carry on with the rhetoric
Post by: mocat on February 14, 2016, 09:58:41 AM
Post by: bucket on February 14, 2016, 08:42:24 PM
Signing a baby is a boss move. I wish he would have gone all Ricky Bobby on that baby and signed its forehead.
Post by: Katpappy on February 14, 2016, 10:23:38 PM
Technically they did find wmd's, just not very many and virtually none were usable. So to say there were "none" is pretty stupid (but hey, this is the pit, so not relevant).Well bite my bad person! A few years back the stupid ass Bush administration admitted that they knew there were no WMD before they started the war. Thanks BIG OIL! Of course the most of the public didn't know because the media didn't cover it, except for a 30 second mention of it by NBC News. Thanks BIG CORP.!
I think he got boo'd for repeatedly attacking W, not for saying that, but whatevs carry on with the rhetoric
Post by: gatoveintisiete on February 15, 2016, 11:47:38 AM
Post by: chuckjames on February 15, 2016, 11:49:45 AM
So who do you guys think Donald will nominate to the supremes? He's prolly gonna have to replace that old lady friend of Antons too. I don't think omarosa is ready.
He's got awesome lawyerly friends that will yuge additions to the Supreme Court. Or why not just make a reality show over who get the nomination aka The Apprentice. The Justice would be a huge hit. IMO
Post by: chum1 on February 15, 2016, 11:52:57 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on February 15, 2016, 12:02:32 PM
Post by: chuckjames on February 15, 2016, 12:10:05 PM
The libs are gonna be so butt hurt over Donald placing two justices in his first 100 days. :ROFL:
While I think Trump would make a terrible President, I probably wouldn't hate his nominees as muc as I would Rubio's or Cruz's so I would take it.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on February 15, 2016, 12:15:14 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 15, 2016, 12:55:01 PM
Post by: CNS on February 15, 2016, 01:19:18 PM
Post by: sys on February 15, 2016, 01:56:11 PM
http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trumps-america-1455290458
Post by: MakeItRain on February 15, 2016, 02:01:41 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on February 15, 2016, 02:15:54 PM
this was quite interesting. liblib, i hope you can find a way to access it.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trumps-america-1455290458
He does a great job of encapsulating why the working class is angry; unless I missed it he doesn't really explore why they are latching onto someone that symbolizes everything they rail against. Manipulating bankruptcy law to lay people off and not pay vendors who have significantly less capital, and eminent domain are two things that should kill him with his constituency.
Post by: chuckjames on February 15, 2016, 02:20:48 PM
https://twitter.com/olivianuzzi/status/698878148595867648
https://twitter.com/olivianuzzi/status/698878552175996928
https://twitter.com/olivianuzzi/status/698878668689559552
Post by: MakeItRain on February 15, 2016, 02:52:36 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on February 15, 2016, 03:02:30 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on February 15, 2016, 03:06:30 PM
Post by: chuckjames on February 15, 2016, 03:09:30 PM
I think it's pretty well established that Trump supporters don't care about his political stances. The question is why they're willing to ignore his past of grossly screwing the middle class.
I mean they've been supporting GOP candidates for awhile that screw over the middle class, at least this one talks to them instead of above them.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on February 15, 2016, 03:10:22 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 15, 2016, 03:20:38 PM
<-- supporter that only supports him because of one political stance
Which one?
Post by: Emo EMAW on February 15, 2016, 03:22:02 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 15, 2016, 03:24:45 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on February 15, 2016, 03:57:26 PM
As a supporter it doesn't suck how crazy he makes some people.
I don't think anyone particularly cares outside of the GOP establishment.
Post by: Skipper44 on February 17, 2016, 11:01:32 AM
this was quite interesting. liblib, i hope you can find a way to access it.thank you for posting this link sys, I found the authors observations of the changes in marriage/kids born out of wedlock/job participation in that article and this one http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970204301404577170733817181646 (http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970204301404577170733817181646) very interesting. I really liked how the second link illustrated the growing gap between blue and white collar society vs what it was a generation ago.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trumps-america-1455290458
Post by: sys on February 17, 2016, 11:27:03 AM
in that article and this one http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970204301404577170733817181646 (http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970204301404577170733817181646) very interesting.
i agree. that was an interesting read.
Post by: renocat on February 18, 2016, 02:09:41 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on February 19, 2016, 10:39:46 AM
Post by: bones129 on February 19, 2016, 03:16:22 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on February 19, 2016, 03:17:37 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on February 20, 2016, 06:48:04 PM
Post by: sys on February 20, 2016, 07:20:19 PM
Post by: chum1 on February 20, 2016, 07:37:49 PM
Post by: chum1 on February 20, 2016, 07:40:09 PM
CHINA!!!
Post by: wetwillie on February 20, 2016, 07:46:26 PM
Post by: catastrophe on February 20, 2016, 07:50:14 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on February 20, 2016, 08:15:50 PM
Post by: wetwillie on February 20, 2016, 08:17:44 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on February 20, 2016, 08:21:09 PM
You are giving up on bern :frown:
It's always been uphill. It isn't over but he's got a lot of work to do.
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on February 20, 2016, 08:25:23 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 20, 2016, 09:44:51 PM
i'm kinda rooting for him, i have to admit.
me too
Post by: catastrophe on February 20, 2016, 11:26:53 PM
Post by: bones129 on February 21, 2016, 01:08:45 AM
Anyone not a republican is obviously rooting for Trump.
Actually, it seems a lot of 'Pubs are also rooting for him. There are also a lot of undecided Demos out there. Guess your position is a bit overbroad.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on February 21, 2016, 03:20:30 AM
Post by: wetwillie on February 21, 2016, 07:43:10 AM
Bernieheads will vote for Hillary and Hillaryheads would vote for Bernie. But there are tons of 'pubs who loathe Trump.
I think you might be underestimating how much Hilary Clinton loathing there is amongst her own party and general population.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on February 21, 2016, 07:52:58 AM
Anyone not a republican is obviously rooting for Trump.
Actually, it seems a lot of 'Pubs are also rooting for him. There are also a lot of undecided Demos out there. Guess your position is a bit overbroad.
Yes this is true, I'm a Trump-pub and prolly 75 percent of people I talk to irl, when the subject comes up, like the Donald.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 21, 2016, 08:12:03 AM
Bernieheads will vote for Hillary and Hillaryheads would vote for Bernie. But there are tons of 'pubs who loathe Trump.
I think you might be underestimating how much Hilary Clinton loathing there is amongst her own party and general population.
Yes, Trump can draw a lot of Bernie's supports. But that's mainly because their views are about 90% the same.
Post by: steve dave on February 21, 2016, 09:34:44 AM
Trump wins SC primary. After calling GWB a liar. After fighting with the Pope. After threatening to sue Ted Cruz. Welcome to the new GOP.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 21, 2016, 10:03:07 AM
Post by: CNS on February 21, 2016, 10:06:18 AM
After a few private coaching seshes, where they get a guest coach like Karl rove, or something, they perform again. Etc. Eventually, we tweet our final vote w/ a hashtag.
Post by: sys on February 21, 2016, 01:53:58 PM
i'd feel pretty foolish if he got elected. but we're still far enough away from that that i can root for him in good conscience.
Post by: MakeItRain on February 21, 2016, 02:31:39 PM
Bernieheads will vote for Hillary and Hillaryheads would vote for Bernie. But there are tons of 'pubs who loathe Trump.
I think you might be underestimating how much Hilary Clinton loathing there is amongst her own party and general population.
Yes, Trump can draw a lot of Bernie's supports. But that's mainly because their views are about 90% the same.
There's no possible way you believe this.
There will be a very good amount of Bernie supporters that will sit the general out.
Post by: wetwillie on February 21, 2016, 03:18:31 PM
Bernieheads will vote for Hillary and Hillaryheads would vote for Bernie. But there are tons of 'pubs who loathe Trump.
I think you might be underestimating how much Hilary Clinton loathing there is amongst her own party and general population.
Yes, Trump can draw a lot of Bernie's supports. But that's mainly because their views are about 90% the same.
There's no possible way you believe this.
There will be a very good amount of Bernie supporters that will sit the general out.
yea i meant alot of democrats will just not vote, i really dont understand how someone could think a bernie supporter would vote for trump. I assumed his post was some kind of sarcasm.
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on February 21, 2016, 09:38:17 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0tE6T-ecmg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0tE6T-ecmg)
Post by: The Big Train on February 21, 2016, 09:41:53 PM
Post by: catastrophe on February 21, 2016, 09:50:16 PM
Post by: sys on February 21, 2016, 10:53:35 PM
Post by: puniraptor on February 22, 2016, 03:27:00 AM
Post by: CNS on February 22, 2016, 05:29:06 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on February 22, 2016, 06:51:01 AM
Post by: sys on February 23, 2016, 11:08:19 PM
Post by: chum1 on February 24, 2016, 07:34:09 AM
Post by: chum1 on February 24, 2016, 08:21:22 AM
Post by: chuckjames on February 24, 2016, 10:13:14 AM
Trump is more dominant than the Warriors.
Post by: Yard Dog on February 24, 2016, 10:43:18 AM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FuTmfwEA.gif&hash=cf88fa39791ed9fd60577f0cfde774f44d9a6d4f)
Post by: Cartierfor3 on February 24, 2016, 10:51:06 AM
Did anyone catch the "i love the uneducated" quote from last night? Priceless. Trump may be the only person who ever runs for POTUS and can get away with saying absolutely anything.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FuTmfwEA.gif&hash=cf88fa39791ed9fd60577f0cfde774f44d9a6d4f)
He's a jackass but this is a good article about why that resonates:
https://reason.com/blog/2016/02/24/trump-i-love-the-poorly-educated-so-shou (https://reason.com/blog/2016/02/24/trump-i-love-the-poorly-educated-so-shou)
Quote
What Beck and other Trump critics miss is that Trump is essentially sending the same message as Sanders: The Donald feels your pain. More than that, he feels your anger, your resentment, your sense of losing through no fault of your own—The Donald also feels this too. More than that, he loves you. He's proud of you. And he's going to make things right for you, through a mix of great deal-making and ball-busting and force and whatever it takes. Because you, my poorly educated friends and my highly educated friends, the young and the old—you're all part of America and nobody loves America more than Trump. He wants to make it great again, after all, whereas all these other candidates do is bitch and moan about how awful this type of person is or that type of person is.
Post by: CNS on February 24, 2016, 11:00:00 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 24, 2016, 11:02:22 AM
Post by: chuckjames on February 24, 2016, 11:03:27 AM
Did anyone catch the "i love the uneducated" quote from last night? Priceless. Trump may be the only person who ever runs for POTUS and can get away with saying absolutely anything.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FuTmfwEA.gif&hash=cf88fa39791ed9fd60577f0cfde774f44d9a6d4f)
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-america-made-donald-trump-unstoppable-20160224
This is an amazing piece about how Trump happened. I think the GOP establishment overestimated how many of their voters actually care about so called "conservative values". This is cycle was always going to be about a populist candidate to take on the oligarchy. We needed a Teddy like candidate and we got a Trump.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 24, 2016, 11:04:26 AM
Trump and Bernie correctly diagnose the problem and give voice to the anger people feel, but they either have the wrong solutions (mostly Bernie) or it's not at all clear that they have a solution (mostly Trump). Stupid Angry Don't Care.
Trump is not a conservative. Stupid Angry Don't Care. Trump has no problem with crony capitalism - he just thinks he can make better deals and pick winners and losers better than Obama. SADC. Trump has no plan for replacing Obamacare. SADC. Trump has no real foreign policy solutions - only the correct diagnosis that we're retreating 'round the world. SADC. Trump has no actual plan to stop digging deeper into debt. SADC. Trump says he'll be tough on immigration, but his plan mostly consists of pissing way billions on a physical wall through the desert. SADC.
But at the end of the day, if the Stupid Angrys get their way and Trump is the nominee, I'll vote for him. Because even as terrible as he is, he's preferable in my opinion to The Liar. And that's saying something.
But can you even imagine that GOP convention? Who are the keynote speakers for Trump? :lol:
Post by: CNS on February 24, 2016, 11:07:30 AM
Can you get clean after that?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 24, 2016, 11:10:12 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 24, 2016, 11:11:10 AM
When it comes to being angry, there's Smart Angry and Stupid Angry. Trump and Bernie capture the Stupid Angry. And I'm very uncomfortable just how much Stupid Angry there is in this country. There is a LOT.
Trump and Bernie correctly diagnose the problem and give voice to the anger people feel, but they either have the wrong solutions (mostly Bernie) or it's not at all clear that they have a solution (mostly Trump). Stupid Angry Don't Care.
Trump is not a conservative. Stupid Angry Don't Care. Trump has no problem with crony capitalism - he just thinks he can make better deals and pick winners and losers better than Obama. SADC. Trump has no plan for replacing Obamacare. SADC. Trump has no real foreign policy solutions - only the correct diagnosis that we're retreating 'round the world. SADC. Trump has no actual plan to stop digging deeper into debt. SADC. Trump says he'll be tough on immigration, but his plan mostly consists of pissing way billions on a physical wall through the desert. SADC.
But at the end of the day, if the Stupid Angrys get their way and Trump is the nominee, I'll vote for him. Because even as terrible as he is, he's preferable in my opinion to The Liar. And that's saying something.
But can you even imagine that GOP convention? Who are the keynote speakers for Trump? :lol:
Stupid Conservative Don't Care
Post by: CNS on February 24, 2016, 11:12:56 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 24, 2016, 11:15:52 AM
Can you even imagine the drive home from your polling location knowing that you actually just voted for Trump.
Can you get clean after that?
Honestly? It won't be a good feeling. I live in Kansas so I suppose I don't really need to vote at all for pres, but I do feel I have a moral obligation to vote against The Liar.
Post by: chuckjames on February 24, 2016, 11:21:27 AM
When it comes to being angry, there's Smart Angry and Stupid Angry. Trump and Bernie capture the Stupid Angry. And I'm very uncomfortable just how much Stupid Angry there is in this country. There is a LOT.
Trump and Bernie correctly diagnose the problem and give voice to the anger people feel, but they either have the wrong solutions (mostly Bernie) or it's not at all clear that they have a solution (mostly Trump). Stupid Angry Don't Care.
Trump is not a conservative. Stupid Angry Don't Care. Trump has no problem with crony capitalism - he just thinks he can make better deals and pick winners and losers better than Obama. SADC. Trump has no plan for replacing Obamacare. SADC. Trump has no real foreign policy solutions - only the correct diagnosis that we're retreating 'round the world. SADC. Trump has no actual plan to stop digging deeper into debt. SADC. Trump says he'll be tough on immigration, but his plan mostly consists of pissing way billions on a physical wall through the desert. SADC.
But at the end of the day, if the Stupid Angrys get their way and Trump is the nominee, I'll vote for him. Because even as terrible as he is, he's preferable in my opinion to The Liar. And that's saying something.
Which proves my point. The people that actually vote for the GOP arent really that conservative. They dont care about Buckley or Laffer curves. They just want their lives to be better. I know you will argue conservationism does this. But they dont see it that way.
Post by: wetwillie on February 24, 2016, 11:24:06 AM
What's hilarious is that Trump has so obviously been patronizing the dumb side of the pubs. No one has any clue if he is any different than Hill politically at all.
I think he is pretty far off from her on taxation, immigration, foreign policy but probably very similar on social issues like abortion, gay marriage, and healthcare
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 24, 2016, 11:27:39 AM
When it comes to being angry, there's Smart Angry and Stupid Angry. Trump and Bernie capture the Stupid Angry. And I'm very uncomfortable just how much Stupid Angry there is in this country. There is a LOT.
Trump and Bernie correctly diagnose the problem and give voice to the anger people feel, but they either have the wrong solutions (mostly Bernie) or it's not at all clear that they have a solution (mostly Trump). Stupid Angry Don't Care.
Trump is not a conservative. Stupid Angry Don't Care. Trump has no problem with crony capitalism - he just thinks he can make better deals and pick winners and losers better than Obama. SADC. Trump has no plan for replacing Obamacare. SADC. Trump has no real foreign policy solutions - only the correct diagnosis that we're retreating 'round the world. SADC. Trump has no actual plan to stop digging deeper into debt. SADC. Trump says he'll be tough on immigration, but his plan mostly consists of pissing way billions on a physical wall through the desert. SADC.
But at the end of the day, if the Stupid Angrys get their way and Trump is the nominee, I'll vote for him. Because even as terrible as he is, he's preferable in my opinion to The Liar. And that's saying something.
Which proves my point. The people that actually vote for the GOP arent really that conservative. They dont care about Buckley or Laffer curves. They just want their lives to be better. I know you will argue conservationism does this. But they dont see it that way.
If your point is that some GOP voters are more conservative than others, congratulations. That's some very profound insight. About 60% of the GOP has voted for somebody besides Trump in the first four contests.
Post by: catastrophe on February 24, 2016, 11:28:04 AM
Post by: Emo EMAW on February 24, 2016, 11:30:49 AM
What's hilarious is that Trump has so obviously been patronizing the dumb side of the pubs. No one has any clue if he is any different than Hill politically at all.
I think he is pretty far off from her on taxation, immigration, foreign policy but probably very similar on social issues like abortion, gay marriage, and healthcare
So you're saying he's nearly perfect? :love:
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 24, 2016, 11:32:20 AM
What's hilarious is that Trump has so obviously been patronizing the dumb side of the pubs. No one has any clue if he is any different than Hill politically at all.
I think he is pretty far off from her on taxation, immigration, foreign policy but probably very similar on social issues like abortion, gay marriage, and healthcare
No, no, no. Didn't you hear Trump on abortion? He used to be pro-choice, but then he met a kid who's mother decided not to abort him, and that kid was "a total superstar!" So now he's decided that it's not Ok to murder babies in the womb. And on healthcare, Trump has clearly stated that Obamacare is "a disaster" and "we're going to do something SO MUCH BETTER." I trust that answers your questions.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 24, 2016, 11:33:48 AM
Post by: wetwillie on February 24, 2016, 11:34:46 AM
What's hilarious is that Trump has so obviously been patronizing the dumb side of the pubs. No one has any clue if he is any different than Hill politically at all.
I think he is pretty far off from her on taxation, immigration, foreign policy but probably very similar on social issues like abortion, gay marriage, and healthcare
No, no, no. Didn't you hear Trump on abortion? He used to be pro-choice, but then he met a kid who's mother decided not to abort him, and that kid was "a total superstar!" So now he's decided that it's not Ok to murder babies in the womb. And on healthcare, Trump has clearly stated that Obamacare is "a disaster" and "we're going to do something SO MUCH BETTER." I trust that answers your questions.
This American life just did a profile of a young black man that is gay that is a huge trump supporter, which was pretty interesting.
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on February 24, 2016, 11:36:32 AM
Post by: CNS on February 24, 2016, 11:49:41 AM
What's hilarious is that Trump has so obviously been patronizing the dumb side of the pubs. No one has any clue if he is any different than Hill politically at all.
I think he is pretty far off from her on taxation, immigration, foreign policy but probably very similar on social issues like abortion, gay marriage, and healthcare
No, no, no. Didn't you hear Trump on abortion? He used to be pro-choice, but then he met a kid who's mother decided not to abort him, and that kid was "a total superstar!" So now he's decided that it's not Ok to murder babies in the womb. And on healthcare, Trump has clearly stated that Obamacare is "a disaster" and "we're going to do something SO MUCH BETTER." I trust that answers your questions.
Yeah, Trump has no stated plans. Most of what comes out of his mouth is not something I see as transparently actually his thoughts. They are his measured responses he thinks will get what he wants from the Dumb Conservative Don't Care Crew. He is simply playing to win, not actually do anything. He may fully alight with Hill on Immigration. I mean, what happens when he meets the kid of a formerly illegal immigrant couple. Maybe that kid will be a super star too? Maybe he doesn't care about this at all already and just knows that ppl tuning in do(most likely, imo). Now, apply that to most of the things he is saying, realize that he was a Crat not too long ago, and I think it is easy enough to see that he could easily be Hill in orange hair.
I am not saying this is the case. I am saying he is pulling a huge, yet obvious to non morons, snow job and his form of governing after wining could take almost any form. He isn't financially beholden to anyone either. Literally, once he wins the primary, he needs nothing from anyone and therefore no one has leverage over him.
Post by: OK_Cat on February 24, 2016, 12:11:19 PM
Are we really letting that go unnoticed?
Post by: chuckjames on February 24, 2016, 12:16:02 PM
When it comes to being angry, there's Smart Angry and Stupid Angry. Trump and Bernie capture the Stupid Angry. And I'm very uncomfortable just how much Stupid Angry there is in this country. There is a LOT.
Trump and Bernie correctly diagnose the problem and give voice to the anger people feel, but they either have the wrong solutions (mostly Bernie) or it's not at all clear that they have a solution (mostly Trump). Stupid Angry Don't Care.
Trump is not a conservative. Stupid Angry Don't Care. Trump has no problem with crony capitalism - he just thinks he can make better deals and pick winners and losers better than Obama. SADC. Trump has no plan for replacing Obamacare. SADC. Trump has no real foreign policy solutions - only the correct diagnosis that we're retreating 'round the world. SADC. Trump has no actual plan to stop digging deeper into debt. SADC. Trump says he'll be tough on immigration, but his plan mostly consists of pissing way billions on a physical wall through the desert. SADC.
But at the end of the day, if the Stupid Angrys get their way and Trump is the nominee, I'll vote for him. Because even as terrible as he is, he's preferable in my opinion to The Liar. And that's saying something.
Which proves my point. The people that actually vote for the GOP arent really that conservative. They dont care about Buckley or Laffer curves. They just want their lives to be better. I know you will argue conservationism does this. But they dont see it that way.
If your point is that some GOP voters are more conservative than others, congratulations. That's some very profound insight. About 60% of the GOP has voted for somebody besides Trump in the first four contests.
No point was this country isnt as center right as conservatives want us to think. You seem very angry about having to vote for Trump.
Post by: star seed 7 on February 24, 2016, 12:16:34 PM
initially I was surprised that trump was winning all the republican battles and then I remembered that 95% of republicans are complete and total idiots and was like oh yeah I guess it makes sense.
Complete And Total Idiots Don't Care
Post by: Dub on February 24, 2016, 12:18:05 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 24, 2016, 01:35:28 PM
Yeah, Trump has no stated plans. Most of what comes out of his mouth is not something I see as transparently actually his thoughts. They are his measured responses he thinks will get what he wants from the Dumb Conservative Don't Care Crew. He is simply playing to win, not actually do anything. He may fully alight with Hill on Immigration. I mean, what happens when he meets the kid of a formerly illegal immigrant couple. Maybe that kid will be a super star too? Maybe he doesn't care about this at all already and just knows that ppl tuning in do(most likely, imo). Now, apply that to most of the things he is saying, realize that he was a Crat not too long ago, and I think it is easy enough to see that he could easily be Hill in orange hair.
I am not saying this is the case. I am saying he is pulling a huge, yet obvious to non morons, snow job and his form of governing after wining could take almost any form. He isn't financially beholden to anyone either. Literally, once he wins the primary, he needs nothing from anyone and therefore no one has leverage over him.
Which is his biggest appeal. That and the wall Mexico is going to pay for.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 24, 2016, 01:37:53 PM
KSU wildcats made a way too long post about how trump sucks and stupid people will vote for him anyway, and then he ended by saying he was voting for him anyway.
Are we really letting that go unnoticed?
A pragmatic person understands that what emerges from the primaries may not be your preferred candidate - far from it - but still better than The Liar. I mean, it was funny the way you said it, tho, just not really true. Very Jon Stewart-y.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 24, 2016, 01:39:49 PM
Post by: OK_Cat on February 24, 2016, 01:42:24 PM
Post by: CNS on February 24, 2016, 01:44:43 PM
Yeah, Trump has no stated plans. Most of what comes out of his mouth is not something I see as transparently actually his thoughts. They are his measured responses he thinks will get what he wants from the Dumb Conservative Don't Care Crew. He is simply playing to win, not actually do anything. He may fully alight with Hill on Immigration. I mean, what happens when he meets the kid of a formerly illegal immigrant couple. Maybe that kid will be a super star too? Maybe he doesn't care about this at all already and just knows that ppl tuning in do(most likely, imo). Now, apply that to most of the things he is saying, realize that he was a Crat not too long ago, and I think it is easy enough to see that he could easily be Hill in orange hair.
I am not saying this is the case. I am saying he is pulling a huge, yet obvious to non morons, snow job and his form of governing after wining could take almost any form. He isn't financially beholden to anyone either. Literally, once he wins the primary, he needs nothing from anyone and therefore no one has leverage over him.
Which is his biggest appeal. That and the wall Mexico is going to pay for.
That only makes sense when taken completely out of the above context.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 24, 2016, 01:48:47 PM
Yes, Donald Trump is many things, but he's not a liar.
I'm sure he's a liar, but he's not The Liar. There can only be one.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.telegraph.co.uk%2Fmultimedia%2Farchive%2F02831%2FClinton1web_2831249b.jpg&hash=b81193a2689229b104218f8772a0535811abea80)
Post by: CNS on February 24, 2016, 01:49:48 PM
Post by: catastrophe on February 24, 2016, 02:19:04 PM
I trust very little of what Hillary says, but I think she has a good chance of being successful in what she truly (perhaps secretly) wants to accomplish.
I'm not sure which scenario scares me more.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on February 24, 2016, 02:57:14 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 24, 2016, 03:14:47 PM
Post by: ChiComCat on February 24, 2016, 03:32:56 PM
Trump represents all the things people outside the party accuse it of; Crony Capitalism, Xenophobic, Racist, Classist, Sexist, Old and White, Patriarchal, Ignorant. . . .It is frustrating because I know the party has the ability to be so much more than that.
I enjoyed this post from the Rubio thread. Maybe the party isn't what some of the Republicans thought it was.
Post by: Yard Dog on February 24, 2016, 03:36:39 PM
KSU wildcats made a way too long post about how trump sucks and stupid people will vote for him anyway, and then he ended by saying he was voting for him anyway.
Are we really letting that go unnoticed?
A pragmatic person understands that what emerges from the primaries may not be your preferred candidate - far from it - but still better than The Liar. I mean, it was funny the way you said it, tho, just not really true. Very Jon Stewart-y.
I'd say very Ted Cruz-y, but then again, I am a Marco Rubio supporter.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 24, 2016, 03:55:12 PM
Trump represents all the things people outside the party accuse it of; Crony Capitalism, Xenophobic, Racist, Classist, Sexist, Old and White, Patriarchal, Ignorant. . . .It is frustrating because I know the party has the ability to be so much more than that.
I enjoyed this post from the Rubio thread. Maybe the party isn't what some of the Republicans thought it was.
It's definitely a whole lot worse than I used to think it was.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 24, 2016, 04:01:58 PM
KSU wildcats made a way too long post about how trump sucks and stupid people will vote for him anyway, and then he ended by saying he was voting for him anyway.
Are we really letting that go unnoticed?
A pragmatic person understands that what emerges from the primaries may not be your preferred candidate - far from it - but still better than The Liar. I mean, it was funny the way you said it, tho, just not really true. Very Jon Stewart-y.
I'd say very Ted Cruz-y, but then again, I am a Marco Rubio supporter.
I like them both. Too bad they can't cut a deal. Flip a coin or something.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on February 24, 2016, 07:18:37 PM
Post by: CHONGS on February 24, 2016, 07:44:16 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 24, 2016, 07:50:34 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on February 24, 2016, 09:22:52 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on February 24, 2016, 10:21:50 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 24, 2016, 10:31:20 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on February 25, 2016, 07:55:30 AM
Post by: wetwillie on February 25, 2016, 08:01:25 AM
Post by: chuckjames on February 25, 2016, 08:26:52 AM
Bloomie will save us
Lol at any notion that Bloomie has any chance of getting elected.
Post by: wetwillie on February 25, 2016, 08:42:48 AM
Post by: CNS on February 25, 2016, 09:33:04 AM
Bloomie will save us
Evidently there was a poll(in by Bloomberg media, lol) this week that asked if ppl would vote for him. 55% said no.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 25, 2016, 09:34:23 AM
Bloomie will save us
Evidently there was a poll(in by Bloomberg media, lol) this week that asked if ppl would vote for him. 55% said no.
What percentage said yes?
Post by: CNS on February 25, 2016, 09:34:51 AM
Bloomie will save us
Evidently there was a poll(in by Bloomberg media, lol) this week that asked if ppl would vote for him. 55% said no.
What percentage said yes?
Podcast that mentioned it didn't say.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 25, 2016, 09:36:12 AM
Bloomie will save us
Evidently there was a poll(in by Bloomberg media, lol) this week that asked if ppl would vote for him. 55% said no.
What percentage said yes?
Podcast that mentioned it didn't say.
If he's around 30% or so, he should definitely run. He wouldn't have to improve that much to win. Of course, the poll needs to be legitimate (maybe this one was :dunno:).
Post by: catastrophe on February 25, 2016, 09:37:33 AM
Post by: CNS on February 25, 2016, 09:40:07 AM
If Trump or Cruz get the nomination, there will be a very large number of republicans who will be desperate to vote for someone besides Hillary. There are also always a good amount of independent voters who, like me, are probably dreading their choices right now.
Same podcast I was listening to was saying this too. They were giving an example of how more registered R's voted than registered D's in Colorado in the last election, yet Obama won the state. They also noted how Millennials are much less likely to register to either party. Their premise being that this race is most likely going to be decided by ppl that don't feel like they have a candidate right now.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 25, 2016, 10:42:19 AM
If Trump or Cruz get the nomination, there will be a very large number of republicans who will be desperate to vote for someone besides Hillary. There are also always a good amount of independent voters who, like me, are probably dreading their choices right now.
The GOP base will fall in line behind Cruz - he'll do better than Romney in this regard - but he will have an independent problem. That doesn't mean he is unelectable. Hillary is a truly terrible candidate and the Dems are going to have serious turnout problems as these early primaries indicate.
If Trump is the nominee, I agree that some traditional GOP voters will stay home. Can't really say how many. But Trump is going to get a LOT of support from typical non-voters and crossover typical Dem voters - I think more than enough to make up the GOP support he loses. Again, the proof is in the primaries. Dem turnout is way down. GOP turnout is way up. At least part of that disparity is because folks who might ordinarily vote Dem are crossing over for Trump.
None of this is to say that Trump is my preferred candidate. But even with his sky high negatives, he would probably beat Hillary. People are underestimating just how angry a great many people are - not just conservatives - after eight years of Obama/Pelosi/Boehner/Reid/McConnell.
Post by: CNS on February 25, 2016, 10:50:12 AM
Post by: catastrophe on February 25, 2016, 10:50:35 AM
Post by: CNS on February 25, 2016, 10:51:28 AM
I think someone already said this, but there is a difference between angry and stupid angry. Trump supporters are almost exclusively in the latter category.
There is a diff. The diff is size. There are a lot more stupid angry in the country than angry.
Post by: ChiComCat on February 25, 2016, 10:54:46 AM
Post by: catastrophe on February 25, 2016, 11:10:17 AM
Post by: ChiComCat on February 25, 2016, 11:31:38 AM
Some primaries are open, but I think most you have to be registered with the party. I think Trump's support is coming from the far right mostly, but that it's not necessarily the same proportion you'd expect because a large number of newer voters do not register for either party and so do not participate in the primary.
Thats what I would think, but K-S-U keeps talking as though Trump has all this support from Democrats.
Post by: sys on February 25, 2016, 11:46:39 AM
we also haven't seen trump in a general election. who knows what how closely he'd hew to default republican positions.
Post by: sys on February 25, 2016, 11:48:46 AM
Post by: chuckjames on February 25, 2016, 11:59:37 AM
Not sure if Luke'd but holy crap. Its kinda over already.
Post by: sys on February 25, 2016, 12:15:32 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on February 25, 2016, 12:18:24 PM
Can Dem's vote in a republican primary in these races? Are you saying independents are registering as 'pubs and voting in the primary? I have a hard time believing that Trump is getting support from people who traditionally vote democrat. Everyone on my FB that posts dumbass trump stuff are the same people that have posted Obama is the anti-christ stuff the past 8 years. Maybe my evidence is anecdotal though so I'm wondering if you have actual numbers. It seems like you are trying to blame democrats for the loon that republicans may nominate.
My sample size is probably similar to yours, but no one that is even remotely Democrat in my social sphere has anything but contempt for Donald Trump, and most of the conservatives are open about their dislike of him.
I think that a large number of millennials and independents will probably go to the polls to vote against him if it comes to that, regardless of whether or not it's Bernie or Clinton.
I think you can say the same of Cruz to a degree. The only Republican left with any chance of general election victory, in my opinion, is Rubio.
Post by: chum1 on February 25, 2016, 12:26:19 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on February 25, 2016, 12:30:16 PM
Post by: chuckjames on February 25, 2016, 12:39:48 PM
When the dust settles, D's will line up like cattle in the chute for the Hil.
And then win the White House and the Senate :love: :love: :love:
Post by: sonofdaxjones on February 25, 2016, 12:40:16 PM
Post by: LickNeckey on February 25, 2016, 03:11:35 PM
hell I would rather vote for Kasich than any Dem candidate because i believe he could actually get something done in an meaningful fashion.
no chance in hell that happens though
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on February 25, 2016, 03:19:45 PM
Post by: chuckjames on February 25, 2016, 03:26:03 PM
In a perfect world, we'd probably just call this thing quits right now and give the thing to Kasich. that won't happen though because of how batcrap crazy the majority of republicans are. is it too late for Kasich to switch and start running as a dem? probably, huh?
Kasich wouldnt win the Dem nomination either. He is a good politician without a party to lead. there really needs to be a third party that is like centrist. Maybe we should just change our system to a parliamentary system. multiple parties work great there.
Post by: Ptolemy on February 25, 2016, 03:31:08 PM
...he could actually get something done in an meaningful fashion.
Never could figure this argument out..."get something done..."
Democrats want YUUUUGE government controlling everything.
Republicans want small government letting people control themselves.
So why is half way between those two divergent paths the best way forward?
Post by: LickNeckey on February 25, 2016, 03:33:09 PM
"an ability to listen to two sides in a dispute, and devise a resolution acceptable to both"
That is the definition of a word i believe you are incapable of understanding.
Post by: CNS on February 25, 2016, 03:34:53 PM
...he could actually get something done in an meaningful fashion.
Never could figure this argument out..."get something done..."
Democrats want YUUUUGE government controlling everything.
Republicans want small government letting people control themselves.
So why is half way between those two divergent paths the best way forward?
That's the system. The bullshit is when one side tries to eliminate both the other side, and any ability to negotiate or compromise.
Post by: star seed 7 on February 25, 2016, 03:35:19 PM
...he could actually get something done in an meaningful fashion.
Never could figure this argument out..."get something done..."
Democrats want YUUUUGE government controlling everything.
Republicans want small government letting people control themselves.
So why is half way between those two divergent paths the best way forward?
So adorable that you actually believe this :lol:
Post by: CNS on February 25, 2016, 03:36:06 PM
Post by: catastrophe on February 25, 2016, 03:51:08 PM
Post by: Ptolemy on February 25, 2016, 03:55:23 PM
an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.
"an ability to listen to two sides in a dispute, and devise a resolution acceptable to both"
That is the definition of a word i believe you are incapable of understanding.
This isn't buying a car...it's governing human beings.
Post by: Ptolemy on February 25, 2016, 03:57:12 PM
So adorable that you actually believe this :lol:
Even more adorable that you went for that aged timeworn knee-jerk response.
Post by: treysolid on February 25, 2016, 04:04:00 PM
In a perfect world, we'd probably just call this thing quits right now and give the thing to Kasich. that won't happen though because of how batcrap crazy the majority of republicans are. is it too late for Kasich to switch and start running as a dem? probably, huh?
Kasich wouldnt win the Dem nomination either. He is a good politician without a party to lead. there really needs to be a third party that is like centrist. Maybe we should just change our system to a parliamentary system. multiple parties work great there.
LOL at Kasich being "centrist." On moral issues he's about as far right as you can go.
http://digg.com/video/samantha-bee-destroys-kasich (http://digg.com/video/samantha-bee-destroys-kasich)
Post by: wELLsculptedbrows on February 25, 2016, 04:15:56 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 25, 2016, 04:22:54 PM
So adorable that you actually believe this :lol:
Even more adorable that you went for that aged timeworn knee-jerk response.
:lol:
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 25, 2016, 04:25:33 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 25, 2016, 06:18:57 PM
lib isn't very dense for what it's worth.
I don't know if this is a compliment or if WackyCat08 doesn't know what dense means :dunno:
Post by: chuckjames on February 25, 2016, 06:23:37 PM
In a perfect world, we'd probably just call this thing quits right now and give the thing to Kasich. that won't happen though because of how batcrap crazy the majority of republicans are. is it too late for Kasich to switch and start running as a dem? probably, huh?
Kasich wouldnt win the Dem nomination either. He is a good politician without a party to lead. there really needs to be a third party that is like centrist. Maybe we should just change our system to a parliamentary system. multiple parties work great there.
LOL at Kasich being "centrist." On moral issues he's about as far right as you can go.
http://digg.com/video/samantha-bee-destroys-kasich (http://digg.com/video/samantha-bee-destroys-kasich)
oh i know but he is what passes in today's world, i mean he is also for a balanced budget amendment which would ruin the economy but alas he at least seems to actually care about people.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 25, 2016, 06:35:45 PM
Exactlylib isn't very dense for what it's worth.
I don't know if this is a compliment or if WackyCat08 doesn't know what dense means :dunno:
Post by: treysolid on February 25, 2016, 06:52:34 PM
In a perfect world, we'd probably just call this thing quits right now and give the thing to Kasich. that won't happen though because of how batcrap crazy the majority of republicans are. is it too late for Kasich to switch and start running as a dem? probably, huh?
Kasich wouldnt win the Dem nomination either. He is a good politician without a party to lead. there really needs to be a third party that is like centrist. Maybe we should just change our system to a parliamentary system. multiple parties work great there.
LOL at Kasich being "centrist." On moral issues he's about as far right as you can go.
http://digg.com/video/samantha-bee-destroys-kasich (http://digg.com/video/samantha-bee-destroys-kasich)
oh i know but he is what passes in today's world, i mean he is also for a balanced budget amendment which would ruin the economy but alas he at least seems to actually care about people.
yeah, he actually cares about people, unless you count women and homosexuals as people.
Post by: star seed 7 on February 25, 2016, 06:54:58 PM
Exactlylib isn't very dense for what it's worth.
I don't know if this is a compliment or if WackyCat08 doesn't know what dense means :dunno:
:curse:
Post by: Tobias on February 25, 2016, 07:20:46 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 25, 2016, 07:32:07 PM
Post by: LickNeckey on February 25, 2016, 07:35:00 PM
an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.
"an ability to listen to two sides in a dispute, and devise a resolution acceptable to both"
That is the definition of a word i believe you are incapable of understanding.
This isn't buying a car...it's governing human beings.
:facepalm:
Post by: MakeItRain on February 25, 2016, 11:39:52 PM
Bloomie will save us
Evidently there was a poll(in by Bloomberg media, lol) this week that asked if ppl would vote for him. 55% said no.
What percentage said yes?
Podcast that mentioned it didn't say.
If he's around 30% or so, he should definitely run. He wouldn't have to improve that much to win. Of course, the poll needs to be legitimate (maybe this one was :dunno:).
Put 250 people in a room of varying political knowledge and there is no way 30% of them can identify Bloomberg's political identity. Being mayor of NYC qualifies you for President in a similar manner as being the advisor of a high school student council.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on February 26, 2016, 08:03:13 AM
Post by: lopakman on February 26, 2016, 08:17:46 AM
Post by: mocat on February 26, 2016, 08:19:48 AM
Exactlylib isn't very dense for what it's worth.
I don't know if this is a compliment or if WackyCat08 doesn't know what dense means :dunno:
omg :lol:
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on February 26, 2016, 08:32:01 AM
Another thing, the republicans dngaf what the libtards think about their policy positions or whether they are "moderate" enough, anymore than the libtards care how much the pubs think they're rough ridin' loony for all the insane crap they say. It's a race to the bottom in primary season.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on February 26, 2016, 09:02:16 AM
I've got news for all you political amatuers. It's the primaries, all the candidates are singing as far from the center as possible (i.e., crazy). Im sure you will all be stunned and enraged when they all "flip flop" during the general.
Another thing, the republicans dngaf what the libtards think about their policy positions or whether they are "moderate" enough, anymore than the libtards care how much the pubs think they're rough ridin' loony for all the insane crap they say. It's a race to the bottom in primary season.
Decent point by SD.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 26, 2016, 09:03:05 AM
:eye:Exactlylib isn't very dense for what it's worth.
I don't know if this is a compliment or if WackyCat08 doesn't know what dense means :dunno:
omg :lol:
Post by: Cire on February 26, 2016, 09:08:31 AM
I legitimately think Kasich as the nominee would be the pubs' best bet to win the general. He has actual experience governing, he is centrist enough on a lot of stuff to convince an anti-Hillary moderate that he's a better recipient of their vote than her, and he seems infinitely more fair-minded and level-headed than the three blustering clowns in the middle last night. I mean those three were a legitimate clown show. I could potentially even be persuaded to vote for Kasich. I mean I won't, but if he were elected president I wouldn't think it was the end of the world like I would with Trump. And that's why the 'Pubs should nominate him. But they won't, because he looks awkward and doesn't have a ton of good sound bytes and isn't inflammatory enough.
Agree completely. He's not charasmatic and that's why he's not the golden boy that rubio is. Rubio is such a played up phony, he's a cut out of what the pubs think will help their party and he's willing to do whatever (go tea party to get elected) to be advanced.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on February 26, 2016, 09:09:19 AM
I've got news for all you political amatuers. It's the primaries, all the candidates are singing as far from the center as possible (i.e., crazy). Im sure you will all be stunned and enraged when they all "flip flop" during the general.
Another thing, the republicans dngaf what the libtards think about their policy positions or whether they are "moderate" enough, anymore than the libtards care how much the pubs think they're rough ridin' loony for all the insane crap they say. It's a race to the bottom in primary season.
also, isn't that going to screw Kasich who was pretty non-neocon on the "if a gay dude wants a cupcake, sell him a cupcake and move on with your life" position?
Post by: Cire on February 26, 2016, 09:10:30 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on February 26, 2016, 09:15:08 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on February 26, 2016, 09:21:21 AM
Kascish isn't popular because he is as articulate as the guy who fixes my car, and as quick on his feet as a three-legged elephant.
Cruz's own family dislikes his face. we gotta pick someone who doesn't universally make people throw up in their mouth.
Post by: CNS on February 26, 2016, 09:22:05 AM
Kascish isn't popular because he is as articulate as the guy who fixes my car, and as quick on his feet as a three-legged elephant.
Cruz's own family dislikes his face. we gotta pick someone who doesn't universally make people throw up in their mouth.
I keep hoping for a third party out-of-nowhere-guy too.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on February 26, 2016, 09:24:28 AM
Kascish isn't popular because he is as articulate as the guy who fixes my car, and as quick on his feet as a three-legged elephant.
Cruz's own family dislikes his face. we gotta pick someone who doesn't universally make people throw up in their mouth.
The only person with life who fits that bill is rubio, and he's on his last breath.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 26, 2016, 09:26:13 AM
Post by: CNS on February 26, 2016, 09:26:42 AM
Post by: Tobias on February 26, 2016, 09:28:38 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 26, 2016, 09:31:36 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on February 26, 2016, 09:39:52 AM
Cruz looks like a basset hound mated a catfish.
a cocky Kevin from The Office
Post by: CNS on February 26, 2016, 09:41:28 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on February 26, 2016, 09:45:30 AM
Kevin could do pretty well in this election, imo.
trump would call him fat
Post by: Dub on February 26, 2016, 12:12:52 PM
Post by: chuckjames on February 26, 2016, 12:26:05 PM
Post by: CNS on February 26, 2016, 02:07:49 PM
Easily the best pic of the campaign so far, imo
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on February 26, 2016, 02:12:03 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 26, 2016, 02:34:37 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on February 26, 2016, 02:53:40 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on February 26, 2016, 02:56:21 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on February 26, 2016, 03:07:55 PM
Watching this happen is actually surreal...
This clown show we have now is the end result of years in the 24 hour cable news cycle.
Everyone is a sound byte. Everyone is a caricature. If you're normal, you're boring, therefore, you get no screen time.
Post by: wetwillie on February 26, 2016, 03:09:36 PM
Post by: michigancat on February 26, 2016, 03:13:42 PM
Post by: michigancat on February 26, 2016, 03:14:30 PM
Post by: Dub on February 26, 2016, 03:15:04 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on February 26, 2016, 07:08:04 PM
(https://cdn3.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/jT0IB-ef6a1gplA__X7oW4qltkc=/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/6111515/trump%20gif.gif)
Is he mocking Marco? :ROFL: if so
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 26, 2016, 07:15:24 PM
http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/donald-trump-mocks-marco-rubios-2013-water-bottle-gaffe/
Post by: stunted on February 26, 2016, 10:28:11 PM
:Woot:
Post by: steve dave on February 26, 2016, 10:33:02 PM
Yes
http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/donald-trump-mocks-marco-rubios-2013-water-bottle-gaffe/
:lol:
Post by: sys on February 27, 2016, 03:25:16 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on February 27, 2016, 07:52:37 PM
:lol:
Post by: wetwillie on February 27, 2016, 08:32:07 PM
Post by: sys on February 27, 2016, 08:50:39 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on February 28, 2016, 04:12:04 PM
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-declines-to-condemn-kkk-leader-david-duke/
Post by: MakeItRain on February 28, 2016, 04:14:23 PM
http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/christie-campaign-s-finance-co-chair-calls-donors-reject-trump-n527451
Post by: Kat Kid on February 28, 2016, 04:56:46 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on February 28, 2016, 05:35:08 PM
Post by: Kat Kid on February 28, 2016, 05:36:13 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: sys on February 28, 2016, 05:43:53 PM
- "i'll have to look at the polls on that, ok. next question."
Post by: wetwillie on February 28, 2016, 06:12:06 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 28, 2016, 07:27:49 PM
Quote
Donald Trump said today he may ask the federal judge overseeing an upcoming civil fraud trial involving the now defunct Trump University to recuse himself because he is Hispanic and is therefore biased against him due to his plan to build a wall to keep out immigrants from Mexico.
amazing
Post by: star seed 7 on February 28, 2016, 07:31:07 PM
Post by: bucket on February 28, 2016, 08:01:40 PM
probably hasn't released tax returns because it has crap tons of donations to hate groups
I kind of understand the not releasing tax returns stuff
Post by: Panjandrum on February 28, 2016, 10:07:30 PM
Like, when has American politics ever NOT been about soundbytes or catchy slogans?
It has been, but Trump is sucking the air out of the room because no one will cover anything else.
It's obviously not the only variable for his success, but he's got a 24 hour megaphone to every crazy racist and xenophobe out there to eat up everything he's saying.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on February 28, 2016, 10:16:54 PM
It'll make LBJ/Bushes and Haliburton look like couch change.
Post by: bones129 on February 29, 2016, 01:09:07 AM
I can't imagine how much Hil for Prison is going to owe Trump when she gets elected.
It'll make LBJ/Bushes and Haliburton look like couch change.
She will ignore him.
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on February 29, 2016, 07:57:18 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 29, 2016, 08:57:04 AM
- "will you condemn the kkk?"
- "i'll have to look at the polls on that, ok. next question."
You honestly think Trump consults polls in determining how to answer questions like that?
Post by: star seed 7 on February 29, 2016, 08:59:47 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 29, 2016, 09:11:45 AM
Good take away
My overall take away is that Donald Trump ought to be able to denounce the KKK without "looking into it." But this is the same guy who just blamed GWB for 9/11 and the "lying" about WMD in Iraq, who has no plan for replacing Obamacare except for "getting of rid of the lines around the states," and has said any number of moronic things. He's a buffoon. I think I've said that before. Many times, actually. It might surprise you to know that I don't support Trump for the GOP nomination. Even though I think he can beat Hillary, I think he'd be a very poor president.
Post by: Institutional Control on February 29, 2016, 09:24:32 AM
https://youtu.be/DnpO_RTSNmQ
Post by: star seed 7 on February 29, 2016, 09:43:32 AM
Post by: Panjandrum on February 29, 2016, 10:05:53 AM
John Oliver's take on Trump.
https://youtu.be/DnpO_RTSNmQ
It was pretty great.
Post by: MakeItRain on February 29, 2016, 10:54:18 AM
Post by: chuckjames on February 29, 2016, 11:22:12 AM
Good take away
My overall take away is that Donald Trump ought to be able to denounce the KKK without "looking into it." But this is the same guy who just blamed GWB for 9/11 and the "lying" about WMD in Iraq, who has no plan for replacing Obamacare except for "getting of rid of the lines around the states," and has said any number of moronic things. He's a buffoon. I think I've said that before. Many times, actually. It might surprise you to know that I don't support Trump for the GOP nomination. Even though I think he can beat Hillary, I think he'd be a very poor president.
How is this different from the rest of the GOP, they have had the house for 5 years and still haven't passed any sort of replacement bill. They now have a memo that basically just say get rid of state lines, a good idea, among with a various of tax credits. Nobody on the right has an actual plan to replace Obamacar, just a bunch of talking points.
Post by: Cartierfor3 on February 29, 2016, 11:29:25 AM
Denouncing the kkk probably isn't in the best interests for someone attempting to become the republican nominee
pretty broad brush you're painting with there lib
Post by: star seed 7 on February 29, 2016, 11:33:45 AM
Denouncing the kkk probably isn't in the best interests for someone attempting to become the republican nominee
pretty broad brush you're painting with there lib
;)
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 29, 2016, 12:40:29 PM
Good take away
My overall take away is that Donald Trump ought to be able to denounce the KKK without "looking into it." But this is the same guy who just blamed GWB for 9/11 and the "lying" about WMD in Iraq, who has no plan for replacing Obamacare except for "getting of rid of the lines around the states," and has said any number of moronic things. He's a buffoon. I think I've said that before. Many times, actually. It might surprise you to know that I don't support Trump for the GOP nomination. Even though I think he can beat Hillary, I think he'd be a very poor president.
How is this different from the rest of the GOP, they have had the house for 5 years and still haven't passed any sort of replacement bill. They now have a memo that basically just say get rid of state lines, a good idea, among with a various of tax credits. Nobody on the right has an actual plan to replace Obamacar, just a bunch of talking points.
You are once again talking out of your ass, good sir. No, the GOP has not actually passed a replacement bill. But you could have simply Google'd "republican plan to replace obamacare," which would have led you to any number of articles and press releases on various detailed plans. Just for example...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2015/02/05/the-impressive-new-obamacare-replace-plan-from-republicans-burr-hatch-and-upton (http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2015/02/05/the-impressive-new-obamacare-replace-plan-from-republicans-burr-hatch-and-upton)
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/256960-consensus-emerging-in-gop-on-how-to-replace-obamacare (http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/256960-consensus-emerging-in-gop-on-how-to-replace-obamacare)
Post by: MakeItRain on February 29, 2016, 12:55:36 PM
Post by: chuckjames on February 29, 2016, 01:00:36 PM
Good take away
My overall take away is that Donald Trump ought to be able to denounce the KKK without "looking into it." But this is the same guy who just blamed GWB for 9/11 and the "lying" about WMD in Iraq, who has no plan for replacing Obamacare except for "getting of rid of the lines around the states," and has said any number of moronic things. He's a buffoon. I think I've said that before. Many times, actually. It might surprise you to know that I don't support Trump for the GOP nomination. Even though I think he can beat Hillary, I think he'd be a very poor president.
How is this different from the rest of the GOP, they have had the house for 5 years and still haven't passed any sort of replacement bill. They now have a memo that basically just say get rid of state lines, a good idea, among with a various of tax credits. Nobody on the right has an actual plan to replace Obamacar, just a bunch of talking points.
You are once again talking out of your ass, good sir. No, the GOP has not actually passed a replacement bill. But you could have simply Google'd "republican plan to replace obamacare," which would have led you to any number of articles and press releases on various detailed plans. Just for example...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2015/02/05/the-impressive-new-obamacare-replace-plan-from-republicans-burr-hatch-and-upton (http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2015/02/05/the-impressive-new-obamacare-replace-plan-from-republicans-burr-hatch-and-upton)
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/256960-consensus-emerging-in-gop-on-how-to-replace-obamacare (http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/256960-consensus-emerging-in-gop-on-how-to-replace-obamacare)
Ok the second one is literally talking points like I was saying. And the first one seems to be ok, but again it doesn't answer question like how do you tackle the problem of pre existing conditions, it just says different regulation procedures, what does that even mean? Again deregulation and Tax credits are a part of plan, but it's got to be more specific than that. But hey the GOP has only had the house for 5 years, so maybe this is the year they come out with a complete plan.
Post by: chuckjames on February 29, 2016, 01:03:54 PM
I actually removing the state line option may be better for the middle class than Obamacare. What should have happened is that Obamacare should have removed state lines as a part of the larger legislation. There is a legit concern about price fixing but these insurance companies only goal is to be profitable, because of that I would hope legit competition would bring prices down and options up.
I agree and it allows the companies to basically split up states so they can all be very profitable. I'm actually interested in why democrats aren't for that.
Post by: CNS on February 29, 2016, 01:05:14 PM
I actually removing the state line option may be better for the middle class than Obamacare. What should have happened is that Obamacare should have removed state lines as a part of the larger legislation. There is a legit concern about price fixing but these insurance companies only goal is to be profitable, because of that I would hope legit competition would bring prices down and options up.
I agree and it allows the companies to basically split up states so they can all be very profitable. I'm actually interested in why democrats aren't for that.
I am guessing it is campaign contributions that are keeping ppl from making this happen.
Post by: chuckjames on February 29, 2016, 01:08:09 PM
Well I mean the rationale they publicize on why it would be bad. I heard it once but I forgot.I actually removing the state line option may be better for the middle class than Obamacare. What should have happened is that Obamacare should have removed state lines as a part of the larger legislation. There is a legit concern about price fixing but these insurance companies only goal is to be profitable, because of that I would hope legit competition would bring prices down and options up.
I agree and it allows the companies to basically split up states so they can all be very profitable. I'm actually interested in why democrats aren't for that.
I am guessing it is campaign contributions that are keeping ppl from making this happen.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 29, 2016, 01:24:41 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 29, 2016, 01:25:38 PM
Well I mean the rationale they publicize on why it would be bad. I heard it once but I forgot.I actually removing the state line option may be better for the middle class than Obamacare. What should have happened is that Obamacare should have removed state lines as a part of the larger legislation. There is a legit concern about price fixing but these insurance companies only goal is to be profitable, because of that I would hope legit competition would bring prices down and options up.
I agree and it allows the companies to basically split up states so they can all be very profitable. I'm actually interested in why democrats aren't for that.
I am guessing it is campaign contributions that are keeping ppl from making this happen.
I know I shouldn't laugh, but this whole exchange among libs is hilarious. "[spoken in hushed tones] you know, I think allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines might help bring down prices...."
The reason Dems fight tooth and nail against this, btw, is because once you allow policies to be purchased anywhere you effectively kill minimum coverage mandates. The policies will simply be sold from whichever states regulate their policies the least. It is VERY important to a number of industries (mental health, acupuncture, etc.) that their services be included in minimum coverage mandates. They lobby heavily for this.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 29, 2016, 01:32:12 PM
Denouncing the kkk probably isn't in the best interests for someone attempting to become the republican nominee
pretty broad brush you're painting with there lib
Trump seems to be proving him right, though.
Post by: ednksu on February 29, 2016, 01:32:31 PM
The republicans have passed a bill to repeal Obamacare, and it was vetoed. It seems silly to criticize them for not replacing Obamacare when they can't get rid of it.Are you the same idiot who blames the dems for shutting down the government when the Republicans held it hostage for repealing Obamacare and no one wanted to do that because it wasn't actually "negotiating" about policy issues?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 29, 2016, 01:33:38 PM
The republicans have passed a bill to repeal Obamacare, and it was vetoed. It seems silly to criticize them for not replacing Obamacare when they can't get rid of it.Are you the same idiot who blames the dems for shutting down the government when the Republicans held it hostage for repealing Obamacare and no one wanted to do that because it wasn't actually "negotiating" about policy issues?
no
Post by: chuckjames on February 29, 2016, 01:34:58 PM
Well I mean the rationale they publicize on why it would be bad. I heard it once but I forgot.I actually removing the state line option may be better for the middle class than Obamacare. What should have happened is that Obamacare should have removed state lines as a part of the larger legislation. There is a legit concern about price fixing but these insurance companies only goal is to be profitable, because of that I would hope legit competition would bring prices down and options up.
I agree and it allows the companies to basically split up states so they can all be very profitable. I'm actually interested in why democrats aren't for that.
I am guessing it is campaign contributions that are keeping ppl from making this happen.
I know I shouldn't laugh, but this whole exchange among libs is hilarious. "[spoken in hushed tones] you know, I think allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines might help bring down prices...."
The reason Dems fight tooth and nail against this, btw, is because once you allow policies to be purchased anywhere you effectively kill minimum coverage mandates. The policies will simply be sold from whichever states regulate their policies the least. It is VERY important to a number of industries (mental health, acupuncture, etc.) that their services be included in minimum coverage mandates. They lobby heavily for this.
This makes sense I was gonna say I doubt the more liberal states want to give up their consumer protection regulations. But you say tomato, I say tomatah. As with most things. And I do think it would be a race to the bottom on actual having coverage that doesn't screw the consumer. But alas the current state based regulations aren't great either.
Post by: MakeItRain on February 29, 2016, 01:38:45 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 29, 2016, 01:40:57 PM
WTF? The minimum coverage mandates are federal, how in the eff does that change with removal of state lines?
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/c9/d3/8a/c9d38aeff7924677112b861cc805f74c.jpg)
Post by: chuckjames on February 29, 2016, 01:45:57 PM
The republicans have passed a bill to repeal Obamacare, and it was vetoed. It seems silly to criticize them for not replacing Obamacare when they can't get rid of it.
This hasn't stopped them from coming out with complete tax plans and budgets, try knew would be vetoed?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 29, 2016, 01:51:44 PM
The republicans have passed a bill to repeal Obamacare, and it was vetoed. It seems silly to criticize them for not replacing Obamacare when they can't get rid of it.
This hasn't stopped them from coming out with complete tax plans and budgets, try knew would be vetoed?
A budget bill was just passed in December. :dunno:
Post by: chuckjames on February 29, 2016, 01:57:00 PM
The republicans have passed a bill to repeal Obamacare, and it was vetoed. It seems silly to criticize them for not replacing Obamacare when they can't get rid of it.
This hasn't stopped them from coming out with complete tax plans and budgets, try knew would be vetoed?
A budget bill was just passed in December. :dunno:
Right one that was a negotiated with Obama, but I'm saying the GOP (mostly Ryan) has plans to redo Medicare into block grants, same with food stamps and welfare. They also have a tax plan they would introduce if in power. I'm saying they have a lot of full out plans and replacements but not one for Obamacare yet.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 29, 2016, 02:41:57 PM
WTF? The minimum coverage mandates are federal, how in the eff does that change with removal of state lines?
No, that wasn't true before Obamacare, and it still isn't entirely true after. http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/mandated-health-insurance-benefits-and-state-laws.aspx (http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/mandated-health-insurance-benefits-and-state-laws.aspx)
Allowing interstate competition, the resulting reduction in minimum coverage requirements, is a big piece of reducing premiums.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 29, 2016, 02:47:10 PM
Well I mean the rationale they publicize on why it would be bad. I heard it once but I forgot.I actually removing the state line option may be better for the middle class than Obamacare. What should have happened is that Obamacare should have removed state lines as a part of the larger legislation. There is a legit concern about price fixing but these insurance companies only goal is to be profitable, because of that I would hope legit competition would bring prices down and options up.
I agree and it allows the companies to basically split up states so they can all be very profitable. I'm actually interested in why democrats aren't for that.
I am guessing it is campaign contributions that are keeping ppl from making this happen.
I know I shouldn't laugh, but this whole exchange among libs is hilarious. "[spoken in hushed tones] you know, I think allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines might help bring down prices...."
The reason Dems fight tooth and nail against this, btw, is because once you allow policies to be purchased anywhere you effectively kill minimum coverage mandates. The policies will simply be sold from whichever states regulate their policies the least. It is VERY important to a number of industries (mental health, acupuncture, etc.) that their services be included in minimum coverage mandates. They lobby heavily for this.
This makes sense I was gonna say I doubt the more liberal states want to give up their consumer protection regulations. But you say tomato, I say tomatah. As with most things. And I do think it would be a race to the bottom on actual having coverage that doesn't screw the consumer. But alas the current state based regulations aren't great either.
Yes, liberals frequently claim that competition will result in a "race to the bottom." Only it usually doesn't work out that way. Instead, the lobbyists lard these policies up with thousands of services we don't need coverage for, and we have to buy it.
Post by: star seed 7 on February 29, 2016, 02:48:21 PM
Post by: CNS on February 29, 2016, 02:52:29 PM
I had some blood work done the other day and they are asking my insurance for $805.
There needs to be a way were prices are known and able to be shopped before hand.
Post by: wetwillie on February 29, 2016, 02:52:55 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 29, 2016, 02:54:02 PM
Might as well just go single payer :excited:
Do you understand that single payer doesn't fix the problem of minimum coverage mandates - it makes it worse? Why are liberals so averse to market competition?
Post by: chuckjames on February 29, 2016, 03:01:04 PM
Might as well just go single payer :excited:
Do you understand that single payer doesn't fix the problem of minimum coverage mandates - it makes it worse? Why are liberals so averse to market competition?
I think the morality of healthcare makes it much more difficult for the magic of the market (invisible hand) to work than say the razor blades market (I just picked a semi normal good with normal supply and demand forces)
Post by: chuckjames on February 29, 2016, 03:07:32 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 29, 2016, 03:14:57 PM
Might as well just go single payer :excited:
Do you understand that single payer doesn't fix the problem of minimum coverage mandates - it makes it worse? Why are liberals so averse to market competition?
I think the morality of healthcare makes it much more difficult for the magic of the market (invisible hand) to work than say the razor blades market (I just picked a semi normal good with normal supply and demand forces)
Ironically, "the morality of healthcare" in countries like Canada have caused its citizens to flock to the United States to see specialists they'd have to wait 6 months or more for back home. The free market isn't "moral" - it just provides better results time and again.
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on February 29, 2016, 03:21:36 PM
Post by: catastrophe on February 29, 2016, 03:24:25 PM
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on February 29, 2016, 03:27:14 PM
Yea, I don't think Canadians are having serious discussions about changing their healthcare system to anything that even remotely resembles ours.
they've had discussions but Canadian citizens do not want it and overall are much, much happier with their system than what americans are with ours. this is true for both post obamacare and pre obamacare. they like their system.
Post by: CNS on February 29, 2016, 03:33:03 PM
Quote
Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach endorses Donald Trump for president
Post by: star seed 7 on February 29, 2016, 03:34:25 PM
Yea, I don't think Canadians are having serious discussions about changing their healthcare system to anything that even remotely resembles ours.
they've had discussions but Canadian citizens do not want it and overall are much, much happier with their system than what americans are with ours. this is true for both post obamacare and pre obamacare. they like their system.
Now that I've had a chance to meet a good number of canadians, I have to say they all love their healthcare system
Post by: star seed 7 on February 29, 2016, 03:35:25 PM
http://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/kris-kobach-endorses-donald-trump (http://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/kris-kobach-endorses-donald-trump)QuoteKansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach endorses Donald Trump for president
The only person in America who hates mexicans as much as trump
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 29, 2016, 03:39:12 PM
Canadians don't flock to the US and are actually really very happy with their healthcare. An overwhelming percentage would not trade it for what the US has.
http://globalnews.ca/news/1886606/more-canadians-leaving-the-country-for-medical-care-report/ (http://globalnews.ca/news/1886606/more-canadians-leaving-the-country-for-medical-care-report/)
http://www.globalhealthcareconnections.com/index.cfm (http://www.globalhealthcareconnections.com/index.cfm) :lol:
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 29, 2016, 03:43:47 PM
Yea, I don't think Canadians are having serious discussions about changing their healthcare system to anything that even remotely resembles ours.
they've had discussions but Canadian citizens do not want it and overall are much, much happier with their system than what americans are with ours. this is true for both post obamacare and pre obamacare. they like their system.
:lol: Oh, no doubt most Canadians are happy with their "free" healthcare. Most don't need to see a specialist. And you could find that "most" people anywhere like all sorts of "free" stuff. That doesn't make it good policy.
http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/canadian-health-spending-to-increase-leaving-country-with-more-debt-report-1.2479743 (http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/canadian-health-spending-to-increase-leaving-country-with-more-debt-report-1.2479743)
http://www.wsj.com/articles/canadas-budget-watchdog-says-provincial-debt-unsustainable-1437495211 (http://www.wsj.com/articles/canadas-budget-watchdog-says-provincial-debt-unsustainable-1437495211)
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/nadeem-esmail/canada-free-health-care_b_3733080.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/nadeem-esmail/canada-free-health-care_b_3733080.html)
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 29, 2016, 03:44:24 PM
Quote
It's estimated that up to 750,000 US residents travel abroad for care each year.
Post by: star seed 7 on February 29, 2016, 03:47:26 PM
http://www.cdc.gov/features/medicaltourism/QuoteIt's estimated that up to 750,000 US residents travel abroad for care each year.
Forbes says 1.6 million
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 29, 2016, 03:55:07 PM
http://www.cdc.gov/features/medicaltourism/QuoteIt's estimated that up to 750,000 US residents travel abroad for care each year.
And the vast majority go for cheaper elective surgeries - not because of wait times to see specialists.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 29, 2016, 03:57:53 PM
http://www.cdc.gov/features/medicaltourism/QuoteIt's estimated that up to 750,000 US residents travel abroad for care each year.
And the vast majority go for cheaper elective surgeries - not because of wait times to see specialists.
Quote
The most common procedures that people undergo on medical tourism trips include cosmetic surgery, dentistry, and heart surgery.
:sdeek:
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 29, 2016, 03:59:24 PM
http://www.cdc.gov/features/medicaltourism/QuoteIt's estimated that up to 750,000 US residents travel abroad for care each year.
And the vast majority go for cheaper elective surgeries - not because of wait times to see specialists.QuoteThe most common procedures that people undergo on medical tourism trips include cosmetic surgery, dentistry, and heart surgery.
:sdeek:
See? I can use bold, too! Any breakdown on heart surgery versus cosmetic surgery and dentistry?
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 29, 2016, 04:01:13 PM
http://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/kris-kobach-endorses-donald-trump (http://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/kris-kobach-endorses-donald-trump)QuoteKansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach endorses Donald Trump for president
The only person in America who hates mexicans as much as trump
Quote
Kobach said illegal immigration has resulted in lost jobs and depressed wages for Americans. And he said Trump is correct that the United States can compel Mexico to pay for construction of a wall between the countries to keep out illegal immigrants.
“As I have discussed with Mr. Trump, the PATRIOT Act contains a provision that the United States can and should use as leverage with the Government of Mexico,” Kobach said.
“We have the ability to shut down the flow of remittances to Mexico from illegal aliens working in the United States,” he said. “Mexico will then have to make a choice: Either make a single payment of $5 billion to $10 billion to the United States to pay for the wall, or lose most of the $23 billion in remittances that Mexico receives every year from its nationals working illegally in the United States.”
He's right. Hell, we could put the entire country on the OFAC list if we wanted to. Mexico would write the check.
Post by: star seed 7 on February 29, 2016, 04:04:41 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 29, 2016, 04:05:39 PM
Embarrassed he's associated with my state
It's my state, too, and he's awesome. (By the way, he's about 1000x smarter than you, Lib7).
Post by: star seed 7 on February 29, 2016, 04:07:33 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 29, 2016, 04:07:45 PM
Post by: CNS on February 29, 2016, 04:08:52 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 29, 2016, 04:09:59 PM
Hopefully President Trump is smart enough to not tap Kobach for some fed job. The last thing we need, as a country, is someone letting that guy out of KS.
Maybe, but he'd only have that job for 4-8 years, while if he stays where he's at, he'll be there for life.
Post by: star seed 7 on February 29, 2016, 04:10:21 PM
Post by: Tobias on February 29, 2016, 04:11:21 PM
Post by: CNS on February 29, 2016, 04:11:38 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on February 29, 2016, 04:12:11 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 29, 2016, 04:13:35 PM
Well, I would imagine that he is going to be the next governor not named Brownback.
I don't think Kobach is well liked enough in Kansas to win a position where he's not already the incumbent.
Post by: mocat on February 29, 2016, 04:16:01 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on February 29, 2016, 04:49:20 PM
Post by: chuckjames on February 29, 2016, 04:59:10 PM
Embarrassed he's associated with my state
It's my state, too, and he's awesome. (By the way, he's about 1000x smarter than you, Lib7).
Making that judgment seems a little strong. Everyone has different strengths and weaknesses. I tend to be good at debiting and crediting different accounts but suck at biology. Does that make some Doctor smarter than me? Could he debit and credit as well as me? I say no.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 29, 2016, 05:25:27 PM
Embarrassed he's associated with my state
It's my state, too, and he's awesome. (By the way, he's about 1000x smarter than you, Lib7).
Making that judgment seems a little strong. Everyone has different strengths and weaknesses. I tend to be good at debiting and crediting different accounts but suck at biology. Does that make some Doctor smarter than me? Could he debit and credit as well as me? I say no.
Well, Kobach is smarter at being a piece of crap human being than all of us combined.
Post by: star seed 7 on February 29, 2016, 05:30:05 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 29, 2016, 06:03:09 PM
Embarrassed he's associated with my state
It's my state, too, and he's awesome. (By the way, he's about 1000x smarter than you, Lib7).
Making that judgment seems a little strong. Everyone has different strengths and weaknesses. I tend to be good at debiting and crediting different accounts but suck at biology. Does that make some Doctor smarter than me? Could he debit and credit as well as me? I say no.
:lol: Yes, with about 15 minutes training he could do bookkeeping better than you also.
Post by: chuckjames on February 29, 2016, 06:11:06 PM
Embarrassed he's associated with my state
It's my state, too, and he's awesome. (By the way, he's about 1000x smarter than you, Lib7).
Making that judgment seems a little strong. Everyone has different strengths and weaknesses. I tend to be good at debiting and crediting different accounts but suck at biology. Does that make some Doctor smarter than me? Could he debit and credit as well as me? I say no.
:lol: Yes, with about 15 minutes training he could do bookkeeping better than you also.
but could he pass the CPA exam in 15 minutes of training?
Post by: renocat on February 29, 2016, 06:18:47 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 29, 2016, 06:34:49 PM
Embarrassed he's associated with my state
It's my state, too, and he's awesome. (By the way, he's about 1000x smarter than you, Lib7).
Making that judgment seems a little strong. Everyone has different strengths and weaknesses. I tend to be good at debiting and crediting different accounts but suck at biology. Does that make some Doctor smarter than me? Could he debit and credit as well as me? I say no.
:lol: Yes, with about 15 minutes training he could do bookkeeping better than you also.
but could he pass the CPA exam in 15 minutes of training?
This thread took an amusing turn.
Post by: Tobias on February 29, 2016, 06:49:30 PM
Post by: chuckjames on February 29, 2016, 07:06:03 PM
Embarrassed he's associated with my state
It's my state, too, and he's awesome. (By the way, he's about 1000x smarter than you, Lib7).
Making that judgment seems a little strong. Everyone has different strengths and weaknesses. I tend to be good at debiting and crediting different accounts but suck at biology. Does that make some Doctor smarter than me? Could he debit and credit as well as me? I say no.
:lol: Yes, with about 15 minutes training he could do bookkeeping better than you also.
but could he pass the CPA exam in 15 minutes of training?
This thread took an amusing turn.
TBH The CPA is kinda overrated. It's just memorization. If you have a decent knowledge of accounting rules and study you can pass easily.
Post by: sys on February 29, 2016, 07:11:57 PM
- "will you condemn the kkk?"
- "i'll have to look at the polls on that, ok. next question."
You honestly think Trump consults polls in determining how to answer questions like that?
yes.
Post by: catastrophe on February 29, 2016, 09:51:07 PM
Post by: ednksu on February 29, 2016, 10:16:00 PM
Because we've had your version of a free market for 50 years and it's led to the US having the highest healthcare costs in the industrial world and some of the lowest satisfaction and success rates. And before you say we need cross state competition, what about state's rights again? If you take that position you are now advocating for federal intervention to force states to do something for the benefit of business only.Might as well just go single payer :excited:
Do you understand that single payer doesn't fix the problem of minimum coverage mandates - it makes it worse? Why are liberals so averse to market competition?
Post by: MakeItRain on February 29, 2016, 11:20:33 PM
WTF? The minimum coverage mandates are federal, how in the eff does that change with removal of state lines?
No, that wasn't true before Obamacare, and it still isn't entirely true after. http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/mandated-health-insurance-benefits-and-state-laws.aspx (http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/mandated-health-insurance-benefits-and-state-laws.aspx)
Allowing interstate competition, the resulting reduction in minimum coverage requirements, is a big piece of reducing premiums.
Hey weirdo, I explicitly stated that the removal of state lines would work best in conjunction with Obamacare.
Post by: bones129 on February 29, 2016, 11:47:46 PM
In a state with a crap ton of embarrassing politicians, kobach is easily the front runner
Respectfully disagree. Brownback by a nose, then Kobach.
Post by: SdK on March 01, 2016, 01:08:15 AM
Post by: renocat on March 01, 2016, 07:00:45 AM
Post by: steve dave on March 01, 2016, 07:23:32 AM
Post by: steve dave on March 01, 2016, 07:26:32 AM
Quote
Anyway, Trump will probably be the GOP nominee and possibly become President. No joke. If you care either way about this, you should vote.
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) February 29, 2016
Silver explains why, in this piece he wrote earlier today:
On Twitter this weekend, there was a lot of activity behind the hashtag #NeverTrump, with various conservative intellectuals and operatives pledging that they’d refuse to support Trump in November. Rubio’s Twitter account employed the hashtag also, although Rubio himself has been ambiguous about whether he’d back Trump.
It’s reasonably safe to say that some of the people in the #NeverTrump movement will, in fact, wind up supporting Trump. Clinton, very likely the Democratic nominee, is a divisive figure, and some anti-Trump conservatives will conclude that Trump is the lesser of two evils. Others will get caught up in the esprit de corps of the election. Some of them might be reassured by how Trump conducts himself during the general election campaign or whom he picks as his running mate.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 01, 2016, 09:04:22 AM
welcome your new leader GOP, you dumbassesQuoteAnyway, Trump will probably be the GOP nominee and possibly become President. No joke. If you care either way about this, you should vote.
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) February 29, 2016
Silver explains why, in this piece he wrote earlier today:
On Twitter this weekend, there was a lot of activity behind the hashtag #NeverTrump, with various conservative intellectuals and operatives pledging that they’d refuse to support Trump in November. Rubio’s Twitter account employed the hashtag also, although Rubio himself has been ambiguous about whether he’d back Trump.
It’s reasonably safe to say that some of the people in the #NeverTrump movement will, in fact, wind up supporting Trump. Clinton, very likely the Democratic nominee, is a divisive figure, and some anti-Trump conservatives will conclude that Trump is the lesser of two evils. Others will get caught up in the esprit de corps of the election. Some of them might be reassured by how Trump conducts himself during the general election campaign or whom he picks as his running mate.
That's not dumb. It is pragmatic.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 01, 2016, 09:05:54 AM
Might as well just go single payer :excited:
Do you understand that single payer doesn't fix the problem of minimum coverage mandates - it makes it worse? Why are liberals so averse to market competition?
Because we've had your version of a free market for 50 years and it's led to the US having the highest healthcare costs in the industrial world and some of the lowest satisfaction and success rates. And before you say we need cross state competition, what about state's rights again? If you take that position you are now advocating for federal intervention to force states to do something for the benefit of business only.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Yup, that's exactly what we've had!
Post by: chum1 on March 01, 2016, 09:31:31 AM
*Gonna build a wall
*Something about China
Post by: CNS on March 01, 2016, 09:34:21 AM
*Raise Tariffs a bunch.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 01, 2016, 09:35:48 AM
*No more Islam
*Say Merry Christmas
Post by: CNS on March 01, 2016, 09:38:12 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 01, 2016, 09:52:48 AM
welcome your new leader GOP, you dumbassesQuoteAnyway, Trump will probably be the GOP nominee and possibly become President. No joke. If you care either way about this, you should vote.
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) February 29, 2016
Silver explains why, in this piece he wrote earlier today:
On Twitter this weekend, there was a lot of activity behind the hashtag #NeverTrump, with various conservative intellectuals and operatives pledging that they’d refuse to support Trump in November. Rubio’s Twitter account employed the hashtag also, although Rubio himself has been ambiguous about whether he’d back Trump.
It’s reasonably safe to say that some of the people in the #NeverTrump movement will, in fact, wind up supporting Trump. Clinton, very likely the Democratic nominee, is a divisive figure, and some anti-Trump conservatives will conclude that Trump is the lesser of two evils. Others will get caught up in the esprit de corps of the election. Some of them might be reassured by how Trump conducts himself during the general election campaign or whom he picks as his running mate.
That's not dumb. It is pragmatic.
:lol: who are you talking to dude?
Post by: chuckjames on March 01, 2016, 10:40:04 AM
welcome your new leader GOP, you dumbassesQuoteAnyway, Trump will probably be the GOP nominee and possibly become President. No joke. If you care either way about this, you should vote.
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) February 29, 2016
Silver explains why, in this piece he wrote earlier today:
On Twitter this weekend, there was a lot of activity behind the hashtag #NeverTrump, with various conservative intellectuals and operatives pledging that they’d refuse to support Trump in November. Rubio’s Twitter account employed the hashtag also, although Rubio himself has been ambiguous about whether he’d back Trump.
It’s reasonably safe to say that some of the people in the #NeverTrump movement will, in fact, wind up supporting Trump. Clinton, very likely the Democratic nominee, is a divisive figure, and some anti-Trump conservatives will conclude that Trump is the lesser of two evils. Others will get caught up in the esprit de corps of the election. Some of them might be reassured by how Trump conducts himself during the general election campaign or whom he picks as his running mate.
That's not dumb. It is pragmatic.
:lol: who are you talking to dude?
Watching Chant tell himself it's ok to vote for Trump is going to be fun to watch over the next 8 months.
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on March 01, 2016, 11:02:42 AM
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on March 01, 2016, 02:05:25 PM
Post by: michigancat on March 01, 2016, 02:11:49 PM
https://www.yahoo.com/politics/trump-cruz-rubio-nytimes-immigration-interview-164046216.html
lol, this is so bizarre. Republicans are both upset at Trump for not really wanting to build a wall, and for using people's prejudices in his favor at the same time. They are terrified of Trump.
Post by: Dub on March 01, 2016, 02:25:06 PM
Post by: CNS on March 01, 2016, 02:28:05 PM
Post by: SdK on March 01, 2016, 02:37:17 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.boingboing.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F02%2F1278cbCOMIC-trump-mysteries-kkk.jpg&hash=56a1b6e1abf997c4e26ec7a90d9888b983580261)Wow. Cartoons. Knowledge. Humor.
Post by: Institutional Control on March 01, 2016, 03:49:52 PM
Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article63230367.html#fmp#storylink=cpy
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 01, 2016, 04:09:21 PM
Post by: ChiComCat on March 01, 2016, 04:15:46 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 01, 2016, 04:24:29 PM
Donald really has become the face of racism.
Rush has got to be PISSED
Post by: MakeItRain on March 01, 2016, 05:22:46 PM
High school basketball fans wave Trump photo, chant ‘build a wall’ at Hispanic opponents
Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article63230367.html#fmp#storylink=cpy
That happened here in Iowa last week as well. One of the large DSM suburban schools student section, Dallas Center-Grimes, chanted TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP at a school with Mexican players during a playoff game. The school has gone out of their way to apologize. The DCG student council went to Perry to formally apologize and some DCG students, obviously not the same ones who chanted Trump, went to Perry's next playoff game after they kicked the crap out of DCG.
Post by: chum1 on March 01, 2016, 05:28:17 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on March 01, 2016, 05:44:14 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: chuckjames on March 01, 2016, 05:45:10 PM
The whiter high schools will finally start winning basketball games if Trump is elected.
Remember when the Wichita schools won like 9 straight 6A state championships. That wouldn't happen under Trump.
Post by: chum1 on March 01, 2016, 05:52:18 PM
You're just now starting to think that?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Everyone's been searching for explanations and talking about anger. But maybe in reality lots of people are just like, "Hey. That guy thinks (racist stuff) like me."
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 01, 2016, 05:53:25 PM
Post by: chuckjames on March 01, 2016, 05:53:57 PM
The whiter high schools will finally start winning basketball games if Trump is elected.
Remember when the Wichita schools won like 9 straight 6A state championships. That wouldn't happen under Trump.
nvm i forgot about that fluke 2004 year when Olathe South won it. Sammy or Carlin must have been suspended that year, probably Carlin...that guy was a psycho.
Post by: chum1 on March 01, 2016, 05:55:59 PM
You're just now starting to think that?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Everyone's been searching for explanations and talking about anger. But maybe in reality lots of people are just like, "Hey. That guy thinks (racist stuff) like me."
People have also suggested that what Trump says doesn't matter to his supporters. But if the above is true, it most certainly DOES matter.
Post by: chuckjames on March 01, 2016, 05:58:41 PM
Dems 2016: Our Candidate should be in prison, but isn't.
i cant until the 'Pubs impeach another Clinton!!!
Post by: wetwillie on March 01, 2016, 06:07:36 PM
Dems 2016: Our Candidate should be in prison, but isn't.
i cant until the 'Pubs impeach another Clinton!!!
Ken Starr couldn't finish the job but Dick Morris sure as hell will.
Post by: CNS on March 01, 2016, 06:18:35 PM
Make America Great(ly racist) AgainYou're just now starting to think that?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Everyone's been searching for explanations and talking about anger. But maybe in reality lots of people are just like, "Hey. That guy thinks (racist stuff) like me."
People have also suggested that what Trump says doesn't matter to his supporters. But if the above is true, it most certainly DOES matter.
Post by: Institutional Control on March 01, 2016, 07:08:03 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 01, 2016, 07:41:18 PM
Post by: steve dave on March 01, 2016, 08:41:01 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 01, 2016, 08:43:14 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on March 01, 2016, 08:46:28 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 01, 2016, 08:47:24 PM
Post by: steve dave on March 01, 2016, 08:47:26 PM
It seems obvious that Christie is the VP favorite.
Yeah, I thought that was assumed to be a done deal
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on March 01, 2016, 08:58:52 PM
What about kasich
He's already said no to being a VP, and specifically to Trump I believe.
I recall hearing him say he would go back to be governor if he didn't get the nomination.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 01, 2016, 08:58:57 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 01, 2016, 08:59:59 PM
Post by: chum1 on March 01, 2016, 09:01:19 PM
"It's going to be big. It's going to he tall. It's going to be so tall. It's going to be beautiful."
Post by: wetwillie on March 01, 2016, 09:02:57 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 01, 2016, 09:03:58 PM
Lol forever at anyone who believes this isn't a contrived plot to get Hillary elected.
I have a hard time believing anyone thought the republican base was actually racist enough for a conspiracy like that to work.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 01, 2016, 09:04:56 PM
Lol forever at anyone who believes this isn't a contrived plot to get Hillary elected.
I have a hard time believing anyone thought the republican base was actually racist enough for a conspiracy like that to work.
Yeah, it's all based on racism. :rolleyes
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 01, 2016, 09:06:33 PM
Lol forever at anyone who believes this isn't a contrived plot to get Hillary elected.
I have a hard time believing anyone thought the republican base was actually racist enough for a conspiracy like that to work.
Yeah, it's all based on racism. :rolleyes
About 90% of Trump's platform is deporting Mexicans and shutting down Mosques.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 01, 2016, 09:07:05 PM
Lol forever at anyone who believes this isn't a contrived plot to get Hillary elected.
I have a hard time believing anyone thought the republican base was actually racist enough for a conspiracy like that to work.
Yeah, it's all based on racism. :rolleyes
About 90% of Trump's platform is deporting Mexicans and shutting down Mosques.
Oh, okay :rolleyes
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 01, 2016, 09:07:48 PM
Lol forever at anyone who believes this isn't a contrived plot to get Hillary elected.
:love: :love: :love: :love: straight to the conspiracy thread!
Not really much of a conspiracy given what is already known.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 01, 2016, 09:12:12 PM
You living under a rough ridin' rock, Memphis?
Post by: michigancat on March 01, 2016, 09:18:39 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 01, 2016, 09:32:21 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 01, 2016, 10:01:46 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 01, 2016, 10:04:45 PM
Post by: catastrophe on March 01, 2016, 10:15:04 PM
This things over. Is a third party candidate even viable at this point? Can they still get on all 50 ballots?
Yes. I mean, we are still weeks away from any candidate getting on any ballot. Why should an independent or third party have to name a candidate before republicans or democrats?
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 01, 2016, 10:26:15 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 01, 2016, 10:35:56 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 01, 2016, 10:37:50 PM
Post by: ednksu on March 01, 2016, 10:55:01 PM
thresholds though....This things over. Is a third party candidate even viable at this point? Can they still get on all 50 ballots?
Yes. I mean, we are still weeks away from any candidate getting on any ballot. Why should an independent or third party have to name a candidate before republicans or democrats?
Post by: ednksu on March 01, 2016, 10:55:35 PM
It's very telling what lengths the establishment will stoop to in order to stop Donald. We are about to gain back control of our country from these two parties that have sold us out for longer than I've been alive. I'll settle for damn near any candidate that can accomplish this, it's just a bonus that Trump is also one magnificent son of a bitch! :billdance:
I......I....I don't think you're trolling.....
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 01, 2016, 10:57:56 PM
I'm not, dumbassIt's very telling what lengths the establishment will stoop to in order to stop Donald. We are about to gain back control of our country from these two parties that have sold us out for longer than I've been alive. I'll settle for damn near any candidate that can accomplish this, it's just a bonus that Trump is also one magnificent son of a bitch! :billdance:
I......I....I don't think you're trolling.....
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 01, 2016, 11:06:52 PM
Post by: catastrophe on March 01, 2016, 11:11:35 PM
The other night cspan was playing one of Trump's species at Regis university or something. I was surprised at how bright eyed, optimistic and confident (and of course devoid of substance) the speech was. Just reading news bites about him, you'd think all he does is lob insults, say xenophibic crap and talk about is how shitty the country is. That appears to be an egregious misrepresentation of his message. I'm a little concerned that the more exposure he gets, the more this will become apparent to the broader electorate and the more likely he is to win. I think attacking him as a racist is a mistake that will backfire.
This would make sense if Trump were not in fact a racist, mysoginistic, xenophobic narcissist. But he is, so I don't see how calling him those things would backfire.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 01, 2016, 11:13:09 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 01, 2016, 11:20:00 PM
The other candidates only have Maria Antoinette like platitudes (fight gender/wealth/racial equality boop beep boop).
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 01, 2016, 11:26:40 PM
Post by: ednksu on March 01, 2016, 11:28:42 PM
The problem with that stance (misconception) is that he can point to myriad real life experiences as examples why that's not the case. In his speech they were a flowing stream of consciousness.
The other candidates only have Maria Antoinette like platitudes (fight gender/wealth/racial equality boop beep boop).
Except you can easily point to as many, if not more examples of him being a failure, committing double speak (in the real and 1984 context) and a number of other issues.
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on March 01, 2016, 11:46:01 PM
The problem with that stance (misconception) is that he can point to myriad real life experiences as examples why that's not the case. In his speech they were a flowing stream of consciousness.
The other candidates only have Maria Antoinette like platitudes (fight gender/wealth/racial equality boop beep boop).
Except you can easily point to as many, if not more examples of him being a failure, committing double speak (in the real and 1984 context) and a number of other issues.
Americans don't care about this, ergo, Obama.
Post by: ednksu on March 01, 2016, 11:51:56 PM
Yeah not so much. The best example might be Gitmo, but he was pretty well backed into a corner by Congress on extending that one. No where near the conflict Trump imposes on logic.The problem with that stance (misconception) is that he can point to myriad real life experiences as examples why that's not the case. In his speech they were a flowing stream of consciousness.
The other candidates only have Maria Antoinette like platitudes (fight gender/wealth/racial equality boop beep boop).
Except you can easily point to as many, if not more examples of him being a failure, committing double speak (in the real and 1984 context) and a number of other issues.
Americans don't care about this, ergo, Obama.
Post by: MakeItRain on March 01, 2016, 11:56:13 PM
Post by: sys on March 01, 2016, 11:58:20 PM
i'll see if i can find a link.
Post by: sys on March 02, 2016, 12:00:17 AM
Post by: Panjandrum on March 02, 2016, 12:11:37 AM
"Well, it's race."
"It's a populist revolution."
"It's the disenfranchised."
This is something that's going to be studied for a long time. It's a fascinating case study that covers a lot of areas.
Post by: bones129 on March 02, 2016, 12:24:09 AM
Trump was on the today show on Tuesday. They asked him about David Duke and race relations. He answered "no one has done more for minorities than me." He then illustrated this by talking about a club he built in South Florida and virtually anyone can get into the club, that was it, his self-proclaimed platform of race issues; a club that nearly everyone can get into.
A "club", obviously if they have the money. Classic Trump. All this guy cares about is himself and how rich he can be. :facepalm:
Post by: michigancat on March 02, 2016, 08:01:09 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/01/politics/valdosta-state-university-students-escorted-out-of-trump-rally/Good grief
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 02, 2016, 08:08:08 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 02, 2016, 08:53:25 AM
Watching the pundits on CNN try to psychoanalyze people voting for Trump is pretty great.
"Well, it's race."
"It's a populist revolution."
"It's the disenfranchised."
This is something that's going to be studied for a long time. It's a fascinating case study that covers a lot of areas.
It's not really that fascinating. It's immigration and disgust with the GOP. The fascinating part is that the GOP "establishment" didn't see this backlash coming.
Post by: star seed 7 on March 02, 2016, 08:59:09 AM
Post by: CNS on March 02, 2016, 09:01:50 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 02, 2016, 09:02:43 AM
The establishment has been turning a blind eye to the growing racist element of their party, and now they are stuck with the result
Yeah, Trump is the candidate we deserve.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 02, 2016, 09:20:20 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 02, 2016, 09:20:56 AM
Post by: Institutional Control on March 02, 2016, 09:23:23 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/02/local-texas-gop-chairman-goes-on-vulgar-homophobic-twitter-rant-about-hillary-clinton-and-fellow-republicans/?postshare=7251456930964562&tid=ss_tw
Post by: catastrophe on March 02, 2016, 09:33:39 AM
Watching the pundits on CNN try to psychoanalyze people voting for Trump is pretty great.
"Well, it's race."
"It's a populist revolution."
"It's the disenfranchised."
This is something that's going to be studied for a long time. It's a fascinating case study that covers a lot of areas.
Conclusion: people are dumb, and if you are on TV long enough repeating over and over how great you are and how much people love you then people start to believe it.
Post by: CNS on March 02, 2016, 10:02:06 AM
I didn't know where to put this but I highly recommend reading this. It is truly a great read.I bet his middle name is Mountain Dew.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/02/local-texas-gop-chairman-goes-on-vulgar-homophobic-twitter-rant-about-hillary-clinton-and-fellow-republicans/?postshare=7251456930964562&tid=ss_tw
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 02, 2016, 10:49:04 AM
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on March 02, 2016, 10:50:33 AM
Trump is the lowest common denominator who is more than happy to pander to these idiots and tell them whatever he thinks they want to hear and they are lapping it up. Build a wall! Kill Muslims! Make America great again! It's all kind of just code for this is a country for white people and everyone else should know their roles.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 02, 2016, 10:59:41 AM
Post by: CNS on March 02, 2016, 11:06:07 AM
The whole trump thing boils down to the fact that you have millions of uneducated and mild to medium racist white people spread across the entire country who have spent the last eight years of their lives fuming over that uppity you know what that is in charge of "their" country.Political comfort food.
Trump is the lowest common denominator who is more than happy to pander to these idiots and tell them whatever he thinks they want to hear and they are lapping it up. Build a wall! Kill Muslims! Make America great again! It's all kind of just code for this is a country for white people and everyone else should know their roles.
Post by: wetwillie on March 02, 2016, 11:14:53 AM
Post by: ednksu on March 02, 2016, 11:17:28 AM
Uh huh - keep blaming raaaacism.Do you honestly think this isn't an issue?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 02, 2016, 11:23:15 AM
Is their data segmenting trumps electorate thus far? I thought he was getting a fairly decent subset of each minority group within each state. I guess it feels disingenuous to say the majority of his votes this far are poor uneducated white people.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-really/471714/
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on March 02, 2016, 11:26:00 AM
Is their data segmenting trumps electorate thus far? I thought he was getting a fairly decent subset of each minority group within each state. I guess it feels disingenuous to say the majority of his votes this far are poor uneducated white people.
I didn't say poor. I said uneducated and mild to medium level racist. although I guess you could also add high level racists into the mix, but I don't think there are as many of them. also, you should read the link McKee just posted.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 02, 2016, 11:31:14 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 02, 2016, 11:37:13 AM
A fascinating sub-plot is the closet trump supporters passively attempt to make him sound good.
Well conservatives are pragmatic and will vote for whoever the republican nominee is. Liberals however march lockstep and force everyone to vote the democrat nominee and also straight line vote for democrats (republicans don't do that tho)
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 02, 2016, 11:38:48 AM
A fascinating sub-plot is the closet trump supporters passively attempt to make him sound good.
Well conservatives are pragmatic and will vote for whoever the republican nominee is. Liberals however march lockstep and force everyone to vote the democrat nominee and also straight line vote for democrats (republicans don't do that tho)
I absolutely know this and if I vote, it will be for Trump (if h wins the nomination). I will do it mocking him the entire time though.
Post by: catastrophe on March 02, 2016, 11:48:53 AM
Post by: ednksu on March 02, 2016, 12:11:32 PM
what! Several pub states, like Kansas, are pushing to bring back party line voting buttons/boxes solely to do this.A fascinating sub-plot is the closet trump supporters passively attempt to make him sound good.
Well conservatives are pragmatic and will vote for whoever the republican nominee is. Liberals however march lockstep and force everyone to vote the democrat nominee and also straight line vote for democrats (republicans don't do that tho)
Post by: wetwillie on March 02, 2016, 12:40:08 PM
Vancouver is really nice you guys. Not many true Canadians there also. True melting pot.
You couldn't afford it
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 02, 2016, 12:54:05 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on March 02, 2016, 12:56:38 PM
what! Several pub states, like Kansas, are pushing to bring back party line voting buttons/boxes solely to do this.A fascinating sub-plot is the closet trump supporters passively attempt to make him sound good.
Well conservatives are pragmatic and will vote for whoever the republican nominee is. Liberals however march lockstep and force everyone to vote the democrat nominee and also straight line vote for democrats (republicans don't do that tho)
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Frs740.pbsrc.com%2Falbums%2Fxx46%2Fkaynil%2Fmacro%2F486229b7.jpg%7Ec200&hash=618178b1685fb4b6dda4e362ad537d91ddd9e083)
Post by: catastrophe on March 02, 2016, 12:57:04 PM
Vancouver is really nice you guys. Not many true Canadians there also. True melting pot.
You couldn't afford it
Probably wouldn't pay it at least. They're working on their own little real estate bubble up there.
Post by: sys on March 02, 2016, 01:04:08 PM
Post by: DQ12 on March 02, 2016, 01:09:14 PM
there is much more to the trump phenomenon than just racism and xenophobia. but racism and xenophobia are important to his candidacy. all candidates have to build coalitions of voters motivated by different issues.I would add desperation and anger and a perception of macroeconomic business expertise. I can't think of anything else that would factor into it.
Post by: chuckjames on March 02, 2016, 01:29:41 PM
there is much more to the trump phenomenon than just racism and xenophobia. but racism and xenophobia are important to his candidacy. all candidates have to build coalitions of voters motivated by different issues.I would add desperation and anger and a perception of macroeconomic business expertise. I can't think of anything else that would factor into it.
I think admiration too. At least from a certain portion of guys. Alot of guys want to live his life. Which I don't think you can say about Romney, even tho they are both successful businessmen.
Post by: wetwillie on March 02, 2016, 01:33:29 PM
Post by: catastrophe on March 02, 2016, 01:36:58 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on March 02, 2016, 01:39:34 PM
Post by: chum1 on March 02, 2016, 01:41:58 PM
Rumor going around among my conservative friends is that Romney is going to run as an independent. Supposed to announce it tomorrow.
That's the split. There it is.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 02, 2016, 01:42:11 PM
Rumor going around among my conservative friends is that Romney is going to run as an independent. Supposed to announce it tomorrow.
That would be great.
Post by: DQ12 on March 02, 2016, 01:43:54 PM
I wonder if Bernie would consider running independent if Romney does. I doubt it, but from a game theory perspective, it might makes sense.Rumor going around among my conservative friends is that Romney is going to run as an independent. Supposed to announce it tomorrow.
That's the split. There it is.
Post by: Dub on March 02, 2016, 01:44:47 PM
Post by: chuckjames on March 02, 2016, 01:45:51 PM
I wonder if Bernie would consider running independent if Romney does. I doubt it, but from a game theory perspective, it might makes sense.Rumor going around among my conservative friends is that Romney is going to run as an independent. Supposed to announce it tomorrow.
That's the split. There it is.
Explain the Game Theory benefits to Bernie?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 02, 2016, 01:48:04 PM
Wouldn't that be a terrible idea? Basically split the Republican party in half and ensure a win for Hilary?
Not if he thinks Hillary would be a better president than Donald.
Post by: Dub on March 02, 2016, 01:50:15 PM
Wouldn't that be a terrible idea? Basically split the Republican party in half and ensure a win for Hilary?
Not if he thinks Hillary would be a better president than Donald.
Hilary will already beat Donald, so why would he destroy the Republican party in the process?
Post by: DQ12 on March 02, 2016, 01:57:32 PM
If the republican vote is split he has a chance at winning the general with a split democrat vote.I wonder if Bernie would consider running independent if Romney does. I doubt it, but from a game theory perspective, it might makes sense.Rumor going around among my conservative friends is that Romney is going to run as an independent. Supposed to announce it tomorrow.
That's the split. There it is.
Explain the Game Theory benefits to Bernie?
Post by: chuckjames on March 02, 2016, 01:58:32 PM
Wouldn't that be a terrible idea? Basically split the Republican party in half and ensure a win for Hilary?
I think part of the GOP doesn't want Trump to win the presidency Bc then the conservatives and establishment lose their party to facist nationalists for at least 4 if not an entire generation.
Post by: DQ12 on March 02, 2016, 01:59:10 PM
Hilary might lose to Donald.Wouldn't that be a terrible idea? Basically split the Republican party in half and ensure a win for Hilary?
Not if he thinks Hillary would be a better president than Donald.
Hilary will already beat Donald, so why would he destroy the Republican party in the process?
Post by: mocat on March 02, 2016, 02:00:40 PM
If the republican vote is split he has a chance at winning the general with a split democrat vote.I wonder if Bernie would consider running independent if Romney does. I doubt it, but from a game theory perspective, it might makes sense.Rumor going around among my conservative friends is that Romney is going to run as an independent. Supposed to announce it tomorrow.
That's the split. There it is.
Explain the Game Theory benefits to Bernie?
that would be wild. minnesota wild! :D
Post by: Dub on March 02, 2016, 02:00:52 PM
Hilary might lose to Donald.Wouldn't that be a terrible idea? Basically split the Republican party in half and ensure a win for Hilary?
Not if he thinks Hillary would be a better president than Donald.
Hilary will already beat Donald, so why would he destroy the Republican party in the process?
I don't think this is remotely possible.
Post by: chuckjames on March 02, 2016, 02:05:38 PM
Hilary might lose to Donald.Wouldn't that be a terrible idea? Basically split the Republican party in half and ensure a win for Hilary?
Not if he thinks Hillary would be a better president than Donald.
Hilary will already beat Donald, so why would he destroy the Republican party in the process?
I don't think this is remotely possible.
I think it's 65-70% chance Hillary would win. But a black swan event could happen like in 2008 and blow it up.
Post by: DQ12 on March 02, 2016, 02:06:36 PM
I don't know how likely it is, but if the last year has shown anything, it's that saying "People will come to their senses on Trump" is generally wrong.Hilary might lose to Donald.Wouldn't that be a terrible idea? Basically split the Republican party in half and ensure a win for Hilary?
Not if he thinks Hillary would be a better president than Donald.
Hilary will already beat Donald, so why would he destroy the Republican party in the process?
I don't think this is remotely possible.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 02, 2016, 02:07:20 PM
Hilary might lose to Donald.Wouldn't that be a terrible idea? Basically split the Republican party in half and ensure a win for Hilary?
Not if he thinks Hillary would be a better president than Donald.
Hilary will already beat Donald, so why would he destroy the Republican party in the process?
I don't think this is remotely possible.
It is very possible. In fact, I'd say it's better than 50% regardless of what the national polls may say. Trump will hold most red states based on anti-Hillary sentiment alone, and stands a decent chance of winning a number of purple rust belt states based on heavy white defections from the Dem base. Dem turnout in the primaries is WAY down. GOP turnout is way up. And Hillary is a dreadful candidate.
Post by: Fedor on March 02, 2016, 02:08:35 PM
We have only seen primary election Donald, who knows what general election Donald has in store.Hilary might lose to Donald.Wouldn't that be a terrible idea? Basically split the Republican party in half and ensure a win for Hilary?
Not if he thinks Hillary would be a better president than Donald.
Hilary will already beat Donald, so why would he destroy the Republican party in the process?
I don't think this is remotely possible.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 02, 2016, 02:12:35 PM
Wouldn't that be a terrible idea? Basically split the Republican party in half and ensure a win for Hilary?
Not if he thinks Hillary would be a better president than Donald.
Hilary will already beat Donald, so why would he destroy the Republican party in the process?
Trump has already destroyed the republican party. Romney would just be trying to salvage what is left of it.
Post by: chuckjames on March 02, 2016, 02:15:48 PM
We have only seen primary election Donald, who knows what general election Donald has in store.Hilary might lose to Donald.Wouldn't that be a terrible idea? Basically split the Republican party in half and ensure a win for Hilary?
Not if he thinks Hillary would be a better president than Donald.
Hilary will already beat Donald, so why would he destroy the Republican party in the process?
I don't think this is remotely possible.
We saw general election Donald last night. Very populist economic message. And not a lot of crazy, other than threatening the current speaker of the house. But alas ole Don has no time for checks and balances.
Post by: chuckjames on March 02, 2016, 02:19:56 PM
We have only seen primary election Donald, who knows what general election Donald has in store.Hilary might lose to Donald.Wouldn't that be a terrible idea? Basically split the Republican party in half and ensure a win for Hilary?
Not if he thinks Hillary would be a better president than Donald.
Hilary will already beat Donald, so why would he destroy the Republican party in the process?
I don't think this is remotely possible.
We saw general election Donald last night. Very populist economic message. And not a lot of crazy, other than threatening the current speaker of the house. But alas ole Don has no time for checks and balances.
Insert Chant or Dax post about Obama not respecting checks and balances either here--->
Post by: chum1 on March 02, 2016, 02:28:53 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 02, 2016, 02:46:45 PM
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
Post by: DQ12 on March 02, 2016, 02:50:10 PM
The accusation that [insert pub candidate here] is racist is the laziest, most predictable and typical comment from the left. Everyone except for their mindless idiot constituency is completely bored and deaf to the accusation. The left is the boy who cried wolf, the chicken who said the sky is falling. This a reason trump is doing well, people are tired of being attacked for not stepping into line without whatever crazy ass contrived issue the left is railing against.I'm certainly right of center and I think Trump's rhetoric appeals to racists. I don't think that's contentious, given the KKK dude's endorsement.
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
Post by: catastrophe on March 02, 2016, 02:58:54 PM
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on March 02, 2016, 03:02:09 PM
The accusation that [insert pub candidate here] is racist is the laziest, most predictable and typical comment from the left. Everyone except for their mindless idiot constituency is completely bored and deaf to the accusation. The left is the boy who cried wolf, the chicken who said the sky is falling. This a reason trump is doing well, people are tired of being attacked for not stepping into line without whatever crazy ass contrived issue the left is railing against.
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
who said that trump is racist? I certainly don't think he is and don't think he believes 90% of what he says. his pandering to the uneducated racists in attempt to get their vote is pretty obvious though and they are coming out to support him in droves.
Post by: 8manpick on March 02, 2016, 03:07:56 PM
Post by: 8manpick on March 02, 2016, 03:08:27 PM
Post by: ChiComCat on March 02, 2016, 03:13:12 PM
The accusation that [insert pub candidate here] is racist is the laziest, most predictable and typical comment from the left. Everyone except for their mindless idiot constituency is completely bored and deaf to the accusation. The left is the boy who cried wolf, the chicken who said the sky is falling. This a reason trump is doing well, people are tired of being attacked for not stepping into line without whatever crazy ass contrived issue the left is railing against.
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
I'm sure racism isn't a voting issue for the former KKK leader. He is supporting Trump for economic policies or something.
Post by: ChiComCat on March 02, 2016, 03:14:05 PM
The accusation that [insert pub candidate here] is racist is the laziest, most predictable and typical comment from the left. Everyone except for their mindless idiot constituency is completely bored and deaf to the accusation. The left is the boy who cried wolf, the chicken who said the sky is falling. This a reason trump is doing well, people are tired of being attacked for not stepping into line without whatever crazy ass contrived issue the left is railing against.
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
who said that trump is racist? I certainly don't think he is and don't think he believes 90% of what he says. his pandering to the uneducated racists in attempt to get their vote is pretty obvious though and they are coming out to support him in droves.
Is there a line between pretending to be racist and being racist?
Post by: star seed 7 on March 02, 2016, 03:15:06 PM
The accusation that [insert pub candidate here] is racist is the laziest, most predictable and typical comment from the left. Everyone except for their mindless idiot constituency is completely bored and deaf to the accusation. The left is the boy who cried wolf, the chicken who said the sky is falling. This a reason trump is doing well, people are tired of being attacked for not stepping into line without whatever crazy ass contrived issue the left is railing against.
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
who said that trump is racist? I certainly don't think he is and don't think he believes 90% of what he says. his pandering to the uneducated racists in attempt to get their vote is pretty obvious though and they are coming out to support him in droves.
Is there a line between pretending to be racist and being racist?
It can be used well for comedy
Post by: chuckjames on March 02, 2016, 03:16:49 PM
Post by: DQ12 on March 02, 2016, 03:21:55 PM
Question for Chant, would you vote for Donald Trump over Barack Hussein Obama?that's obviously true
Post by: treysolid on March 02, 2016, 03:29:27 PM
The accusation that [insert pub candidate here] is racist is the laziest, most predictable and typical comment from the left. Everyone except for their mindless idiot constituency is completely bored and deaf to the accusation. The left is the boy who cried wolf, the chicken who said the sky is falling. This a reason trump is doing well, people are tired of being attacked for not stepping into line without whatever crazy ass contrived issue the left is railing against.
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
lol. literally the very first thing trump said after his campaign announcement was that immigrants crossing our southern border were rapists (with some, I assume, good people sprinkled in there). not "there's a bunch of people escaping cartel violence in mexico and central america (with some criminals sprinkled in there)." so who's stereotyping who?
Post by: treysolid on March 02, 2016, 03:31:01 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on March 02, 2016, 03:31:23 PM
The accusation that [insert pub candidate here] is racist is the laziest, most predictable and typical comment from the left. Everyone except for their mindless idiot constituency is completely bored and deaf to the accusation. The left is the boy who cried wolf, the chicken who said the sky is falling. This a reason trump is doing well, people are tired of being attacked for not stepping into line without whatever crazy ass contrived issue the left is railing against.
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
who said that trump is racist? I certainly don't think he is and don't think he believes 90% of what he says. his pandering to the uneducated racists in attempt to get their vote is pretty obvious though and they are coming out to support him in droves.
Is there a line between pretending to be racist and being racist?
It's the same line that bisects perception and reality.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 02, 2016, 03:34:52 PM
Post by: ednksu on March 02, 2016, 03:40:42 PM
Trump may just be pretending to be racist. If he is, it's not nearly as obvious as his pretending to be Christian is, though."Last April, perhaps in a surge of Czech nationalism, Ivana Trump told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that from time to time her husband reads a book of Hitler's collected speeches, My New Order, which he keeps in a cabinet by his bed ... Hitler's speeches, from his earliest days up through the Phony War of 1939, reveal his extraordinary ability as a master propagandist," Marie Brenner wrote.
http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trumps-ex-wife-once-said-he-kept-a-book-of-hitlers-speeches-by-his-bed-2015-8
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 02, 2016, 03:46:41 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 02, 2016, 03:48:17 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on March 02, 2016, 03:53:49 PM
if a conservative does run as a third party independent, then Hillary should press Bernie to see if he'll be her vice right away.
If the Dems were more organized and smart about it, they'd probably push for Elizabeth Warren.
Post by: star seed 7 on March 02, 2016, 03:56:42 PM
It was a great moment after the last debate when Trump was getting interviewed and claimed that the IRS was targeting him with audits due to his strong Christian beliefs.
Yes! This was fantastic!
Post by: Emo EMAW on March 02, 2016, 04:14:01 PM
Post by: Cire on March 02, 2016, 04:15:25 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 02, 2016, 04:22:09 PM
Wasn't Cruz watch partying at a known bigots bar?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Emerson Bigots? :sdeek:
Post by: Dub on March 02, 2016, 04:22:36 PM
It was a great moment after the last debate when Trump was getting interviewed and claimed that the IRS was targeting him with audits due to his strong Christian beliefs.
Yes! This was fantastic!
I saw this live too and it was great television seeing the face of the guy asking the question trying to comprehend what just happened and figuring out follow up questions
Post by: michigancat on March 02, 2016, 04:22:55 PM
I would be so pumped to vote for Mitt Romney (I)
yeah it's crazy how attractive that sounds in this field
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 02, 2016, 04:32:02 PM
That can't be real. :sdeek:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwwdE2H__Zg
Post by: Dub on March 02, 2016, 04:40:40 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 02, 2016, 05:04:27 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on March 02, 2016, 05:12:09 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 02, 2016, 05:31:44 PM
The accusation that [insert pub candidate here] is racist is the laziest, most predictable and typical comment from the left. Everyone except for their mindless idiot constituency is completely bored and deaf to the accusation. The left is the boy who cried wolf, the chicken who said the sky is falling. This a reason trump is doing well, people are tired of being attacked for not stepping into line without whatever crazy ass contrived issue the left is railing against.I'm certainly right of center and I think Trump's rhetoric appeals to racists. I don't think that's contentious, given the KKK dude's endorsement.
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
Conflating the KKK across a homogeneous segment of society is pretty rough ridin' ridiculous. The KKK also endorsed Ben Carson. It's a handful of loons screaming for attention. It's far cry from the organization of your grandpa's southern democrats riding around lynching black people and terrorizing black neighborhoods. GMAFB.
There are no doubt racists in this world. I would venture a guess the labor unions who dutifully support democrats constitute a good portion of them. Trump isn't running against b.o., in case you haven't noticed. He's running against an elitist establishment crooked clinton. At least get the prejudices correct (sexism).
The left's slanderous marketing scheme of calling everyone racist, and parsing words and writing what was implied as overt and generally being terrible subhuman people has run its course. It's backfiring. Those fucks gave us b.o., now they're giving us trump.
Post by: steve dave on March 02, 2016, 05:34:40 PM
A fascinating sub-plot is the closet trump supporters passively attempt to make him sound good.
Yes, very enjoyable
Post by: michigancat on March 02, 2016, 05:38:17 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on March 02, 2016, 06:10:23 PM
I didn't know where to put this but I highly recommend reading this. It is truly a great read.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/02/local-texas-gop-chairman-goes-on-vulgar-homophobic-twitter-rant-about-hillary-clinton-and-fellow-republicans/?postshare=7251456930964562&tid=ss_tw
http://gawker.com/the-newest-texas-gop-county-chairman-is-completely-eff-1762439255
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: catastrophe on March 02, 2016, 06:13:25 PM
The KKK didn't endorse Ben Carson, LOL
If FSD had any credibility left on this topic, claiming that the KKK endorsed a black man for president just pissed the rest of it away.
Post by: chuckjames on March 02, 2016, 07:04:33 PM
Hilary might lose to Donald.Wouldn't that be a terrible idea? Basically split the Republican party in half and ensure a win for Hilary?
Not if he thinks Hillary would be a better president than Donald.
Hilary will already beat Donald, so why would he destroy the Republican party in the process?
I don't think this is remotely possible.
It is very possible. In fact, I'd say it's better than 50% regardless of what the national polls may say. Trump will hold most red states based on anti-Hillary sentiment alone, and stands a decent chance of winning a number of purple rust belt states based on heavy white defections from the Dem base. Dem turnout in the primaries is WAY down. GOP turnout is way up. And Hillary is a dreadful candidate.
While I agree Hillary isn't a great candidate. Primary turnout has nothing to do with who wins the general.
https://twitter.com/seantrende/status/705195508998885376
Post by: treysolid on March 02, 2016, 07:41:54 PM
The accusation that [insert pub candidate here] is racist is the laziest, most predictable and typical comment from the left. Everyone except for their mindless idiot constituency is completely bored and deaf to the accusation. The left is the boy who cried wolf, the chicken who said the sky is falling. This a reason trump is doing well, people are tired of being attacked for not stepping into line without whatever crazy ass contrived issue the left is railing against.I'm certainly right of center and I think Trump's rhetoric appeals to racists. I don't think that's contentious, given the KKK dude's endorsement.
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
Conflating the KKK across a homogeneous segment of society is pretty rough ridin' ridiculous. The KKK also endorsed Ben Carson. It's a handful of loons screaming for attention. It's far cry from the organization of your grandpa's southern democrats riding around lynching black people and terrorizing black neighborhoods. GMAFB.
There are no doubt racists in this world. I would venture a guess the labor unions who dutifully support democrats constitute a good portion of them. Trump isn't running against b.o., in case you haven't noticed. He's running against an elitist establishment crooked clinton. At least get the prejudices correct (sexism).
The left's slanderous marketing scheme of calling everyone racist, and parsing words and writing what was implied as overt and generally being terrible subhuman people has run its course. It's backfiring. Those fucks gave us b.o., now they're giving us trump.
wow. that's pretty disingenuous, given that the parties switched at around the turn of the century. modern day republicans that refer to themselves as the "party of lincoln" are so rough ridin' deceitful.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 02, 2016, 08:04:15 PM
The KKK didn't endorse Ben Carson, LOL
If FSD had any credibility left on this topic, claiming that the KKK endorsed a black man for president just pissed the rest of it away.
http://nationalreport.net/ku-klux-klan-endorse-dr-ben-carson-president/
Again, not your grandpa's southern democrat kkk
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 02, 2016, 08:07:47 PM
The accusation that [insert pub candidate here] is racist is the laziest, most predictable and typical comment from the left. Everyone except for their mindless idiot constituency is completely bored and deaf to the accusation. The left is the boy who cried wolf, the chicken who said the sky is falling. This a reason trump is doing well, people are tired of being attacked for not stepping into line without whatever crazy ass contrived issue the left is railing against.I'm certainly right of center and I think Trump's rhetoric appeals to racists. I don't think that's contentious, given the KKK dude's endorsement.
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
Conflating the KKK across a homogeneous segment of society is pretty rough ridin' ridiculous. The KKK also endorsed Ben Carson. It's a handful of loons screaming for attention. It's far cry from the organization of your grandpa's southern democrats riding around lynching black people and terrorizing black neighborhoods. GMAFB.
There are no doubt racists in this world. I would venture a guess the labor unions who dutifully support democrats constitute a good portion of them. Trump isn't running against b.o., in case you haven't noticed. He's running against an elitist establishment crooked clinton. At least get the prejudices correct (sexism).
The left's slanderous marketing scheme of calling everyone racist, and parsing words and writing what was implied as overt and generally being terrible subhuman people has run its course. It's backfiring. Those fucks gave us b.o., now they're giving us trump.
wow. that's pretty disingenuous, given that the parties switched at around the turn of the century. modern day republicans that refer to themselves as the "party of lincoln" are so rough ridin' deceitful.
Oh, they switched did they? :lol:
Gtfoo. A feeble minded victim of the not so thinly veiled marketing sceme.
Post by: star seed 7 on March 02, 2016, 08:12:42 PM
The KKK didn't endorse Ben Carson, LOL
If FSD had any credibility left on this topic, claiming that the KKK endorsed a black man for president just pissed the rest of it away.
http://nationalreport.net/ku-klux-klan-endorse-dr-ben-carson-president/
Again, not your grandpa's southern democrat kkk
:lol:
Post by: star seed 7 on March 02, 2016, 08:15:32 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on March 02, 2016, 08:16:01 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: star seed 7 on March 02, 2016, 08:16:10 PM
Post by: treysolid on March 02, 2016, 08:20:54 PM
The accusation that [insert pub candidate here] is racist is the laziest, most predictable and typical comment from the left. Everyone except for their mindless idiot constituency is completely bored and deaf to the accusation. The left is the boy who cried wolf, the chicken who said the sky is falling. This a reason trump is doing well, people are tired of being attacked for not stepping into line without whatever crazy ass contrived issue the left is railing against.I'm certainly right of center and I think Trump's rhetoric appeals to racists. I don't think that's contentious, given the KKK dude's endorsement.
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
Conflating the KKK across a homogeneous segment of society is pretty rough ridin' ridiculous. The KKK also endorsed Ben Carson. It's a handful of loons screaming for attention. It's far cry from the organization of your grandpa's southern democrats riding around lynching black people and terrorizing black neighborhoods. GMAFB.
There are no doubt racists in this world. I would venture a guess the labor unions who dutifully support democrats constitute a good portion of them. Trump isn't running against b.o., in case you haven't noticed. He's running against an elitist establishment crooked clinton. At least get the prejudices correct (sexism).
The left's slanderous marketing scheme of calling everyone racist, and parsing words and writing what was implied as overt and generally being terrible subhuman people has run its course. It's backfiring. Those fucks gave us b.o., now they're giving us trump.
wow. that's pretty disingenuous, given that the parties switched at around the turn of the century. modern day republicans that refer to themselves as the "party of lincoln" are so rough ridin' deceitful.
Oh, they switched did they? :lol:
Gtfoo. A feeble minded victim of the not so thinly veiled marketing sceme.
pfft. yep, I'm a sucker who will believe anything those historical facts tell me.
Post by: michigancat on March 02, 2016, 08:21:23 PM
The KKK didn't endorse Ben Carson, LOL
If FSD had any credibility left on this topic, claiming that the KKK endorsed a black man for president just pissed the rest of it away.
http://nationalreport.net/ku-klux-klan-endorse-dr-ben-carson-president/
Again, not your grandpa's southern democrat kkk
Post by: chum1 on March 02, 2016, 08:22:38 PM
Shane Paulson is a pioneer in the field of mobile journalism. Logging millions of miles in his heavily modified Volkswagen Bug camper, Shane has dedicated his life to going wherever the story takes him.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 02, 2016, 08:25:04 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 02, 2016, 08:27:07 PM
The accusation that [insert pub candidate here] is racist is the laziest, most predictable and typical comment from the left. Everyone except for their mindless idiot constituency is completely bored and deaf to the accusation. The left is the boy who cried wolf, the chicken who said the sky is falling. This a reason trump is doing well, people are tired of being attacked for not stepping into line without whatever crazy ass contrived issue the left is railing against.I'm certainly right of center and I think Trump's rhetoric appeals to racists. I don't think that's contentious, given the KKK dude's endorsement.
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
Conflating the KKK across a homogeneous segment of society is pretty rough ridin' ridiculous. The KKK also endorsed Ben Carson. It's a handful of loons screaming for attention. It's far cry from the organization of your grandpa's southern democrats riding around lynching black people and terrorizing black neighborhoods. GMAFB.
There are no doubt racists in this world. I would venture a guess the labor unions who dutifully support democrats constitute a good portion of them. Trump isn't running against b.o., in case you haven't noticed. He's running against an elitist establishment crooked clinton. At least get the prejudices correct (sexism).
The left's slanderous marketing scheme of calling everyone racist, and parsing words and writing what was implied as overt and generally being terrible subhuman people has run its course. It's backfiring. Those fucks gave us b.o., now they're giving us trump.
wow. that's pretty disingenuous, given that the parties switched at around the turn of the century. modern day republicans that refer to themselves as the "party of lincoln" are so rough ridin' deceitful.
Oh, they switched did they? :lol:
Gtfoo. A feeble minded victim of the not so thinly veiled marketing sceme.
pfft. yep, I'm a sucker who will believe anything those historical facts tell me.
Facts? Okay. Is there a racist baton the parties pass back and forth?
Post by: chum1 on March 02, 2016, 08:27:34 PM
Originally from the Langerhans Islets, Alexander Crouton-Skitch practices journalism with what he calls "a motivational surgeon's scalpel." As co-founder and charter member of the Longines Symphonette Society, he is proud to be internationally recognized as its President Emeritus.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 02, 2016, 08:29:53 PM
Hard hitting stuff, libtards :Wha:
Let's get the blogonerd and then cite huff post and thinkprogress blogonerd crap for our own pov. :ROFL:
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 02, 2016, 08:38:46 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 02, 2016, 08:59:25 PM
The KKK didn't endorse Ben Carson, LOL
If FSD had any credibility left on this topic, claiming that the KKK endorsed a black man for president just pissed the rest of it away.
http://nationalreport.net/ku-klux-klan-endorse-dr-ben-carson-president/
Again, not your grandpa's southern democrat kkk
This is awesome
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 02, 2016, 09:01:38 PM
Everyone who supports trump is a white racist because 1) unsolicited kkk endorsement, and 2) said there are rapists and drug dealers hopping the border.
Hard hitting stuff, libtards :Wha:
Let's get the blogonerd and then cite huff post and thinkprogress blogonerd crap for our own pov. :ROFL:
He could decline the endorsement
Post by: MakeItRain on March 02, 2016, 09:06:09 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 02, 2016, 09:14:16 PM
http://gawker.com/media-hating-trump-campaign-approves-credentials-for-sl-1762371934
The video embedded in the comments is something else.
Post by: MakeItRain on March 02, 2016, 09:25:59 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 02, 2016, 09:48:43 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 02, 2016, 09:51:48 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 02, 2016, 09:52:43 PM
Gawker
rough ridin' liberal media and their indisputable facts and crap :curse:
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 02, 2016, 09:53:58 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 02, 2016, 09:55:51 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 02, 2016, 09:56:28 PM
Post by: cfbandyman on March 02, 2016, 10:47:46 PM
Post by: bones129 on March 03, 2016, 12:08:07 AM
The KKK didn't endorse Ben Carson, LOL
If FSD had any credibility left on this topic, claiming that the KKK endorsed a black man for president just pissed the rest of it away.
http://nationalreport.net/ku-klux-klan-endorse-dr-ben-carson-president/
Again, not your grandpa's southern democrat kkk
Give it up, FSD. Your apparently go-to website (nationalreport.net) is satire, BS, etc. You've been fooled. :lol: :ROFL:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Report
Post by: MakeItRain on March 03, 2016, 09:08:55 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 03, 2016, 09:09:48 AM
The KKK didn't endorse Ben Carson, LOL
If FSD had any credibility left on this topic, claiming that the KKK endorsed a black man for president just pissed the rest of it away.
http://nationalreport.net/ku-klux-klan-endorse-dr-ben-carson-president/
Again, not your grandpa's southern democrat kkk
Give it up, FSD. Your apparently go-to website (nationalreport.net) is satire, BS, etc. You've been fooled. :lol: :ROFL:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Report
FSD is going to claim he was just totally trolling you guys
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 03, 2016, 09:15:52 AM
The dumbass Republican party is so lost. I love how they think rough ridin' Mitt Romney attacking Donald Trump is going to make any difference in the support he's getting. No one gives two shits about Mitt and certainly Trump supporters don't. What a ridiculously desperate and tone deaf strategy.
Yeah, their party has been taken from them. I think their only reasonable course of action at this point is to put a candidate up as an independent to keep the new republicans from getting too powerful, then form a new 3rd party over the next 4 years to take on Hillary.
Post by: DQ12 on March 03, 2016, 09:17:51 AM
I didn't say all trump supporters are racists, and I didn't even say Trump was a racist -- I just said that Trump's incendiary, anti-brown people rhetoric (from Syrian refugees to the rapist illegal aliens) appeals to people that are already pretty racist. Kind of an "all squares are rectangles, not all rectangles are squares" sort of thing. My point is that I think he's got the racist segment of the electorate pretty well cornered.The accusation that [insert pub candidate here] is racist is the laziest, most predictable and typical comment from the left. Everyone except for their mindless idiot constituency is completely bored and deaf to the accusation. The left is the boy who cried wolf, the chicken who said the sky is falling. This a reason trump is doing well, people are tired of being attacked for not stepping into line without whatever crazy ass contrived issue the left is railing against.I'm certainly right of center and I think Trump's rhetoric appeals to racists. I don't think that's contentious, given the KKK dude's endorsement.
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
Conflating the KKK across a homogeneous segment of society is pretty rough ridin' ridiculous. The KKK also endorsed Ben Carson. It's a handful of loons screaming for attention. It's far cry from the organization of your grandpa's southern democrats riding around lynching black people and terrorizing black neighborhoods. GMAFB.
There are no doubt racists in this world. I would venture a guess the labor unions who dutifully support democrats constitute a good portion of them. Trump isn't running against b.o., in case you haven't noticed. He's running against an elitist establishment crooked clinton. At least get the prejudices correct (sexism).
The left's slanderous marketing scheme of calling everyone racist, and parsing words and writing what was implied as overt and generally being terrible subhuman people has run its course. It's backfiring. Those fucks gave us b.o., now they're giving us trump.
The people that think "'diversity' is a code word for white genocide" or whatever the phrase is are probably going to vote for trump.
I don't support the same ideals Trump supports. I don't share the same values as Trump. And I certainly don't consider Trump to be a guy I want running the country. So if Trump is the Republican nominee -- if Trump is what "Republican" means -- I'll have a very hard time considering myself a "Republican" moving forward.
Post by: catastrophe on March 03, 2016, 09:22:46 AM
The KKK didn't endorse Ben Carson, LOL
If FSD had any credibility left on this topic, claiming that the KKK endorsed a black man for president just pissed the rest of it away.
http://nationalreport.net/ku-klux-klan-endorse-dr-ben-carson-president/
Again, not your grandpa's southern democrat kkk
Give it up, FSD. Your apparently go-to website (nationalreport.net) is satire, BS, etc. You've been fooled. :lol: :ROFL:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Report
I can just imagine FSD logging in to the National Report every morning and being utterly outraged at the direction this country is going.
Post by: catastrophe on March 03, 2016, 09:25:29 AM
So if Trump is the Republican nominee -- if Trump is what "Republican" means -- I'll have a very hard time considering myself a "Republican" moving forward.
I think a lot of people feel this way, which is exactly why the establishment is terrified of Trump getting the nomination.
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 09:26:32 AM
Quote
...making profits from "duping gullible Internet users with deceptively newsy headlines
Oh my.
Post by: star seed 7 on March 03, 2016, 09:26:53 AM
AND HE'S BLACK YOU TRYING TO SAY HE'S RACIST DLEW???
Post by: chum1 on March 03, 2016, 11:16:21 AM
Post by: steve dave on March 03, 2016, 11:32:36 AM
I didn't say all trump supporters are racists, and I didn't even say Trump was a racist -- I just said that Trump's incendiary, anti-brown people rhetoric (from Syrian refugees to the rapist illegal aliens) appeals to people that are already pretty racist. Kind of an "all squares are rectangles, not all rectangles are squares" sort of thing. My point is that I think he's got the racist segment of the electorate pretty well cornered.The accusation that [insert pub candidate here] is racist is the laziest, most predictable and typical comment from the left. Everyone except for their mindless idiot constituency is completely bored and deaf to the accusation. The left is the boy who cried wolf, the chicken who said the sky is falling. This a reason trump is doing well, people are tired of being attacked for not stepping into line without whatever crazy ass contrived issue the left is railing against.I'm certainly right of center and I think Trump's rhetoric appeals to racists. I don't think that's contentious, given the KKK dude's endorsement.
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
Conflating the KKK across a homogeneous segment of society is pretty rough ridin' ridiculous. The KKK also endorsed Ben Carson. It's a handful of loons screaming for attention. It's far cry from the organization of your grandpa's southern democrats riding around lynching black people and terrorizing black neighborhoods. GMAFB.
There are no doubt racists in this world. I would venture a guess the labor unions who dutifully support democrats constitute a good portion of them. Trump isn't running against b.o., in case you haven't noticed. He's running against an elitist establishment crooked clinton. At least get the prejudices correct (sexism).
The left's slanderous marketing scheme of calling everyone racist, and parsing words and writing what was implied as overt and generally being terrible subhuman people has run its course. It's backfiring. Those fucks gave us b.o., now they're giving us trump.
The people that think "'diversity' is a code word for white genocide" or whatever the phrase is are probably going to vote for trump.
I don't support the same ideals Trump supports. I don't share the same values as Trump. And I certainly don't consider Trump to be a guy I want running the country. So if Trump is the Republican nominee -- if Trump is what "Republican" means -- I'll have a very hard time considering myself a "Republican" moving forward.
good post. similar to:
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FAsw6waV.jpg&hash=25082b14da8934cec4bc76be726dcdeb41889f89)
Post by: MakeItRain on March 03, 2016, 12:37:35 PM
I didn't say all trump supporters are racists, and I didn't even say Trump was a racist -- I just said that Trump's incendiary, anti-brown people rhetoric (from Syrian refugees to the rapist illegal aliens) appeals to people that are already pretty racist. Kind of an "all squares are rectangles, not all rectangles are squares" sort of thing. My point is that I think he's got the racist segment of the electorate pretty well cornered.The accusation that [insert pub candidate here] is racist is the laziest, most predictable and typical comment from the left. Everyone except for their mindless idiot constituency is completely bored and deaf to the accusation. The left is the boy who cried wolf, the chicken who said the sky is falling. This a reason trump is doing well, people are tired of being attacked for not stepping into line without whatever crazy ass contrived issue the left is railing against.I'm certainly right of center and I think Trump's rhetoric appeals to racists. I don't think that's contentious, given the KKK dude's endorsement.
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
Conflating the KKK across a homogeneous segment of society is pretty rough ridin' ridiculous. The KKK also endorsed Ben Carson. It's a handful of loons screaming for attention. It's far cry from the organization of your grandpa's southern democrats riding around lynching black people and terrorizing black neighborhoods. GMAFB.
There are no doubt racists in this world. I would venture a guess the labor unions who dutifully support democrats constitute a good portion of them. Trump isn't running against b.o., in case you haven't noticed. He's running against an elitist establishment crooked clinton. At least get the prejudices correct (sexism).
The left's slanderous marketing scheme of calling everyone racist, and parsing words and writing what was implied as overt and generally being terrible subhuman people has run its course. It's backfiring. Those fucks gave us b.o., now they're giving us trump.
The people that think "'diversity' is a code word for white genocide" or whatever the phrase is are probably going to vote for trump.
I don't support the same ideals Trump supports. I don't share the same values as Trump. And I certainly don't consider Trump to be a guy I want running the country. So if Trump is the Republican nominee -- if Trump is what "Republican" means -- I'll have a very hard time considering myself a "Republican" moving forward.
I'm not really certain who's feelings we're sparing here by parsing this but Donald Trump is absolutely racist. He pointed to a golf club that "everyone can go to" as a sign that he isn't racist. The only other justification he has used that he isn't racist is to point to all of the low wage workers his businesses has employed. Normal people don't have to justify why they aren't racist but when your son is sitting down with a pro-slavery separatist, when you won't disassociate from white supremacists and the klan, when minorities are getting beaten up at your events and you not only refuse to repudiate the beatings but emphasize that the people deserve it, when minorities are bullied at your events for simply attempting to listen to a speech and you do nothing you absolutely have to prove that you aren't racist. He hasn't and won't.
Post by: chuckjames on March 03, 2016, 12:41:15 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 03, 2016, 12:42:03 PM
I didn't say all trump supporters are racists, and I didn't even say Trump was a racist -- I just said that Trump's incendiary, anti-brown people rhetoric (from Syrian refugees to the rapist illegal aliens) appeals to people that are already pretty racist. Kind of an "all squares are rectangles, not all rectangles are squares" sort of thing. My point is that I think he's got the racist segment of the electorate pretty well cornered.The accusation that [insert pub candidate here] is racist is the laziest, most predictable and typical comment from the left. Everyone except for their mindless idiot constituency is completely bored and deaf to the accusation. The left is the boy who cried wolf, the chicken who said the sky is falling. This a reason trump is doing well, people are tired of being attacked for not stepping into line without whatever crazy ass contrived issue the left is railing against.I'm certainly right of center and I think Trump's rhetoric appeals to racists. I don't think that's contentious, given the KKK dude's endorsement.
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
Conflating the KKK across a homogeneous segment of society is pretty rough ridin' ridiculous. The KKK also endorsed Ben Carson. It's a handful of loons screaming for attention. It's far cry from the organization of your grandpa's southern democrats riding around lynching black people and terrorizing black neighborhoods. GMAFB.
There are no doubt racists in this world. I would venture a guess the labor unions who dutifully support democrats constitute a good portion of them. Trump isn't running against b.o., in case you haven't noticed. He's running against an elitist establishment crooked clinton. At least get the prejudices correct (sexism).
The left's slanderous marketing scheme of calling everyone racist, and parsing words and writing what was implied as overt and generally being terrible subhuman people has run its course. It's backfiring. Those fucks gave us b.o., now they're giving us trump.
The people that think "'diversity' is a code word for white genocide" or whatever the phrase is are probably going to vote for trump.
I don't support the same ideals Trump supports. I don't share the same values as Trump. And I certainly don't consider Trump to be a guy I want running the country. So if Trump is the Republican nominee -- if Trump is what "Republican" means -- I'll have a very hard time considering myself a "Republican" moving forward.
Sans the labor unions racists, I agree trump has the white racist market cornered. The Democrats have the non-white racist market cornered, however.
I thinks it's pretty safe to say that as far as people who vote based purely on hatred, jealousy and prejudice go, democrats have 3/4 of that demogaphic locked down.
Post by: DQ12 on March 03, 2016, 12:43:56 PM
I'm not really certain who's feelings we're sparing here by parsing this but Donald Trump is absolutely racist. He pointed to a golf club that "everyone can go to" as a sign that he isn't racist. The only other justification he has used that he isn't racist is to point to all of the low wage workers his businesses has employed. Normal people don't have to justify why they aren't racist but when your son is sitting down with a pro-slavery separatist, when you won't disassociate from white supremacists and the klan, when minorities are getting beaten up at your events and you not only refuse to repudiate the beatings but emphasize that the people deserve it, when minorities are bullied at your events for simply attempting to listen to a speech and you do nothing you absolutely have to prove that you aren't racist. He hasn't and won't.I agree. That just wasn't the point I was getting at.
I thinks it's pretty safe to say that as far as people who vote based purely on hatred, jealousy and prejudice go, democrats have 3/4 of that demogaphic locked down.Well, I super disagree with you there, but I can't imagine us ever seeing eye to eye on that, so cheers.
This splintering of the republican party was probably going to happen sooner or later.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 03, 2016, 12:49:09 PM
I didn't say all trump supporters are racists, and I didn't even say Trump was a racist -- I just said that Trump's incendiary, anti-brown people rhetoric (from Syrian refugees to the rapist illegal aliens) appeals to people that are already pretty racist. Kind of an "all squares are rectangles, not all rectangles are squares" sort of thing. My point is that I think he's got the racist segment of the electorate pretty well cornered.The accusation that [insert pub candidate here] is racist is the laziest, most predictable and typical comment from the left. Everyone except for their mindless idiot constituency is completely bored and deaf to the accusation. The left is the boy who cried wolf, the chicken who said the sky is falling. This a reason trump is doing well, people are tired of being attacked for not stepping into line without whatever crazy ass contrived issue the left is railing against.I'm certainly right of center and I think Trump's rhetoric appeals to racists. I don't think that's contentious, given the KKK dude's endorsement.
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
Conflating the KKK across a homogeneous segment of society is pretty rough ridin' ridiculous. The KKK also endorsed Ben Carson. It's a handful of loons screaming for attention. It's far cry from the organization of your grandpa's southern democrats riding around lynching black people and terrorizing black neighborhoods. GMAFB.
There are no doubt racists in this world. I would venture a guess the labor unions who dutifully support democrats constitute a good portion of them. Trump isn't running against b.o., in case you haven't noticed. He's running against an elitist establishment crooked clinton. At least get the prejudices correct (sexism).
The left's slanderous marketing scheme of calling everyone racist, and parsing words and writing what was implied as overt and generally being terrible subhuman people has run its course. It's backfiring. Those fucks gave us b.o., now they're giving us trump.
The people that think "'diversity' is a code word for white genocide" or whatever the phrase is are probably going to vote for trump.
I don't support the same ideals Trump supports. I don't share the same values as Trump. And I certainly don't consider Trump to be a guy I want running the country. So if Trump is the Republican nominee -- if Trump is what "Republican" means -- I'll have a very hard time considering myself a "Republican" moving forward.
I'm not really certain who's feelings we're sparing here by parsing this but Donald Trump is absolutely racist. He pointed to a golf club that "everyone can go to" as a sign that he isn't racist. The only other justification he has used that he isn't racist is to point to all of the low wage workers his businesses has employed. Normal people don't have to justify why they aren't racist but when your son is sitting down with a pro-slavery separatist, when you won't disassociate from white supremacists and the klan, when minorities are getting beaten up at your events and you not only refuse to repudiate the beatings but emphasize that the people deserve it, when minorities are bullied at your events for simply attempting to listen to a speech and you do nothing you absolutely have to prove that you aren't racist. He hasn't and won't.
LOL.
It's obamas secret service beating people up.
The notion that if you don't "immediately repudiate" something you effectively adopt it, is such political garbage.
And the one time one guy met with a bad guy so you're a racist is essentially a very watered down version of the Jeremiah Wright crap you've played down as absurd on at least one occassion.
Lastly, casino worker make pretty decent money, particularly compared to the new part time work force created by the aca.
I stand by my comments that the "everybody against us is a racist" is slowly starting to backfire for the left. Just like 'Merica slowly backfired for the pubs. Keep it up.
Post by: stunted on March 03, 2016, 12:55:47 PM
bernard sanders falling like a rock
:Woot:
looks like hilary is starting to fall
Post by: steve dave on March 03, 2016, 12:57:25 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 03, 2016, 12:59:47 PM
I'm not really certain who's feelings we're sparing here by parsing this but Donald Trump is absolutely racist. He pointed to a golf club that "everyone can go to" as a sign that he isn't racist. The only other justification he has used that he isn't racist is to point to all of the low wage workers his businesses has employed. Normal people don't have to justify why they aren't racist but when your son is sitting down with a pro-slavery separatist, when you won't disassociate from white supremacists and the klan, when minorities are getting beaten up at your events and you not only refuse to repudiate the beatings but emphasize that the people deserve it, when minorities are bullied at your events for simply attempting to listen to a speech and you do nothing you absolutely have to prove that you aren't racist. He hasn't and won't.I agree. That just wasn't the point I was getting at.I thinks it's pretty safe to say that as far as people who vote based purely on hatred, jealousy and prejudice go, democrats have 3/4 of that demogaphic locked down.Well, I super disagree with you there, but I can't imagine us ever seeing eye to eye on that, so cheers.
This splintering of the republican party was probably going to happen sooner or later.
You obviously haven't met many people that make up the left. They hate everyone who isn't with them.
Post by: MakeItRain on March 03, 2016, 01:00:46 PM
I didn't say all trump supporters are racists, and I didn't even say Trump was a racist -- I just said that Trump's incendiary, anti-brown people rhetoric (from Syrian refugees to the rapist illegal aliens) appeals to people that are already pretty racist. Kind of an "all squares are rectangles, not all rectangles are squares" sort of thing. My point is that I think he's got the racist segment of the electorate pretty well cornered.The accusation that [insert pub candidate here] is racist is the laziest, most predictable and typical comment from the left. Everyone except for their mindless idiot constituency is completely bored and deaf to the accusation. The left is the boy who cried wolf, the chicken who said the sky is falling. This a reason trump is doing well, people are tired of being attacked for not stepping into line without whatever crazy ass contrived issue the left is railing against.I'm certainly right of center and I think Trump's rhetoric appeals to racists. I don't think that's contentious, given the KKK dude's endorsement.
In the case of Trump, I assume the racism accusations largely stem from his comments about the number of criminals illegally crossing the border into our country. That statement is undeniably true, and properly identifies a serious health, safety and welfare issue that is not being properly addressed by our federal government, and which federal government is actually obstructing the efforts of border states efforts to address.
Everyone is free to be distracted by the libtard from real tangible issues. Just know that you effort to bigot and stereotype other people into becoming bigots in fact is failing before your eyes.
Conflating the KKK across a homogeneous segment of society is pretty rough ridin' ridiculous. The KKK also endorsed Ben Carson. It's a handful of loons screaming for attention. It's far cry from the organization of your grandpa's southern democrats riding around lynching black people and terrorizing black neighborhoods. GMAFB.
There are no doubt racists in this world. I would venture a guess the labor unions who dutifully support democrats constitute a good portion of them. Trump isn't running against b.o., in case you haven't noticed. He's running against an elitist establishment crooked clinton. At least get the prejudices correct (sexism).
The left's slanderous marketing scheme of calling everyone racist, and parsing words and writing what was implied as overt and generally being terrible subhuman people has run its course. It's backfiring. Those fucks gave us b.o., now they're giving us trump.
The people that think "'diversity' is a code word for white genocide" or whatever the phrase is are probably going to vote for trump.
I don't support the same ideals Trump supports. I don't share the same values as Trump. And I certainly don't consider Trump to be a guy I want running the country. So if Trump is the Republican nominee -- if Trump is what "Republican" means -- I'll have a very hard time considering myself a "Republican" moving forward.
I'm not really certain who's feelings we're sparing here by parsing this but Donald Trump is absolutely racist. He pointed to a golf club that "everyone can go to" as a sign that he isn't racist. The only other justification he has used that he isn't racist is to point to all of the low wage workers his businesses has employed. Normal people don't have to justify why they aren't racist but when your son is sitting down with a pro-slavery separatist, when you won't disassociate from white supremacists and the klan, when minorities are getting beaten up at your events and you not only refuse to repudiate the beatings but emphasize that the people deserve it, when minorities are bullied at your events for simply attempting to listen to a speech and you do nothing you absolutely have to prove that you aren't racist. He hasn't and won't.
LOL.
It's obamas secret service beating people up.
The notion that if you don't "immediately repudiate" something you effectively adopt it, is such political garbage.
And the one time one guy met with a bad guy so you're a racist is essentially a very watered down version of the Jeremiah Wright crap you've played down as absurd on at least one occassion.
Lastly, casino worker make pretty decent money, particularly compared to the new part time work force created by the aca.
I stand by my comments that the "everybody against us is a racist" is slowly starting to backfire for the left. Just like 'Merica slowly backfired for the pubs. Keep it up.
That guy who got pushed down by the secret service deserved more than he actually got. He should have gotten his ass kicked and arrested; I'm not talking about him and you know it.
I normally agree with you when it comes to repudiating things when you're a politician; the klan is one of those things that you should disavow every single time you're asked. If you bitched about Jeremiah Wright or Saul Alinsky you can't have the take that Trump did it once, he doesn't have to do it every other time he's asked.
Comparing Jeremiah Wright with James Edwards is hilarious, nearly as funny as someone trying to pass the KKK endorsing Ben Carson as fact.
I'll take you at your word about casino workers. What about housekeepers, dish washers, and bussers? Better yet, who the eff cares about how many of those people are employed by Trump properties, it isn't like he actually hired them?
Post by: catastrophe on March 03, 2016, 01:04:47 PM
Post by: sys on March 03, 2016, 01:51:15 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 03, 2016, 02:02:58 PM
Post by: ednksu on March 03, 2016, 02:03:19 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 03, 2016, 02:05:22 PM
What's Oscar Romneys effing problem.
Romney is a much better American than I gave him credit for 4 years ago.
Post by: DQ12 on March 03, 2016, 02:11:08 PM
Transcript of Mitt's speech. Thought it was wonderful.
Post by: IPA4Me on March 03, 2016, 02:11:25 PM
https://twitter.com/courierjournal/status/705155000918372352
Interviewee: Matthew Heimbach (@MatthewHeimbach): https://twitter.com/MatthewHeimbach?s=09
Post by: chuckjames on March 03, 2016, 02:13:28 PM
What's Oscar Romneys effing problem.
Romney is a much better American than I gave him credit for 4 years ago.
Meh he gave Trump and his Birther arguments legitimacy by accepting his endorsement. He's probably more to blame than anyone for Trump's rise (Other than Obama obviously).
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 03, 2016, 02:16:05 PM
Post by: DQ12 on March 03, 2016, 02:16:30 PM
Uh...I disagree.What's Oscar Romneys effing problem.
Romney is a much better American than I gave him credit for 4 years ago.
Meh he gave Trump and his Birther arguments legitimacy by accepting his endorsement. He's probably more to blame than anyone for Trump's rise (Other than Obama obviously).
Post by: MakeItRain on March 03, 2016, 02:17:03 PM
What's Oscar Romneys effing problem.
Romney is a much better American than I gave him credit for 4 years ago.
I think these establishment Republicans freaking out is total horseshit. They don't give two fucks about the general populace, the source of this freak out about Trump is based off of the perceived threat to their status and security, its totally transparent. Where was the outrage months ago? Where was the outrage at Ted Cruz for the outlandish crap he's done that's much more of a threat to the Republican status quo? They think that Trump winning the nomination is going to lead to some mass exodus of the party and they may lose the senate and eventually the house. Trump isn't any more divisive than Ted Cruz, Rick Santorum, Scott Walker, the tea party, etc.
eff Mitt Romney
Post by: MakeItRain on March 03, 2016, 02:21:11 PM
Post by: chuckjames on March 03, 2016, 02:21:45 PM
Uh...I disagree.What's Oscar Romneys effing problem.
Romney is a much better American than I gave him credit for 4 years ago.
Meh he gave Trump and his Birther arguments legitimacy by accepting his endorsement. He's probably more to blame than anyone for Trump's rise (Other than Obama obviously).
I think Romney accepting Trump's endorsement and they way they did it Gave Trump a lot of legitimacy to Trump, and told the now Trump supporters they are welcome in GOP, if they help win elections.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 03, 2016, 02:24:26 PM
What's Oscar Romneys effing problem.
Romney is a much better American than I gave him credit for 4 years ago.
I think these establishment Republicans freaking out is total horseshit. They don't give two fucks about the general populace, the source of this freak out about Trump is based off of the perceived threat to their status and security, its totally transparent. Where was the outrage months ago? Where was the outrage at Ted Cruz for the outlandish crap he's done that's much more of a threat to the Republican status quo? They think that Trump winning the nomination is going to lead to some mass exodus of the party and they may lose the senate and eventually the house. Trump isn't any more divisive than Ted Cruz, Rick Santorum, Scott Walker, the tea party, etc.
eff Mitt Romney
We agree again :cheers:, he even laid out the roadmap of vote kasich in Ohio, Rubio in Florida etc to keep Trump from getting the delegates he needs. These guys need to be given the boot.
Post by: chuckjames on March 03, 2016, 02:33:15 PM
https://twitter.com/natesilver538/status/705473902311567362
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 03, 2016, 02:43:56 PM
Post by: chuckjames on March 03, 2016, 02:49:42 PM
The reality of my non conspiracy rings more true by the hour.
Are you saying the Trump campaign was a long con to get Hillary elected? I almost think it's possible but still the GOP's fault for allowing it to happen.
Post by: chum1 on March 03, 2016, 03:05:55 PM
http://fortune.com/2016/03/01/donald-trump-mexico-immigration-border/
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 04:03:14 PM
Quote
Romney stated flatly, "When it comes to foreign policy, (Trump) is very, very not smart."
OMG
:lol:
Post by: DQ12 on March 03, 2016, 04:32:28 PM
QuoteRomney stated flatly, "When it comes to foreign policy, (Trump) is very, very not smart."
OMG
:lol:
Quote
And then what he said about on “60 Minutes”. Did you hear this? It was about Syria and ISIS, and it has to go down as the most ridiculous and dangerous idea of the entire campaign season. Let ISIS take out Assad, he said, and then we can pick up the remnants.
Now, think about that. Let the most dangerous terror organization the world has ever known take over an entire country? This recklessness is recklessness in the extreme. Now, Donald Trump tells us that he is very, very smart.
(LAUGHTER)
I’m afraid that when it comes to foreign policy he is very, very not smart.
(APPLAUSE)
I know what you're getting at, but he's contrasting it with the last sentence. In context it's not bad.
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on March 03, 2016, 05:16:22 PM
Post by: chum1 on March 03, 2016, 05:23:56 PM
Guess what though? White uneducated trump supporters don't give a crap about what some uppity, non bud light drinking, millionaire, Mormon, old guy weirdo has to say about "their guy".
Hey everyone rebelling against the establishment, listen to these guys from the establishment and you'll be convinced by what they have to say.
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 05:28:25 PM
Post by: steve dave on March 03, 2016, 06:05:01 PM
Post by: sys on March 03, 2016, 06:13:06 PM
btw, the latest 538 on how much voters hate rubio and cruz is good. this quote (diff. story) is also good.
Quote
Trump is actually doing what Bloomberg, who explored presidential runs in 2008 and 2012, twice concluded is impossible. “I am 100 percent convinced that you cannot in this country win an election unless you are the nominee of one of the two major parties,” he told this magazine in 2013. “The second thing I am convinced of is that I could not get through the primary process with either party.”
Post by: catastrophe on March 03, 2016, 06:13:15 PM
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 07:45:50 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 03, 2016, 07:49:43 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 03, 2016, 07:53:26 PM
Post by: CHONGS on March 03, 2016, 07:54:38 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 03, 2016, 07:55:59 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 03, 2016, 08:08:34 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 03, 2016, 08:10:13 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 03, 2016, 08:10:56 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 03, 2016, 08:11:55 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 03, 2016, 08:13:47 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 03, 2016, 08:14:19 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 03, 2016, 08:14:48 PM
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on March 03, 2016, 08:16:30 PM
If the Republicans actually want somebody to say crap like this and have it make a difference it needs to be George Bush or W. Romney is just a loser why should the country listen to him?
At this point in time, the only option is to have Larry the cable guy or Ron white run on the pub ticket to take votes away from trump. "Let's git r done and make America great again!"
Post by: Tobias on March 03, 2016, 08:18:08 PM
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 08:18:22 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 03, 2016, 08:18:49 PM
I bet the duck dynasty guys could kill
Backed cruz
Post by: wetwillie on March 03, 2016, 08:19:47 PM
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 08:21:51 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 03, 2016, 08:21:55 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 03, 2016, 08:24:35 PM
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 08:26:22 PM
Post by: chum1 on March 03, 2016, 08:26:34 PM
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 08:27:00 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 03, 2016, 08:31:21 PM
Post by: bucket on March 03, 2016, 08:31:47 PM
Cruz had something on his lip.
:love: He had no idea. Glad someone else saw.
Post by: wetwillie on March 03, 2016, 08:37:45 PM
The little Marco stuff should be enough to make reasonable ppl see that trump is not fit.
Yes definitely the last straw
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 08:44:35 PM
I don't remember another election where there was so much booing during debates.
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on March 03, 2016, 08:46:40 PM
The little Marco stuff should be enough to make reasonable ppl see that trump is not fit.
Yes definitely the last straw
Trump is essentially a wwe baby face and you guys think the crowd is going to stop cheering because he made fun of Roddy rowdy piper or something. V doubtful.
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 08:56:43 PM
Post by: steve dave on March 03, 2016, 08:57:17 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 03, 2016, 09:00:49 PM
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 09:02:18 PM
Post by: sys on March 03, 2016, 09:02:52 PM
Post by: sys on March 03, 2016, 09:04:05 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 03, 2016, 09:04:13 PM
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 09:06:19 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 03, 2016, 09:07:25 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 03, 2016, 09:09:00 PM
Post by: sys on March 03, 2016, 09:09:35 PM
Marco got his haircut to court the low/medium vote, right?
so hard to tell with him.
Post by: sys on March 03, 2016, 09:10:24 PM
They are def going after don. The best so far were the graphics on cutting the deficit, where don said we would find the money vs how much money was actually there to get.
i heard that part on the radio. it was brutal. they held him down and raped him.
Post by: wetwillie on March 03, 2016, 09:10:44 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 03, 2016, 09:11:31 PM
Post by: michigancat on March 03, 2016, 09:12:34 PM
Post by: sys on March 03, 2016, 09:12:41 PM
Post by: michigancat on March 03, 2016, 09:12:58 PM
Post by: sys on March 03, 2016, 09:13:17 PM
Not watching, but why did everyone wait this long to trash him?
probably waiting for a candidate to do it.
Post by: wetwillie on March 03, 2016, 09:13:49 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 03, 2016, 09:14:21 PM
And what happens if he actually wins? They just forget all this crap?
They probably just fund an independent. They'd rather have Hillary.
Post by: star seed 7 on March 03, 2016, 09:14:37 PM
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 09:15:24 PM
Post by: jmlynch1 on March 03, 2016, 09:15:31 PM
EDIT: Actually, I guess this is more likely on FNC than the GOP. So I will edit that to say. "Clearly fair and balanced..."
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 09:15:56 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 03, 2016, 09:16:42 PM
Post by: sys on March 03, 2016, 09:17:29 PM
I literally hate Ted cruz
he's good at what he does though.
Post by: sys on March 03, 2016, 09:18:29 PM
Don is riled up, I don't think I've seen him this rattled.
i think he doesn't want to attack the mods, so he doesn't know what to do.
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 09:20:42 PM
Post by: sys on March 03, 2016, 09:20:56 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 03, 2016, 09:22:11 PM
Post by: chum1 on March 03, 2016, 09:23:17 PM
Don is riled up, I don't think I've seen him this rattled.
Was going to say the same.
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 09:24:13 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 03, 2016, 09:25:01 PM
Kasich is the only adult on the stage.
LIV will not respond :frown:
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 09:27:20 PM
WTF does that have to do w anything.
Kasich, good grief.
Post by: catastrophe on March 03, 2016, 09:28:04 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 03, 2016, 09:30:47 PM
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 09:32:31 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 03, 2016, 09:36:32 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 03, 2016, 09:40:25 PM
Post by: sys on March 03, 2016, 09:41:58 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 03, 2016, 09:43:01 PM
Post by: catastrophe on March 03, 2016, 09:43:26 PM
Post by: CNS on March 03, 2016, 09:43:53 PM
Post by: sys on March 03, 2016, 09:52:20 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 03, 2016, 09:52:20 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 03, 2016, 09:57:36 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 03, 2016, 09:57:52 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 03, 2016, 09:59:56 PM
I love when people blame the demise of Detroit on democrats and Democrats only
So ah, who else is to blame there lib?
Post by: sys on March 03, 2016, 10:01:22 PM
Post by: chum1 on March 03, 2016, 10:02:46 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 03, 2016, 10:08:58 PM
Post by: sys on March 03, 2016, 10:11:17 PM
The bill O'Reilly interview is great
it was the weirdest thing i've seen in this election (so far).
Post by: star seed 7 on March 03, 2016, 10:20:34 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 03, 2016, 10:27:39 PM
Trump refuses to release the recording of off the record comments to NYT on immigration because he "has too much respect for the off the record process." Not even Trump supporters can be so stupid to swallow that line.
And when his back is to the wall, he always grabs for a petty little personal insult. "Little Marco." :lol:
Trump: "it's a minor civil case! It's a minor civil case!" Good lord. :lol:
Trump was just obliterated tonight.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 03, 2016, 10:36:53 PM
Post by: jmlynch1 on March 03, 2016, 10:39:31 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 03, 2016, 10:42:33 PM
That debate was a slam dunk for the dens imo
it was like a million gop doug fluties running around
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 03, 2016, 11:03:35 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 03, 2016, 11:22:53 PM
Wow, this debate is a hatchet job. I love that they had math graphics. What a complete debacle by the GOP. Clearly this is the party of the people...
EDIT: Actually, I guess this is more likely on FNC than the GOP. So I will edit that to say. "Clearly fair and balanced..."
FWIW, they did the same thing to Rubio and Cruz during the last debate. I'm sure they would have done it to trump as well but he didn't show up.
Post by: MakeItRain on March 03, 2016, 11:25:13 PM
I literally hate Ted cruz
he's good at what he does though.
1. Lie
2. Accuse everyone else of lying
3. Not answer questions
4. Filibuster
Yep, he's the master of these things.
Post by: sys on March 04, 2016, 12:10:20 AM
Post by: catastrophe on March 04, 2016, 07:27:48 AM
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on March 04, 2016, 08:39:28 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 08:40:55 AM
Does anyone have a link to what Trump said about his dick? I'd like the context, but I don't want to Google that.
"Look at those hands, are they small hands?" the front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination said, raising them for viewers to see. "And, he referred to my hands -- 'if they're small, something else must be small.' I guarantee you there's no problem. I guarantee."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/03/politics/donald-trump-small-hands-marco-rubio/
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on March 04, 2016, 08:43:26 AM
Does anyone have a link to what Trump said about his dick? I'd like the context, but I don't want to Google that.
"Look at those hands, are they small hands?" the front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination said, raising them for viewers to see. "And, he referred to my hands -- 'if they're small, something else must be small.' I guarantee you there's no problem. I guarantee."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/03/politics/donald-trump-small-hands-marco-rubio/
all of the republican candidates are so trailer trashy. Obama would never sit around in public talking about his d size.
Post by: DQ12 on March 04, 2016, 09:15:58 AM
Not that it matters at all, because Donald could have dropped his pants, laid a steamy one on the stage, then sieg heil'd and his numbers would remain the same.
Post by: catastrophe on March 04, 2016, 09:30:00 AM
Not that it matters at all, because Donald could have dropped his pants, laid a steamy one on the stage, then sieg heil'd and his numbers would remain the same.
I honestly believe you about that, and it terrifies me.
Post by: chuckjames on March 04, 2016, 10:09:32 AM
Post by: Asteriskhead on March 04, 2016, 10:29:42 AM
Post by: DQ12 on March 04, 2016, 10:33:06 AM
Post by: Asteriskhead on March 04, 2016, 10:34:58 AM
I don't really get why everyone is so up in arms about the other nominees saying they would vote for trump in a general. Yeah, they hate Donald and think that he'd be a lousy president. Guess what? They hate Hillary too and think she'd be a worse president.
They should write themselves in, if they believe they are the best candidate, not just fall in lockstep because they didn't win. That is one of the reasons why people are upset with the parties.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 10:36:13 AM
I don't really get why everyone is so up in arms about the other nominees saying they would vote for trump in a general. Yeah, they hate Donald and think that he'd be a lousy president. Guess what? They hate Hillary too and think she'd be a worse president. Or at least that's how the logic goes. People may disagree, but the collective gasp last night on the subject was a little puzzling to me.
I don't think most people believe they actually think Donald would be a better president than Clinton.
Post by: DQ12 on March 04, 2016, 10:37:59 AM
Really? Do you think Bernie should keep campaigning after he loses the nomination?I don't really get why everyone is so up in arms about the other nominees saying they would vote for trump in a general. Yeah, they hate Donald and think that he'd be a lousy president. Guess what? They hate Hillary too and think she'd be a worse president.
They should write themselves in, if they believe they are the best candidate, not just fall in lockstep because they didn't win. That is one of the reasons why people are upset with the parties.
Post by: DQ12 on March 04, 2016, 10:40:11 AM
Well, Cruz is certainly closer on the political spectrum to Donald than Hillary. There's a reason that most right leaning people would vote for Donald rather than Hillary in a general, and I don't think it's solely because those people are being disingenuous or whatever.I don't really get why everyone is so up in arms about the other nominees saying they would vote for trump in a general. Yeah, they hate Donald and think that he'd be a lousy president. Guess what? They hate Hillary too and think she'd be a worse president. Or at least that's how the logic goes. People may disagree, but the collective gasp last night on the subject was a little puzzling to me.
I don't think most people believe they actually think Donald would be a better president than Clinton.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 04, 2016, 10:41:53 AM
I don't really get why everyone is so up in arms about the other nominees saying they would vote for trump in a general. Yeah, they hate Donald and think that he'd be a lousy president. Guess what? They hate Hillary too and think she'd be a worse president. Or at least that's how the logic goes. People may disagree, but the collective gasp last night on the subject was a little puzzling to me.
Yes. Marco best expressed this last night.
Quote
RUBIO: I’ll support Donald if he’s the Republican nominee, and let me tell you why. Because the Democrats have two people left in the race. One of them is a socialist. America doesn’t want to be a socialist country. If you want to be a socialist country, then move to a socialist country.
The other one is under FBI investigation. And not only is she under FBI investigation, she lied to the families of the victims of Benghazi, and anyone who lies to the families of victims who lost their lives in the service of our country can never be the commander- in-chief of the United States.
All of which is 100% true. Trump is a buffoon and a jerk. I'd still hold my nose and vote for him because the Dem choices are a socialist and a felon/person even worse than Trump. And by the way, the felon is going to win the Dem nomination unless the FBI recommends indictment soon - and there is no indication they are in any hurry to conclude their investigation.
So for all the bitching and mockery from the Dems about how the GOP could possibly nominate Trump, you're right, but you should also look in the mirror.
Post by: chum1 on March 04, 2016, 10:43:18 AM
Post by: steve dave on March 04, 2016, 10:45:01 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 04, 2016, 10:45:15 AM
I don't really get why everyone is so up in arms about the other nominees saying they would vote for trump in a general. Yeah, they hate Donald and think that he'd be a lousy president. Guess what? They hate Hillary too and think she'd be a worse president. Or at least that's how the logic goes. People may disagree, but the collective gasp last night on the subject was a little puzzling to me.
I don't think most people believe they actually think Donald would be a better president than Clinton.
Your odd sentence structure aside, his supporters certainly think he'd be better than Hillary. As for me - and I think I'm fairly representative of anti-Trump conservatives - I don't think Trump could be worse than Hillary, and might be better in some regards.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 04, 2016, 10:46:44 AM
did trump say he wouldn't support the other candidates and would instead run as a third party? I mean, if he wants to twist the GOPs arm behind their backs and make them scream uncle that's the way to do it. it would gift wrap the presidency to the Dems.
No, he said the opposite last night.
Quote
TRUMP: ... OK — that I’m very, very proud of — millions and millions of people have come to the Republican Party over the last little while. They’ve come to the Republican Party. And by the way, the Democrats are losing people. This is a trend that’s taking place. It’s the biggest thing happening in politics, and I’m very proud to be a part of it. And I’m going to give them some credit, too, even though they don’t deserve it. But the answer is: Yes, I will.
WALLACE: Yes, you will support the nominee of the party? TRUMP: Yes, I will. Yes. I will.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 10:47:19 AM
Post by: DQ12 on March 04, 2016, 10:49:05 AM
Also an anti-trump (mostly) conservative -- I think something like a nuclear holocaust is more likely under Trump than Hillary. I think Hillary would probably just keep mostly the status quo -- Which, isn't ideal in a lot of respects, but sheesh, I really don't like the possible effects of Trump commanding his generals to commit war crimes.I don't really get why everyone is so up in arms about the other nominees saying they would vote for trump in a general. Yeah, they hate Donald and think that he'd be a lousy president. Guess what? They hate Hillary too and think she'd be a worse president. Or at least that's how the logic goes. People may disagree, but the collective gasp last night on the subject was a little puzzling to me.
I don't think most people believe they actually think Donald would be a better president than Clinton.
Your odd sentence structure aside, his supporters certainly think he'd be better than Hillary. As for me - and I think I'm fairly representative of anti-Trump conservatives - I don't think Trump could be worse than Hillary, and might be better in some regards.
Post by: Asteriskhead on March 04, 2016, 10:49:41 AM
Really? Do you think Bernie should keep campaigning after he loses the nomination?I don't really get why everyone is so up in arms about the other nominees saying they would vote for trump in a general. Yeah, they hate Donald and think that he'd be a lousy president. Guess what? They hate Hillary too and think she'd be a worse president.
They should write themselves in, if they believe they are the best candidate, not just fall in lockstep because they didn't win. That is one of the reasons why people are upset with the parties.
Yes, and I believe Bernie supporters would prefer to back him as an independent, rather than give their vote to Hilary. Both parties need destroyed, this election cycle is the chance to do it.
Post by: DQ12 on March 04, 2016, 10:51:46 AM
I mean you can't spend 2 hours telling me that Donald Trump has no policy or plans whatsoever, defrauds people all the time, bankrupts businesses regularly, and would be a complete and total failure of a president, and then at the end of all that tell me you'd support him over Hillary Clinton.You really can, and it's really not a hard concept to grasp:
1. Donald Trump would be a very bad president.
2. Hillary would be a worse president than Donald Trump.
3. I would support Donald Trump over Hillary.
Like I said, you may disagree with point 2 (I do), but pretending to be shocked by the logic is bizarre.
Post by: DQ12 on March 04, 2016, 10:53:51 AM
Fair, but that only makes sense, pragmatically, if there's someone on the Right to split the Republican nominee's vote. Otherwise, "well done well done," Bernie, point well made, but in the mean time, settle in for 4 years of President Donald J. Trump.Really? Do you think Bernie should keep campaigning after he loses the nomination?I don't really get why everyone is so up in arms about the other nominees saying they would vote for trump in a general. Yeah, they hate Donald and think that he'd be a lousy president. Guess what? They hate Hillary too and think she'd be a worse president.
They should write themselves in, if they believe they are the best candidate, not just fall in lockstep because they didn't win. That is one of the reasons why people are upset with the parties.
Yes, and I believe Bernie supporters would prefer to back him as an independent, rather than give their vote to Hilary. Both parties need destroyed, this election cycle is the chance to do it.
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on March 04, 2016, 10:54:39 AM
I mean you can't spend 2 hours telling me that Donald Trump has no policy or plans whatsoever, defrauds people all the time, bankrupts businesses regularly, and would be a complete and total failure of a president, and then at the end of all that tell me you'd support him over Hillary Clinton. Oh, and Donald also has small hands. Good point, little Marco.
I mean, isn't that the point of all primaries? You bash your opponents and then as soon as they win the nomination you support them.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 10:54:51 AM
I mean you can't spend 2 hours telling me that Donald Trump has no policy or plans whatsoever, defrauds people all the time, bankrupts businesses regularly, and would be a complete and total failure of a president, and then at the end of all that tell me you'd support him over Hillary Clinton.You really can, and it's really not a hard concept to grasp:
1. Donald Trump would be a very bad president.
2. Hillary would be a worse president than Donald Trump.
3. I would support Donald Trump over Hillary.
Like I said, you may disagree with point 2 (I do), but pretending to be shocked by the logic is bizarre.
I think you would have to have a serious lack of judgment to actually believe 2. I get why the candidates all fell into line, since they have a rabid base to appease, but I don't really think they believe Donald Trump would be a better president than Hillary Clinton.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 10:55:42 AM
I mean you can't spend 2 hours telling me that Donald Trump has no policy or plans whatsoever, defrauds people all the time, bankrupts businesses regularly, and would be a complete and total failure of a president, and then at the end of all that tell me you'd support him over Hillary Clinton. Oh, and Donald also has small hands. Good point, little Marco.
I mean, isn't that the point of all primaries? You bash your opponents and then as soon as they win the nomination you support them.
Not like this.
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on March 04, 2016, 10:56:38 AM
I mean you can't spend 2 hours telling me that Donald Trump has no policy or plans whatsoever, defrauds people all the time, bankrupts businesses regularly, and would be a complete and total failure of a president, and then at the end of all that tell me you'd support him over Hillary Clinton.You really can, and it's really not a hard concept to grasp:
1. Donald Trump would be a very bad president.
2. Hillary would be a worse president than Donald Trump.
3. I would support Donald Trump over Hillary.
Like I said, you may disagree with point 2 (I do), but pretending to be shocked by the logic is bizarre.
I think you would have to have a serious lack of judgment to actually believe 2. I get why the candidates all fell into line, since they have a rabid base to appease, but I don't really think they believe Donald Trump would be a better president than Hillary Clinton.
I think my mom believes #2 because she watched 13 Hours.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 11:00:47 AM
Post by: DQ12 on March 04, 2016, 11:01:02 AM
I think anyone would have to have a serious lack of judgment to actually believe that Trump would be a better "head of state" than Hillary. But I think if you're truly committed to the conservative principles and policies you've been espousing for the last year or two, a Trump presidency is far more likely to enact more of them than a Hillary presidency.I mean you can't spend 2 hours telling me that Donald Trump has no policy or plans whatsoever, defrauds people all the time, bankrupts businesses regularly, and would be a complete and total failure of a president, and then at the end of all that tell me you'd support him over Hillary Clinton.You really can, and it's really not a hard concept to grasp:
1. Donald Trump would be a very bad president.
2. Hillary would be a worse president than Donald Trump.
3. I would support Donald Trump over Hillary.
Like I said, you may disagree with point 2 (I do), but pretending to be shocked by the logic is bizarre.
I think you would have to have a serious lack of judgment to actually believe 2. I get why the candidates all fell into line, since they have a rabid base to appease, but I don't really think they believe Donald Trump would be a better president than Hillary Clinton.
From a policy standpoint, Trump and the rest of the GOP field don't appear to be all that different. The method of accomplishing those goals vary widely, but not as much as they do compared to Hillary.
Post by: Asteriskhead on March 04, 2016, 11:01:09 AM
Fair, but that only makes sense, pragmatically, if there's someone on the Right to split the Republican nominee's vote. Otherwise, "well done well done," Bernie, point well made, but in the mean time, settle in for 4 years of President Donald J. Trump.Really? Do you think Bernie should keep campaigning after he loses the nomination?I don't really get why everyone is so up in arms about the other nominees saying they would vote for trump in a general. Yeah, they hate Donald and think that he'd be a lousy president. Guess what? They hate Hillary too and think she'd be a worse president.
They should write themselves in, if they believe they are the best candidate, not just fall in lockstep because they didn't win. That is one of the reasons why people are upset with the parties.
Yes, and I believe Bernie supporters would prefer to back him as an independent, rather than give their vote to Hilary. Both parties need destroyed, this election cycle is the chance to do it.
Pray to your god for me that the GOP pushes out Trump.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 11:03:59 AM
I think anyone would have to have a serious lack of judgment to actually believe that Trump would be a better "head of state" than Hillary. But I think if you're truly committed to the conservative principles and policies you've been espousing for the last year or two, a Trump presidency is far more likely to enact more of them than a Hillary presidency.I mean you can't spend 2 hours telling me that Donald Trump has no policy or plans whatsoever, defrauds people all the time, bankrupts businesses regularly, and would be a complete and total failure of a president, and then at the end of all that tell me you'd support him over Hillary Clinton.You really can, and it's really not a hard concept to grasp:
1. Donald Trump would be a very bad president.
2. Hillary would be a worse president than Donald Trump.
3. I would support Donald Trump over Hillary.
Like I said, you may disagree with point 2 (I do), but pretending to be shocked by the logic is bizarre.
I think you would have to have a serious lack of judgment to actually believe 2. I get why the candidates all fell into line, since they have a rabid base to appease, but I don't really think they believe Donald Trump would be a better president than Hillary Clinton.
From a policy standpoint, Trump and the rest of the GOP field don't appear to be all that different. The method of accomplishing those goals vary widely, but not as much as they do compared to Hillary.
What sort of conservative principles are you referring to?
Post by: star seed 7 on March 04, 2016, 11:07:41 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 04, 2016, 11:11:21 AM
I think anyone would have to have a serious lack of judgment to actually believe that Trump would be a better "head of state" than Hillary. But I think if you're truly committed to the conservative principles and policies you've been espousing for the last year or two, a Trump presidency is far more likely to enact more of them than a Hillary presidency.I mean you can't spend 2 hours telling me that Donald Trump has no policy or plans whatsoever, defrauds people all the time, bankrupts businesses regularly, and would be a complete and total failure of a president, and then at the end of all that tell me you'd support him over Hillary Clinton.You really can, and it's really not a hard concept to grasp:
1. Donald Trump would be a very bad president.
2. Hillary would be a worse president than Donald Trump.
3. I would support Donald Trump over Hillary.
Like I said, you may disagree with point 2 (I do), but pretending to be shocked by the logic is bizarre.
I think you would have to have a serious lack of judgment to actually believe 2. I get why the candidates all fell into line, since they have a rabid base to appease, but I don't really think they believe Donald Trump would be a better president than Hillary Clinton.
From a policy standpoint, Trump and the rest of the GOP field don't appear to be all that different. The method of accomplishing those goals vary widely, but not as much as they do compared to Hillary.
What sort of conservative principles are you referring to?
Dlew is exactly correct. And these principles would include (a) repealing and replacing Obamacare, (b) enacting stricter immigration enforcement, and (c) reducing the size of the federal bureaucracy, to name just a few. All are at least possible with Trump. So Point 2 above is not only logical, it is reasonable from a conservative point of view.
On foreign policy, it is possible that Trump could be worse than Hillary (she's got a pretty terrible track record, FYI), but I think his advisors and generals would keep him in check.
Post by: DQ12 on March 04, 2016, 11:13:28 AM
I mean, generally speaking, fiscal and social policy.I think anyone would have to have a serious lack of judgment to actually believe that Trump would be a better "head of state" than Hillary. But I think if you're truly committed to the conservative principles and policies you've been espousing for the last year or two, a Trump presidency is far more likely to enact more of them than a Hillary presidency.I mean you can't spend 2 hours telling me that Donald Trump has no policy or plans whatsoever, defrauds people all the time, bankrupts businesses regularly, and would be a complete and total failure of a president, and then at the end of all that tell me you'd support him over Hillary Clinton.You really can, and it's really not a hard concept to grasp:
1. Donald Trump would be a very bad president.
2. Hillary would be a worse president than Donald Trump.
3. I would support Donald Trump over Hillary.
Like I said, you may disagree with point 2 (I do), but pretending to be shocked by the logic is bizarre.
I think you would have to have a serious lack of judgment to actually believe 2. I get why the candidates all fell into line, since they have a rabid base to appease, but I don't really think they believe Donald Trump would be a better president than Hillary Clinton.
From a policy standpoint, Trump and the rest of the GOP field don't appear to be all that different. The method of accomplishing those goals vary widely, but not as much as they do compared to Hillary.
What sort of conservative principles are you referring to?
I honestly can't tell whether you're intentionally being obtuse about this. I know having a serious discussion about the logic behind supporting a Trump presidency is weird (trust me, it's weird for me too), but that's a reality we're dealing with right now.
Post by: star seed 7 on March 04, 2016, 11:14:31 AM
Post by: DQ12 on March 04, 2016, 11:15:27 AM
Also don't forget that regresocons really love putin and trump claims he will be best buds with putinPutin was pretty well demonized by everyone not named Trump last night.
Post by: star seed 7 on March 04, 2016, 11:18:06 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 11:25:58 AM
I mean, generally speaking, fiscal and social policy.I think anyone would have to have a serious lack of judgment to actually believe that Trump would be a better "head of state" than Hillary. But I think if you're truly committed to the conservative principles and policies you've been espousing for the last year or two, a Trump presidency is far more likely to enact more of them than a Hillary presidency.I mean you can't spend 2 hours telling me that Donald Trump has no policy or plans whatsoever, defrauds people all the time, bankrupts businesses regularly, and would be a complete and total failure of a president, and then at the end of all that tell me you'd support him over Hillary Clinton.You really can, and it's really not a hard concept to grasp:
1. Donald Trump would be a very bad president.
2. Hillary would be a worse president than Donald Trump.
3. I would support Donald Trump over Hillary.
Like I said, you may disagree with point 2 (I do), but pretending to be shocked by the logic is bizarre.
I think you would have to have a serious lack of judgment to actually believe 2. I get why the candidates all fell into line, since they have a rabid base to appease, but I don't really think they believe Donald Trump would be a better president than Hillary Clinton.
From a policy standpoint, Trump and the rest of the GOP field don't appear to be all that different. The method of accomplishing those goals vary widely, but not as much as they do compared to Hillary.
What sort of conservative principles are you referring to?
I honestly can't tell whether you're intentionally being obtuse about this. I know having a serious discussion about the logic behind supporting a Trump presidency is weird (trust me, it's weird for me too), but that's a reality we're dealing with right now.
Trump has advocated for single payer in the past. Ted Cruz has argued that Trump still wants to implement it today. A border wall would cost more than $10 billion. Mexico is not going to pay for it. I haven't seen a single fiscally conservative policy Trump has advocated beyond a tax cut. I also don't know anything about his social policy other than that he claims to be pro life, lies about being Christian, and wants spy on mosques and ban Muslims from immigrating to the US. Oh, and he wants to bring back water boarding and go much further than that (whatever that means).
Post by: sys on March 04, 2016, 11:26:12 AM
I don't really get why everyone is so up in arms about the other nominees saying they would vote for trump in a general. Yeah, they hate Donald and think that he'd be a lousy president. Guess what? They hate Hillary too and think she'd be a worse president. Or at least that's how the logic goes. People may disagree, but the collective gasp last night on the subject was a little puzzling to me.
it's because rubio apparently spent all day tweeting #never, which as i understand it, is a hashtag for pubs who are declaring that they would not support trump in a general election. then he went on the debates and vowed - "yeah, trump". for the others, it was not a conflict.
Post by: DQ12 on March 04, 2016, 11:27:50 AM
So I guess I'm not sure what your point is.I mean, generally speaking, fiscal and social policy.
I honestly can't tell whether you're intentionally being obtuse about this. I know having a serious discussion about the logic behind supporting a Trump presidency is weird (trust me, it's weird for me too), but that's a reality we're dealing with right now.
Trump has advocated for single payer in the past. Ted Cruz has argued that Trump still wants to implement it today. A border wall would cost more than $10 billion. Mexico is not going to pay for it. I haven't seen a single fiscally conservative policy Trump has advocated beyond a tax cut. I also don't know anything about his social policy other than that he claims to be pro life, lies about being Christian, and wants spy on mosques and ban Muslims from immigrating to the US. Oh, and he wants to bring back water boarding and go much further than that (whatever that means).
Post by: DQ12 on March 04, 2016, 11:30:27 AM
WELL. I didn't know that.I don't really get why everyone is so up in arms about the other nominees saying they would vote for trump in a general. Yeah, they hate Donald and think that he'd be a lousy president. Guess what? They hate Hillary too and think she'd be a worse president. Or at least that's how the logic goes. People may disagree, but the collective gasp last night on the subject was a little puzzling to me.
it's because rubio apparently spent all day tweeting #never, which as i understand it, is a hashtag for pubs who are declaring that they would not support trump in a general election. then he went on the debates and vowed - "yeah, trump". for the others, it was not a conflict.
In that case, yeah. You shouldn't say "#never" if you actually mean "ok but only in this incredibly likely circumstance."
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 11:30:38 AM
Post by: DQ12 on March 04, 2016, 11:32:25 AM
The point is that Hillary is more fiscally conservative than Trump would be. I guess Trump is more socially conservative if that means being a racist and torturing folks.I think, on its face, "Hillary is more fiscally conservative than Trump" is a pretty bold take.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 11:34:05 AM
The point is that Hillary is more fiscally conservative than Trump would be. I guess Trump is more socially conservative if that means being a racist and torturing folks.I think "Hillary is more fiscally conservative than Trump" is a pretty bold take.
We're defining "more fiscally conservative" as spending less money, right?
Post by: steve dave on March 04, 2016, 11:38:27 AM
Post by: DQ12 on March 04, 2016, 11:42:09 AM
That, and lowering taxes.The point is that Hillary is more fiscally conservative than Trump would be. I guess Trump is more socially conservative if that means being a racist and torturing folks.I think "Hillary is more fiscally conservative than Trump" is a pretty bold take.
We're defining "more fiscally conservative" as spending less money, right?
I think Trump's ideas are ludicrous and obscene and (most importantly) unclear. That said, saying "I'm going to seriously cut government waste" signals to a lot of people that he plans on cutting more than enough to offset the cost of the wall and whatever other dumbass policy he plans to enact. This is one of the many frustrating aspects about discussing Trump - discussing him anything beyond "he'd be embarrassing and dangerous to have as a president" is near impossible, because everything he says is so general.
That said, I do think he would cut government spending more than Hillary would.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 11:51:52 AM
That, and lowering taxes.The point is that Hillary is more fiscally conservative than Trump would be. I guess Trump is more socially conservative if that means being a racist and torturing folks.I think "Hillary is more fiscally conservative than Trump" is a pretty bold take.
We're defining "more fiscally conservative" as spending less money, right?
I think Trump's ideas are ludicrous and obscene and (most importantly) unclear. That said, saying "I'm going to seriously cut government waste" signals to a lot of people that he plans on cutting more than enough to offset the cost of the wall and whatever other dumbass policy he plans to enact. This is one of the many frustrating aspects about discussing Trump - discussing him anything beyond "he'd be embarrassing and dangerous to have as a president" is near impossible, because everything he says is so general.
That said, I do think he would cut government spending more than Hillary would.
The thing is, he has given specific examples of things he wants to increase spending on. Has Hillary? I agree that tax cuts need to be considered, and I'm not sure how heavily they should be weighed. I expect him to increase spending by more than he cuts taxes, though. I think it's common sense that he ends up spending more than Hillary. Military expansion, 1000+ mile walls, and increased surveillance on US citizens cost a lot of money. If you subtract a potential tax cut off of his spending increase, you might fall somewhere below Hillary, but you'd probably have to multiply the tax cut by something.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 04, 2016, 11:53:34 AM
Also :lol: at the idea that Hillary will be more fiscally conservative than Trump.
Finally, if Trump really wants to make Mexico pay for the wall - he actually can. Not sure what the trade consequences would be, but we absolutely have the leverage to make them pay for it.
Post by: DQ12 on March 04, 2016, 11:56:07 AM
Well, he also says he wants to gut things like the EPA and Department of Education so, who really knows. Not me, because I'm not voting for him.That, and lowering taxes.The point is that Hillary is more fiscally conservative than Trump would be. I guess Trump is more socially conservative if that means being a racist and torturing folks.I think "Hillary is more fiscally conservative than Trump" is a pretty bold take.
We're defining "more fiscally conservative" as spending less money, right?
I think Trump's ideas are ludicrous and obscene and (most importantly) unclear. That said, saying "I'm going to seriously cut government waste" signals to a lot of people that he plans on cutting more than enough to offset the cost of the wall and whatever other dumbass policy he plans to enact. This is one of the many frustrating aspects about discussing Trump - discussing him anything beyond "he'd be embarrassing and dangerous to have as a president" is near impossible, because everything he says is so general.
That said, I do think he would cut government spending more than Hillary would.
The thing is, he has given specific examples of things he wants to increase spending on. Has Hillary? I agree that tax cuts need to be considered, and I'm not sure how heavily they should be weighed. I expect him to increase spending by more than he cuts taxes, though. I think it's common sense that he ends up spending more than Hillary. Military expansion, 1000+ mile walls, and increased surveillance on US citizens cost a lot of money. If you subtract a potential tax cut off of his spending increase, you might fall somewhere below Hillary, but you'd probably have to multiply the tax cut by something.
I was just trying to explain the rationale for why someone who supports Rubio or Cruz (especially Cruz, really) may prefer Trump over Hillary. I'm done trying to explain the appeal of Trump. I need a shower.
Post by: sys on March 04, 2016, 12:14:54 PM
You shouldn't say "#never" if you actually mean "ok but only in this incredibly likely circumstance."
that should have been #nevertrump. sorry.
Post by: chum1 on March 04, 2016, 12:17:21 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 04, 2016, 12:20:48 PM
Or maybe he actually tweeted that he would never vote for trump in the general?
Post by: michigancat on March 04, 2016, 12:21:56 PM
Post by: sys on March 04, 2016, 12:22:36 PM
http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/the-problem-with-the-never-trump-movement
it's absolutely ridiculous. the same day you have the last pub candidate delivering his magnus opus on why trump is the devil you have the party forcing it's other candidates to pledge to support him on natl tv. it's hard to imagine a less competent political party.
Post by: sys on March 04, 2016, 12:23:30 PM
To be fair, I think Rubio only tweeted that Trump "is a con artist and cannot be our nominee." So if you tweet that to #nevertrump, does that mean you're saying you won't vote for him in the general? I don't tweet, but I wasn't aware that tweeting to a group means you support it.
Or maybe he actually tweeted that he would never vote for trump in the general?
i don't know what he tweeted. just going by news stories.
Post by: DQ12 on March 04, 2016, 12:24:12 PM
noted. and to your original point:You shouldn't say "#never" if you actually mean "ok but only in this incredibly likely circumstance."
that should have been #nevertrump. sorry.
additional data often tends to be complicating. i wish i hadn't been made aware of this.
Post by: mocat on March 04, 2016, 12:25:00 PM
http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/the-problem-with-the-never-trump-movement
it's absolutely ridiculous. the same day you have the last pub candidate delivering his magnus opus on why trump is the devil you have the party forcing it's other candidates to pledge to support him on natl tv. it's hard to imagine a less competent political party.
dick joke?
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 04, 2016, 12:36:15 PM
To be fair, I think Rubio only tweeted that Trump "is a con artist and cannot be our nominee." So if you tweet that to #nevertrump, does that mean you're saying you won't vote for him in the general? I don't tweet, but I wasn't aware that tweeting to a group means you support it.
Or maybe he actually tweeted that he would never vote for trump in the general?
i don't know what he tweeted. just going by news stories.
Yeah I probably wouldn't rely on that. I just did a quick Google search and found the actual tweet. Unless he tweeted some more.
Post by: steve dave on March 04, 2016, 12:44:06 PM
To be fair, I think Rubio only tweeted that Trump "is a con artist and cannot be our nominee." So if you tweet that to #nevertrump, does that mean you're saying you won't vote for him in the general? I don't tweet, but I wasn't aware that tweeting to a group means you support it.
Or maybe he actually tweeted that he would never vote for trump in the general?
i don't know what he tweeted. just going by news stories.
Yeah I probably wouldn't rely on that. I just did a quick Google search and found the actual tweet. Unless he tweeted some more.
it's like trying to explain twitter to my mom
Quote
Donald Trump is a con artist — and he cannot be our nominee. #NeverTrump https://t.co/3ZYQZraCfNhttps://t.co/8wm9ToY7El
— Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) February 27, 2016
Post by: everyone shut up on March 04, 2016, 12:45:34 PM
Post by: steve dave on March 04, 2016, 12:45:53 PM
Post by: steve dave on March 04, 2016, 12:47:05 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160304%2F514f9db3ed53dda4b46653057536cabb.jpg&hash=a5639f646d257a30aa5d4ba52adfdc3379ad7169)
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160304%2F4c0fca81f83f8b72004ec73c41cb1a26.jpg&hash=34672b9338ccf106e1591c4859284e4438ad23fa)
Post by: star seed 7 on March 04, 2016, 12:47:19 PM
Post by: CNS on March 04, 2016, 12:48:11 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 12:50:28 PM
I agree that Trump has been all over the board on a number of issues. But if my choice is the mystery box or the reliable liberal, felon, and awful human being, I'll take the mystery box.
Also :lol: at the idea that Hillary will be more fiscally conservative than Trump.
Finally, if Trump really wants to make Mexico pay for the wall - he actually can. Not sure what the trade consequences would be, but we absolutely have the leverage to make them pay for it.
Even if Mexico does pay for the wall (won't happen), it would take nearly $1 billion per year to maintain it.
Post by: steve dave on March 04, 2016, 12:52:01 PM
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on March 04, 2016, 01:12:39 PM
Post by: catastrophe on March 04, 2016, 01:15:33 PM
Finally, if Trump really wants to make Mexico pay for the wall - he actually can. Not sure what the trade consequences would be, but we absolutely have the leverage to make them pay for it.
It does concern me that to maintain his pride Trump would probably be willing to give up something like $20 billion worth of benefits to Mexico just so he can say he made them build a wall.
Post by: DQ12 on March 04, 2016, 01:18:29 PM
the entire idea of the wall is so amazingly absurd. I'm posting this here instead of the wall thread because I don't want to ruin the awesome stuff the wall thread has going on.And the wall isn't even number 1 most absurd thing as far as his immigration plan is concerned. I think that distinction belongs to his plan to round up the illegals like we're the damn brownshirts and ship them south.
Post by: sys on March 04, 2016, 01:21:11 PM
And the wall isn't even number 1 most absurd thing as far as his immigration plan is concerned. I think that distinction belongs to his plan to round up the illegals like we're the damn brownshirts and ship them south.
i thought part of his plan to force mexicans to pay for the wall was to confiscate remittance payments sent by illegal immigrants?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 01:21:58 PM
And the wall isn't even number 1 most absurd thing as far as his immigration plan is concerned. I think that distinction belongs to his plan to round up the illegals like we're the damn brownshirts and ship them south.
i thought part of his plan to force mexicans to pay for the wall was to confiscate remittance payments sent by illegal immigrants?
Everything's negotiable.
Post by: steve dave on March 04, 2016, 01:22:40 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 04, 2016, 01:24:02 PM
the entire idea of the wall is so amazingly absurd. I'm posting this here instead of the wall thread because I don't want to ruin the awesome stuff the wall thread has going on.And the wall isn't even number 1 most absurd thing as far as his immigration plan is concerned. I think that distinction belongs to his plan to round up the illegals like we're the damn brownshirts and ship them south.
Yeah he's not actually going to do that. This is probably what he told the NYT off the record and it's why he refuses to authorize the NYT to release the audio.
It's also why, as a politician, you should never treat off the record interviews like their actually off the record.
Post by: CNS on March 04, 2016, 01:26:40 PM
the entire idea of the wall is so amazingly absurd. I'm posting this here instead of the wall thread because I don't want to ruin the awesome stuff the wall thread has going on.And the wall isn't even number 1 most absurd thing as far as his immigration plan is concerned. I think that distinction belongs to his plan to round up the illegals like we're the damn brownshirts and ship them south.
Yeah he's not actually going to do that. This is probably what he told the NYT off the record and it's why he refuses to authorize the NYT to release the audio.
It's also why, as a politician, you should never treat off the record interviews like their actually off the record.
He said pretty clearly last night that he still isn't a politician.
Post by: KCFDcat on March 04, 2016, 01:27:37 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 04, 2016, 01:34:43 PM
Yesterday I learned that a close friend of mine is starting to become a trump supporter. I'm very upset
They're all around us. A number of people in my neighborhood are Trump supporters. These are reasonably intelligent, successful people. The best I can figure, they don't follow politics closely enough to understand how phony he is, and they're kinda going with a "burn it all down" mentality.
Or as Lib7 would say - they're obviously yuuuge racists.
Post by: star seed 7 on March 04, 2016, 01:36:18 PM
Post by: KCFDcat on March 04, 2016, 01:43:43 PM
This dude follows politics, but is a libertarian/just wants a shakeup in DC. Thinks trump is the only candidate that will deliver that. Funny thing is he still somewhat likes Bernie too.Yesterday I learned that a close friend of mine is starting to become a trump supporter. I'm very upset
They're all around us. A number of people in my neighborhood are Trump supporters. These are reasonably intelligent, successful people. The best I can figure, they don't follow politics closely enough to understand how phony he is, and they're kinda going with a "burn it all down" mentality.
Or as Lib7 would say - they're obviously yuuuge racists.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 01:45:44 PM
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on March 04, 2016, 01:50:44 PM
Post by: michigancat on March 04, 2016, 01:53:57 PM
Post by: michigancat on March 04, 2016, 01:56:12 PM
Build a wall to keep out illegals?
Starting unnecessary wars?
Torturing prisoners of war?
Killing the families of suspected terrorists?
I mean, Obama pretty much does all of that crap, just a lightweight version.
Post by: sys on March 04, 2016, 01:57:31 PM
You guys should read that Intercept piece. He's basically taking Republican policy just one step further while speaking without a filter. When you think about it, it's amazing people are so scared of what he would do.
i read it. i don't think there is anything amazing about party leaders seeing some uncontrollable populist running hog wild on themes that they carefully exploited to get votes they otherwise may not have been able to gather and being scared by it.
Post by: catastrophe on March 04, 2016, 02:02:16 PM
Post by: michigancat on March 04, 2016, 02:04:07 PM
You guys should read that Intercept piece. He's basically taking Republican policy just one step further while speaking without a filter. When you think about it, it's amazing people are so scared of what he would do.
i read it. i don't think there is anything amazing about party leaders seeing some uncontrollable populist running hog wild on themes that they carefully exploited to get votes they otherwise may not have been able to gather and being scared by it.
I'm thinking more of the average republican voter that is seemingly repulsed at Trump. It's what they've been voting for.
I understand why party leadership is acting repulsed.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 02:05:34 PM
Can someone just compile a video of Trump saying incredibly vulgar things so that I can send it to my very Christian mother?
Just have her follow him on twitter.
Post by: catastrophe on March 04, 2016, 02:11:38 PM
You guys should read that Intercept piece. He's basically taking Republican policy just one step further while speaking without a filter. When you think about it, it's amazing people are so scared of what he would do.
i read it. i don't think there is anything amazing about party leaders seeing some uncontrollable populist running hog wild on themes that they carefully exploited to get votes they otherwise may not have been able to gather and being scared by it.
I'm thinking more of the average republican voter that is seemingly repulsed at Trump. It's what they've been voting for.
I understand why party leadership is acting repulsed.
I'm assuming you are trying to make a subtle dig regarding the perceived intelligence/ decency of a typical Republican voter.
I think there are plenty of reasons to not like Trump even if most of his policy proposals follow the party line. He shows a fundamental misunderstanding of a lot of the things he talks about, he lies constantly about things that are easily proven false, and he regularly makes rude and insulting comments often without any provocation.
Post by: michigancat on March 04, 2016, 02:14:26 PM
You guys should read that Intercept piece. He's basically taking Republican policy just one step further while speaking without a filter. When you think about it, it's amazing people are so scared of what he would do.
i read it. i don't think there is anything amazing about party leaders seeing some uncontrollable populist running hog wild on themes that they carefully exploited to get votes they otherwise may not have been able to gather and being scared by it.
I'm thinking more of the average republican voter that is seemingly repulsed at Trump. It's what they've been voting for.
I understand why party leadership is acting repulsed.
I'm assuming you are trying to make a subtle dig regarding the perceived intelligence/ decency of a typical Republican voter.
I think there are plenty of reasons to not like Trump even if most of his policy proposals follow the party line. He shows a fundamental misunderstanding of a lot of the things he talks about, he lies constantly about things that are easily proven false, and he regularly makes rude and insulting comments often without any provocation.
It's a dig at the republican platform, for sure.
So #nevertrump, to you, is mostly about him being a rude liar?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 02:18:56 PM
Which of his policies are crazy to the republican party?
Build a wall to keep out illegals?
Starting unnecessary wars?
Torturing prisoners of war?
Killing the families of suspected terrorists?
I mean, Obama pretty much does all of that crap, just a lightweight version.
I only vote for RINOs, though.
Post by: catastrophe on March 04, 2016, 02:24:28 PM
You guys should read that Intercept piece. He's basically taking Republican policy just one step further while speaking without a filter. When you think about it, it's amazing people are so scared of what he would do.
i read it. i don't think there is anything amazing about party leaders seeing some uncontrollable populist running hog wild on themes that they carefully exploited to get votes they otherwise may not have been able to gather and being scared by it.
I'm thinking more of the average republican voter that is seemingly repulsed at Trump. It's what they've been voting for.
I understand why party leadership is acting repulsed.
I'm assuming you are trying to make a subtle dig regarding the perceived intelligence/ decency of a typical Republican voter.
I think there are plenty of reasons to not like Trump even if most of his policy proposals follow the party line. He shows a fundamental misunderstanding of a lot of the things he talks about, he lies constantly about things that are easily proven false, and he regularly makes rude and insulting comments often without any provocation.
It's a dig at the republican platform, for sure.
So #nevertrump, to you, is mostly about him being a rude liar?
I would just say more broadly it is about being a horrible representative of what the party stands for. It is alienating to a bunch of people, not just the hard core establishment.
Post by: michigancat on March 04, 2016, 02:33:46 PM
You guys should read that Intercept piece. He's basically taking Republican policy just one step further while speaking without a filter. When you think about it, it's amazing people are so scared of what he would do.
i read it. i don't think there is anything amazing about party leaders seeing some uncontrollable populist running hog wild on themes that they carefully exploited to get votes they otherwise may not have been able to gather and being scared by it.
I'm thinking more of the average republican voter that is seemingly repulsed at Trump. It's what they've been voting for.
I understand why party leadership is acting repulsed.
I'm assuming you are trying to make a subtle dig regarding the perceived intelligence/ decency of a typical Republican voter.
I think there are plenty of reasons to not like Trump even if most of his policy proposals follow the party line. He shows a fundamental misunderstanding of a lot of the things he talks about, he lies constantly about things that are easily proven false, and he regularly makes rude and insulting comments often without any provocation.
It's a dig at the republican platform, for sure.
So #nevertrump, to you, is mostly about him being a rude liar?
I would just say more broadly it is about being a horrible representative of what the party stands for. It is alienating to a bunch of people, not just the hard core establishment.
yeah, is he alienating people by being rude?
Post by: catastrophe on March 04, 2016, 02:35:54 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 02:36:44 PM
Post by: DQ12 on March 04, 2016, 02:36:58 PM
Post by: chuckjames on March 04, 2016, 03:05:29 PM
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/03/donald-trump-needs-7-of-10-white-guys-213699?o=2
Post by: XocolateThundarr on March 04, 2016, 03:10:01 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 03:16:28 PM
If I'm on team #BID, which candidate should I vote for?
It sort of depends on why you want to #BID.
Post by: michigancat on March 04, 2016, 03:17:53 PM
Which of his policies are crazy to the republican party?
Build a wall to keep out illegals?
Starting unnecessary wars?
Torturing prisoners of war?
Killing the families of suspected terrorists?
I mean, Obama pretty much does all of that crap, just a lightweight version.
lol, that logic puts no value on moderation and reduces the world down into binary decisions
There is no value in moderation when it comes to torture or starting bogus wars IMO. Like, what would you consider to be moderate torture?
Post by: michigancat on March 04, 2016, 05:07:48 PM
Regarding the wall: It has basically been a Republican goal and talking point for years. Trump is just a loudmouth about it.
Why is going after civilians directly significantly worse than targeting combatants' private homes where their families live? (something Obama has definitely done and/or is currently doing)
Post by: steve dave on March 04, 2016, 06:16:26 PM
Post by: michigancat on March 04, 2016, 06:25:42 PM
We can agree to disagree that the decision to risk/kill non-combatants along with combatants due to actionable intelligence is different than collecting intelligence on people who associate with combatants and killing them for that association.
That's fair, can we at least agree that going from one to the next isn't exactly a major leap? Once you've decided it's totally acceptable to kill someone simply for being around someone we decide is a bad guy, explicitly targeting innocents seems like an easy decision to make if you think it will be effective. I wouldn't be surprised if it's already been done.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 07:15:28 PM
Post by: michigancat on March 04, 2016, 08:07:03 PM
The wall has been talked about and championed by fringe elements of the Republican Party. Donald is the first major candidate that I'm aware of who thought it was a good idea.How is the "wall" significantly different from this?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Fence_Act_of_2006
Post by: CNS on March 04, 2016, 08:09:01 PM
Post by: CNS on March 04, 2016, 08:26:26 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 04, 2016, 08:27:46 PM
Post by: CNS on March 04, 2016, 08:29:45 PM
He flipped on asking the military to commit illegal war crimes.He knows how to lead. If he told them to do it, it would be done. There is no asking.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 04, 2016, 09:27:57 PM
The wall has been talked about and championed by fringe elements of the Republican Party. Donald is the first major candidate that I'm aware of who thought it was a good idea.How is the "wall" significantly different from this?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Fence_Act_of_2006
Trump's wall is 3 times as long and covers ground a whole lot further from any cities. That makes it much more expensive to build and a whole lot less effective.
Post by: wetwillie on March 04, 2016, 09:32:29 PM
Post by: CNS on March 04, 2016, 09:34:53 PM
Post by: steve dave on March 04, 2016, 11:04:48 PM
The wall has been talked about and championed by fringe elements of the Republican Party. Donald is the first major candidate that I'm aware of who thought it was a good idea.How is the "wall" significantly different from this?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Fence_Act_of_2006
Trump's wall is 3 times as long and covers ground a whole lot further from any cities. That makes it much more expensive to build and a whole lot less effective.
it's not even in the same wall ball park. I don't think our friend SANFRANCISCOcat has even thought about the wall.
Post by: stunted on March 05, 2016, 04:29:39 AM
:love:
Post by: steve dave on March 05, 2016, 07:36:09 AM
Post by: Tobias on March 05, 2016, 07:39:41 AM
Post by: wetwillie on March 05, 2016, 07:47:34 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 05, 2016, 08:42:17 AM
Rubio is nearly as distasteful if we are being honest. Kasich is our George W Obama clone that we want.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.huffpost.com%2Fgen%2F1840171%2Fthumbs%2Fo-100-EMOJI-570.jpg%3F5&hash=b30937d1225bc118061d722a58ff838e4d5d3526)
Post by: catastrophe on March 05, 2016, 09:04:21 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 05, 2016, 10:58:24 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 05, 2016, 11:06:27 AM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi2.wp.com%2Fwww.powerlineblog.com%2Fed-assets%2F2016%2F03%2FCrony-Trump.jpg&hash=234037272f1ffe7fe9737d325820194127acd8a6)
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 05, 2016, 11:07:52 AM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi2.wp.com%2Fwww.powerlineblog.com%2Fed-assets%2F2016%2F03%2FTrumpCamps.jpg&hash=4f2161638429bab08604e9823fe7a41813ab91c4)
Post by: CNS on March 05, 2016, 11:11:06 AM
Post by: chuckjames on March 05, 2016, 03:33:04 PM
Post by: mocat on March 05, 2016, 04:02:53 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 05, 2016, 04:04:21 PM
This is unacceptable america
Post by: steve dave on March 05, 2016, 04:06:24 PM
Post by: sys on March 05, 2016, 04:20:04 PM
I saw a 'shopped Trump bumper sticker that said. Trump 2016: eff Me, No eff You. I found it humorous.
that is very good.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 05, 2016, 05:22:37 PM
Contrast with Oklahoma just a few days ago, which was also a "closed" caucus and the most comparable electorate. Cruz 34% Donald 28% Rubio 26%.
If these results hold, that represents a significant swing from Rubio to Cruz. If the anti-Trump vote consolidates now behind Cruz, Trump can still be beaten.
Post by: Tobias on March 05, 2016, 05:24:12 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 05, 2016, 05:24:43 PM
Ksuw types need to find a new way to say crony capitalism, because it turns people off immediately and makes you sound like a weirdo
Really? You know who else rails against it? Bernie Sanders.
Post by: mocat on March 05, 2016, 05:25:59 PM
Post by: sys on March 05, 2016, 05:33:10 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 05, 2016, 05:33:25 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 05, 2016, 05:51:43 PM
kansas is kansas. the maine result is very interesting. not just trump trailing in a state he was expected to win, but rubio barely showing up.
5%, it's literally one caucus site in Maine, they have only 20 for the entire state.
Post by: sys on March 05, 2016, 06:16:57 PM
kansas is kansas. the maine result is very interesting. not just trump trailing in a state he was expected to win, but rubio barely showing up.
5%, it's literally one caucus site in Maine, they have only 20 for the entire state.
41% here.
http://www.decisiondeskhq.com/results/2016/primary/gop/president/maine/
Post by: sys on March 05, 2016, 06:19:31 PM
Post by: mocat on March 05, 2016, 06:32:46 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 05, 2016, 06:34:43 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 05, 2016, 06:35:16 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 05, 2016, 06:35:30 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 05, 2016, 06:36:08 PM
Post by: sys on March 05, 2016, 06:42:27 PM
rubio special reserve
this is really good.
Post by: Cartierfor3 on March 05, 2016, 06:44:46 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 05, 2016, 06:50:49 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 05, 2016, 06:51:40 PM
Post by: sys on March 05, 2016, 06:58:50 PM
what are the cruzites chugging on tonight? corona?
it's been an amazing day for him so far - everything that super tuesday was supposed to be and wasn't. 538 is talking like he still even has a small chance in kentucky. puerto rico will be super interesting as well.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 05, 2016, 07:31:09 PM
Post by: sys on March 05, 2016, 07:50:46 PM
I like Little Marco the best.
would sound much better in spanish.
Post by: CNS on March 05, 2016, 07:51:37 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 05, 2016, 07:54:02 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 05, 2016, 07:56:09 PM
Post by: sys on March 05, 2016, 07:57:58 PM
Marcolito?
different countries/regions use different diminutives. i would use marquillo because i like the illo sound, but most mexicans which is sorta america's default spanish would use marquito.
Post by: Skipper44 on March 05, 2016, 08:02:09 PM
Marcolito?Marcolito hold me tighter
I think I am sinking down
And I am all strung out on crony capitalism
On the outskirts of town
Post by: CNS on March 05, 2016, 08:11:32 PM
Post by: mocat on March 05, 2016, 08:16:39 PM
Post by: mocat on March 05, 2016, 08:17:35 PM
Post by: sys on March 05, 2016, 08:18:27 PM
What would Ecuadorians say? Probably Marquiposa
if trump hears that, that's definitely what he will use in the next debate.
Post by: mocat on March 05, 2016, 08:19:53 PM
Post by: sys on March 05, 2016, 10:10:23 PM
Quote
Trump opened his victory speech with a couple of thank-yous to the voters in Louisiana and Kentucky, then pivoted to his competitors. Cruz's success in Maine wasn't surprising, he said, “because it's very close to Canada.” And Rubio? “Personally, I'd call for him to drop out of the race. I think it's time now.”
Post by: star seed 7 on March 05, 2016, 10:13:33 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 06, 2016, 09:03:02 AM
Post by: treysolid on March 06, 2016, 09:41:02 AM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160306%2F3bc3ef3525b1c865dd624ffb8ae29e90.jpg&hash=f5bd34e30aad996b5cb5d0d5d286bbadf1ca257f)
wtf is the "silent majority?"
Post by: Asteriskhead on March 06, 2016, 09:44:24 AM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160306%2F3bc3ef3525b1c865dd624ffb8ae29e90.jpg&hash=f5bd34e30aad996b5cb5d0d5d286bbadf1ca257f)
wtf is the "silent majority?"
Looks like it might be yuuge pieces of crap who were too afraid to voice their opinions until Trump came around.
Post by: IPA4Me on March 06, 2016, 09:52:19 AM
https://twitter.com/gregorykorte/status/706342306991972353
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 07, 2016, 09:21:18 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 07, 2016, 09:22:33 AM
More fuel to my not very much of a conspiracy conspiracy. Trump is very poorly situated to launch much of a get out the vote operation if nominated.
He's poorly situated to launch much of a get out the vote operation for the primaries, too, but all kinds of first time voters are coming out in droves to vote for him.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 07, 2016, 09:23:59 AM
More fuel to my not very much of a conspiracy conspiracy. Trump is very poorly situated to launch much of a get out the vote operation if nominated.
He's poorly situated to launch much of a get out the vote operation for the primaries, too, but all kinds of first time voters are coming out in droves to vote for him.
Generals are almost completely different. Serving this up on a platter for Hillary for Prison 2016.
Post by: star seed 7 on March 07, 2016, 09:30:59 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 07, 2016, 09:34:34 AM
Truly an underwoodian scheme. Sometimes you really have to respect how well the clintons play the game. I mean they convinced a billionaire to go out and make a racist fool of himself and he gets basically nothing out of it except press! :clap:
You'll probably put out 6 more HFP2016 signs in the yard now.
Post by: star seed 7 on March 07, 2016, 09:37:54 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 07, 2016, 09:48:21 AM
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on March 07, 2016, 10:27:57 AM
Marcolito?
different countries/regions use different diminutives. i would use marquillo because i like the illo sound, but most mexicans which is sorta america's default spanish would use marquito.
I'd like to call him Marco Poco.
Post by: Kat Kid on March 08, 2016, 09:36:27 AM
Post by: Emo EMAW on March 08, 2016, 09:56:25 AM
Marcolito?
different countries/regions use different diminutives. i would use marquillo because i like the illo sound, but most mexicans which is sorta america's default spanish would use marquito.
I'd like to call him Marco Poco.
Is this a Mrs. Gooch original pun?
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on March 08, 2016, 12:00:21 PM
Marcolito?
different countries/regions use different diminutives. i would use marquillo because i like the illo sound, but most mexicans which is sorta america's default spanish would use marquito.
I'd like to call him Marco Poco.
Is this a Mrs. Gooch original pun?
Yeah, I'm really good at Spanish now. :lol:
Post by: Emo EMAW on March 08, 2016, 01:14:24 PM
Marcolito?
different countries/regions use different diminutives. i would use marquillo because i like the illo sound, but most mexicans which is sorta america's default spanish would use marquito.
I'd like to call him Marco Poco.
Is this a Mrs. Gooch original pun?
Yeah, I'm really good at Spanish now. :lol:
Bravo Mrs. Gooch, bravo!
Post by: sys on March 08, 2016, 07:41:50 PM
Post by: sys on March 08, 2016, 07:51:24 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 08, 2016, 08:01:29 PM
Post by: sys on March 08, 2016, 08:03:12 PM
These things are happening so frequently now that it loses excitement
i've been looking forward to when the votes are reported all day. maybe you're just jaded.
Post by: wetwillie on March 08, 2016, 08:04:09 PM
Post by: sys on March 08, 2016, 08:08:50 PM
Post by: renocat on March 08, 2016, 11:15:12 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on March 09, 2016, 08:17:49 AM
http://www.cracked.com/blog/what-i-learned-accidentally-managing-trumps-campaign/
Post by: Yard Dog on March 09, 2016, 09:48:13 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 09, 2016, 09:59:53 AM
https://www.facebook.com/endfederalreserve/videos/681625301939928/
:love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love: :love:
Post by: Cartierfor3 on March 09, 2016, 10:32:54 AM
(https://pmchollywoodlife.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/donald-ivanka-trump-throwback-photo-ftr-1.jpg)
Post by: star seed 7 on March 09, 2016, 12:09:10 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on March 09, 2016, 12:13:10 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 09, 2016, 12:19:03 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 09, 2016, 12:32:03 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on March 09, 2016, 12:33:29 PM
http://hollywoodlife.com/2016/02/02/ivanka-donald-trump-throwback-photo-daughter/ (http://hollywoodlife.com/2016/02/02/ivanka-donald-trump-throwback-photo-daughter/)
Post by: Institutional Control on March 09, 2016, 12:35:47 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 09, 2016, 12:52:41 PM
What's wrong with the picture?
I have two daughters, I assure you that there will never ever ever be a picture taken of my teenage daughter sitting in my lap wearing a mini skirt stroking my face. I don't think that he is bonking his daughter or even wants to but if you scour the internet looking for a similar picture of someone else you won't find one and there's a reason for that.
Post by: Cartierfor3 on March 09, 2016, 01:04:04 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on March 09, 2016, 01:09:36 PM
What's wrong with the picture?
I have two daughters, I assure you that there will never ever ever be a picture taken of my teenage daughter sitting in my lap wearing a mini skirt stroking my face. I don't think that he is bonking his daughter or even wants to but if you scour the internet looking for a similar picture of someone else you won't find one and there's a reason for that.
Dude you have seriously underestimated the internet.
Post by: MakeItRain on March 09, 2016, 01:43:50 PM
What's wrong with the picture?
I have two daughters, I assure you that there will never ever ever be a picture taken of my teenage daughter sitting in my lap wearing a mini skirt stroking my face. I don't think that he is bonking his daughter or even wants to but if you scour the internet looking for a similar picture of someone else you won't find one and there's a reason for that.
Dude you have seriously underestimated the internet.
I'll wait, porn doesn't count either. I didn't notice it until I clicked cartier's link but she also isn't wearing a bra. The photo is mad gross.
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on March 09, 2016, 03:02:17 PM
except instead of a coach it's a president and his family and they are all intelligent, thoughtful and respectful. so a lot of people want to go replace them with some foul, loud mouth, harsh talking, bigot, pervy family.
Post by: DQ12 on March 10, 2016, 11:34:32 AM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on March 10, 2016, 11:58:34 AM
a couple of my friends want to go to the trump rally in chicago and protest tomorrow. i think there's a decent chance this thing may turn into a riot. i politely declined.
plus you have a Cats semifinal Big XII game to watch bro!
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 10, 2016, 12:19:08 PM
a couple of my friends want to go to the trump rally in chicago and protest tomorrow. i think there's a decent chance this thing may turn into a riot. i politely declined.
plus you have a Cats semifinal Big XII game to watch bro!
quarterfinal :Ugh:
Post by: 8manpick on March 10, 2016, 12:38:26 PM
a couple of my friends want to go to the trump rally in chicago and protest tomorrow. i think there's a decent chance this thing may turn into a riot. i politely declined.Let's tailgate it
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 10, 2016, 02:05:35 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 10, 2016, 02:07:04 PM
Anybody protesting war monger Hillary for Prison 2016 or Bern SINO Sanders who has never met a war he didn't vote for?
Why would they?
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 10, 2016, 02:13:01 PM
Anybody protesting war monger Hillary for Prison 2016 or Bern SINO Sanders who has never met a war he didn't vote for?
Why would they?
Hillary is a classic white Dem Elite who is patronizingly racist and Bernie has supported legislation which actually emboldens border militia. Again both are huge war mongers, Bern even left the sole voice of dissent on Afghanistan action out to dry.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 10, 2016, 02:19:36 PM
Anybody protesting war monger Hillary for Prison 2016 or Bern SINO Sanders who has never met a war he didn't vote for?
Why would they?
Hillary is a classic white Dem Elite who is patronizingly racist and Bernie has supported legislation which actually emboldens border militia. Again both are huge war mongers, Bern even left the sole voice of dissent on Afghanistan action out to dry.
Well, none of that is going to piss people off like Donald Trump does.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 10, 2016, 02:23:56 PM
Anybody protesting war monger Hillary for Prison 2016 or Bern SINO Sanders who has never met a war he didn't vote for?
Why would they?
Hillary is a classic white Dem Elite who is patronizingly racist and Bernie has supported legislation which actually emboldens border militia. Again both are huge war mongers, Bern even left the sole voice of dissent on Afghanistan action out to dry.
Well, none of that is going to piss people off like Donald Trump does.
Only pointing out the hypocrisy of most ProgLibs.
Post by: sys on March 10, 2016, 06:19:39 PM
Post by: steve dave on March 11, 2016, 09:15:30 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 11, 2016, 09:41:49 AM
Post by: chuckjames on March 11, 2016, 10:15:07 AM
Just your run of the mill average white trash Trump supporter, nothing to see here.
https://twitter.com/trymainelee/status/708310127430860800
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 11, 2016, 10:18:09 AM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on March 11, 2016, 10:32:03 AM
https://twitter.com/trymainelee/status/708310547268112385
Post by: star seed 7 on March 11, 2016, 11:16:27 AM
Post by: 8manpick on March 11, 2016, 11:34:37 AM
Steve, you should go to a rally and tell him how you feel.
Wait, are you here for the rally/riot SD?
Post by: lopakman on March 11, 2016, 12:08:30 PM
Post by: OK_Cat on March 11, 2016, 12:28:02 PM
oh man that video of that guy getting knocked out at the Trump rally was priceless. Thankfully the pussification of america hasn't reached the extreme that when someone is acting like a complete bad person you can't punch them in the face. Watching it in slow mow is the best :D
Cool tank top, bro
Post by: AbeFroman on March 11, 2016, 02:25:46 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on March 11, 2016, 06:57:37 PM
Post by: bucket on March 11, 2016, 07:19:37 PM
So is anyone else watching live coverage of Trump's Chicago rally? It got postponed. Tons of protesters and supporters scuffling. Lots of hilarious live footage of herp derps getting super mad. Saw a guy in a cowboy hat and Bass Pro Shops racing jacket getting super butthurt.
I watched. I wish the protesters would show more restraint.
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on March 11, 2016, 08:04:56 PM
Post by: renocat on March 12, 2016, 01:31:10 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 12, 2016, 04:17:00 AM
Post by: ednksu on March 12, 2016, 07:18:59 AM
Post by: bucket on March 12, 2016, 09:05:37 AM
Race riot in Cleveland? The fergies have something new to do this summer. I agree with Rubio that this is backlash to the Obama strategy of dividing and scaring the hell out of people into believing they are screwed.
Obama desirs to blend.us.all into one.big.happy pot of.thoroughly crap stew because he believes some people.are.privelidged. And.we.cannot separate out.by religion. The.State has to be god
Which is it? :dunno:
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 12, 2016, 10:33:36 AM
Post by: renocat on March 12, 2016, 11:57:10 AM
Post by: bucket on March 12, 2016, 12:20:02 PM
Why should someone hollering at a Trump rally be granted.some label of freedom of speech? It is verbal terrorism, especially if the.rally is not in a public place.
I don't see the difference between what they did and what he does. Frankly, they were more civil. His rallies are public.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 12, 2016, 01:47:56 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on March 12, 2016, 01:54:06 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 12, 2016, 02:22:40 PM
between the trump rally, the protesters, and the ku fans downtown is going to be a stupid festival today. like, hundreds of stupid people.
Not sure how the Mecum car auction fits into this but it is going to be a dummy stew for sure.
Post by: star seed 7 on March 12, 2016, 02:28:13 PM
Post by: renocat on March 12, 2016, 04:53:36 PM
Post by: bucket on March 12, 2016, 05:41:51 PM
They attacked WUD in Ohio today. This isn't about protesting, it is ugly ghetto terrorism. Obama and his ilk inflame these Soros funded thugs. Soros wants to destroy America and turn us into an atheistic socialistic hell hole. These Fergie Army thugs have to squashed like ticks.
Sheldon Adelson
Post by: Cartierfor3 on March 12, 2016, 07:40:06 PM
Post by: michigancat on March 12, 2016, 07:40:26 PM
what's the point of protesting a trump rallySometimes you get them cancelled
Post by: Cartierfor3 on March 12, 2016, 07:41:07 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 12, 2016, 07:41:19 PM
what's the point of protesting a trump rally
They want to make sure we don't make America great again
Post by: michigancat on March 12, 2016, 07:46:12 PM
all they are doing is getting him more publicity. its counterproductive.I don't think so
Post by: Cartierfor3 on March 12, 2016, 07:52:55 PM
all they are doing is getting him more publicity. its counterproductive.I don't think so
which trump rally got the most tv coverage
Post by: michigancat on March 12, 2016, 07:56:00 PM
I don't think all publicity is good publicityall they are doing is getting him more publicity. its counterproductive.I don't think so
which trump rally got the most tv coverage
Post by: Cartierfor3 on March 12, 2016, 08:02:03 PM
Post by: michigancat on March 12, 2016, 08:05:25 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 12, 2016, 08:06:14 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 12, 2016, 08:20:19 PM
Post by: EMAWmeister on March 13, 2016, 12:47:16 AM
Why do people still think this is a clever/non-racist insult? Its a rough ridin' saturday afternoon, protesters have just as much a right to be downtown as idiot basketball fans. Also, I feel like people who say the "mothers basement/get a job/my tax dollars pay for" are complete IRL brown posters.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 13, 2016, 09:56:29 AM
It brings more attention to the fact that his supporters are big fat racists, which isn't really a good look.
Yes, nazi granny style
Post by: MakeItRain on March 13, 2016, 10:46:23 AM
It brings more attention to the fact that his supporters are big fat racists, which isn't really a good look.
Yes, nazi granny style
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/nazi-saluting-trump-supporter-says-shes-not-a-nazi/
https://twitter.com/sakirkhader/status/708821173317050368
Post by: MakeItRain on March 13, 2016, 10:50:45 AM
https://twitter.com/ThisIsFusion/status/708478623926362113
Post by: MakeItRain on March 13, 2016, 10:52:30 AM
Post by: wetwillie on March 13, 2016, 10:56:02 AM
Post by: michigancat on March 13, 2016, 11:02:22 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 13, 2016, 01:06:27 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 13, 2016, 01:08:32 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 13, 2016, 01:31:13 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 13, 2016, 01:38:50 PM
MIR have you seen the clip of him reading that poem about the snake?
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/03/12/trump-invokes-rb-song-in-explanation-against-negotiating-with-terrorists-you-knew-damn-well-i-was-a-snake/
Post by: MakeItRain on March 13, 2016, 01:41:46 PM
Post by: CNS on March 13, 2016, 02:03:00 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 13, 2016, 02:10:56 PM
He is the embodiment of so much of what is wrong. I never would have guessed that the best mascot white trash, hillbillies, open racists, closet racists, and religious zealots could ask for is not only the same person but a billionaire from New York.
Before he ran for president I guarantee you he used the term cracker in a derogatory way, a lot, probably still does.
Post by: sys on March 13, 2016, 02:38:23 PM
Post by: IPA4Me on March 13, 2016, 02:42:55 PM
[tweet]708983126601682944[/tweet]
https://twitter.com/HCookAustin/status/709076158697086980
Post by: star seed 7 on March 13, 2016, 03:22:31 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 13, 2016, 04:42:15 PM
Post by: lopakman on March 13, 2016, 05:48:11 PM
Post by: CNS on March 13, 2016, 05:53:04 PM
Post by: lopakman on March 13, 2016, 06:00:19 PM
Lol at anything in recent national politics including finding coming ground. That crap was buried with the emergence of the Tea Party.
It might've been buried even before but yeah the Tea Party is a joke as well
Post by: TCUHornedFrog on March 14, 2016, 09:50:23 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 14, 2016, 09:56:49 AM
So how many of you Brownbackistanis are Trumpers?
www.gopowercat.com
Post by: TCUHornedFrog on March 14, 2016, 09:59:32 AM
www.gopowercat.com
yea but on gE tho?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 14, 2016, 10:00:18 AM
www.gopowercat.com
yea but on gE tho?
We have 2 that I'm aware of.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 14, 2016, 10:23:27 AM
www.gopowercat.com
yea but on gE tho?
Probably none
Post by: TCUHornedFrog on March 14, 2016, 10:44:17 AM
Probably none
There's at least 10-15. Trump came in second in the Brownbackistan primary with 23.3% of the vote.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 14, 2016, 10:55:30 AM
Probably none
There's at least 10-15. Trump came in second in the Brownbackistan primary with 23.3% of the vote.
They are over at GPC
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 14, 2016, 10:56:50 AM
Post by: TCUHornedFrog on March 14, 2016, 10:58:35 AM
Yeah, we are much better than the average Kansan.
I can agree with this post.
Post by: TCUHornedFrog on March 14, 2016, 10:59:33 AM
Probably none
There's at least 10-15. Trump came in second in the Brownbackistan primary with 23.3% of the vote.
They are over at GPC
There has to be some here too.
Post by: treysolid on March 14, 2016, 11:01:32 AM
MIR have you seen the clip of him reading that poem about the snake?
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/03/12/trump-invokes-rb-song-in-explanation-against-negotiating-with-terrorists-you-knew-damn-well-i-was-a-snake/
that's not really about "negotiating with terrorists" or whatever. that's a dog whistle for anti-muslim immigration.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 14, 2016, 12:00:03 PM
Probably none
There's at least 10-15. Trump came in second in the Brownbackistan primary with 23.3% of the vote.
They are over at GPC
There has to be some here too.
We probably have dozens of them if you count the Arkansas posters who registered accounts here.
Post by: catastrophe on March 14, 2016, 01:13:40 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 14, 2016, 01:35:45 PM
Post by: mocat on March 14, 2016, 02:06:43 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 14, 2016, 02:10:45 PM
Post by: michigancat on March 14, 2016, 03:59:07 PM
Post by: stunted on March 14, 2016, 04:35:37 PM
also great display of his alphaness. he doesn't back away from the threat, steps forward
Post by: IPA4Me on March 14, 2016, 04:54:42 PM
Post by: renocat on March 14, 2016, 06:57:48 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 14, 2016, 08:09:37 PM
Post by: CNS on March 14, 2016, 08:15:08 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 14, 2016, 08:19:36 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 14, 2016, 08:20:09 PM
We are past that. We are now at the "my supporters can beat up your supporters" stage. The 2-minutes Hate is on right before sundown, then it's time to rumble.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 14, 2016, 08:27:11 PM
Education level is a decent indicator of whether or not you're aTrumpPopulist/Reform Candidate supporter. You probably won't find many on any college message boards.
Careful not to leave out the berners
Post by: MakeItRain on March 14, 2016, 08:29:36 PM
i don't think we have any trumpers on here, but we do have a few cruzers
We absolutely have two trumpers on this blog, one of them posted just in the previous page. Glad to see the two shitbrains really leave their mark on everyone here. Most don't notice them because the two of them legitimately spend 3/4 of their posts following me around like some psycho filming me through a peephole.
Post by: MakeItRain on March 14, 2016, 08:31:16 PM
Education level is a decent indicator of whether or not you're aTrumpPopulist/Reform Candidate supporter. You probably won't find many on any college message boards.
Careful not to leave out the berners
You know this information has already been parsed, right? Not that truth and accuracy matter to a played out sock anyway.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 14, 2016, 08:31:40 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 14, 2016, 08:41:41 PM
Bernie and Trump blare the same idiot rhetoric on a half dozen major issues, you just have to laugh at all these pseudo intellectual pius ass clowns who support Bern and hate Trump.
List the half dozen
Post by: MakeItRain on March 14, 2016, 08:44:23 PM
They buried the lede.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 14, 2016, 08:45:09 PM
The only difference is one is a wildly successful narcissist who probably doesn't want to be president but, rather, wants to see if he can get elected president. The other is a rather unsuccessful loser who has never had a real job, but had the fortuitous fortune of being a the biggest dopey leftist at a time when Democrats were so lost they actually thought being a dopey leftist was a good idea.
Post by: MakeItRain on March 14, 2016, 08:48:07 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 14, 2016, 09:03:13 PM
Angry white men v. Angry neerdowells
Potato potato
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 14, 2016, 10:09:03 PM
Post by: nicname on March 15, 2016, 02:36:01 AM
You gotta tell yourself what you gotta tell yourself.
Angry white men v. Angry neerdowells
Potato potato
The half dozen major issues Trump and Bern share the same rhetoric on plz.
Post by: ednksu on March 15, 2016, 06:24:13 AM
Bernie the political animal betrays his rhetoric time and time and time again.
List thehalf dozenrhetoric
Lets try this experiment.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 15, 2016, 06:36:18 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 15, 2016, 07:30:04 AM
Bernie the political animal betrays his rhetoric time and time and time again.
List thehalf dozenrhetoric
Lets try this experiment.
Why do that? Dax and fsd weren't saying anything close to the same thing.
Post by: catastrophe on March 15, 2016, 07:55:32 AM
Portrays himself as a party rebel, yet votes party line the majority of the time. Portrays himself as anti war yet has voted for war at every turn which has caused resignations from his staff.
I can think of one military engagement Bernie did not support. Your ignorance of it kind of undermines your entire point here.
Post by: ednksu on March 15, 2016, 07:58:24 AM
Bernie the political animal betrays his rhetoric time and time and time again.
List thehalf dozenrhetoric
Lets try this experiment.
Why do that? Dax and fsd weren't saying anything close to the same thing.
At the heart of the matter the test isn't exactly the same but instead tests how the radical right perceives a candidate, how they build their strawmen, and what the candidate is actually saying. So at the base they are the same. I believe candidate X says/does Y. Okay show where examples of the incongruent positions, rhetoric to action etc.
Post by: ednksu on March 15, 2016, 08:01:44 AM
Portrays himself as a party rebel, yet votes party line the majority of the time. Portrays himself as anti war yet has voted for war at every turn which has caused resignations from his staff.
http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-iraq/
http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-afghanistan/
http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-privacy-and-digital-rights/
Wrong on Iraq, kinda wrong about Afghanistan, and wrong about the Patriot Act.
Do you have any issues in particular or just talking points Dax?
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 15, 2016, 08:43:40 AM
Afghanistan-Yes, voted for unilateral powers to the president to conduct war in Afghanistan.
Iraq- no, then voted to fund it.
Israel- yes to military occupation of Palestine.
Has given no indication he's against drone wars and has supported the ongoing military relationship with the theological regime of Saudi Arabia.
Supports a coalition military action in Syria.
Post by: michigancat on March 15, 2016, 08:52:47 AM
Post by: catastrophe on March 15, 2016, 09:43:05 AM
Post by: ednksu on March 15, 2016, 09:49:20 AM
Kosovo-Yes
Afghanistan-Yes, voted for unilateral powers to the president to conduct war in Afghanistan.
Iraq- no, then voted to fund it.
Israel- yes to military occupation of Palestine.
Has given no indication he's against drone wars and has supported the ongoing military relationship with the theological regime of Saudi Arabia.
Supports a coalition military action in Syria.
As in the past, you've shown your willingness to distort the truth for your agenda. Kosovo is yet another pint where you've shown a tenuous grasp of the facts and order of events. Just because you support a resolution with broad support doesn't mean you're a war monger.
http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-nato/
http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-israel-and-the-palestinians/
Post by: chum1 on March 15, 2016, 09:56:13 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 15, 2016, 09:59:59 AM
What's going on here? Conservatives don't like it when some conservatives are called dumb, so they respond by saying that some liberals are dumb, too?
Politics!
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 15, 2016, 10:43:10 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 15, 2016, 10:50:40 AM
http://theantimedia.org/bernie-sanders-elephant-in-the-room/
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 15, 2016, 10:52:30 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 15, 2016, 10:56:22 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 15, 2016, 11:17:22 AM
What's going on here? Conservatives don't like it when some conservatives are called dumb, so they respond by saying that some liberals are dumb, too?
The Berners just found out they are as dumb or dumber than the trumpers, and they are not happy about it.
They are confused how this is possible, because they went to college!!!
Post by: catastrophe on March 15, 2016, 11:32:00 AM
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernie-sanders-troubling-history-supporting-us-military-violence-abroad
http://theantimedia.org/bernie-sanders-elephant-in-the-room/
These positions only seem controversial if you (incorrectly) believe Sanders portrays himself as a pacifist. The reason his votes on those engagements aren't talked about in the media is because they were all pretty damn popular choices; both at the time and in many circumstances even today.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 15, 2016, 11:34:38 AM
Post by: michigancat on March 15, 2016, 12:02:19 PM
I don't believe he's a pacifist, it's just there's so many Bernie supporters who think he's a huge anti-war guy and he isn't. In fact, he likes war, destabilization, occupation and regime change, likes it a lot.
Relative to most in the federal government, he's a huge anti-war guy. Who are some current senators that are more anti-war than him?
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 15, 2016, 12:03:54 PM
I don't believe he's a pacifist, it's just there's so many Bernie supporters who think he's a huge anti-war guy and he isn't. In fact, he likes war, destabilization, occupation and regime change, likes it a lot.
Relative to most in the federal government, he's a huge anti-war guy. Who are some current senators that are more anti-war than him?
Don't know and are they running for President?
Post by: michigancat on March 15, 2016, 12:07:14 PM
I don't believe he's a pacifist, it's just there's so many Bernie supporters who think he's a huge anti-war guy and he isn't. In fact, he likes war, destabilization, occupation and regime change, likes it a lot.
Relative to most in the federal government, he's a huge anti-war guy. Who are some current senators that are more anti-war than him?
Don't know and are they running for President?
I don't believe he's a pacifist, it's just there's so many Bernie supporters who think he's a huge anti-war guy and he isn't. In fact, he likes war, destabilization, occupation and regime change, likes it a lot.
Relative to most in the federal government, he's a huge anti-war guy. Who are some current senators that are more anti-war than him?
Don't know and are they running for President?
OK, relative to people running for president over the last, say, 20 years, who is more anti-war than him?
I mean it seems like it should be easy to rattle off a few names giving your tone.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 15, 2016, 12:08:16 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 15, 2016, 12:09:57 PM
Post by: michigancat on March 15, 2016, 12:19:07 PM
Ron Paul talked a pretty big anti interventionism game, but he wasn't a Senator.
Yes, he's a good one.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 15, 2016, 01:09:49 PM
Lol, at the pseudo intellectual libtards rallying around a war monger on the basis that he may not be as war monger-y as his counterpaert. They love lying to themselves-psychopath
Post by: DQ12 on March 15, 2016, 01:19:55 PM
This thread is about how stupid Berners are, not about which candidate is the least war monger-y.This thread is actually about how ridiculous and embarrassing the GOP frontrunner is.
Lol, at the pseudo intellectual libtards rallying around a war monger on the basis that he may not be as war monger-y as his counterpaert. They love lying to themselves-psychopath
And given a choice of "warmongers," I think choosing the least war monger-y one makes sense, if you're strictly anti-war.
Post by: TCUHornedFrog on March 15, 2016, 01:24:57 PM
This thread is about how stupid Berners are, not about which candidate is the least war monger-y.
Lol, at the pseudo intellectual libtards rallying around a war monger on the basis that he may not be as war monger-y as his counterpaert. They love lying to themselves-psychopath
Thread title is Trump Candidacy but in your mind you think it is about Bernie Sanders supporters. Seems legit.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 15, 2016, 01:26:41 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 15, 2016, 02:44:56 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 15, 2016, 02:47:36 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 15, 2016, 03:48:17 PM
Raaaaaaacist
Seeeeeeeexist
Our guy doesn't mean what he says or say what he means, so nevermind how absurd and contradictory everything he says is. Deep down we know he is just good for everyone except those jew wall streeters.
Post by: chum1 on March 15, 2016, 04:12:58 PM
Post by: CNS on March 15, 2016, 04:21:06 PM
Post by: chum1 on March 15, 2016, 04:22:48 PM
Post by: TCUHornedFrog on March 15, 2016, 04:37:27 PM
This thread is sort of evolving into a sub-repository for libtatdisms.
Raaaaaaacist
Seeeeeeeexist
Our guy doesn't mean what he says or say what he means, so nevermind how absurd and contradictory everything he says is. Deep down we know he is just good for everyone except those jew wall streeters.
:sdeek:
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 15, 2016, 07:30:33 PM
Post by: sys on March 15, 2016, 07:52:37 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 15, 2016, 07:54:48 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 15, 2016, 07:59:01 PM
Rubio is going to stay in the race because the map really opens up for him now.
Noooooope
trump is winning the nom, Hillary will mop the floor with him. :Crybaby:
Post by: MakeItRain on March 15, 2016, 08:35:40 PM
Have you not noticed FSD slipping? Well, anyway, that is what's happening ITT
Is this worse than using an onion knockoff to cite Ben Carson getting an endorsement from the kkk?
Post by: star seed 7 on March 15, 2016, 08:38:06 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 15, 2016, 09:10:38 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 15, 2016, 09:20:12 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 15, 2016, 09:21:54 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 15, 2016, 09:23:35 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 15, 2016, 09:37:11 PM
What's dissimilar about a bunch of angry ignorant people?
ironic
Post by: star seed 7 on March 15, 2016, 09:40:24 PM
What's dissimilar about a bunch of angry ignorant people?
ironic
:lol:
Post by: OK_Cat on March 15, 2016, 09:43:25 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 15, 2016, 09:49:50 PM
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on March 15, 2016, 09:52:23 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 15, 2016, 09:56:07 PM
Lol at the thought of kasich being trumps vp
KSUW is super weird about this trump thing. I don't how you can know anything about John Kasich and not be aware of his great disdain for Donald Trump.
Post by: MakeItRain on March 15, 2016, 09:57:55 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 15, 2016, 10:01:41 PM
Post by: sys on March 15, 2016, 10:15:26 PM
Lol at the thought of kasich being trumps vp
KSUW is super weird about this trump thing. I don't how you can know anything about John Kasich and not be aware of his great disdain for Donald Trump.
the entire world's great disdain for cruz is pretty well known as well.
there's no reason for kasich to drop out. why drop out when he can stay in, get as many delegates as he can and see how much they're worth in cleveland.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 15, 2016, 10:19:25 PM
Actually ironicWhat's dissimilar about a bunch of angry ignorant people?
ironic
Post by: MakeItRain on March 15, 2016, 10:19:49 PM
Post by: sys on March 15, 2016, 10:23:10 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 15, 2016, 10:27:19 PM
Either way, what a disaster. At least the dems set it up so the morons can't hijack the party. In the year of populism, elitism may save the day.
Post by: star seed 7 on March 15, 2016, 10:28:36 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 15, 2016, 10:30:55 PM
did fsd just throw his support to hillary :Wha:
This can be your new condom egregious misrepresentation
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 15, 2016, 10:42:19 PM
Lol at the thought of kasich being trumps vp
KSUW is super weird about this trump thing. I don't how you can know anything about John Kasich and not be aware of his great disdain for Donald Trump.
the entire world's great disdain for cruz is pretty well known as well.
there's no reason for kasich to drop out. why drop out when he can stay in, get as many delegates as he can and see how much they're worth in cleveland.
Hint: Kasich's delegates are worth jack crap if Trump secures the nomination pre-convention. Which he will, if Kasich stays in.
Kasich needs to cut his deal now.
Post by: sys on March 15, 2016, 10:45:02 PM
Hint: Kasich's delegates are worth jack crap if Trump secures the nomination pre-convention. Which he will, if Kasich stays in.
Kasich needs to cut his deal now.
trump is likely to get 1237 regardless of what kasich does. and cruz's promises are worth exactly as much as kasich's delegates if that happens.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 15, 2016, 10:48:04 PM
Hint: Kasich's delegates are worth jack crap if Trump secures the nomination pre-convention. Which he will, if Kasich stays in.
Kasich needs to cut his deal now.
trump is likely to get 1237 regardless of what kasich does.
Nope. Not if it's one on one Trump v. Cruz (with Kasich in his corner).
Post by: sys on March 15, 2016, 10:49:09 PM
Nope. Not if it's one on one Trump v. Cruz (with Kasich in his corner).
no offense, but i don't think you know what you're talking about.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 15, 2016, 10:57:27 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 15, 2016, 11:05:04 PM
Nope. Not if it's one on one Trump v. Cruz (with Kasich in his corner).
no offense, but i don't think you know what you're talking about.
Lol ok. Maybe we'll find out.
Post by: MakeItRain on March 16, 2016, 12:42:52 AM
Hint: Kasich's delegates are worth jack crap if Trump secures the nomination pre-convention. Which he will, if Kasich stays in.
Kasich needs to cut his deal now.
trump is likely to get 1237 regardless of what kasich does.
Nope. Not if it's one on one Trump v. Cruz (with Kasich in his corner).
You seem to be of the very odd opinion that Cruz will pick up all the votes from these people dropping out and Trump will get none. Are you not noticing Trump's percentages increasing with each candidate leaving the race? It seems as if more republicans are more comfortable with Trump than you are giving credit for.
Post by: Panjandrum on March 16, 2016, 02:07:28 AM
Cruz is a sociopath that is probably at least a little crazy.
It's a tough choice if you are stuck on voting down party lines.
Post by: 8manpick on March 16, 2016, 08:17:00 AM
(Will probably end up voting lib or libertarian in the general, given those two choices though)
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 16, 2016, 09:21:31 AM
Gonna be sad when all the lemmings line up for HFP2016 who is every bit as unelectable as Trump if not more so.
Post by: steve dave on March 16, 2016, 09:24:47 AM
would vote Trump over Cruz.
(Will probably end up voting lib or libertarian in the general, given those two choices though)
same
Post by: cfbandyman on March 16, 2016, 09:28:55 AM
Lol at the thought of kasich being trumps vp
KSUW is super weird about this trump thing. I don't how you can know anything about John Kasich and not be aware of his great disdain for Donald Drumpf.
the entire world's great disdain for cruz is pretty well known as well.
there's no reason for kasich to drop out. why drop out when he can stay in, get as many delegates as he can and see how much they're worth in cleveland.
I agree with this a lot. Not just because he won Ohio, but Kasich has increasingly been getting more % of the votes, and until Rubio dropped out was routinely beating Rubio, and has only been getting more momentum, and I think he is increasingly seen as the "level headed" response to not just Drumpf, but Cruz as well by the right. He should stay in, and ride this rough rider out
Post by: CNS on March 16, 2016, 09:32:58 AM
Would Trump's election shake global confidence in the USA, economically?
You have to be very aware of ppl that are unpredictable. It would effect all our relationships(good and bad) at least a little.
Again, Brittan has been mulling over actually banning Trump from entering their country for about a year now. That is the guy that is about to be elected the actual leader of our country. One that is seen at that level by one of our greatest allies.
Post by: wetwillie on March 16, 2016, 09:33:12 AM
Post by: CNS on March 16, 2016, 09:35:33 AM
Post by: catastrophe on March 16, 2016, 09:40:55 AM
Post by: catastrophe on March 16, 2016, 09:42:51 AM
Post by: 8manpick on March 16, 2016, 09:54:49 AM
I hate the idea of the Repubs brokering a convention. It feels like it takes the ppl out of the system to me. However, you almost have to hope for the ppl to be taken out of the system if they want a Trump. I mean, I don't, but still. WTF is going on anymore?
But isn't the real "system" just the general election? We have contested primaries, but is there really anything stopping a party from picking one candidate from the start?
Post by: CNS on March 16, 2016, 09:59:45 AM
Also, when most people are registered as independents why is it such a given that a 3rd party candidate has no chance? It's like the people already don't have a voice or at least they think they don't.Money
Until a third party starts earning the way the d's and r's do, they have no chance.
Post by: catastrophe on March 16, 2016, 10:17:27 AM
Also, when most people are registered as independents why is it such a given that a 3rd party candidate has no chance? It's like the people already don't have a voice or at least they think they don't.Money
Until a third party starts earning the way the d's and r's do, they have no chance.
Bernie Sanders raised money by getting like a million donations of $27 each. The only reason a third party couldn't do the same is because there is some kind of mass hysteria among the public who think a third party cannot raise money or otherwise have a chance to win.
You could literally have 10-20 million people who would consider donating to/ voting for a guy like Gary Johnson but don't do it because they are afraid of throwing their vote/money away.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 16, 2016, 10:22:09 AM
I originally thought I could stomach voting trump over Hilary because I thought Trump was just posturing and would basically turn out to be a moderate in the general. I'm not so sure anymore what exactly he will actually do which means I just can't do it even knowing how awful Hilary is.
A critical analysis of hill makes me wonder if your preconceptions are correct. There is a large public record of hill taking the exact opposite pozition on literally every issue she is currently planking on, with some of these switcheroos rather fresh. Common sense would dictate that she is also highly unpredictable.
While the Donald certainly seems volatile, I wonder if his actual business practices may indicate a more consistent and predictable behavior pattern. Perhaps he is the candidate that affords more certainty.
This is truly a hobson's choice.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 16, 2016, 10:23:02 AM
Also, when most people are registered as independents why is it such a given that a 3rd party candidate has no chance? It's like the people already don't have a voice or at least they think they don't.Money
Until a third party starts earning the way the d's and r's do, they have no chance.
Bernie Sanders raised money by getting like a million donations of $27 each. The only reason a third party couldn't do the same is because there is some kind of mass hysteria among the public who think a third party cannot raise money or otherwise have a chance to win.
You could literally have 10-20 million people who would consider donating to/ voting for a guy like Gary Johnson but don't do it because they are afraid of throwing their vote/money away.
Buy a calculator, bro
Post by: CNS on March 16, 2016, 10:24:48 AM
Also, when most people are registered as independents why is it such a given that a 3rd party candidate has no chance? It's like the people already don't have a voice or at least they think they don't.Money
Until a third party starts earning the way the d's and r's do, they have no chance.
Bernie Sanders raised money by getting like a million donations of $27 each. The only reason a third party couldn't do the same is because there is some kind of mass hysteria among the public who think a third party cannot raise money or otherwise have a chance to win.
You could literally have 10-20 million people who would consider donating to/ voting for a guy like Gary Johnson but don't do it because they are afraid of throwing their vote/money away.
That is a small amt of the money. The PAC money is huge.
Post by: chuckjames on March 16, 2016, 10:29:49 AM
Also, when most people are registered as independents why is it such a given that a 3rd party candidate has no chance? It's like the people already don't have a voice or at least they think they don't.Money
Until a third party starts earning the way the d's and r's do, they have no chance.
Bernie Sanders raised money by getting like a million donations of $27 each. The only reason a third party couldn't do the same is because there is some kind of mass hysteria among the public who think a third party cannot raise money or otherwise have a chance to win.
You could literally have 10-20 million people who would consider donating to/ voting for a guy like Gary Johnson but don't do it because they are afraid of throwing their vote/money away.
That is a small amt of the money. The PAC money is huge.
Yea the Ds are gonna spend in the range of a One Billion dollars (Dr. Evil voice). The party apparatus is also huge for getting out vote and such.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 16, 2016, 10:32:33 AM
If this makes it to a brokered convention, the scenario in my mind is saying "ok Trump supporters, good for you but you're not Republicans. Just go make your own party and GTFO."
Yeah, and hopefully that would happen. The republican party is better off without Trump and his supporters.
Post by: catastrophe on March 16, 2016, 10:35:25 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 16, 2016, 10:45:07 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 16, 2016, 11:35:07 AM
Gonna be sad when all the lemmings line up for HFP2016 who is every bit as unelectable as Trump if not more so.
:lol: things a mindless partisan says
Post by: catastrophe on March 16, 2016, 11:45:48 AM
Post by: wetwillie on March 16, 2016, 11:48:26 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on March 16, 2016, 12:13:25 PM
Post by: chuckjames on March 16, 2016, 01:54:31 PM
Let's restart this bitch. We get Colin Powell and you guys can take Biden. :comeatme:
Nah..we will take a Trump v Hillary and let the cards fall where they do.
Post by: sys on March 16, 2016, 02:24:32 PM
That is a small amt of the money. The PAC money is huge.
trump & sanders, if nothing else, have proven that you don't need enormous quantities of money to run for national political office. and that having enormous quantities of money is not an insurmountable advantage.
Post by: CNS on March 16, 2016, 02:28:50 PM
That is a small amt of the money. The PAC money is huge.
trump & sanders, if nothing else, have proven that you don't need enormous quantities of money to run for national political office. and that having enormous quantities of money is not an insurmountable advantage.
To a certain extent. I would imagine that most of the money that will be spent in this campaign has yet to be spent, though.
Post by: wetwillie on March 16, 2016, 02:45:01 PM
Post by: CNS on March 16, 2016, 02:58:00 PM
Twitter and Facebook have allowed candidates to circumvent traditional media and speak directly to the people.
Both existed last pres election and yet a record was set on money spent. :dunno:
Post by: sys on March 16, 2016, 03:00:27 PM
:lol:
Post by: chuckjames on March 16, 2016, 04:37:23 PM
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-voters-aversion-to-foreign-sounding-names-cost-him-delegates/
:lol:
Can you imagine if he comes up 2 delegates short? Oh boy!!
Post by: Institutional Control on March 16, 2016, 04:45:21 PM
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-voters-aversion-to-foreign-sounding-names-cost-him-delegates/
:lol:
Can you imagine if he comes up 2 delegates short? Oh boy!!
He would probably sue the RNC.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: MakeItRain on March 16, 2016, 06:08:58 PM
Let's restart this bitch. We get Colin Powell and you guys can take Biden. :comeatme:
Politically one and the same
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 16, 2016, 06:57:00 PM
Gonna be sad when all the lemmings line up for HFP2016 who is every bit as unelectable as Trump if not more so.
:lol: things a mindless partisan says
Lol, Why do you think you speak for all libs? That's exactly how it's going to go and you know it, and Hillary in her own right is easily one of the most disengenius pathological liars to ever to run for the presidency in modern American history. Her role in the executive branch as SOS was and still is an unmitigated disaster.
Post by: star seed 7 on March 16, 2016, 07:30:47 PM
doesn't work well with word filter tho
Post by: MakeItRain on March 16, 2016, 08:18:01 PM
Gonna be sad when all the lemmings line up for HFP2016 who is every bit as unelectable as Trump if not more so.
:lol: things a mindless partisan says
Lol, Why do you think you speak for all libs? That's exactly how it's going to go and you know it, and Hillary in her own right is easily one of the most disengenius pathological liars to ever to run for the presidency in modern American history. Her role in the executive branch as SOS was and still is an unmitigated disaster.
If you say so.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 16, 2016, 09:59:28 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 16, 2016, 10:25:39 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 16, 2016, 10:32:51 PM
Post by: treysolid on March 16, 2016, 10:49:40 PM
What do you guys think Donald will fix first in this broken country when he becomes Trump45
hopefully, he'll get finger-lengthening surgery to fix his nubby little fingers.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 16, 2016, 10:56:37 PM
What do you guys think Donald will fix first in this broken country when he becomes Trump45
hopefully, he'll get finger-lengthening surgery to fix his nubby little fingers.
What a dumb thing to hope for, are you a dumbfuck
Post by: MakeItRain on March 17, 2016, 01:32:10 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 17, 2016, 08:13:51 AM
Post by: steve dave on March 17, 2016, 08:33:39 AM
I don't think libtards are gonna jump on the hill psycho wagon at near the rate the dems hope they do
I think the GOP will jump on the trump wagon though. which says a lot about the base of each party imo.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 17, 2016, 08:53:47 AM
Post by: steve dave on March 17, 2016, 08:58:33 AM
Why does 45 have all this unprecedented crossover appeal tho :love:
not enough public education funding
Post by: chum1 on March 17, 2016, 09:02:10 AM
Post by: 8manpick on March 17, 2016, 09:09:06 AM
I think the people who are talking about how much Hillary is hated now are the same people who were talking how much Obama was hated before the last election.
Yeah. Lots of (most?) people think she has been a great Secretary of State and may be one of the most experienced presidential candidates in recent history.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 17, 2016, 09:59:35 AM
I don't think libtards are gonna jump on the hill psycho wagon at near the rate the dems hope they do
No but they will vote against Trump
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 17, 2016, 10:01:30 AM
I think the people who are talking about how much Hillary is hated now are the same people who were talking how much Obama was hated before the last election.
the demographics of the voting electorate will not put a vaguely racist candidate in office.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 17, 2016, 10:09:03 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 17, 2016, 10:11:15 AM
:resetbutton
Post by: TCUHornedFrog on March 17, 2016, 10:35:03 AM
I think the people who are talking about how much Hillary is hated now are the same people who were talking how much Obama was hated before the last election.
Yes, Hillary motivates the gop base to vote. Unfortunately for the gop, their eventual nominee is a dumb eff that alienates conservatives that aren't mentally impaired.
My boss is a life long gop voter and he's pissed because he is going to have to vote for Hillary. He refuses to vote for Cruz and Trump.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 17, 2016, 01:46:19 PM
I think the people who are talking about how much Hillary is hated now are the same people who were talking how much Obama was hated before the last election.
Yeah. Lots of (most?) people think she has been a great Secretary of State and may be one of the most experienced presidential candidates in recent history.
Don't forget great sense of humor and hot body. Lots (most?) people think she might be more honest than Abe Lincoln, too.
Post by: 8manpick on March 17, 2016, 01:47:54 PM
Not saying I agree with that opinion. Lots of people think Trump is a good option for POTUS.I think the people who are talking about how much Hillary is hated now are the same people who were talking how much Obama was hated before the last election.
Yeah. Lots of (most?) people think she has been a great Secretary of State and may be one of the most experienced presidential candidates in recent history.
Don't forget great sense of humor and hot body. Lots (most?) people think she might be more honest than Abe Lincoln, too.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 17, 2016, 03:58:07 PM
I think the people who are talking about how much Hillary is hated now are the same people who were talking how much Obama was hated before the last election.
I don't know a single Democrat who isnt absolutely repulsed by the idea of hill rod.
Likewise, I don't know a single Republican who isn't hoping another Republican ends up with the nomination.
I equate the pre-2008 Obama hate to the current Cruz hate. It's a rather unfounded fear that the ideologue is going to be able to relentlessly impart and enforce his ideology against the public.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 17, 2016, 03:59:30 PM
Not saying I agree with that opinion. Lots of people think Trump is a good option for POTUS.I think the people who are talking about how much Hillary is hated now are the same people who were talking how much Obama was hated before the last election.
Yeah. Lots of (most?) people think she has been a great Secretary of State and may be one of the most experienced presidential candidates in recent history.
Don't forget great sense of humor and hot body. Lots (most?) people think she might be more honest than Abe Lincoln, too.
Lots or most? Gmafb, you must have really stupid friends/acquaintances
Post by: bucket on March 17, 2016, 04:52:55 PM
I think the people who are talking about how much Hillary is hated now are the same people who were talking how much Obama was hated before the last election.
I don't know a single Democrat who isnt absolutely repulsed by the idea of hill rod.
Likewise, I don't know a single Republican who isn't hoping another Republican ends up with the nomination.
I equate the pre-2008 Obama hate to the current Cruz hate. It's a rather unfounded fear that the ideologue is going to be able to relentlessly impart and enforce his ideology against the public.
:thumbsup:
Post by: chum1 on March 17, 2016, 05:31:46 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 17, 2016, 06:01:55 PM
Post by: sys on March 17, 2016, 06:09:37 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on March 17, 2016, 06:25:06 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: wetwillie on March 17, 2016, 06:25:54 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 17, 2016, 06:33:02 PM
Post by: chum1 on March 17, 2016, 06:41:47 PM
Post by: michigancat on March 17, 2016, 07:45:32 PM
I don't vote. But if I did, I'd vote for her because having a woman president serves the greater good more than any of the other issues people like to discuss.This is a great point.
Post by: steve dave on March 17, 2016, 08:09:09 PM
I don't vote. But if I did, I'd vote for her because having a woman president serves the greater good more than any of the other issues people like to discuss.
Chum, I like you
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 17, 2016, 08:30:58 PM
Voting for her does nothing other than further denigrate the publics confidence in the political system. If you think that's for the greater good, you are an idiot.
Post by: star seed 7 on March 17, 2016, 08:33:48 PM
Hillary is a living breathing caricature of what everyone hates about politicians and politics, and what is spurring the populist revolt that is trump and Bern.
Voting for her does nothing other than further denigrate the publics confidence in the political system. If you think that's for the greater good, you are an idiot.
Probably for the best
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 17, 2016, 08:35:27 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 17, 2016, 08:39:03 PM
Hillary :curse:
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 17, 2016, 08:40:00 PM
Hillary is a living breathing caricature of what everyone hates about politicians and politics, and what is spurring the populist revolt that is trump and Bern.
Voting for her does nothing other than further denigrate the publics confidence in the political system. If you think that's for the greater good, you are an idiot.
Probably for the best
You should consider moving to somalia
Post by: steve dave on March 17, 2016, 08:41:25 PM
So now she's too incompetent to denigrate the publics confidence in the political system?
Hillary :curse:
Haha
Post by: chum1 on March 17, 2016, 08:52:08 PM
(https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0854/8758/products/Koozies_6c757274-bfba-4c4c-8a51-cf938078ce22_large.jpg)
(https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0854/8758/products/Mens_Everyday_Pantsuit_Tee_large.jpg)
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 17, 2016, 08:55:26 PM
I like you chum, it's so great that you found that
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 17, 2016, 09:37:32 PM
Post by: TCUHornedFrog on March 17, 2016, 10:16:24 PM
I can't rough ridin' stand trump, but to pretend the stuff hillary has actually done in elected office is not more disqualifying is at best intellectually disingenuous.
Does anyone else find it amusing when really stupid people try to act like they have intellectual integrity?
Post by: star seed 7 on March 17, 2016, 10:17:14 PM
I can't rough ridin' stand trump, but to pretend the stuff hillary has actually done in elected office is not more disqualifying is at best intellectually disingenuous.
Does anyone else find it amusing when really stupid people try to act like they have intellectual integrity?
fsd is a texan :frown:
Post by: TCUHornedFrog on March 17, 2016, 10:19:53 PM
fsd is a texan :frown:
:sdeek: So he is stupid and fat?
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 17, 2016, 10:23:12 PM
Also, why has AmericanStandard forsaken us?
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 17, 2016, 10:26:02 PM
fsd is a texan :frown:
:sdeek: So he is stupid and fat?
Watts is the presentation guy, like Al Gore is for you...
“The ‘97% consensus’ article is poorly conceived, poorly designed and poorly executed. It obscures the complexities of the climate issue and it is a sign of the desperately poor level of public and policy debate in this country [UK] that the energy minister should cite it.”
– Mike Hulme, Ph.D. Professor of Climate Change, University of East Anglia (UEA)
The 97% consensus article is completely accurate.
-Poindexter McSmartypants, Ph.D. Professor of Climate Change, University of Bumfuckistan
:Purple Koolaid:
Post by: TCUHornedFrog on March 17, 2016, 10:28:56 PM
How are we handling this milquetoast poster with the ever-so-clever tcuhornedfrog handle?
Also, why has AmericanStandard forsaken us?
So...how fat are you?
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 17, 2016, 10:29:59 PM
:ROFL:
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 17, 2016, 10:34:22 PM
Post by: TCUHornedFrog on March 17, 2016, 11:11:43 PM
I bet tcuhornedfrog thinks the earth is a sphere when technically it's not. Omg, lol
You didn't answer my question.
How fat are you?
Are you obese or morbidly obese?
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 17, 2016, 11:22:18 PM
Any of you guys watch F1? I realize Brownbackistan is mostly nascar territory, but F1 is better.
There's an an American team this year for the first time in awhile (Haas).
Also, if you have a chance to go to the race in Austin, it is awesome. I've been every year except last year and will be going back this year.QuoteThe 2016 Season Preview - New Rules, Teams, Drivers & Races
Can Ferrari take the fight to Mercedes this year and make the 2016 FIA Formula One World Championship a genuine two-horse race? Have the Italian team done enough work over the winter to take the big step needed to challenge the dominant Silver Arrows, who have won 32 of the 38 races since the new turbo-hybrid rules were inaugurated in 2014?
As questions go it’s the most pressing one in F1 racing right now, and certainly worth a lot more than the proverbial $64million.
If - as many commentators believe - the answer is in the affirmative, we should be in for a superb season of classic back-and-forth racing between two great names at the sharp end, along with what promises to be a slugfest in the upper midfield.
But before assessing the relative merits of the leading contenders, a look at what’s changed since 2015. Not much, is the answer, and the competition should be all the better for that. Most of the teams, and at least two of the four engine manufacturers, have got a firm handle on things after the past two seasons, and that alone could help to close things up given the laws that govern diminishing returns.
In terms of the technical and sporting regulations, driver safety is further enhanced thanks to a much tougher lateral impact test on the chassis, but the most interesting changes are noisier and more powerful cars; a revised choice of tyres for each driver at each race; further limitations on car-to-pit radio communications; and revisions to qualifying.
Power unit changes
Engine development restrictions have been eased so that power unit providers such as Renault and Honda who have been struggling, have a better chance of catching up. Thus previously off-limits ‘black areas’ where no modifications were allowed have been opened up. Power levels from the best engines may now be exceeding 1000 bhp. Meanwhile, both Renault and Honda are believed to have boosted their power outputs by up to 70 bhp, and to be on a similar level to one another.
At the same time, the exhaust systems have been revised. The turbocharger wastegate’s chamber has been removed from the exhaust, thus eliminating what had effectively become a silencer, in order to give the engines a more guttural note intended to appease those who believed they were too quiet. Thermal efficiency and economy should not be affected.
A fifth choice of tyre
Adding to the unpredictability of racing in 2016, Pirelli have introduced a fifth tyre compound to their range of dry-weather rubber. The purple ultrasofts join the orange hards, the white mediums, the yellow softs and the red supersofts.
Pirelli will now bring three compounds to each race, each driver having 13 sets. Two sets of these will be nominated by Pirelli for the race, while a third set is reserved for Q3. Beyond that, each driver is free to make his own choice of compounds.
In Melbourne, for instance, Lewis Hamilton has opted for a set of mediums, six sets of softs and six sets of supersofts, whereas Mercedes team mate Nico Rosberg has gone for two sets of mediums, five of softs and six of supersofts. The Ferrari drivers have gone for the same two, five, six choice, while the Williams duo have chosen a set of mediums, five softs and seven supersofts.
The idea is that, within the limitations of Pirelli’s overall selection per race, drivers have the scope to make strategic choices based on their own driving styles, the characteristics of their cars, and the nature of each track.
Pirelli have also revised the basic construction of the tyres; they will still degrade when pushed beyond a certain point, but should be less prone to overheating during that process, thus enabling drivers to run closer to their individual limits rather than holding back and trying to postpone the moment when the tyre goes ‘over the cliff.’ This should provide another boost to the racing.
Limitations on radio communication
As an extension of limitations on radio traffic introduced last year in an attempt to make drivers more self-reliant by reducing the in-race role of engineers, there has been further restriction on modes of communication.
Teams have come to embrace radio transmissions, and many principals believe that it allowed the fans to ride in the car with the drivers. But the intention is to make the latter more independent and to leave certain actions to them rather than to their engineers.
During races teams are still allowed to use the radio to warn the driver of any on-track dangers, such as track conditions - weather, oil or debris, etc; to inform him if his car has a critical problem, such as a puncture or an overheating engine; to do likewise if rival cars are similarly affected; to issue instructions if the driver needs to pit or retire his car; and to inform him of situations such as marshalling flags in certain corners, race cessation or any instructions they have received relating to the driver from race control.
What they can no longer do from the one-minute signal until the race-start signal, is instruct the driver to run through the pit lane, to go to the back of the grid, to discuss the balance of the car, to switch it off, or to conduct a radio check.
During grid reconnaissance laps, however, they can discuss the usual things such as what to do on following laps, whether to do practice starts leaving the pits, discuss the balance, go to the back of the grid, conduct radio checks, to come back through the pit lane, and to advise an incoming driver of pit lane conditions.
The intention is to make things less predictable and to introduce the possibility of human error. Thus each driver will have more say in his own race strategy, the deployment of various engine modes and tyre choices, perhaps even the timing of pit stops, and there will be less reliance on optimising everything via algorithms developed by the engineers.
For example, two team mates might choose different points of the race to engage certain engine modes. Thus there will be more leeway for drivers to pursue their own strategic initiatives rather than having to stick with what their team dictates - something that the Mercedes duo in particular complained of in 2014 and 2015 - with the added possibility that strategic errors made in the heat of battle might influence the outcome of races.
Changes to qualifying
A new qualifying procedure will go ahead in Melbourne - one which could give races an added twist by introducing a situation whereby the top runners might get caught out by circumstance and be unable to start from the front of the grid.
Here’s how it will work:
The three-session knockout system remains, but instead of a specified number of drivers being eliminated after set time periods, the clock will soon start ticking during each session.
Q1 will run for 16 minutes. After seven of them the current slowest car will be eliminated. This process will repeat every 90 seconds until 15 cars are left.
After a break they will proceed to Q2, which will last for 15 minutes, and after six the 90-second elimination periods will start again until only eight cars are left.
After another break Q3 will then see all eight running, but after five minutes six further cars will be eliminated over 90s periods until only two cars are left in a head-to-head fight for pole.
Speaking this week, world champion Lewis Hamilton urged everyone to reserve judgement until it has been tried in Albert Park.
“I’m looking forward to Melbourne and trying it out, maybe we’ll be surprised. It may be really exciting, or maybe it won’t be. We’ll see.”
The longest season
Formula One racing will continue to push its global boundaries in 2016. The German Grand Prix returns at Hockenheim at the end of July, while the European round at Baku brings the number of races to a record 21 in the season.
The Baku City Circuit will host their inaugural race on June 17-19, the week after Canada, and will historically mark the first race ever to be held in Azerbaijan.
Three rookies and a familiar face
On the driving front, former McLaren racer Kevin Magnussen makes a welcome return in place of Pastor Maldonado at Renault (formerly Lotus), as the paddock also prepares to welcome three rookies: Jolyon Palmer, the son of former F1 racer Jonathan Palmer, at Renault; DTM champion and Mercedes protege Pascal Wehrlein at Manor, where he will partner Rio Haryanto, who will become the first Indonesian to race at motorsport’s highest level.
Uncle Sam joins in
As Renault return officially to F1 racing as a fully-fledged manufacturer for the first time since 2009, after taking back control of the latest iteration of Lotus, Gene Haas’s new team makes a welcome debut as it becomes the first American-led squad to compete in F1 racing since Beatrice Haas back in 1985-86.
So who will win?
All teams were limited to eight days of pre-season testing at Spain’s Circuit de Barcelona-Catalunya, but testing can be a notoriously fickle means of calculating likely form. You might know the details for one team, but nobody knows all the details for all of them, such as what weight of fuel a car was carrying when it did a strong lap, or which setting was being used on the engine. And just to make it even more confusing for their rivals, Mercedes did very little running on anything other than the medium tyres.
They did, however, complete an awful lot of laps. So if nothing else, we know that the F1 W07 Hybrid’s reliability is as close to bulletproof as its predecessors, even allowing for a transmission failure for Hamilton in the second test.
Last year the world champion team completed 1,340 laps over 12 days of testing; this year they managed nearly as much (1,294) in two-thirds of that time. Indeed, such was their metronomic progress that they eventually elected to split the running daily between Hamilton and Rosberg. In the course of 6,024 km, the Mercedes drivers completed the mileage of almost 19 Grands Prix… Rosberg’s 656-lap tally was far and away the highest of all of the drivers.
Mercedes were not, however, the fastest. That honour fell to Ferrari’s Kimi Raikkonen, with a best lap of 1m 22.765s on the ultrasoft Pirelli tyre, and he tied Rosberg for fastest time on the softs, with 1m 23.0s. Whereas Rosberg set that time on the first day of the second test, however, Raikkonen did so on the third when the track was well rubbered in.
Ferrari have made a lot of changes to their power unit, which was itself a major improvement over the 2014 versions, while changes to their car - principally to the front suspension which is now of the more popular push-rod design, and the aerodynamics - are aimed at reducing the understeer that hampered Raikkonen in 2015. The SF16-H looks good on the track, if not quite as good as the F1 W07 Hybrid, which seems to glide round in easy obeyance of its drivers’ every command.
Ferrari also suffered a transmission problem and other gremlins in testing, but Raikkonen and Sebastian Vettel nevertheless completed 4,148 km of running, and both were consistently close to the top of the timesheets.
Most observers believe that Mercedes did a pretty good job of keeping their chowder dry, however. Rosberg never ran the supersoft tyres or the ultrasofts, for example, while Hamilton barely ventured off the mediums. But Ferrari will be quicker than they were last year, and the signs are that they have narrowed the gap to Mercedes. What remains to be seen, is how great that reduction might be.
Rosberg doesn’t know, and acknowledged: “Ferrari have been very quick. All of the teams have their strategists, we know more or less what fuel thee others were running and they know our fuel, so we know more or less where we are compared to Ferrari. That’s why I say it’s close. But we’re not sure if we are ahead or behind.”
Race simulations on the medium tyres habitually raced at the Circuit de Barcelona-Catalunya suggest that Hamilton had a big advantage over both Rosberg and Vettel on similar runs. Perhaps that was the only time that Mercedes really showed their hand.
Williams, too, looked quick at times, while tending generally to focus on car set-up rather than fast laps. On soft rubber, Felipe Massa lapped in 1m 23.2s. The FW38, however, looks more of a handful on the medium rubber. With 3,985 km under their wheels, the Brazilian and team mate Valtteri Bottas were relatively happy with the way things went in a critical year for the team as they seek to take the fight to Ferrari, while facing increased threat from their pursuers. Interestingly, they believe that the reds are much closer to their grasp than the silvers…
Who could crash the podium party?
Toro Rosso had their fair share of problems in testing - many of them associated with the lateness of the deal to run the 2015 Ferrari engine and the need to modify their car to accommodate it - but nevertheless managed to cover a second-best 4,883 km as Carlos Sainz set the fourth best soft-tyre time of 1m 23.9s, suggesting that Christian Horner’s opinion that the sister team to his Red Bull Racing squad could beat it in the early going might not be misplaced. With a season of experience behind them, the young Spaniard and his sensational team mate Max Verstappen will be strong upper midfield contenders, especially as James Key’s STR11 looks the business out on the track.
Force India will also be in that fight. They ran very strongly in the second half of 2015 with the VJM08B, and the VJM09 carries on where that car left off. Nico Hulkenberg was fifth fastest on the softs with 1m 24.2s, as he, Sergio Perez and development driver Alfonso Celis amassed 3,626 km.
Red Bull face another tough year, the development improvements of the TAG Heuer sponsored version of Renault’s V6 notwithstanding. Their testing yielded 3,803 km and Daniel Ricciardo’s 1m 23.5s soft-tyre best, and the RB12 looked every bit as fluidly poised as the Mercedes. You underestimate the Australian and his hard-charging team mate Daniil Kvyat at your peril as both are now tough, seasoned competitors. But Renault still lags behind Mercedes and Ferrari on power, which will make their task even more difficult.
And who might emerge from the midfield?
Sauber go into 2016 with the same drivers - Felipe Nasr and Marcus Ericsson - and a revised C35 echoes the fundamental design philosophy of last year’s C34 while seeking to eliminate its shortcomings. Despite that continuity, this will be a challenging year for the small Swiss team amid the likely challenges from giants such as McLaren and Renault, not to mention the well-funded new Haas squad.
McLaren’s testing covered 3,305 km, and demonstrated that the Honda engine has better ERS deployment but still lacks Mercedes-challenging horsepower. It’s probably now on a par with Renault. Reliability was also questionable, albeit of a more niggling nature than some of last year’s significant catastrophes. Interestingly, some observers felt the new MP4-31 did not look as poised as the MP4-30 did last year, but in fairness it did not run with its full 2016 aero specification and it’s possible that set-up changes to cope with horsepower shortfalls compromised its behaviour. But it’s clear that there is still much work to be done here before Fernando Alonso and Jenson Button start to run near the front.
Renault’s decision to return as a manufacturer is a major boost for F1 racing and an endorsement of its value to road car development. But though the engine is reportedly better than it was in 2015, the benefit of many of the improvements that the French auto giant will make or have made to the team’s infrastructure will not make itself felt for some time. Theirs will be a long road back to the front, but in Kevin Magnussen and Jolyon Palmer they have a brace of up-and-coming drivers with their own individual points to prove.
Haas got their maiden F1 campaign off to a great start in the first Barcelona test, a front wing failure notwithstanding, but the second provided a reality check as a host of irritating problems made Esteban Gutierrez the driver with the least mileage. Nevertheless, the signs are that the American outfit have the means and the resources to run strongly in the midfield once they hits their stride, and in Romain Grosjean especially they have a star capable of unexpected performances.
Finally, Manor come into 2016 with their revised management and driver line-ups, which see racing director Dave Ryan returning to active F1 duty for the first time since 2009, and rookies Pascal Wehrlein and Rio Haryanto getting their first chance in the ‘Big League’. Mercedes power is a major step forward, but will now focus attention on the effectiveness of the MRT05, which is alone in retaining the longer nose which even Ferrari have now abandoned.
A race into the unknown
Will the new tyre regulations, the potential minefield of qualifying, and the drivers having more of a say in their own race strategies and decision-making, make crucial differences in the outcome of races?
Qualifying could spring some surprises of the ‘bad luck, bad timing’ variety, while the need for cool intelligence from drivers in the heat of battle could cause some upsets. And with them having to select their tyre options early for the first eight races, to help Pirelli to estimate their production requirements, we might see some of them regretting their choices but unable to do anything about them.
Like most things to do with the 2016 season form, however, the jury is still deliberating. The one thing that is for sure right now is that no matter what happens in Albert Park on Sunday week, the full picture and the real pecking order will take a few races to materialise, especially as everyone has more parts to bring to the party than they had time to ready for testing in Spain.
It’s going to be fascinating campaign...
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 17, 2016, 11:25:23 PM
Post by: bones129 on March 17, 2016, 11:31:25 PM
Post by: slobber on March 18, 2016, 08:46:38 AM
Gonna win 'em all! (using Tapatalk)
Post by: TCUHornedFrog on March 18, 2016, 10:24:30 AM
:zzz:
So we know you can Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V. Now, can you answer the question?
Are you obese or morbidly obese?
Post by: chum1 on March 18, 2016, 11:01:37 AM
Post by: catastrophe on March 18, 2016, 11:14:14 AM
:zzz:Any of you guys watch F1? I realize Brownbackistan is mostly nascar territory, but F1 is better.
There's an an American team this year for the first time in awhile (Haas).
Also, if you have a chance to go to the race in Austin, it is awesome. I've been every year except last year and will be going back this year.QuoteThe 2016 Season Preview - New Rules, Teams, Drivers & Races
Can Ferrari take the fight to Mercedes this year and make the 2016 FIA Formula One World Championship a genuine two-horse race? Have the Italian team done enough work over the winter to take the big step needed to challenge the dominant Silver Arrows, who have won 32 of the 38 races since the new turbo-hybrid rules were inaugurated in 2014?
As questions go it’s the most pressing one in F1 racing right now, and certainly worth a lot more than the proverbial $64million.
If - as many commentators believe - the answer is in the affirmative, we should be in for a superb season of classic back-and-forth racing between two great names at the sharp end, along with what promises to be a slugfest in the upper midfield.
But before assessing the relative merits of the leading contenders, a look at what’s changed since 2015. Not much, is the answer, and the competition should be all the better for that. Most of the teams, and at least two of the four engine manufacturers, have got a firm handle on things after the past two seasons, and that alone could help to close things up given the laws that govern diminishing returns.
In terms of the technical and sporting regulations, driver safety is further enhanced thanks to a much tougher lateral impact test on the chassis, but the most interesting changes are noisier and more powerful cars; a revised choice of tyres for each driver at each race; further limitations on car-to-pit radio communications; and revisions to qualifying.
Power unit changes
Engine development restrictions have been eased so that power unit providers such as Renault and Honda who have been struggling, have a better chance of catching up. Thus previously off-limits ‘black areas’ where no modifications were allowed have been opened up. Power levels from the best engines may now be exceeding 1000 bhp. Meanwhile, both Renault and Honda are believed to have boosted their power outputs by up to 70 bhp, and to be on a similar level to one another.
At the same time, the exhaust systems have been revised. The turbocharger wastegate’s chamber has been removed from the exhaust, thus eliminating what had effectively become a silencer, in order to give the engines a more guttural note intended to appease those who believed they were too quiet. Thermal efficiency and economy should not be affected.
A fifth choice of tyre
Adding to the unpredictability of racing in 2016, Pirelli have introduced a fifth tyre compound to their range of dry-weather rubber. The purple ultrasofts join the orange hards, the white mediums, the yellow softs and the red supersofts.
Pirelli will now bring three compounds to each race, each driver having 13 sets. Two sets of these will be nominated by Pirelli for the race, while a third set is reserved for Q3. Beyond that, each driver is free to make his own choice of compounds.
In Melbourne, for instance, Lewis Hamilton has opted for a set of mediums, six sets of softs and six sets of supersofts, whereas Mercedes team mate Nico Rosberg has gone for two sets of mediums, five of softs and six of supersofts. The Ferrari drivers have gone for the same two, five, six choice, while the Williams duo have chosen a set of mediums, five softs and seven supersofts.
The idea is that, within the limitations of Pirelli’s overall selection per race, drivers have the scope to make strategic choices based on their own driving styles, the characteristics of their cars, and the nature of each track.
Pirelli have also revised the basic construction of the tyres; they will still degrade when pushed beyond a certain point, but should be less prone to overheating during that process, thus enabling drivers to run closer to their individual limits rather than holding back and trying to postpone the moment when the tyre goes ‘over the cliff.’ This should provide another boost to the racing.
Limitations on radio communication
As an extension of limitations on radio traffic introduced last year in an attempt to make drivers more self-reliant by reducing the in-race role of engineers, there has been further restriction on modes of communication.
Teams have come to embrace radio transmissions, and many principals believe that it allowed the fans to ride in the car with the drivers. But the intention is to make the latter more independent and to leave certain actions to them rather than to their engineers.
During races teams are still allowed to use the radio to warn the driver of any on-track dangers, such as track conditions - weather, oil or debris, etc; to inform him if his car has a critical problem, such as a puncture or an overheating engine; to do likewise if rival cars are similarly affected; to issue instructions if the driver needs to pit or retire his car; and to inform him of situations such as marshalling flags in certain corners, race cessation or any instructions they have received relating to the driver from race control.
What they can no longer do from the one-minute signal until the race-start signal, is instruct the driver to run through the pit lane, to go to the back of the grid, to discuss the balance of the car, to switch it off, or to conduct a radio check.
During grid reconnaissance laps, however, they can discuss the usual things such as what to do on following laps, whether to do practice starts leaving the pits, discuss the balance, go to the back of the grid, conduct radio checks, to come back through the pit lane, and to advise an incoming driver of pit lane conditions.
The intention is to make things less predictable and to introduce the possibility of human error. Thus each driver will have more say in his own race strategy, the deployment of various engine modes and tyre choices, perhaps even the timing of pit stops, and there will be less reliance on optimising everything via algorithms developed by the engineers.
For example, two team mates might choose different points of the race to engage certain engine modes. Thus there will be more leeway for drivers to pursue their own strategic initiatives rather than having to stick with what their team dictates - something that the Mercedes duo in particular complained of in 2014 and 2015 - with the added possibility that strategic errors made in the heat of battle might influence the outcome of races.
Changes to qualifying
A new qualifying procedure will go ahead in Melbourne - one which could give races an added twist by introducing a situation whereby the top runners might get caught out by circumstance and be unable to start from the front of the grid.
Here’s how it will work:
The three-session knockout system remains, but instead of a specified number of drivers being eliminated after set time periods, the clock will soon start ticking during each session.
Q1 will run for 16 minutes. After seven of them the current slowest car will be eliminated. This process will repeat every 90 seconds until 15 cars are left.
After a break they will proceed to Q2, which will last for 15 minutes, and after six the 90-second elimination periods will start again until only eight cars are left.
After another break Q3 will then see all eight running, but after five minutes six further cars will be eliminated over 90s periods until only two cars are left in a head-to-head fight for pole.
Speaking this week, world champion Lewis Hamilton urged everyone to reserve judgement until it has been tried in Albert Park.
“I’m looking forward to Melbourne and trying it out, maybe we’ll be surprised. It may be really exciting, or maybe it won’t be. We’ll see.”
The longest season
Formula One racing will continue to push its global boundaries in 2016. The German Grand Prix returns at Hockenheim at the end of July, while the European round at Baku brings the number of races to a record 21 in the season.
The Baku City Circuit will host their inaugural race on June 17-19, the week after Canada, and will historically mark the first race ever to be held in Azerbaijan.
Three rookies and a familiar face
On the driving front, former McLaren racer Kevin Magnussen makes a welcome return in place of Pastor Maldonado at Renault (formerly Lotus), as the paddock also prepares to welcome three rookies: Jolyon Palmer, the son of former F1 racer Jonathan Palmer, at Renault; DTM champion and Mercedes protege Pascal Wehrlein at Manor, where he will partner Rio Haryanto, who will become the first Indonesian to race at motorsport’s highest level.
Uncle Sam joins in
As Renault return officially to F1 racing as a fully-fledged manufacturer for the first time since 2009, after taking back control of the latest iteration of Lotus, Gene Haas’s new team makes a welcome debut as it becomes the first American-led squad to compete in F1 racing since Beatrice Haas back in 1985-86.
So who will win?
All teams were limited to eight days of pre-season testing at Spain’s Circuit de Barcelona-Catalunya, but testing can be a notoriously fickle means of calculating likely form. You might know the details for one team, but nobody knows all the details for all of them, such as what weight of fuel a car was carrying when it did a strong lap, or which setting was being used on the engine. And just to make it even more confusing for their rivals, Mercedes did very little running on anything other than the medium tyres.
They did, however, complete an awful lot of laps. So if nothing else, we know that the F1 W07 Hybrid’s reliability is as close to bulletproof as its predecessors, even allowing for a transmission failure for Hamilton in the second test.
Last year the world champion team completed 1,340 laps over 12 days of testing; this year they managed nearly as much (1,294) in two-thirds of that time. Indeed, such was their metronomic progress that they eventually elected to split the running daily between Hamilton and Rosberg. In the course of 6,024 km, the Mercedes drivers completed the mileage of almost 19 Grands Prix… Rosberg’s 656-lap tally was far and away the highest of all of the drivers.
Mercedes were not, however, the fastest. That honour fell to Ferrari’s Kimi Raikkonen, with a best lap of 1m 22.765s on the ultrasoft Pirelli tyre, and he tied Rosberg for fastest time on the softs, with 1m 23.0s. Whereas Rosberg set that time on the first day of the second test, however, Raikkonen did so on the third when the track was well rubbered in.
Ferrari have made a lot of changes to their power unit, which was itself a major improvement over the 2014 versions, while changes to their car - principally to the front suspension which is now of the more popular push-rod design, and the aerodynamics - are aimed at reducing the understeer that hampered Raikkonen in 2015. The SF16-H looks good on the track, if not quite as good as the F1 W07 Hybrid, which seems to glide round in easy obeyance of its drivers’ every command.
Ferrari also suffered a transmission problem and other gremlins in testing, but Raikkonen and Sebastian Vettel nevertheless completed 4,148 km of running, and both were consistently close to the top of the timesheets.
Most observers believe that Mercedes did a pretty good job of keeping their chowder dry, however. Rosberg never ran the supersoft tyres or the ultrasofts, for example, while Hamilton barely ventured off the mediums. But Ferrari will be quicker than they were last year, and the signs are that they have narrowed the gap to Mercedes. What remains to be seen, is how great that reduction might be.
Rosberg doesn’t know, and acknowledged: “Ferrari have been very quick. All of the teams have their strategists, we know more or less what fuel thee others were running and they know our fuel, so we know more or less where we are compared to Ferrari. That’s why I say it’s close. But we’re not sure if we are ahead or behind.”
Race simulations on the medium tyres habitually raced at the Circuit de Barcelona-Catalunya suggest that Hamilton had a big advantage over both Rosberg and Vettel on similar runs. Perhaps that was the only time that Mercedes really showed their hand.
Williams, too, looked quick at times, while tending generally to focus on car set-up rather than fast laps. On soft rubber, Felipe Massa lapped in 1m 23.2s. The FW38, however, looks more of a handful on the medium rubber. With 3,985 km under their wheels, the Brazilian and team mate Valtteri Bottas were relatively happy with the way things went in a critical year for the team as they seek to take the fight to Ferrari, while facing increased threat from their pursuers. Interestingly, they believe that the reds are much closer to their grasp than the silvers…
Who could crash the podium party?
Toro Rosso had their fair share of problems in testing - many of them associated with the lateness of the deal to run the 2015 Ferrari engine and the need to modify their car to accommodate it - but nevertheless managed to cover a second-best 4,883 km as Carlos Sainz set the fourth best soft-tyre time of 1m 23.9s, suggesting that Christian Horner’s opinion that the sister team to his Red Bull Racing squad could beat it in the early going might not be misplaced. With a season of experience behind them, the young Spaniard and his sensational team mate Max Verstappen will be strong upper midfield contenders, especially as James Key’s STR11 looks the business out on the track.
Force India will also be in that fight. They ran very strongly in the second half of 2015 with the VJM08B, and the VJM09 carries on where that car left off. Nico Hulkenberg was fifth fastest on the softs with 1m 24.2s, as he, Sergio Perez and development driver Alfonso Celis amassed 3,626 km.
Red Bull face another tough year, the development improvements of the TAG Heuer sponsored version of Renault’s V6 notwithstanding. Their testing yielded 3,803 km and Daniel Ricciardo’s 1m 23.5s soft-tyre best, and the RB12 looked every bit as fluidly poised as the Mercedes. You underestimate the Australian and his hard-charging team mate Daniil Kvyat at your peril as both are now tough, seasoned competitors. But Renault still lags behind Mercedes and Ferrari on power, which will make their task even more difficult.
And who might emerge from the midfield?
Sauber go into 2016 with the same drivers - Felipe Nasr and Marcus Ericsson - and a revised C35 echoes the fundamental design philosophy of last year’s C34 while seeking to eliminate its shortcomings. Despite that continuity, this will be a challenging year for the small Swiss team amid the likely challenges from giants such as McLaren and Renault, not to mention the well-funded new Haas squad.
McLaren’s testing covered 3,305 km, and demonstrated that the Honda engine has better ERS deployment but still lacks Mercedes-challenging horsepower. It’s probably now on a par with Renault. Reliability was also questionable, albeit of a more niggling nature than some of last year’s significant catastrophes. Interestingly, some observers felt the new MP4-31 did not look as poised as the MP4-30 did last year, but in fairness it did not run with its full 2016 aero specification and it’s possible that set-up changes to cope with horsepower shortfalls compromised its behaviour. But it’s clear that there is still much work to be done here before Fernando Alonso and Jenson Button start to run near the front.
Renault’s decision to return as a manufacturer is a major boost for F1 racing and an endorsement of its value to road car development. But though the engine is reportedly better than it was in 2015, the benefit of many of the improvements that the French auto giant will make or have made to the team’s infrastructure will not make itself felt for some time. Theirs will be a long road back to the front, but in Kevin Magnussen and Jolyon Palmer they have a brace of up-and-coming drivers with their own individual points to prove.
Haas got their maiden F1 campaign off to a great start in the first Barcelona test, a front wing failure notwithstanding, but the second provided a reality check as a host of irritating problems made Esteban Gutierrez the driver with the least mileage. Nevertheless, the signs are that the American outfit have the means and the resources to run strongly in the midfield once they hits their stride, and in Romain Grosjean especially they have a star capable of unexpected performances.
Finally, Manor come into 2016 with their revised management and driver line-ups, which see racing director Dave Ryan returning to active F1 duty for the first time since 2009, and rookies Pascal Wehrlein and Rio Haryanto getting their first chance in the ‘Big League’. Mercedes power is a major step forward, but will now focus attention on the effectiveness of the MRT05, which is alone in retaining the longer nose which even Ferrari have now abandoned.
A race into the unknown
Will the new tyre regulations, the potential minefield of qualifying, and the drivers having more of a say in their own race strategies and decision-making, make crucial differences in the outcome of races?
Qualifying could spring some surprises of the ‘bad luck, bad timing’ variety, while the need for cool intelligence from drivers in the heat of battle could cause some upsets. And with them having to select their tyre options early for the first eight races, to help Pirelli to estimate their production requirements, we might see some of them regretting their choices but unable to do anything about them.
Like most things to do with the 2016 season form, however, the jury is still deliberating. The one thing that is for sure right now is that no matter what happens in Albert Park on Sunday week, the full picture and the real pecking order will take a few races to materialise, especially as everyone has more parts to bring to the party than they had time to ready for testing in Spain.
It’s going to be fascinating campaign...
Just wanted to say, I did not read this.
Post by: renocat on March 21, 2016, 05:33:47 PM
Post by: cfbandyman on March 21, 2016, 05:51:20 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 22, 2016, 04:27:49 PM
Hint: Kasich's delegates are worth jack crap if Trump secures the nomination pre-convention. Which he will, if Kasich stays in.
Kasich needs to cut his deal now.
trump is likely to get 1237 regardless of what kasich does.
Nope. Not if it's one on one Trump v. Cruz (with Kasich in his corner).
Ok, so just circling back to this, have you now figured out that (1) Cruz can still deny Trump the delegates to secure nomination outright, and likely will if Kasich drops out, and (2) Kasich has absolutely nothing to gain by staying in (unless he has already cut his deal with Trump behind the scenes, as seems increasingly likely)? If you still disagree, read this...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/03/22/the_four_republican_camps.html (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/03/22/the_four_republican_camps.html)
Tonight's going to be very interesting! How many "ostriches" are there? In other words, will Kasich's supporters flock to Cruz despite Kasich still being in the race, or will they stubbornly vote for Kasich and hand Trump yet another state with about a 40% plurality?
Post by: sys on March 22, 2016, 04:49:05 PM
Post by: sys on March 22, 2016, 04:54:39 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 22, 2016, 06:08:29 PM
Tonight's going to be interesting. Unfortunately, early voting - well before Rubio dropped out - will continue to cast a shadow on things, but I expect Cruz run quite close to Trump in AZ, with Kasich's 10% handing Trump the win.
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on March 22, 2016, 06:23:41 PM
Hint: Kasich's delegates are worth jack crap if Trump secures the nomination pre-convention. Which he will, if Kasich stays in.
Kasich needs to cut his deal now.
trump is likely to get 1237 regardless of what kasich does.
Nope. Not if it's one on one Trump v. Cruz (with Kasich in his corner).
Ok, so just circling back to this, have you now figured out that (1) Cruz can still deny Trump the delegates to secure nomination outright, and likely will if Kasich drops out, and (2) Kasich has absolutely nothing to gain by staying in (unless he has already cut his deal with Trump behind the scenes, as seems increasingly likely)? If you still disagree, read this...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/03/22/the_four_republican_camps.html (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/03/22/the_four_republican_camps.html)
Tonight's going to be very interesting! How many "ostriches" are there? In other words, will Kasich's supporters flock to Cruz despite Kasich still being in the race, or will they stubbornly vote for Kasich and hand Trump yet another state with about a 40% plurality?
:lol:
Post by: wetwillie on March 22, 2016, 07:24:48 PM
Post by: sys on March 22, 2016, 07:32:41 PM
Is there any reason to follow this race until the convention?
it's fun.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 22, 2016, 07:45:23 PM
Respond with racist, bigot,blah-blah only if you're a respect.
Post by: bucket on March 22, 2016, 07:51:15 PM
what did you guys daddy's do to you that you rebell against alpha male presidential candidates like Donald Trump?
Respond with racist, bigot,blah-blah only if you're a respect.
Perfect example of the uneducated voter Trump is praying on right now.
Post by: star seed 7 on March 22, 2016, 07:52:01 PM
what did you guys daddy's do to you that you rebell against alpha male presidential candidates like Donald Trump?
Respond with racist, bigot,blah-blah only if you're a respect.
Perfect example of the uneducated voter Trump is praying on right now.
Oof
Post by: treysolid on March 22, 2016, 08:01:12 PM
what did you guys daddy's do to you that you rebell against alpha male presidential candidates like Donald Trump?
Respond with racist, bigot,blah-blah only if you're a respect.
my dad taught me to avoid jackasses and blowhards.
Post by: bucket on March 22, 2016, 08:08:00 PM
what did you guys daddy's do to you that you rebell against alpha male presidential candidates like Donald Trump?
Respond with racist, bigot,blah-blah only if you're a respect.
Perfect example of the uneducated voter Trump is praying on right now.
Oof
You're taking it out of context. Quit being so pc :shakesfist:
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 22, 2016, 08:31:28 PM
what did you guys daddy's do to you that you rebell against alpha male presidential candidates like Donald Trump?
Respond with racist, bigot,blah-blah only if you're a respect.
Perfect example of the uneducated voter Trump is praying on right now.
Oof
You're taking it out of context. Quit being so pc :shakesfist:
I think he just wants you to spell it correctly there #daddyissues
Post by: sys on March 22, 2016, 11:14:20 PM
Post by: puniraptor on March 22, 2016, 11:34:41 PM
Post by: bones129 on March 23, 2016, 12:40:47 AM
Post by: sys on March 23, 2016, 03:25:01 AM
Post by: chum1 on March 23, 2016, 06:36:55 AM
Post by: chum1 on March 23, 2016, 06:40:10 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 23, 2016, 08:56:57 AM
Post by: tdaver on March 23, 2016, 09:19:56 AM
In retrospect, yesterday was kind of noteworthy because Arizona might be the most pro-Trump state and Utah might be the most anti-Trump state.
Mitt Romney had a strong radio/tv campaign going urging everyone to vote for Cruz so that Trump wouldn't win outright. Didn't come out and say it but implied that he could be the nominee in that scenario. Utah Mormons are good at following instructions, especially to get one of their own elected.
Post by: ShellShock on March 23, 2016, 09:45:44 AM
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on March 23, 2016, 01:52:33 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 23, 2016, 01:54:08 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on March 23, 2016, 03:25:52 PM
https://youtu.be/vU8dCYocuyI
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 23, 2016, 04:23:32 PM
results are in. in your fat kasich-hating face, ksuw.
Huh? Trump performed better than expected in AZ, but he still failed to reach 50%, and I nailed it on Kasich's 10%.
Tonight's going to be interesting. Unfortunately, early voting - well before Rubio dropped out - will continue to cast a shadow on things, but I expect Cruz run quite close to Trump in AZ, with Kasich's 10% handing Trump the win.
Without Kasich, or early voting, Trump still would have won AZ but by a much narrower margin. This doesn't change the fact that Kasich is playing for absolutely nothing, unless he has already cut a deal behind the scenes with Trump. And it doesn't change the fact that Cruz can still deny Trump from securing the nomination on the first ballot.
Post by: sys on March 23, 2016, 04:26:24 PM
Huh? Trump performed better than expected in AZ, but he still failed to reach 50%, and I nailed it on Kasich's 10%.
:lol: yeah, you nailed it.
kasich and cruz are fighting for the exact same thing, a contested convention. neither has a chance at getting to 1237.
Post by: steve dave on March 23, 2016, 05:12:56 PM
Post by: CNS on March 23, 2016, 05:20:16 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: chum1 on March 23, 2016, 05:26:06 PM
Also not that it makes a difference, but there's plenty of historical precedent for a brokered convention.
Post by: steve dave on March 23, 2016, 05:31:25 PM
Not that it makes a difference, but I think more Republicans would be super pissed that Trump is their nominee than would be super pissed about a brokered convention.
Also not that it makes a difference, but there's plenty of historical precedent for a brokered convention.
trump will leave and take the millions of downgrades with him and the "right" will be non viable in a general election.
Post by: catastrophe on March 23, 2016, 05:32:20 PM
Post by: CNS on March 23, 2016, 05:41:51 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: chum1 on March 23, 2016, 05:43:19 PM
Not that it makes a difference, but I think more Republicans would be super pissed that Trump is their nominee than would be super pissed about a brokered convention.
Also not that it makes a difference, but there's plenty of historical precedent for a brokered convention.
trump will leave and take the millions of downgrades with him and the "right" will be non viable in a general election.
What if a bunch of Trump hating Republicans convince some Republican to run as a third party candidate? Romney? Ryan? Ted?
If people can get used to the idea of having Trump as the nominee, why couldn't people also get used to the idea of a brokered convention deciding the nominee?
I don't think this is necessarily an asymmetrical situation.
Post by: steve dave on March 23, 2016, 05:44:51 PM
Post by: sys on March 23, 2016, 06:09:16 PM
Post by: steve dave on March 23, 2016, 06:10:36 PM
Post by: sys on March 23, 2016, 06:14:00 PM
Post by: steve dave on March 23, 2016, 06:15:21 PM
they'll stay home and clinton will waltz into the white house in a landslide.
I think Clinton does that either way but the right will fall inline behind trump. I hope they don't but they will.
Post by: sys on March 23, 2016, 06:21:23 PM
Post by: steve dave on March 23, 2016, 06:46:03 PM
i think we may get to find out. it should be fun.
If they fall in line it will be boring and stupid
Post by: sys on March 23, 2016, 06:48:08 PM
Post by: chum1 on March 23, 2016, 06:50:48 PM
Post by: steve dave on March 23, 2016, 06:53:48 PM
I think many powerful Republicans hate Trump more because they think he can't beat Hillary than for any other reason.
Confirmed
Post by: chum1 on March 23, 2016, 07:00:56 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 23, 2016, 07:04:07 PM
Post by: chum1 on March 23, 2016, 07:07:59 PM
Brokered convention is dead, they are going to try to win with a 3rd party spoiler in the general.
No, dammit! Not dead yet! :curse:
Post by: sys on March 24, 2016, 12:41:04 AM
Quote
When Quinnipiac pollsters asked non-Trump GOP voters to name their second choice this week, 46 percent of Kasich supporters chose Trump compared to only 37 percent who opted for Cruz.
Post by: bones129 on March 24, 2016, 12:44:24 AM
[quoteWhen Quinnipiac pollsters asked non-Trump GOP voters to name their second choice this week, 46 percent of Kasich supporters chose Trump compared to only 37 percent who opted for Cruz.][/quote]
Interesting.
Post by: star seed 7 on March 24, 2016, 12:45:44 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on March 24, 2016, 08:42:26 AM
:sdeek:
Post by: ednksu on March 24, 2016, 02:47:47 PM
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/274193-isis-releases-video-after-brussels-attack
Post by: sys on March 24, 2016, 03:02:41 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 24, 2016, 03:31:11 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 24, 2016, 03:56:35 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 24, 2016, 04:16:14 PM
Post by: Tobias on March 24, 2016, 04:24:27 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 24, 2016, 04:40:19 PM
Post by: Kat Kid on March 24, 2016, 09:10:21 PM
Post by: Kat Kid on March 24, 2016, 09:10:55 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 24, 2016, 09:13:39 PM
Post by: mocat on March 24, 2016, 09:15:24 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 24, 2016, 09:16:49 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 24, 2016, 09:20:58 PM
Tom hardy is never surprised
he still has my heart
Post by: sys on March 25, 2016, 01:30:46 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 25, 2016, 08:50:16 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on March 25, 2016, 08:52:58 AM
Post by: sys on March 25, 2016, 11:41:51 AM
Giv'em hell sys
we'll stop him, gvs.
Post by: Institutional Control on March 25, 2016, 01:07:39 PM
i changed my registration today, so i can vote against trump on june 7th.
Voting against Trump in the primary seems like a waste since the alternative is Ted Cruz.
Post by: sys on March 25, 2016, 01:19:26 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 26, 2016, 08:31:29 AM
- felt they didn't have a voice
- opposed to NAFTA
- favored border security
- favored taxing the rich more
- opposed to "nation building"
Other than border security (libtard translation: racist against mexicans), his supporters seem to believe in the same things as Berners. Lol
Fwiw, border security is basically another way of saying higher wages for low skill labor.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 26, 2016, 08:33:17 AM
California and Texas both piss me off. It's hippies/hipsters vs crazy eff, small dick syndrome guys from the south, with guns. They both control a large portion of the electoral votes. Except, California takes the cake. :frown:
Not all of Cal is hippies and hipsters.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 26, 2016, 08:33:23 AM
California and Texas both piss me off. It's hippies/hipsters vs crazy eff, small dick syndrome guys from the south, with guns. They both control a large portion of the electoral votes. Except, California takes the cake. :frown:
Not all of Cal is hippies and hipsters
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 26, 2016, 08:34:00 AM
Meanwhile the "establishment" is swing so far left/right
Post by: wetwillie on March 26, 2016, 08:35:24 AM
Post by: steve dave on March 26, 2016, 08:46:24 AM
If Steve Dave founded the Moderate Party and put someone viable on the ticket I would totes vote for them.
Ok, I'll do it
Post by: CNS on March 26, 2016, 10:28:29 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 26, 2016, 10:58:17 AM
Some survey group did surveys of trump supporters and found these things to be the most common theme:
- felt they didn't have a voice
- opposed to NAFTA
- favored border security
- favored taxing the rich more
- opposed to "nation building"
Other than border security (libtard translation: racist against mexicans), his supporters seem to believe in the same things as Berners. Lol
Fwiw, border security is basically another way of saying higher wages for low skill labor.
Did they love the KKK?
Post by: steve dave on March 26, 2016, 11:03:21 AM
-we pay too much in taxes. the top earners (1% may be too low, maybe like 0.75%?) have to pay more but everyone else less.
-guns are ok to own, get rid of all the loopholes that let crazy people own them without background checks. also no machine guns or those ones that people shoot tons of kids with (I don't know about guns so I'm going to need a policy advisor to explain this further)
-abortion is ok early when we're talking about some cells binding together, middle under certain circumstances, but not really late term (need a scientist to figure out the cutoff here and explain the what/how/when)
-gays get 100% equal rights and treatment (marriage, tax status, etc.)
-marijuana legal and taxed like booze
-stronger border security but most current people in the country have a path to citizenship. Trump gets to bid on any wall contracts because we are a fair and just government.
-make mexico pay for all of these things that cost more money than we already spend. canada has to pay for some as well.
-all religious groups/churches/etc. taxed like businesses. this will actually foot a lot of that bill. combined with the marijuana tax money mexico and canada are off the hook.
-environmental policy seems fine as is. politicians now have to put a $5 bill in a big jar every time they try to talk about if something environmental exists or not if they aren't actual scientist (and not the religious "scientists"). this funds a lot of the above as well because most of the HOR are crap brains.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 26, 2016, 11:14:47 AM
Post by: steve dave on March 26, 2016, 11:32:55 AM
How about GITMO? Close that joint right?
For sure. And we hand it to Cuba to reinforce our new best bud status on the condition that a Park Hyatt goes in immediately.
Post by: CNS on March 26, 2016, 01:44:01 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 26, 2016, 01:52:57 PM
Post by: steve dave on March 26, 2016, 01:56:15 PM
No more invading countries unless it's like WWIII
Oh yeah, that's up there
Post by: star seed 7 on March 26, 2016, 01:58:02 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 26, 2016, 01:59:07 PM
As an ultra lib, I would be OK with all this
Welcome!
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 26, 2016, 02:00:37 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 26, 2016, 02:03:35 PM
Post by: sys on March 26, 2016, 02:04:01 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 26, 2016, 03:36:20 PM
those moderate positions are mosly Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). :surprised:
Vote for Trump
Post by: sys on March 26, 2016, 03:37:56 PM
those moderate positions are mosly Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). :surprised:
Vote for Trump
it turns out trump is a moderate. :frown:
Post by: MakeItRain on March 26, 2016, 05:39:34 PM
Post by: wetwillie on March 26, 2016, 05:47:43 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 26, 2016, 11:57:59 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 27, 2016, 12:03:09 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 27, 2016, 09:51:03 AM
Uniting Berners and trumpers seems like something 'teve 'Ave and Dickstone were born to do. Go get 'em special ed!
Super awesome burn again, you are an insult machine with a quick wit
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 27, 2016, 10:57:33 AM
Uniting Berners and trumpers seems like something 'teve 'Ave and Dickstone were born to do. Go get 'em special ed!
Super awesome burn again, you are an insult machine with a quick wit
That's kind of you to say, but you're no slouch yourself there Super awesome burnmaster dickstone.
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on March 28, 2016, 08:49:21 AM
Post by: wetwillie on March 28, 2016, 09:26:00 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 28, 2016, 09:34:43 AM
those moderate positions are mosly Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). :surprised:
Yeah, they were sort of disappointing.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 28, 2016, 09:28:18 PM
Uniting Berners and trumpers seems like something 'teve 'Ave and Dickstone were born to do. Go get 'em special ed!
Super awesome burn again, you are an insult machine with a quick wit
That's kind of you to say, but you're no slouch yourself there Super awesome burnmaster dickstone.
Good response from your sock
Post by: renocat on March 29, 2016, 06:35:57 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 29, 2016, 06:40:10 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 29, 2016, 07:13:37 PM
Uniting Berners and trumpers seems like something 'teve 'Ave and Dickstone were born to do. Go get 'em special ed!
Super awesome burn again, you are an insult machine with a quick wit
That's kind of you to say, but you're no slouch yourself there Super awesome burnmaster dickstone.
Good response from your sock
Oh man, you're like a ninja :love:
Post by: star seed 7 on March 29, 2016, 07:19:08 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on March 29, 2016, 07:45:35 PM
It's pretty sad when a mod is so clownsuited body bagged zapped he is relegated to accusing posters of being socks. :lol:
Post by: MakeItRain on March 30, 2016, 01:19:34 AM
Post by: sys on March 30, 2016, 05:11:38 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 30, 2016, 08:57:52 PM
:Wha:
It's pretty sad when a mod is so clownsuited body bagged zapped he is relegated to accusing posters of being socks. :lol:
I was waiting for him to say he boned my sister before destroying his fat face.
Post by: 8manpick on March 31, 2016, 08:57:13 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 31, 2016, 08:58:55 AM
3-30-2016 trump update. said women that have abortions should be punished. then said they shouldn't be. denied that there is difference between first and second statements.
He said that if abortion were illegal, then there would need to be "some sort of punishment" for women that abort. That's true. It's also not a politically correct thing to say - which is why "Mr. I'm Totally Anti-PC" promptly retracted.
There is an intelligent argument to be had on this issue - sadly Trump is not smart enough to correctly engage in such an argument. Too bad Trump didn't read "The Thread," or he would have been better prepared for this and all manner of other idiotic pro-abortion "trap questions" from liberals.
When answering this question, as with most abortion questions, it is clarifying to begin with the "5 minutes before/after" analysis. First, the after: Should there be criminal punishment for a woman who gives birth to a child and then promptly suffocates it, throws the child out a window, etc.? Most people - human beings at least - would say yes. Now what if a 9 months pregnant woman ingests a bottle of Plan B pills or asks her husband to hammer away with a baseball bat? Why should punishment be different? Again, most people would say "well in that case, sure."
So next you get the question of where to draw the line. From a legal standpoint, that will vary by state, just as the legality of different abortions at different stages varies by state.
I hope everyone will keep this in mind the next time they are approached by a snotty MSNBC host.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 31, 2016, 09:14:12 AM
Post by: catastrophe on March 31, 2016, 09:28:17 AM
Why are people up in arms about Trump's abortion comments? If you want to make abortion illegal (a crime) isn't the natural progression to punish those who commit that crime? Weird thing to be outraged about.
Honestly I'm a bit surprised by the backlash as well, but it must have been fierce for Trump to actually back off for once. Especially if Trump felt he was loosing the incredible amount of good will he had built up for the ladies who love him for how much respect he has for them.
Post by: MakeItRain on March 31, 2016, 09:36:47 AM
Why are people up in arms about Trump's abortion comments? If you want to make abortion illegal (a crime) isn't the natural progression to punish those who commit that crime? Weird thing to be outraged about.
Honestly I'm a bit surprised by the backlash as well, but it must have been fierce for Trump to actually back off for once. Especially if Trump felt he was loosing the incredible amount of good will he had built up for the ladies who love him for how much respect he has for them.
Seriously guys? Even Katrina Pierson figured this out. There was backlash because if someone is committing a crime in this instance it's the doctor actually performing the procedure. If he would have said that he wouldn't have spooked the pro-life people.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 31, 2016, 09:40:24 AM
Why are people up in arms about Trump's abortion comments? If you want to make abortion illegal (a crime) isn't the natural progression to punish those who commit that crime? Weird thing to be outraged about.
Honestly I'm a bit surprised by the backlash as well, but it must have been fierce for Trump to actually back off for once. Especially if Trump felt he was loosing the incredible amount of good will he had built up for the ladies who love him for how much respect he has for them.
Seriously guys? Even Katrina Pierson figured this out. There was backlash because if someone is committing a crime in this instance it's the doctor actually performing the procedure. If he would have said that he wouldn't have spooked the pro-life people.
Isn't that sort of like saying if you hire a hitman, then only the hitman should get punished?
Post by: MakeItRain on March 31, 2016, 09:44:11 AM
Why are people up in arms about Trump's abortion comments? If you want to make abortion illegal (a crime) isn't the natural progression to punish those who commit that crime? Weird thing to be outraged about.
Honestly I'm a bit surprised by the backlash as well, but it must have been fierce for Trump to actually back off for once. Especially if Trump felt he was loosing the incredible amount of good will he had built up for the ladies who love him for how much respect he has for them.
Seriously guys? Even Katrina Pierson figured this out. There was backlash because if someone is committing a crime in this instance it's the doctor actually performing the procedure. If he would have said that he wouldn't have spooked the pro-life people.
Isn't that sort of like saying if you hire a hitman, then only the hitman should get punished?
No it isn't like that at all, unless we start licencing hitmen. The better example is in states where doctor assisted suicide isn't legal who do you think would get charged in a botched suicide? Did any of the family members of the people Dr. Kevorkian killed get charged?
Post by: 8manpick on March 31, 2016, 09:48:38 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 31, 2016, 09:51:26 AM
I don't think abortion should be a crime, BUT IF IT WAS, then not not punishing the woman who gets an abortion is logically incongruent.
How's that, they aren't giving themselves the procedure. It is currently illegal for a woman to intentionally harm their fetus.
Post by: 8manpick on March 31, 2016, 09:56:17 AM
I don't think abortion should be a crime, BUT IF IT WAS, then not not punishing the woman who gets an abortion is logically incongruent.
How's that, they aren't giving themselves the procedure. It is currently illegal for a woman to intentionally harm their fetus.
If a pregnant woman was just walking down the street, and a doctor hit her with an abortion ray, then I see your point.
The getaway driver is still charged in a bank robbery. Maybe more analogous, the person who hired the bank robbers gets charged.
Post by: catastrophe on March 31, 2016, 09:56:28 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 31, 2016, 10:08:24 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 31, 2016, 10:09:28 AM
Post by: 8manpick on March 31, 2016, 10:16:05 AM
In all of your examples the co-conspirators are not paid, licenced professionals providing a service.
In the scenario where abortion is illegal, there are no licenses to perform abortions
Post by: star seed 7 on March 31, 2016, 10:19:18 AM
In all of your examples the co-conspirators are not paid, licenced professionals providing a service.
In the scenario where abortion is illegal, there are no licenses to perform abortions
I think this is the part mir is getting lost on
It would likely be a dealer/user situation where the user is generally left alone, but using is still punishable if they want.
Post by: catastrophe on March 31, 2016, 10:28:59 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on March 31, 2016, 10:38:06 AM
Right, and then what do you do if women try to perform abortions on themselves. Surely you'd want to discourage that. I can't believe one of the least ridiculous things I've heard Trump say is actually the only thing he's backpedalled on.
That's already illegal, not sure of the point.
Post by: catastrophe on March 31, 2016, 10:43:23 AM
Post by: DQ12 on March 31, 2016, 11:58:04 AM
Post by: sys on March 31, 2016, 12:00:44 PM
Post by: catastrophe on March 31, 2016, 12:13:08 PM
just like every 'pubs rape & incest exemption is logically inconsistent but is a requisite for getting elected.
I know we're off topic now, but I disagree that the rape talking point is logically inconsistent. Pregnancy does put a lot of strain on the body and can even (rarely) give rise to life-threatening circumstances. If you consent to sex you are assuming those remote risks. However, if it's completely involuntary it makes sense to allow an abortion as a type of "self defense" provided you do so early enough that the abortion itself isn't just as threatening to your health.
The incest thing (assuming no rape) makes no sense as an exception, IMO. Most people don't want to go down the road of saying you can have an abortion if the baby is likely to be born with defects.
Post by: sys on March 31, 2016, 12:22:29 PM
i wonder how far away it is from it being medically feasible to harvest an embryo and implant it in a surrogate in the case of rape? could it be done now, if there was demand?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 31, 2016, 01:21:45 PM
Post by: sys on March 31, 2016, 01:22:41 PM
The way the interview came off to me, punishment isn't really something Trump had given any thought to, so he just said the thing that makes the most sense.
very obviously, the issue is something he has not given much thought to.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on March 31, 2016, 01:27:10 PM
if you believe that abortion is the murder of a living human being, then it is not logically consistent that it is ok to murder that human merely because a crime was committed against it's mother or because it's mother may be physically inconvenienced or compromised by carrying it. the health of the mother exemption is not inconsistent and would still allow remedy if a health complication developed.
i wonder how far away it is from it being medically feasible to harvest an embryo and implant it in a surrogate in the case of rape? could it be done now, if there was demand?
That is actually a crazy interesting scenario.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 31, 2016, 01:28:28 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 31, 2016, 01:44:52 PM
I don't think abortion should be a crime, BUT IF IT WAS, then not not punishing the woman who gets an abortion is logically incongruent.
How's that, they aren't giving themselves the procedure. It is currently illegal for a woman to intentionally harm their fetus.
Thank you for highlighting the absurd incongruence of our current laws. Most states criminalize self-inflicted abortion (though it rarely charged), but it's perfectly legal in most states and in fact constitutionally protected for a state-licensed physician to perform most abortions. It it's legal for a doctor to do it, why can't a woman do it? What ever happened to "my body my choice"?
Post by: ChiComCat on March 31, 2016, 01:50:44 PM
I don't think abortion should be a crime, BUT IF IT WAS, then not not punishing the woman who gets an abortion is logically incongruent.
How's that, they aren't giving themselves the procedure. It is currently illegal for a woman to intentionally harm their fetus.
Thank you for highlighting the absurd incongruence of our current laws. Most states criminalize self-inflicted abortion (though it rarely charged), but it's perfectly legal in most states and in fact constitutionally protected for a state-licensed physician to perform most abortions. It it's legal for a doctor to do it, why can't a woman do it? What ever happened to "my body my choice"?
I am not sure what your point is. There are a number of procedures that require licensed doctors to carry out.
Post by: DQ12 on March 31, 2016, 02:04:07 PM
Or receiving access to prescribed medication. I don't know what Chant is getting at, but I don't think it's a good argument.I don't think abortion should be a crime, BUT IF IT WAS, then not not punishing the woman who gets an abortion is logically incongruent.
How's that, they aren't giving themselves the procedure. It is currently illegal for a woman to intentionally harm their fetus.
Thank you for highlighting the absurd incongruence of our current laws. Most states criminalize self-inflicted abortion (though it rarely charged), but it's perfectly legal in most states and in fact constitutionally protected for a state-licensed physician to perform most abortions. It it's legal for a doctor to do it, why can't a woman do it? What ever happened to "my body my choice"?
I am not sure what your point is. There are a number of procedures that require licensed doctors to carry out.
Post by: star seed 7 on March 31, 2016, 03:14:08 PM
I don't think abortion should be a crime, BUT IF IT WAS, then not not punishing the woman who gets an abortion is logically incongruent.
How's that, they aren't giving themselves the procedure. It is currently illegal for a woman to intentionally harm their fetus.
Thank you for highlighting the absurd incongruence of our current laws. Most states criminalize self-inflicted abortion (though it rarely charged), but it's perfectly legal in most states and in fact constitutionally protected for a state-licensed physician to perform most abortions. It it's legal for a doctor to do it, why can't a woman do it? What ever happened to "my body my choice"?
Haven't given this much thought, have you?
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 31, 2016, 03:17:12 PM
Likewise, many states would charge the killing of a pregnant woman as a double homicide, which doesnt seem to square with the mantra that a fetus is just a lump of cells that can be freely disposed of by the mother.
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on March 31, 2016, 03:21:28 PM
I don't think abortion should be a crime, BUT IF IT WAS, then not not punishing the woman who gets an abortion is logically incongruent.
How's that, they aren't giving themselves the procedure. It is currently illegal for a woman to intentionally harm their fetus.
Thank you for highlighting the absurd incongruence of our current laws. Most states criminalize self-inflicted abortion (though it rarely charged), but it's perfectly legal in most states and in fact constitutionally protected for a state-licensed physician to perform most abortions. It it's legal for a doctor to do it, why can't a woman do it? What ever happened to "my body my choice"?
I am not sure what your point is. There are a number of procedures that require licensed doctors to carry out.
Is it illegal to do surgery on yourself?
Post by: star seed 7 on March 31, 2016, 03:24:45 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on March 31, 2016, 03:25:37 PM
Post by: ChiComCat on March 31, 2016, 03:53:41 PM
I don't think abortion should be a crime, BUT IF IT WAS, then not not punishing the woman who gets an abortion is logically incongruent.
How's that, they aren't giving themselves the procedure. It is currently illegal for a woman to intentionally harm their fetus.
Thank you for highlighting the absurd incongruence of our current laws. Most states criminalize self-inflicted abortion (though it rarely charged), but it's perfectly legal in most states and in fact constitutionally protected for a state-licensed physician to perform most abortions. It it's legal for a doctor to do it, why can't a woman do it? What ever happened to "my body my choice"?
I am not sure what your point is. There are a number of procedures that require licensed doctors to carry out.
Is it illegal to do surgery on yourself?
Broad question and the broad answer is no. Self inflicting an abortion is rarely a surgical procedure though. Usually it involves ingesting dangerous and/or prescribed substances. There are a number of laws making that illegal.
BTW, if some mod slogging through this wants to chuck the last few pages in some abortion thread, it's prob not a bad idea.
Post by: catastrophe on March 31, 2016, 03:57:01 PM
I don't think we should fine or jail women who self abort.
Whatever it is, there needs to be something to discourage the practice. If it is acceptable for someone to perform a complex and dangerous procedure on themselves it makes no sense to say it's unacceptable to allow a qualified professional to perform it for them. The reverse actually makes sense if you are into protecting people from themselves (hence the current laws).
Post by: catastrophe on March 31, 2016, 03:59:07 PM
Post by: sys on March 31, 2016, 04:02:49 PM
Once again, the strangest thing about this is that the second Trump says something that at least a few reasonable people agree on, he takes it back. Just proves he's crazy even when he makes sense.
that's not strange at all. he's trying to get elected.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on March 31, 2016, 04:09:47 PM
Once again, the strangest thing about this is that the second Trump says something that at least a few reasonable people agree on, he takes it back. Just proves he's crazy even when he makes sense.
that's not strange at all. he's trying to get elected.
Sometimes watching Trump is like watching your team get a fast break on a steal and then miss the dunk. But mostly it's like watching K-State basketball in general. Mostly.
Post by: catastrophe on March 31, 2016, 05:15:03 PM
Once again, the strangest thing about this is that the second Trump says something that at least a few reasonable people agree on, he takes it back. Just proves he's crazy even when he makes sense.
that's not strange at all. he's trying to get elected.
But to get ahead he has been saying all the things practically any campaign manager would have considered political suicide. It's a classic case of forgetting what got you there.
Post by: catastrophe on March 31, 2016, 05:19:57 PM
I am being 100% serious when I say I don't really think Trump is trying to use rhetoric to whip people into a fury. I think he is just one of the most scared and paranoid people that has made a serious run for office.
Post by: sys on March 31, 2016, 05:21:53 PM
It's a classic case of forgetting what got you there.
i think it's more of a case of realizing you're about to commit suicide and pulling the gun out of your mouth.
Post by: bones129 on April 06, 2016, 01:41:11 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/04/05/a-quieted-donald-trump-quickly-turns-on-lyin-ted/?_r=0
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on April 06, 2016, 08:10:59 AM
Trump takes a hit tonight and blames it on everybody else. :lol:
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/04/05/a-quieted-donald-trump-quickly-turns-on-lyin-ted/?_r=0
Trump really is up against a lot. I really don't want him to be president, but I can't help but find myself pulling for him sometimes.
Post by: bones129 on April 15, 2016, 12:44:41 AM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on April 15, 2016, 08:52:30 AM
Post by: Ptolemy on April 15, 2016, 09:04:22 AM
Post by: bones129 on April 20, 2016, 12:31:30 AM
The Tool retools. This could get interesting.
Post by: Yard Dog on April 20, 2016, 09:11:17 AM
Trump's victory speech tonight was interesting. He dropped the "Lyin' Ted" references and instead referred to Cruz as "The Senator." He also formalized his references to Kasich, calling him "Governor Kasich." The Don is clearly in retool mode, as evidenced also by his recent staff changes.
The Tool retools. This could get interesting.
The healing begins. :cheers:
Post by: chum1 on April 20, 2016, 09:25:53 AM
Post by: CNS on April 20, 2016, 09:37:02 AM
He would still own the most legitimate threat to the 'pubs in my lifetime, in an independent run. He may not hold the key to victory, but he could easily ensure a 'pub loss in the General at this point.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on April 20, 2016, 09:40:26 AM
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on April 20, 2016, 09:41:49 AM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on April 20, 2016, 11:03:56 AM
Post by: bones129 on April 21, 2016, 12:06:28 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on April 26, 2016, 12:31:39 PM
Post by: sys on April 26, 2016, 12:41:38 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on April 26, 2016, 03:33:01 PM
“You know, I tweeted today, @realDonaldTrump. I tweet,” Trump said. He added, “Don’t worry, I’ll give it up after I’m president. We won’t tweet anymore. I don’t know. Not presidential.”
Probably a good idea.
Post by: sys on April 26, 2016, 07:44:17 PM
Quote from: nate silver
Trump has made up the ground he lost in states like Wisconsin and Colorado and put himself in the strongest position he’s been in since March 15.
:frown:
Post by: MakeItRain on April 26, 2016, 09:54:53 PM
Post by: sys on April 26, 2016, 10:08:12 PM
The Hillarystans in the media will make this closer than it needs to be. Tonight Trump had some fair, not exactly accurate but fair, criticisms of Hillz and the panel on the Clinton News Network used it as an opportunity to paint the attacks as sexist. This will wear thin with a decent percentage of (potential) voters and there will be blow back. S.E. Cupp who can't stand Trump had to defend him by pointing out the obvious.
they did that with sanders too. it's some bullshit.
Post by: Panjandrum on April 26, 2016, 10:25:41 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on April 26, 2016, 10:29:43 PM
While we're marching towards the most inevitable outcome, I still feel like I'm being painted in a corner to vote for someone I'm not really a fan of to prevent the election of someone that terrifies me.
I mean, this is what we all knew would happen the whole time
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on April 26, 2016, 10:36:08 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on April 26, 2016, 10:39:10 PM
i don't think you can say the same for trump
;)
Post by: The Big Train on April 26, 2016, 10:40:48 PM
Post by: catastrophe on April 26, 2016, 10:41:24 PM
Post by: wetwillie on April 26, 2016, 10:43:00 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on April 26, 2016, 10:43:49 PM
Id vote the crap out of a third Obama term
:love:
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on April 26, 2016, 10:49:30 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on April 26, 2016, 11:03:13 PM
Id vote the crap out of a third Obama term
People said the same thing about W when it was b.o. v McCain. The moral of the story is neither of these people can do any irreparable harm, so why worry about voting our one.
Post by: star seed 7 on April 26, 2016, 11:04:47 PM
Post by: mocat on April 26, 2016, 11:08:55 PM
Id vote the crap out of a third Obama term
People said the same thing about W when it was b.o. v McCain
lol
Post by: steve dave on April 27, 2016, 12:35:05 PM
Post by: sys on April 27, 2016, 02:47:31 PM
Quote
it may not be that undecided voters are gravitating to Trump so much as anti-Trump Republicans are discouraged.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its-trumps-nomination-to-lose/
i'm biased, because i've been hammering on this for a while. but, imo, this is the result of all the idiot establishment 'pubs saying that a contested convention would be limited to the existing candidates. what reason does a #nevertrump voter have for going out and casting an antitrump vote if there's no hope of getting someone other than cruz or kasich shoved in their face for the effort?
Post by: CNS on April 27, 2016, 02:56:04 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on April 27, 2016, 02:59:16 PM
Id vote the crap out of a third Obama term
People said the same thing about W when it was b.o. v McCain
lol
More people than said it about b.o.
Post by: sys on April 27, 2016, 03:22:59 PM
Supposedly Cruz is announcing today that Carly will be his running mate.
better to lose fast than lose slow, i've never said, but i guess cruz thinks.
Post by: Panjandrum on April 27, 2016, 03:26:35 PM
Supposedly Cruz is announcing today that Carly will be his running mate.
better to lose fast than lose slow, i've never said, but i guess cruz thinks.
"She's a woman, so that covers the #womancard, and she's a former CEO, so that counterbalances Donald. It's genius!"
:thumbsup:
Post by: Dugout DickStone on April 27, 2016, 04:13:12 PM
Post by: wetwillie on April 27, 2016, 05:00:08 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on April 27, 2016, 11:44:34 PM
Id vote the crap out of a third Obama term
Well congrats because you'll have that opportunity
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on April 28, 2016, 01:09:11 AM
Id vote the crap out of a third Obama term
Well congrats because you'll have that opportunity
I suggest all libs write in Obama.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on April 28, 2016, 01:14:52 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on April 28, 2016, 01:09:09 PM
Post by: steve dave on April 28, 2016, 01:34:41 PM
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on April 28, 2016, 02:07:58 PM
I'm going to IRL order one of those red hats tho
You're going to help Drumpf get elected. :shakesfist:
Post by: sys on April 28, 2016, 02:14:25 PM
I'm going to IRL order one of those red hats tho
You're going to help Drumpf get elected. :shakesfist:
at the risk of having someone tell me i'm hot and bothered over the issue - referring to trump as drumpf is stupid too.
Post by: steve dave on April 28, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
Post by: sys on April 28, 2016, 02:29:10 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on April 28, 2016, 02:56:27 PM
it's almost like telling me i'm lying, which enrages me more than anything in the world.
I don't believe that's true
Post by: sys on April 28, 2016, 03:02:17 PM
it's almost like telling me i'm lying, which enrages me more than anything in the world.
I don't believe that's true
you're disagreeing, which is different and doesn't anger me.
Post by: Emo EMAW on April 28, 2016, 03:09:06 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on April 29, 2016, 02:40:13 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on April 29, 2016, 03:03:32 PM
Post by: sys on May 02, 2016, 01:14:16 PM
good article. trump may have too many negatives to carry the day, but i think clinton would be quite vulnerable on the ideology/patriotism axis.
Post by: star seed 7 on May 03, 2016, 11:13:30 AM
A Cruz campaign spokesperson told the Miami Herald, which pointed out numerous flaws in the Enquirer story, that it was “another garbage story in a tabloid full of garbage.”
“His father was with Lee Harvey Oswald prior to Oswald's being — you know, shot. I mean, the whole thing is ridiculous,” Trump said Tuesday during a phone interview with Fox News. “What is this, right prior to his being shot, and nobody even brings it up. They don't even talk about that. That was reported, and nobody talks about it.”
“I mean, what was he doing — what was he doing with Lee Harvey Oswald shortly before the death? Before the shooting?” Trump continued. “It’s horrible.”
Post by: steve dave on May 03, 2016, 11:38:20 AM
Post by: steve dave on May 03, 2016, 11:38:56 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 03, 2016, 11:43:21 AM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on May 03, 2016, 12:25:16 PM
Post by: steve dave on May 03, 2016, 12:28:52 PM
The Enquirer is right more than they're wrong lately.
Oh for sure John Doug
Post by: steve dave on May 03, 2016, 12:42:05 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on May 03, 2016, 01:00:27 PM
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/trump_41_clinton_39
So, like, he has a chance at winning the popular vote but losing the election?
Post by: catastrophe on May 03, 2016, 01:07:08 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 03, 2016, 01:09:35 PM
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/trump_41_clinton_39
So, like, he has a chance at winning the popular vote but losing the election?
That's the only poll I've seen that has him ahead.
Post by: DQ12 on May 03, 2016, 01:46:22 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 03, 2016, 01:48:05 PM
Post by: sys on May 03, 2016, 01:49:21 PM
That's the only poll I've seen that has him ahead.
his numbers will go up once he's the nominee, it's just a question of how much. demography will be against him, but it'd be against any republican.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 03, 2016, 02:43:50 PM
Post by: chuckjames on May 03, 2016, 03:48:01 PM
Post by: chuckjames on May 03, 2016, 03:57:49 PM
Fascistic demagogue!!!
Not the biggest Andrew Sullivan fan, but i thought this was good.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/04/america-tyranny-donald-trump.html
Post by: renocat on May 03, 2016, 09:02:55 PM
Post by: wetwillie on May 03, 2016, 09:25:09 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 03, 2016, 09:40:56 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on May 03, 2016, 09:42:30 PM
Has anyone seen Chris Christie lately? I hope trump didn't kill him.
All you can eat buffet night at the Trenton Olive Garden
Post by: TCUHornedFrog on May 03, 2016, 11:14:40 PM
He will get shellacked in the general by Hillary. The democrats will control selection of the next 2-3 Supreme Court justices. The gop might even lose congress as a result. :excited:
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 03, 2016, 11:31:36 PM
That's why I :lol: at all this over-the-top bullshit about Trump, and I don't like the guy and won't vote for him. My Flying Spaghetti Monster the Dems are going to nominate war mongering Wall Street thug sell out America at every turn for a buck Hillary Clinton and all you proglib whack jobs can do is keep hurling "fascist" labels at Trump. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Post by: Tobias on May 03, 2016, 11:35:24 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 03, 2016, 11:38:25 PM
Meanwhile Hillary's policies get hundreds murdered and slaughtered every day.
But, Trump = Fascist :lol: :lol:
Post by: ednksu on May 04, 2016, 12:03:08 AM
I'm sadly old enough to remember when Ronald Reagan was going to start WWIII and everybody alive at the time was going to die, so that means some of you would have never been born. When in reality, Ronnie may have turned out to be the most non interventionist president since WWII (Oh yeah, a nod to Whackadoodle who will chime in with some factoids that everyone knows about Central America, a place where more then one U.S. president has meddled).
That's why I :lol: at all this over-the-top bullshit about Trump, and I don't like the guy and won't vote for him. My Flying Spaghetti Monster the Dems are going to nominate war mongering Wall Street thug sell out America at every turn for a buck Hillary Clinton and all you proglib whack jobs can do is keep hurling "fascist" labels at Trump. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
You're seriously laughing off Iran rough ridin' Contra?
Post by: renocat on May 04, 2016, 02:43:11 AM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on May 04, 2016, 03:48:14 AM
So far not one person that we know of has died because of Donald Trump's policies
I count the USFL
Post by: steve dave on May 04, 2016, 06:19:11 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 04, 2016, 06:30:21 AM
I'm sadly old enough to remember when Ronald Reagan was going to start WWIII and everybody alive at the time was going to die, so that means some of you would have never been born. When in reality, Ronnie may have turned out to be the most non interventionist president since WWII (Oh yeah, a nod to Whackadoodle who will chime in with some factoids that everyone knows about Central America, a place where more then one U.S. president has meddled).
That's why I :lol: at all this over-the-top bullshit about Trump, and I don't like the guy and won't vote for him. My Flying Spaghetti Monster the Dems are going to nominate war mongering Wall Street thug sell out America at every turn for a buck Hillary Clinton and all you proglib whack jobs can do is keep hurling "fascist" labels at Trump. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
You're seriously laughing off Iran rough ridin' Contra?
LOl, you laugh off bombing a sovereign nation for nearly 80 days, killing thousands and in violation of the NATO charter with no congressional mandate while sending the CIA and special forces to support entities that were getting material support from Iran and Bin Laden/AQ. A region being assimilated into NATO in a process that could actually bring us WWIII as we provoke Russia at every turn in Hillary's LOL "reset", maybe the dumbest FP stunt in history. So if you can laugh so off dropping thousands of tons of bombs on innocent people I can laugh off a dumb weapons deal, while remembering Obama now arms nearly everyone in the Middle East with cash.
Trump ='s words, Hillary and the Clinton's = Death.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 04, 2016, 06:33:45 AM
Post by: steve dave on May 04, 2016, 06:37:16 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 04, 2016, 06:39:49 AM
It means the same thing it has always meant. friend.
Friends can be dumbasses and even Feel the Berners, at least a few have "come around".
Post by: star seed 7 on May 04, 2016, 08:18:32 AM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on May 04, 2016, 08:31:57 AM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on May 04, 2016, 08:32:11 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 04, 2016, 08:34:03 AM
It's not like there's a choice. :rolleyes:
Vote for Hillary.
This is so great you guys. I have had so much fun watching this entire election cycle. 2015/16=BITB for election entertainment
We still get to watch the republican convention and the presidential debates. :drool:
Post by: star seed 7 on May 04, 2016, 08:40:16 AM
Post by: steve dave on May 04, 2016, 08:57:48 AM
It's not like there's a choice. :rolleyes:
BETTER THAN HILLARY!
Post by: cfbandyman on May 04, 2016, 09:02:45 AM
This is so great you guys. I have had so much fun watching this entire election cycle. 2015/16=BITB for election entertainment
We truly live in blessed times of entertainment
Post by: renocat on May 04, 2016, 09:39:46 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 04, 2016, 10:00:40 AM
Post by: CNS on May 04, 2016, 11:25:19 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 04, 2016, 11:27:18 AM
Post by: WildcatNkilt on May 04, 2016, 11:32:18 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 04, 2016, 11:39:32 AM
Who will be Trump's running mate? Christie?
A picture of himself
Post by: sys on May 04, 2016, 11:48:44 AM
Kasich just dropped out. Trump is the candidate.
i've grown to dislike kasich.
Post by: ednksu on May 04, 2016, 01:16:57 PM
I'm sadly old enough to remember when Ronald Reagan was going to start WWIII and everybody alive at the time was going to die, so that means some of you would have never been born. When in reality, Ronnie may have turned out to be the most non interventionist president since WWII (Oh yeah, a nod to Whackadoodle who will chime in with some factoids that everyone knows about Central America, a place where more then one U.S. president has meddled).
That's why I :lol: at all this over-the-top bullshit about Trump, and I don't like the guy and won't vote for him. My Flying Spaghetti Monster the Dems are going to nominate war mongering Wall Street thug sell out America at every turn for a buck Hillary Clinton and all you proglib whack jobs can do is keep hurling "fascist" labels at Trump. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
You're seriously laughing off Iran rough ridin' Contra?
LOl, you laugh off bombing a sovereign nation for nearly 80 days, killing thousands and in violation of the NATO charter with no congressional mandate while sending the CIA and special forces to support entities that were getting material support from Iran and Bin Laden/AQ. A region being assimilated into NATO in a process that could actually bring us WWIII as we provoke Russia at every turn in Hillary's LOL "reset", maybe the dumbest FP stunt in history. So if you can laugh so off dropping thousands of tons of bombs on innocent people I can laugh off a dumb weapons deal, while remembering Obama now arms nearly everyone in the Middle East with cash.
Trump ='s words, Hillary and the Clinton's = Death.
You are so small minded. I don't think anyone on this blog supports Hillary, but that is the only way you can participate in threads, by creating that false dichotomy.
Also you're wrong about NATO/Bosnia/etc, but we don't need to get into that again, start a new thread.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 04, 2016, 01:44:16 PM
I'm sadly old enough to remember when Ronald Reagan was going to start WWIII and everybody alive at the time was going to die, so that means some of you would have never been born. When in reality, Ronnie may have turned out to be the most non interventionist president since WWII (Oh yeah, a nod to Whackadoodle who will chime in with some factoids that everyone knows about Central America, a place where more then one U.S. president has meddled).
That's why I :lol: at all this over-the-top bullshit about Trump, and I don't like the guy and won't vote for him. My Flying Spaghetti Monster the Dems are going to nominate war mongering Wall Street thug sell out America at every turn for a buck Hillary Clinton and all you proglib whack jobs can do is keep hurling "fascist" labels at Trump. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
You're seriously laughing off Iran rough ridin' Contra?
LOl, you laugh off bombing a sovereign nation for nearly 80 days, killing thousands and in violation of the NATO charter with no congressional mandate while sending the CIA and special forces to support entities that were getting material support from Iran and Bin Laden/AQ. A region being assimilated into NATO in a process that could actually bring us WWIII as we provoke Russia at every turn in Hillary's LOL "reset", maybe the dumbest FP stunt in history. So if you can laugh so off dropping thousands of tons of bombs on innocent people I can laugh off a dumb weapons deal, while remembering Obama now arms nearly everyone in the Middle East with cash.
Trump ='s words, Hillary and the Clinton's = Death.
You are so small minded. I don't think anyone on this blog supports Hillary, but that is the only way you can participate in threads, by creating that false dichotomy.
Also you're wrong about NATO/Bosnia/etc, but we don't need to get into that again, start a new thread.
So Whack-A-Doodle, this thread isn't about discussion of politics, it's only about who on this board supports or doesn't support? So when you and the other non-thinking prog-libs constantly spew forth the "right" you're only talking about people on this board?
In terms of Clinton's illegal war in Yugoslavia I was only making an analogy of the illegal and highly deadly things that you LOL about and just pass over because you're a good little prog-lib jackboot who only regurgitates what you're spoon fed.
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on May 04, 2016, 02:09:55 PM
Why isn't Elizabeth Warren running for President? Seems like she might be a good choice although I haven't done a lot of research.
Post by: sys on May 04, 2016, 02:12:08 PM
Post by: Tobias on May 04, 2016, 02:12:45 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 04, 2016, 02:28:18 PM
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on May 04, 2016, 02:33:31 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 04, 2016, 02:36:28 PM
She seems pretty good on Twitter. :dunno:
The :lol: hypocrisy
Post by: star seed 7 on May 04, 2016, 02:36:54 PM
Post by: DQ12 on May 04, 2016, 02:37:52 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 04, 2016, 02:38:26 PM
FAUXCAHONTAS
Sarcasm towards prog-lib idiot politicians gets you all :curse:
Post by: Tobias on May 04, 2016, 02:38:52 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 04, 2016, 02:40:10 PM
Post by: sys on May 04, 2016, 02:41:09 PM
the left laughs now, but I think they'd be smarter to hold their laughter until Hillary wins the general. I think Hillary is probably gonna win, but I thought Jeb and Marco would obviously win too.
yeah.
Post by: pvegs on May 04, 2016, 03:12:57 PM
I'm sadly old enough to remember when Ronald Reagan was going to start WWIII and everybody alive at the time was going to die, so that means some of you would have never been born. When in reality, Ronnie may have turned out to be the most non interventionist president since WWII (Oh yeah, a nod to Whackadoodle who will chime in with some factoids that everyone knows about Central America, a place where more then one U.S. president has meddled).
That's why I :lol: at all this over-the-top bullshit about Trump, and I don't like the guy and won't vote for him. My Flying Spaghetti Monster the Dems are going to nominate war mongering Wall Street thug sell out America at every turn for a buck Hillary Clinton and all you proglib whack jobs can do is keep hurling "fascist" labels at Trump. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
It really says something that Trump is so evil and repugnant, even Dax won't vote for him.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 04, 2016, 03:21:31 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 04, 2016, 03:30:55 PM
Post by: chuckjames on May 04, 2016, 03:34:48 PM
the left laughs now, but I think they'd be smarter to hold their laughter until Hillary wins the general. I think Hillary is probably gonna win, but I thought Jeb and Marco would obviously win too.
yeah.
meh im not worried, the general isnt the primary. With Trump proabably taking the public funding option, Hillary will outspend him by close to 10-1. and i know that didnt matter in the primary, but Trump wont be talking to the gullible mouth breathing racists he was able to con in the party formerly known as the GOP.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 04, 2016, 03:35:15 PM
I'm sadly old enough to remember when Ronald Reagan was going to start WWIII and everybody alive at the time was going to die, so that means some of you would have never been born. When in reality, Ronnie may have turned out to be the most non interventionist president since WWII (Oh yeah, a nod to Whackadoodle who will chime in with some factoids that everyone knows about Central America, a place where more then one U.S. president has meddled).
That's why I :lol: at all this over-the-top bullshit about Trump, and I don't like the guy and won't vote for him. My Flying Spaghetti Monster the Dems are going to nominate war mongering Wall Street thug sell out America at every turn for a buck Hillary Clinton and all you proglib whack jobs can do is keep hurling "fascist" labels at Trump. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
It really says something that Trump is so evil and repugnant, even Dax won't vote for him.
Hillary's even more evil and repugnant and tens of thousands of dead people around the world if given a chance to come back from the grave would tell you she is, but she got to flash that peace sign on the tarmac in Libya, so, yah I guess.
Post by: star seed 7 on May 04, 2016, 03:38:00 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 04, 2016, 03:39:07 PM
Dax is in love with trump
Lib gets so :curse: when anyone talks bad on his gal, Hil
Post by: DQ12 on May 04, 2016, 03:43:06 PM
alright man. I think Hillary is going to win, but. Sheesh, I really don't think it's a gimme. Hillary isn't exactly an electability powerhouse herself.the left laughs now, but I think they'd be smarter to hold their laughter until Hillary wins the general. I think Hillary is probably gonna win, but I thought Jeb and Marco would obviously win too.
yeah.
meh im not worried, the general isnt the primary. With Trump proabably taking the public funding option, Hillary will outspend him by close to 10-1. and i know that didnt matter in the primary, but Trump wont be talking to the gullible mouth breathing racists he was able to con in the party formerly known as the GOP.
Trump is about to change up his rhetoric and sound a lot more reasonable.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 04, 2016, 03:48:34 PM
There is more than one person on the ballotI don't want to vote for a criminal either. :cry:
Post by: star seed 7 on May 04, 2016, 03:50:39 PM
Post by: chuckjames on May 04, 2016, 03:53:41 PM
alright man. I think Hillary is going to win, but. Sheesh, I really don't think it's a gimme. Hillary isn't exactly an electability powerhouse herself.the left laughs now, but I think they'd be smarter to hold their laughter until Hillary wins the general. I think Hillary is probably gonna win, but I thought Jeb and Marco would obviously win too.
yeah.
meh im not worried, the general isnt the primary. With Trump proabably taking the public funding option, Hillary will outspend him by close to 10-1. and i know that didnt matter in the primary, but Trump wont be talking to the gullible mouth breathing racists he was able to con in the party formerly known as the GOP.
Trump is about to change up his rhetoric and sound a lot more reasonable.
like its not 100%, i agree, but its about as much as a gimme as there is in American national politics. He can change his rhetoric, and then the DNC/HRC will just buy another ad that gets free media showing Trump saying something awful 6 months ago. I could be way off, but the polls showed Trump always winning the GOP nomination, and the polls show HRC beating Trump easily.
Post by: ednksu on May 04, 2016, 03:57:46 PM
There is more than 2 people on the ballotand a blank line
Post by: ednksu on May 04, 2016, 03:59:17 PM
WTF are you talking about? Are you high or on the spectrum?I'm sadly old enough to remember when Ronald Reagan was going to start WWIII and everybody alive at the time was going to die, so that means some of you would have never been born. When in reality, Ronnie may have turned out to be the most non interventionist president since WWII (Oh yeah, a nod to Whackadoodle who will chime in with some factoids that everyone knows about Central America, a place where more then one U.S. president has meddled).
That's why I :lol: at all this over-the-top bullshit about Trump, and I don't like the guy and won't vote for him. My Flying Spaghetti Monster the Dems are going to nominate war mongering Wall Street thug sell out America at every turn for a buck Hillary Clinton and all you proglib whack jobs can do is keep hurling "fascist" labels at Trump. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
You're seriously laughing off Iran rough ridin' Contra?
LOl, you laugh off bombing a sovereign nation for nearly 80 days, killing thousands and in violation of the NATO charter with no congressional mandate while sending the CIA and special forces to support entities that were getting material support from Iran and Bin Laden/AQ. A region being assimilated into NATO in a process that could actually bring us WWIII as we provoke Russia at every turn in Hillary's LOL "reset", maybe the dumbest FP stunt in history. So if you can laugh so off dropping thousands of tons of bombs on innocent people I can laugh off a dumb weapons deal, while remembering Obama now arms nearly everyone in the Middle East with cash.
Trump ='s words, Hillary and the Clinton's = Death.
You are so small minded. I don't think anyone on this blog supports Hillary, but that is the only way you can participate in threads, by creating that false dichotomy.
Also you're wrong about NATO/Bosnia/etc, but we don't need to get into that again, start a new thread.
So Whack-A-Doodle, this thread isn't about discussion of politics, it's only about who on this board supports or doesn't support? So when you and the other non-thinking prog-libs constantly spew forth the "right" you're only talking about people on this board?
In terms of Clinton's illegal war in Yugoslavia I was only making an analogy of the illegal and highly deadly things that you LOL about and just pass over because you're a good little prog-lib jackboot who only regurgitates what you're spoon fed.
Post by: ednksu on May 04, 2016, 04:00:34 PM
https://twitter.com/elizabethforma/status/727692197148119040
Why isn't Elizabeth Warren running for President? Seems like she might be a good choice although I haven't done a lot of research.
whole quote
Donald Trump is now the leader of the Republican Party. It's real – he is one step away from the White House. Here's what else is real:
Trump has built his campaign on racism, sexism, and xenophobia. There's more enthusiasm for him among leaders of the KKK than leaders of the political party he now controls.
He incites supporters to violence, praises Putin, and, according to a columnist who recently interviewed him, is "cool with being called an authoritarian" and doesn't mind associations with history's worst dictators.
He attacks veterans like John McCain who were captured and puts our servicemembers at risk by cheerleading illegal torture. In a world with ISIS militants and leaders like North Korean strongman Kim Jong-Un conducting nuclear tests, he surrounds himself with a foreign policy team that has been called a "collection of charlatans," and puts out contradictory and nonsensical national security ideas one expert recently called "incoherent" and "truly bizarre."
What happens next will test the character for all of us – Republican, Democrat, and Independent. It will determine whether we move forward as one nation or splinter at the hands of one man's narcissism and divisiveness. I know which side I'm on, and I’m going to fight my heart out to make sure Donald Trump’s toxic stew of hatred and insecurity never reaches the White House.
Post by: pvegs on May 04, 2016, 04:03:37 PM
WTF are you talking about? Are you high or on the spectrum?I'm sadly old enough to remember when Ronald Reagan was going to start WWIII and everybody alive at the time was going to die, so that means some of you would have never been born. When in reality, Ronnie may have turned out to be the most non interventionist president since WWII (Oh yeah, a nod to Whackadoodle who will chime in with some factoids that everyone knows about Central America, a place where more then one U.S. president has meddled).
That's why I :lol: at all this over-the-top bullshit about Trump, and I don't like the guy and won't vote for him. My Flying Spaghetti Monster the Dems are going to nominate war mongering Wall Street thug sell out America at every turn for a buck Hillary Clinton and all you proglib whack jobs can do is keep hurling "fascist" labels at Trump. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
You're seriously laughing off Iran rough ridin' Contra?
LOl, you laugh off bombing a sovereign nation for nearly 80 days, killing thousands and in violation of the NATO charter with no congressional mandate while sending the CIA and special forces to support entities that were getting material support from Iran and Bin Laden/AQ. A region being assimilated into NATO in a process that could actually bring us WWIII as we provoke Russia at every turn in Hillary's LOL "reset", maybe the dumbest FP stunt in history. So if you can laugh so off dropping thousands of tons of bombs on innocent people I can laugh off a dumb weapons deal, while remembering Obama now arms nearly everyone in the Middle East with cash.
Trump ='s words, Hillary and the Clinton's = Death.
You are so small minded. I don't think anyone on this blog supports Hillary, but that is the only way you can participate in threads, by creating that false dichotomy.
Also you're wrong about NATO/Bosnia/etc, but we don't need to get into that again, start a new thread.
So Whack-A-Doodle, this thread isn't about discussion of politics, it's only about who on this board supports or doesn't support? So when you and the other non-thinking prog-libs constantly spew forth the "right" you're only talking about people on this board?
In terms of Clinton's illegal war in Yugoslavia I was only making an analogy of the illegal and highly deadly things that you LOL about and just pass over because you're a good little prog-lib jackboot who only regurgitates what you're spoon fed.
Edn, I take heart in the fact that dax is probably a lot older than me and so will be dead much sooner.
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on May 04, 2016, 04:30:49 PM
Post by: wetwillie on May 04, 2016, 04:32:22 PM
Looks like I'm going to have to vote for Hillary now.
You were going to vote for Cruz?
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 04, 2016, 04:44:12 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 04, 2016, 04:45:28 PM
whack-a-doodle
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 04, 2016, 04:49:51 PM
Post by: chuckjames on May 04, 2016, 04:52:18 PM
I'm just happy all the major holidays are over until the election. I don't know if I can fake agree about Donald Trump with the fannings. :Yuck:
i have to go to a family vacay to Myrtle Beach this summer, and my step mom's family are all from South Carolina and huge Trump supporters, its going to be fantastic.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 04, 2016, 04:54:00 PM
Oh man. :runaway:I'm just happy all the major holidays are over until the election. I don't know if I can fake agree about Donald Trump with the fannings. :Yuck:
i have to go to a family vacay to Myrtle Beach this summer, and my step mom's family are all from South Carolina and huge Trump supporters, its going to be fantastic.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 04, 2016, 05:01:05 PM
I'm just happy all the major holidays are over until the election. I don't know if I can fake agree about Donald Trump with the fannings. :Yuck:
Maybe he'll win and get worked into the Fanning Thanksgiving prayer.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on May 04, 2016, 05:03:21 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 04, 2016, 05:31:43 PM
I'm just happy all the major holidays are over until the election. I don't know if I can fake agree about Donald Trump with the fannings. :Yuck:
i have to go to a family vacay to Myrtle Beach this summer, and my step mom's family are all from South Carolina and huge Trump supporters, its going to be fantastic.
MB in the summer :Yuck:
Post by: chuckjames on May 04, 2016, 05:34:51 PM
I'm just happy all the major holidays are over until the election. I don't know if I can fake agree about Donald Trump with the fannings. :Yuck:
i have to go to a family vacay to Myrtle Beach this summer, and my step mom's family are all from South Carolina and huge Trump supporters, its going to be fantastic.
MB in the summer :Yuck:
yea its not ideal at all, but my step mom is from MB so my dad rents a beach house down there for a week every summer. and altho the beach sucks its better than a Kansas beach. and the people watching can be quite entertaining.
Post by: pvegs on May 04, 2016, 05:42:09 PM
Oh man. :runaway:I'm just happy all the major holidays are over until the election. I don't know if I can fake agree about Donald Trump with the fannings. :Yuck:
i have to go to a family vacay to Myrtle Beach this summer, and my step mom's family are all from South Carolina and huge Trump supporters, its going to be fantastic.
I have one Trump-supporting family member who lives in Louisiana. She's my aunt, the type of person who posts memes on Facebook such as, "Like if you think people with sagging pants should face criminal charges." Also, not incidentally, the only person I've ever unfollowed on Facebook.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 04, 2016, 06:10:05 PM
Post by: chuckjames on May 04, 2016, 06:16:09 PM
I mean, you guys know I'm conservative, but I can't watch this happen. Wtf is wrong with this rough ridin' party?!
the party allowed dog whistle politics and accepted the racists that came along with them to win elections for too long.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 04, 2016, 07:18:01 PM
Trump = perceived racism
Clinton's = oversaw one of the worst public education system states in the country which disproportionately hurts minorities, signed into law one of the harshest criminal sentencing laws in U.S. history, a law which disproportionately hurts minorities.
Post by: stunted on May 04, 2016, 07:43:22 PM
Hillary is going to moonwalk into the oval office :lol:
vegas disagrees
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on May 04, 2016, 08:31:38 PM
Looks like I'm going to have to vote for Hillary now.
You were going to vote for Cruz?
No. I might have voted for Gary Johnson but now I have to do everything I can to keep Donald out of the White House.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on May 04, 2016, 08:41:23 PM
Clinton's = oversaw one of the worst public education system states in the country which disproportionately hurts minorities
Would love to hear specifics on what you think they're responsible for here, i.e. what did they cause? What did they allow to continue? What should they have done differently, and how would that have realistically changed the situation? :users:
Post by: star seed 7 on May 04, 2016, 08:48:10 PM
Words vs actions:
Trump = perceived racism
Clinton's = oversaw one of the worst public education system states in the country which disproportionately hurts minorities, signed into law one of the harshest criminal sentencing laws in U.S. history, a law which disproportionately hurts minorities.
Misogynist
Post by: Dugout DickStone on May 04, 2016, 08:55:35 PM
Post by: wetwillie on May 04, 2016, 09:01:07 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 04, 2016, 09:04:09 PM
Clinton's = oversaw one of the worst public education system states in the country which disproportionately hurts minorities
Would love to hear specifics on what you think they're responsible for here, i.e. what did they cause? What did they allow to continue? What should they have done differently, and how would that have realistically changed the situation? :users:
LOL at SB wanting specifics now? :lol: First off, why did she make teachers the scapegoats for Arkansas' education problems, which she quite clearly did with her mandatory skills test? Bill Clinton held the Arkansas legislature financial hostage on a budget deal unless they passed the teacher testing legislation. So, you're going to attack the teachers first in a state that had historically under funded education? Fascinating. Of course the usual suspect publications all praise what she did.
Then when the teachers did very poorly on the test, the Clinton's, with eye's on even bigger prizes where they knew they need the NEA, backed off substantially, selling their own reform out.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 04, 2016, 09:05:22 PM
Words vs actions:
Trump = perceived racism
Clinton's = oversaw one of the worst public education system states in the country which disproportionately hurts minorities, signed into law one of the harshest criminal sentencing laws in U.S. history, a law which disproportionately hurts minorities.
Misogynist
I agree, with the way Hillary et. al have attacked women who come forward to discuss their abuse at the hand (or cigar) of her husband.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on May 04, 2016, 09:21:31 PM
Clinton's = oversaw one of the worst public education system states in the country which disproportionately hurts minorities
Would love to hear specifics on what you think they're responsible for here, i.e. what did they cause? What did they allow to continue? What should they have done differently, and how would that have realistically changed the situation? :users:
LOL at SB wanting specifics now? :lol: First off, why did she make teachers the scapegoats for Arkansas' education problems, which she quite clearly did with her mandatory skills test? Bill Clinton held the Arkansas legislature financial hostage on a budget deal unless they passed the teacher testing legislation. So, you're going to attack the teachers first in a state that had historically under funded education? Fascinating. Of course the usual suspect publications all praise what she did.
Then when the teachers did very poorly on the test, the Clinton's, with eye's on even bigger prizes where they knew they need the NEA, backed off substantially, selling their own reform out.
Links plz, I wasn't really paying attention to issues relating to Arkansas' educational climate when I was 9 and in Kansas. Will read them all, though. Genuinely interested.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 04, 2016, 09:29:19 PM
She isn't skating to anything. She's awkward, awful, and has opposed every position she's currently planking.
Post by: Panjandrum on May 04, 2016, 09:34:45 PM
You can mobilize 500k angry white people in Indiana to go vote for him in a primary, but in a general election does his support really scale?
And I'm not going to get into a debate about Hillary. None of this, to me, is about her. You could put a cardboard cutout of Howdy Doody up there, and people are going to debate whether or not they're really going to pull that lever for Donald Trump.
I'm still not convinced that some establishment Republicans won't throw some third party candidate out there just to siphon off some of his votes.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on May 04, 2016, 09:41:50 PM
Post by: wetwillie on May 04, 2016, 09:45:05 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 04, 2016, 09:52:36 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on May 04, 2016, 10:09:03 PM
I'm sadly old enough to remember when Ronald Reagan was going to start WWIII and everybody alive at the time was going to die, so that means some of you would have never been born. When in reality, Ronnie may have turned out to be the most non interventionist president since WWII (Oh yeah, a nod to Whackadoodle who will chime in with some factoids that everyone knows about Central America, a place where more then one U.S. president has meddled).
What about the Caribbean island he invaded that is roughly the same size as Lincoln, Nebraska? How many presidents have done that?
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 04, 2016, 10:32:14 PM
I'm sadly old enough to remember when Ronald Reagan was going to start WWIII and everybody alive at the time was going to die, so that means some of you would have never been born. When in reality, Ronnie may have turned out to be the most non interventionist president since WWII (Oh yeah, a nod to Whackadoodle who will chime in with some factoids that everyone knows about Central America, a place where more then one U.S. president has meddled).
What about the Caribbean island he invaded that is roughly the same size as Lincoln, Nebraska? How many presidents have done that?
Well, give or take you can probably start with McKinley, that is if you're talking just the Caribbean.
Post by: MakeItRain on May 04, 2016, 10:58:19 PM
I'm sadly old enough to remember when Ronald Reagan was going to start WWIII and everybody alive at the time was going to die, so that means some of you would have never been born. When in reality, Ronnie may have turned out to be the most non interventionist president since WWII (Oh yeah, a nod to Whackadoodle who will chime in with some factoids that everyone knows about Central America, a place where more then one U.S. president has meddled).
What about the Caribbean island he invaded that is roughly the same size as Lincoln, Nebraska? How many presidents have done that?
Well, give or take you can probably start with McKinley, that is if you're talking just the Caribbean.
Post by: ednksu on May 05, 2016, 12:39:23 AM
http://www.thegoparcade.com/
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 05, 2016, 01:13:39 AM
Harry Truman sided with pro Hitler thugs and put them in power in Greece, Korea (50,000 Americans dead). Eisenhower Iran and several other brush fires, started down the path in Vietnam, a couple of CIA coups (not going to look them up now. Kennedy Bay of Pigs, Vietnam. Johnson Vietnam Escalation (50,000 American's dead), Nixon bombing of Cambodia, started Vietnam draw down. Ford, can't remember anything. Carter let Iran fall then had a failed hostage rescue, and with Zbig started arming the mujaheddin in Afghanistan. Bush I Panama, first gulf war. Clinton cruise missile attacks in Iraq, illegal war in the Balkans. Bush II Afghanistan and Iraq War II huge loss of life, endless war and started drone strike program. Obama Afghan surge, expanded drone strikes in multiple countries, overthrow of Libyan government, extreme intervention in Syria creating a humanitarian disaster, idiotic support of Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, massive weapons sales to ME theocracies, confrontation with Russia, drew down Iraq forces, now sending forces back to Iraq.
I'm sure I missed a few along the way, but those are the highlights. Reagan looks pretty freaking tame in comparison.
Post by: renocat on May 05, 2016, 02:30:19 AM
Post by: chuckjames on May 05, 2016, 09:03:38 AM
Let's see invaded a small island in the Caribbean, Central America insurgency via the CIA, a bombing attack on Libya, a dumb arms for hostages deal, sending Marines to Lebanon on a peace keeping mission that was a disaster continued Carter's policy of arming mujaheddin.
Harry Truman sided with pro Hitler thugs and put them in power in Greece, Korea (50,000 Americans dead). Eisenhower Iran and several other brush fires, started down the path in Vietnam, a couple of CIA coups (not going to look them up now. Kennedy Bay of Pigs, Vietnam. Johnson Vietnam Escalation (50,000 American's dead), Nixon bombing of Cambodia, started Vietnam draw down. Ford, can't remember anything. Carter let Iran fall then had a failed hostage rescue, and with Zbig started arming the mujaheddin in Afghanistan. Bush I Panama, first gulf war. Clinton cruise missile attacks in Iraq, illegal war in the Balkans. Bush II Afghanistan and Iraq War II huge loss of life, endless war and started drone strike program. Obama Afghan surge, expanded drone strikes in multiple countries, overthrow of Libyan government, extreme intervention in Syria creating a humanitarian disaster, idiotic support of Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, massive weapons sales to ME theocracies, confrontation with Russia, drew down Iraq forces, now sending forces back to Iraq.
I'm sure I missed a few along the way, but those are the highlights. Reagan looks pretty freaking tame in comparison.
Dear God our foreign policy has been a disaster for 70 years.
Post by: catastrophe on May 05, 2016, 09:24:29 AM
Aren't there enough olds and racists in Florida?
Trump hates Israel though. That's a problem in Florida.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 05, 2016, 09:30:56 AM
Aren't there enough olds and racists in Florida?
Trump hates Israel though. That's a problem in Florida.
Trump was the grand marshal at the Israeli Day Parade.
Post by: wetwillie on May 05, 2016, 09:32:31 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 05, 2016, 09:34:07 AM
Quote
One of the first jarring moments came in December when Trump, a Christian, addressed the Republican Jewish Coalition and likened himself to the Jewish businessmen in the room, saying, "I'm a negotiator, like you folks."
While he did receive applause when he said the room was filled with more people who had renegotiated deals than any other group he had addressed, the response was less positive when he went on to predict why he wouldn't receive the group's support.
"You’re not going to support me because I don’t want your money," Trump said.
"You don’t want to give me money and that’s OK. You want to control your own politician, that’s fine. ... I understand: five months ago, I was with you. Who is better than me?"
Post by: catastrophe on May 05, 2016, 09:35:42 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 05, 2016, 09:37:31 AM
Trump said if he were in talks with Israel and Palestine he wouldn't bitch slap the Palestinian until they agreed to GTFO. And this is a guy who is basically racist against the entire Middle East. He HATES Israel.
I can't follow this logic.
Post by: 8manpick on May 05, 2016, 11:06:05 AM
Source: A+
Post by: star seed 7 on May 05, 2016, 11:41:20 AM
Quote
He was asking me a theoretical, or just a question in theory, and I talked about it only from that standpoint. Of course not. And that was done, he said, you know, I guess it was theoretically, but he was asking me a rhetorical question, and I gave an answer. And by the way, people thought from an academic standpoint, and asked rhetorically, people said that answer was an unbelievable academic answer. But of course not, and I said that afterwards. Everybody understands that.
Post by: steve dave on May 05, 2016, 02:47:32 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 05, 2016, 02:48:12 PM
Post by: catastrophe on May 05, 2016, 02:57:07 PM
Post by: CNS on May 05, 2016, 03:07:10 PM
Post by: steve dave on May 05, 2016, 03:35:32 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on May 05, 2016, 03:44:52 PM
On punishing abort'rsQuoteHe was asking me a theoretical, or just a question in theory, and I talked about it only from that standpoint. Of course not. And that was done, he said, you know, I guess it was theoretically, but he was asking me a rhetorical question, and I gave an answer. And by the way, people thought from an academic standpoint, and asked rhetorically, people said that answer was an unbelievable academic answer. But of course not, and I said that afterwards. Everybody understands that.
Absolutely amazing to read this stuff written out.
Post by: CNS on May 05, 2016, 03:54:32 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 05, 2016, 03:58:41 PM
Post by: sys on May 05, 2016, 04:02:03 PM
Paul Ryan should have come out and said he'd accept the nomination from the convention floor, then. He could have given Cruz/Kasich a boost.
ryan and reibus or whatever the eff his name was effectively killed both cruz and kasich. once voters learned that a vote for cruz or kasich was a vote for cruz or kasich, neither had a chance.
Post by: steve dave on May 05, 2016, 04:09:40 PM
Post by: The Big Train on May 05, 2016, 04:24:10 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 05, 2016, 07:06:49 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 05, 2016, 07:07:51 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 05, 2016, 07:08:41 PM
Post by: chum1 on May 06, 2016, 06:28:10 AM
Quote
Supporting:
New Hampshire Senator Kelly Ayotte
Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie
Former Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal
Senator Majority Leader Mitch McConnell
Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval
Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker
Not supporting:
House Speaker Paul Ryan
Former President George H W Bush
Former President George W Bush
Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney
Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse
Yet to comment:
Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush
Texas Senator Ted Cruz
Ohio Governor John Kasich
Florida Senator Marco Rubio
http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-36214738
Post by: ednksu on May 06, 2016, 09:06:56 AM
Post by: wetwillie on May 06, 2016, 09:28:43 AM
Post by: pvegs on May 06, 2016, 12:51:43 PM
Words vs actions:
Trump = perceived racism
Clinton's = oversaw one of the worst public education system states in the country which disproportionately hurts minorities, signed into law one of the harshest criminal sentencing laws in U.S. history, a law which disproportionately hurts minorities.
"Perceived racism." Lol, you fuckwit.
Post by: sys on May 06, 2016, 06:03:20 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on May 06, 2016, 07:00:22 PM
H and Dole's opinion kinda matter to me.
:lol:
Post by: SkinnyBenny on May 06, 2016, 08:56:49 PM
Words vs actions:
Trump = perceived racism
Clinton's = oversaw one of the worst public education system states in the country which disproportionately hurts minorities, signed into law one of the harshest criminal sentencing laws in U.S. history, a law which disproportionately hurts minorities.
"Perceived racism." Lol, you fuckwit.
yeah that part was pretty lol
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 07, 2016, 09:01:57 AM
Words vs actions:
Trump = perceived racism
Clinton's = oversaw one of the worst public education system states in the country which disproportionately hurts minorities, signed into law one of the harshest criminal sentencing laws in U.S. history, a law which disproportionately hurts minorities.
"Perceived racism." Lol, you fuckwit.
yeah that part was pretty lol
So much anger, you guys probably watched the "we must bring them to heel!!" video and had your reality destroyed.
Post by: OK_Cat on May 07, 2016, 10:20:21 AM
Post by: bucket on May 07, 2016, 10:09:08 PM
Quote
At a rally in Spokane, Washington State HC Mike Leach endorsed presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.
We interrupt your dissection of Team X's draft grades to bring you one of those strange sports-politics crossovers. "It’s time for Mr. Trump to assist us together in our country…making America great again," Leach said at the Spokane rally. This isn't coming out of the blue. Leach and Trump have been friends since the former's time coaching at Texas Tech. For his part, Trump called Leach "an offensive genius." The reality television star/somehow-politician has said many, many, many things, but that one is actually true. You may now resume reading draft grades.
Source: College Football Talk May 7 - 6:53 PM
:driving:
Post by: eastcat on May 07, 2016, 10:42:31 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on May 08, 2016, 10:35:30 PM
Words vs actions:
Trump = perceived racism
Clinton's = oversaw one of the worst public education system states in the country which disproportionately hurts minorities, signed into law one of the harshest criminal sentencing laws in U.S. history, a law which disproportionately hurts minorities.
"Perceived racism." Lol, you fuckwit.
yeah that part was pretty lol
So much anger, you guys probably watched the "we must bring them to heel!!" video and had your reality destroyed.
Confused about what one has to do with the other
These rough ridin' coaches, man. Can we put Leach's "genius" to bed now?QuoteAt a rally in Spokane, Washington State HC Mike Leach endorsed presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.
We interrupt your dissection of Team X's draft grades to bring you one of those strange sports-politics crossovers. "It’s time for Mr. Trump to assist us together in our country…making America great again," Leach said at the Spokane rally. This isn't coming out of the blue. Leach and Trump have been friends since the former's time coaching at Texas Tech. For his part, Trump called Leach "an offensive genius." The reality television star/somehow-politician has said many, many, many things, but that one is actually true. You may now resume reading draft grades.
Source: College Football Talk May 7 - 6:53 PM
:driving:
Post by: kim carnes on May 08, 2016, 11:20:28 PM
Post by: pvegs on May 09, 2016, 02:18:13 AM
I'm holding out for the bushes to endorse trump, then I will know I'm voting correctly.
This makes you thinking it's cool to refer to having sex as "smashing" so much clearer. I'm holding out hope Snyder endorses Trump so I can officially quit K-State sports. I mean, Snyder did make fun of global warming a few years ago..
Post by: wetwillie on May 09, 2016, 06:35:56 AM
I'm holding out for the bushes to endorse trump, then I will know I'm voting correctly.
This makes you thinking it's cool to refer to having sex as "smashing" so much clearer. I'm holding out hope Snyder endorses Trump so I can officially quit K-State sports. I mean, Snyder did make fun of global warming a few years ago..
You are adorable.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 09, 2016, 07:27:32 AM
I'd love to see someone defend this statement.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on May 09, 2016, 08:26:34 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on May 09, 2016, 08:57:01 AM
Why?
Celebrity endorsement of either of these candidates is the height of stupidity. Other coaches will beat WSU over the head with this. He thought telling the world he's voting for trump is more important than doing his job effectively.
Post by: pvegs on May 09, 2016, 01:16:09 PM
I'm holding out for the bushes to endorse trump, then I will know I'm voting correctly.
This makes you thinking it's cool to refer to having sex as "smashing" so much clearer. I'm holding out hope Snyder endorses Trump so I can officially quit K-State sports. I mean, Snyder did make fun of global warming a few years ago..
You are adorable.
Thx, ww. You're a ghost.
Post by: sys on May 09, 2016, 03:04:09 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/07/us/politics/donald-trumps-idea-to-cut-national-debt-get-creditors-to-accept-less.html?_r=0
I'd love to see someone defend this statement.
it's indefensible.
Post by: bones129 on May 10, 2016, 01:04:56 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/07/us/politics/donald-trumps-idea-to-cut-national-debt-get-creditors-to-accept-less.html?_r=0
I'd love to see someone defend this statement.
it's indefensible.
Trump: :lol:
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 10, 2016, 09:12:45 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on May 10, 2016, 08:46:18 PM
Post by: wetwillie on May 10, 2016, 08:49:59 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 10, 2016, 09:10:59 PM
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/05/donald-trump-white-nationalist-afp-delegate-california
Quote
"For many, many years, when I would say these things, other white people would call me names: 'Oh, you're a hatemonger, you're a Nazi, you're like Hitler,'" he confessed. "Now they come in and say, 'Oh, you're like Donald Trump.'"
:lol:
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 10, 2016, 09:31:37 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 10, 2016, 09:44:48 PM
Post by: bones129 on May 10, 2016, 11:30:17 PM
Post by: stunted on May 11, 2016, 01:09:21 AM
Former PayPal CEO and billionaire hedge fund manager Peter Thiel is a delegate for the Trumpster now.
https://www.amazon.com/Diversity-Myth-Multiculturalism-Politics-Intolerance-ebook/dp/B00SQLF352
looks interesting
Post by: MakeItRain on May 11, 2016, 01:58:14 AM
Former PayPal CEO and billionaire hedge fund manager Peter Thiel is a delegate for the Trumpster now.
Just another very confused libertarian.
Post by: mocat on May 11, 2016, 09:32:19 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 11, 2016, 09:45:38 AM
(https://media.riffsy.com/images/0243ae470d6447909876993fadcf8841/raw)
We're immediately losers no matter who wins, so we might as well sit back and enjoy the festivities.
Post by: star seed 7 on May 11, 2016, 09:46:43 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 11, 2016, 09:47:24 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 11, 2016, 10:08:54 AM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on May 11, 2016, 11:05:00 AM
We should have a kc election night pak, entire pit is invited!
I'll be busy cleaning and stock piling weapons. I heard Hillary is gonna take away all guns.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 11, 2016, 01:11:26 PM
We should have a kc election night pak, entire pit is invited!
I'll be busy cleaning and stock piling weapons. I heard Hillary is gonna take away all guns.
Sounds like a waste of time, then.
Post by: chuckjames on May 11, 2016, 02:08:54 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on May 11, 2016, 02:21:40 PM
I'm actually getting pretty pumped for this!
(https://media.riffsy.com/images/0243ae470d6447909876993fadcf8841/raw)
We're immediately losers no matter who wins, so we might as well sit back and enjoy the festivities.
I'd like to do a list of who will be the biggest losers. I think the super religious right who actually bought trump's act will be up there.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 11, 2016, 02:26:16 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 11, 2016, 02:30:21 PM
I know they're pretty similar, but the super racist redneck begs to differ.
I think they are big winners, regardless of what happens. People who used to compare them to Hitler now just compare them to Trump instead. That is a huge improvement for them.
Post by: The Big Train on May 11, 2016, 02:54:48 PM
https://appsto.re/us/3DTkbb.i
Post by: steve dave on May 11, 2016, 06:34:26 PM
Post by: renocat on May 11, 2016, 09:04:23 PM
Post by: meow meow on May 12, 2016, 10:24:18 AM
Post by: chum1 on May 12, 2016, 10:55:21 AM
Post by: CNS on May 12, 2016, 10:57:55 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on May 12, 2016, 11:30:06 AM
I know they're pretty similar, but the super racist redneck beg to differ.
Trump is their absolute best outcome.
Post by: slobber on May 12, 2016, 12:22:27 PM
Gonna win 'em all! (using Tapatalk)
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 12, 2016, 01:21:12 PM
Post by: steve dave on May 12, 2016, 03:15:35 PM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on May 12, 2016, 04:06:51 PM
See you 'round. I'll be dropping by the GOT and Distance Running threads occasionally.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 12, 2016, 04:09:14 PM
Remember how I said that every generation gets a little dumber/worse than the last? Our descent into Idiocracy is happening faster than I thought. The American People, beltway politicians/advisors, and super delegates have given us Donald Trump versus Hillary Clinton. I haven't been posting because there's really nothing left to say. And besides, arguing with the liberal nitwits on this board is pointless and, worse, boring.
See you 'round. I'll be dropping by the GOT and Distance Running threads occasionally.
The younger generation doesn't vote, though. It's your generation that loves Trump.
Post by: star seed 7 on May 12, 2016, 04:14:45 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 12, 2016, 04:15:54 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on May 12, 2016, 04:16:38 PM
Remember how I said that every generation gets a little dumber/worse than the last? Our descent into Idiocracy is happening faster than I thought. The American People, beltway politicians/advisors, and super delegates have given us Donald Trump versus Hillary Clinton. I haven't been posting because there's really nothing left to say. And besides, arguing with the liberal nitwits on this board is pointless and, worse, boring.
See you 'round. I'll be dropping by the GOT and Distance Running threads occasionally.
The younger generation doesn't vote, though. It's your generation that loves Trump.
He's still admitting that his generation is dumber than the one that spawned him.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on May 12, 2016, 04:21:23 PM
Remember how I said that every generation gets a little dumber/worse than the last? Our descent into Idiocracy is happening faster than I thought. The American People, beltway politicians/advisors, and super delegates have given us Donald Trump versus Hillary Clinton. I haven't been posting because there's really nothing left to say. And besides, arguing with the liberal nitwits on this board is pointless and, worse, boring.
See you 'round. I'll be dropping by the GOT and Distance Running threads occasionally.
The younger generation doesn't vote, though. It's your generation that loves Trump.
Right. I freely admit that my generation and my parents' generation are a big part of the problem. Again, each generation is a little stupider than the last. This has been coming for a long time. You seem to be banking on the next generations waking up from whatever celebrity trash or curated news feeds they're reviewing on their retina implants and saying "whoa, what the eff is going on around here?" I wouldn't bank on that. Each generation = a little dumber than the last.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 12, 2016, 04:22:49 PM
Remember how I said that every generation gets a little dumber/worse than the last? Our descent into Idiocracy is happening faster than I thought. The American People, beltway politicians/advisors, and super delegates have given us Donald Trump versus Hillary Clinton. I haven't been posting because there's really nothing left to say. And besides, arguing with the liberal nitwits on this board is pointless and, worse, boring.
See you 'round. I'll be dropping by the GOT and Distance Running threads occasionally.
The younger generation doesn't vote, though. It's your generation that loves Trump.
Right. I freely admit that my generation and my parents' generation are a big part of the problem. Again, each generation is a little stupider than the last. This has been coming for a long time. You seem to be banking on the next generations waking up from whatever celebrity trash or curated news feeds they're reviewing on their retina implants and saying "whoa, what the eff is going on around here?" I wouldn't bank on that. Each generation = a little dumber than the last.
I think the cord-cutting generation that doesn't have access to cable news networks might end up better-informed than the generation before them. Maybe.
Post by: star seed 7 on May 12, 2016, 04:23:45 PM
Post by: wetwillie on May 12, 2016, 04:36:23 PM
Post by: OK_Cat on May 12, 2016, 04:42:28 PM
I think people are getting smarter not the other way around.
Of course people as a whole are smarter than previous generations. It's just that the most vocal people are really, really dumb.
Post by: wetwillie on May 12, 2016, 04:46:32 PM
I think people are getting smarter not the other way around.
Of course people as a whole are smarter than previous generations. It's just that the most vocal people are really, really dumb.
You are pretty vocal
Post by: catastrophe on May 12, 2016, 04:46:59 PM
Post by: wetwillie on May 12, 2016, 04:47:15 PM
Post by: OK_Cat on May 12, 2016, 04:47:25 PM
I think people are getting smarter not the other way around.
Of course people as a whole are smarter than previous generations. It's just that the most vocal people are really, really dumb.
You are pretty vocal
You son of a
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 12, 2016, 04:47:54 PM
Post by: OK_Cat on May 12, 2016, 04:49:40 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 12, 2016, 04:50:55 PM
Post by: OK_Cat on May 12, 2016, 04:54:48 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on May 12, 2016, 04:58:31 PM
Post by: wetwillie on May 12, 2016, 04:59:00 PM
Post by: OK_Cat on May 12, 2016, 04:59:58 PM
Oh
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 12, 2016, 07:38:41 PM
Post by: ShellShock on May 12, 2016, 07:58:44 PM
Post by: wetwillie on May 12, 2016, 08:01:58 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on May 12, 2016, 08:10:08 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 12, 2016, 08:15:32 PM
The 20-30 age group are supporting Trump because they're tired of all the dumb crap the existing presidents and congressional folks have done. I mean, look at the state of this country! We're a hot mess on a set of train tracks to a steep cliff. I'm to the point where I'll try something new...why wouldn't you?
Yeah, about 20% of that demographic will vote Trump.
Post by: chum1 on May 12, 2016, 08:28:31 PM
Racists
Misogynists
Xenophobes
Bullies
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 12, 2016, 08:39:53 PM
People to dumb to understand she loves war
People who ignore her racism
Wall Street
Foreign Countries and wealthy theocrats and connected foreigners many of them former politicians in some of the most racist misogynistic anti-gay countries in the world
. . . to be con't
Post by: bucket on May 12, 2016, 09:02:24 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 12, 2016, 09:10:08 PM
Love the theme the proglibs are running with here, those that are voting for Trump are "all in" and think he's Jesus2, while all Hillary supporters are fully aware of their candidates massive list of shortcomings, failures, stealth racism, Wall Street shilling, selling out to foreign entities and war mongering . . . but golly they're reluctantly and almost with regret still going to support her :angst
lol can u read cuz i dunno if u can read cause i said ksuw thinks reagan is jesus2 lol u dumbfuck
Post by: SkinnyBenny on May 12, 2016, 10:10:41 PM
Hillary's Biggest Supporters:
People to dumb to understand she loves war
People who ignore her racism
Wall Street
Foreign Countries and wealthy theocrats and connected foreigners many of them former politicians in some of the most racist misogynistic anti-gay countries in the world
. . . to be con't
:D
Post by: OK_Cat on May 12, 2016, 11:11:31 PM
Post by: michigancat on May 12, 2016, 11:13:21 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 13, 2016, 06:43:47 AM
Love the theme the proglibs are running with here, those that are voting for Trump are "all in" and think he's Jesus2, while all Hillary supporters are fully aware of their candidates massive list of shortcomings, failures, stealth racism, Wall Street shilling, selling out to foreign entities and war mongering . . . but golly they're reluctantly and almost with regret still going to support her :angst
lol can u read cuz i dunno if u can read cause i said ksuw thinks reagan is jesus2 lol u dumbfuck
"Those".
HF you're a DA, and an angry one at that.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 13, 2016, 06:46:54 AM
Trump = Reagan is pretty good. Reagan just got his start being a flip flopping phony psycho at the state level first
Flip flopping phony!
Post by: sonofdaxjones on May 13, 2016, 06:49:04 AM
Hillary's Biggest Supporters:
People to dumb to understand she loves war
People who ignore her racism
Wall Street
Foreign Countries and wealthy theocrats and connected foreigners many of them former politicians in some of the most racist misogynistic anti-gay countries in the world
. . . to be con't
:D
When you've got nothing go for grammar. #passiveaggressivesb
Post by: renocat on May 13, 2016, 07:30:02 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 13, 2016, 08:32:03 AM
Post by: steve dave on May 13, 2016, 08:59:39 AM
Post by: cfbandyman on May 13, 2016, 09:33:03 AM
Drumpf's biggest demographics:
Racists
Misogynists
Xenophobes
Bullies
Trump's demographics are the ones I want deported and my country back from :shakesfist:
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 13, 2016, 09:54:04 AM
http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-charity-aided-clinton-friends-1463086383
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 13, 2016, 09:57:23 AM
Trump's biggest demographics:
Racists - Clintons
Misogynists and serial rapists - clintons
Xenophobes - I believe they call themselves "patriots"
Bullies - boohoo
Thieves and Crooks - Clintons
Liars - Clintons
Self dealing - clintons
LOL, at anyone drawing these distinctions among the candidates. You're lying to yourself
Post by: BushBlister on May 13, 2016, 12:58:24 PM
Post by: Kat Kid on May 13, 2016, 04:36:27 PM
Post by: catastrophe on May 13, 2016, 04:55:24 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiWp9ftUYAErDDf.jpg)
:lol:
Is that a parody account?
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 13, 2016, 05:59:56 PM
Post by: treysolid on May 14, 2016, 07:57:35 AM
in socail studies my teacher said the trump was a bigot but i was like more like SOCAILIST STUDIES!!!
don't give up on school just yet, BB.
Post by: star seed 7 on May 14, 2016, 11:46:00 AM
Post by: BushBlister on May 14, 2016, 11:57:39 AM
well maybe i dunno hes probably right he got a trophy thing earlier this year
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 14, 2016, 01:54:09 PM
Post by: stunted on May 14, 2016, 05:07:43 PM
Socail?
:D
Post by: bones129 on May 16, 2016, 12:44:59 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on May 16, 2016, 09:22:16 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 16, 2016, 09:29:11 AM
so where is the phony phone call discussed ITT?
So amazing
Post by: catastrophe on May 16, 2016, 10:36:55 AM
Post by: sys on May 16, 2016, 03:34:08 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on May 16, 2016, 03:36:49 PM
Post by: stunted on May 16, 2016, 03:45:29 PM
Quote
our wit and to our arguments
https://youtu.be/PpLPOPe32qk?t=6m34s
Post by: wELLsculptedbrows on May 16, 2016, 04:33:53 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7O26NYXGYM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7O26NYXGYM)
:Lolrun:
Post by: sys on May 16, 2016, 04:55:33 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on May 16, 2016, 05:54:53 PM
Quoteour wit and to our arguments
https://youtu.be/PpLPOPe32qk?t=6m34s
OMG, you guys kept Portland pak pretty quiet.
Post by: stunted on May 17, 2016, 04:15:02 AM
Trump = Reagan is pretty good. Reagan just got his start being a flip flopping phony psycho at the state level first
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8wJc7vHcTs
Post by: renocat on May 17, 2016, 07:20:14 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 17, 2016, 09:13:49 AM
The clip they played on SNL was very :lol:I love SNL, but they spend 90% of their time making fun of the GOP.
Post by: catastrophe on May 17, 2016, 09:21:36 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 17, 2016, 09:24:46 AM
Post by: Tobias on May 17, 2016, 09:25:39 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 17, 2016, 09:28:21 AM
SNL :curse:
:D
Post by: chuckjames on May 17, 2016, 10:46:20 AM
The clip they played on SNL was very :lol:I love SNL, but they spend 90% of their time making fun of the GOP.
Maybe its because the GOP is easier to make fun of?
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 17, 2016, 10:59:30 AM
Post by: Tobias on May 17, 2016, 11:25:31 AM
Post by: ChiComCat on May 17, 2016, 11:36:43 AM
I'm just saying, ppl get so :curse: over Fox, when almost every other news outlet piles on the GOP. That being said, I get it, it's a cluster eff. Just gets out old when libs bitch about fox. You have like 50 other channels to go to, to lol at the GOP.
I enjoy how you bitch about the other news channels and then get mad at people bitching about yours.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 17, 2016, 01:05:31 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 17, 2016, 01:06:27 PM
Post by: Tobias on May 17, 2016, 01:07:16 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on May 17, 2016, 01:16:32 PM
https://youtu.be/QuZLJ1G1mxA
Post by: ChiComCat on May 17, 2016, 01:21:30 PM
I don't, There's one channel that supports the GOP and I see a million posts a day from libs on Facebook outraged over it. Like, open your eyes! Every media outlet out there is hugging trees and trying to push free crap.
You are bitching about them in this post and the last one.
The problem isn't Fox news or the more liberal outlets. The problem is that news networks are way more concerned about ratings than factually accurate news. Regardless of facts, every story now has to be presented under two different lenses so each party can continue to insist they are always right.
Post by: star seed 7 on May 17, 2016, 01:23:59 PM
I don't, There's one channel that supports the GOP and I see a million posts a day from libs on Facebook outraged over it. Like, open your eyes! Every media outlet out there is hugging trees and trying to push free crap.
:lol:
Post by: Dugout DickStone on May 17, 2016, 02:24:31 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 18, 2016, 10:37:07 PM
Trump = Reagan is pretty good. Reagan just got his start being a flip flopping phony psycho at the state level first
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FET66pUw.jpg&hash=8c22c5c5edcd59f8bda1d7ec1816cfd0b6a960cf)
Post by: stunted on May 19, 2016, 01:00:21 AM
Post by: pvegs on May 19, 2016, 01:02:44 AM
http://www.royalsreview.com/2016/5/18/11700292/george-brett-appears-to-endorse-donald-trump-on-royals-telecast
Post by: steve dave on May 19, 2016, 06:44:23 AM
Post by: puniraptor on May 19, 2016, 06:50:53 AM
Post by: sys on May 19, 2016, 10:47:35 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/05/16/donald-trumps-john-miller-interview-is-even-crazier-than-you-think/
Post by: michigancat on May 19, 2016, 11:09:08 PM
hopefully not luked or just too old to be irrelevant. your next president, you idiots.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/05/16/donald-trumps-john-miller-interview-is-even-crazier-than-you-think/
I didn't realize it was so long. Good grief.
Post by: bones129 on May 19, 2016, 11:14:27 PM
hopefully not luked or just too old to be irrelevant. your next president, you idiots.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/05/16/donald-trumps-john-miller-interview-is-even-crazier-than-you-think/
I didn't realize it was so long. Good grief.
Trump likes to talk. Especially about himself.
Post by: catastrophe on May 19, 2016, 11:18:48 PM
Post by: bucket on May 19, 2016, 11:20:38 PM
Post by: puniraptor on May 20, 2016, 05:21:42 AM
Post by: Tobias on May 20, 2016, 07:19:27 AM
Post by: stunted on May 23, 2016, 12:12:31 PM
:love: :love: :love:
Post by: pvegs on May 25, 2016, 12:18:53 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LibRNYJmZ-I
:love: :love: :love:
You know, being 97% a nihilist, I have mostly stayed out of the fray on this one, but if you're voting for Trump, you're evil, and you should have a small orange dick tattooed on your forearm, Holocaust death camp style, so we can sort you out after the fact.
Post by: Emo EMAW on May 25, 2016, 12:28:02 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LibRNYJmZ-I
:love: :love: :love:
You know, being 97% a nihilist, I have mostly stayed out of the fray on this one, but if you're voting for Trump, you're evil, and you should have a small orange dick tattooed on your forearm, Holocaust death camp style, so we can sort you out after the fact.
You believe that a good chunk of this country are evil people? :sdeek:
Post by: star seed 7 on May 25, 2016, 12:31:06 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LibRNYJmZ-I
:love: :love: :love:
You know, being 97% a nihilist, I have mostly stayed out of the fray on this one, but if you're voting for Trump, you're evil, and you should have a small orange dick tattooed on your forearm, Holocaust death camp style, so we can sort you out after the fact.
You believe that a good chunk of this country are evil people? :sdeek:
That's basically the republican party platform
Post by: Emo EMAW on May 25, 2016, 12:44:06 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LibRNYJmZ-I
:love: :love: :love:
You know, being 97% a nihilist, I have mostly stayed out of the fray on this one, but if you're voting for Trump, you're evil, and you should have a small orange dick tattooed on your forearm, Holocaust death camp style, so we can sort you out after the fact.
You believe that a good chunk of this country are evil people? :sdeek:
That's basically the republican party platform
That 100% of a large aligned group of people (100+ MM) are evil?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 25, 2016, 12:57:01 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LibRNYJmZ-I
:love: :love: :love:
You know, being 97% a nihilist, I have mostly stayed out of the fray on this one, but if you're voting for Trump, you're evil, and you should have a small orange dick tattooed on your forearm, Holocaust death camp style, so we can sort you out after the fact.
You believe that a good chunk of this country are evil people? :sdeek:
That's basically the republican party platform
That 100% of a large aligned group of people (100+ MM) are evil?
Most of them are just very gullible.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 25, 2016, 01:20:54 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on May 25, 2016, 01:25:09 PM
So are libs. They think you should be able to go to college for free and there be no consequences at all. Adorable! :love:
I'd rather them think that than believe with 100% certainty that if you vote for the other guy you are inherently evil.
Post by: star seed 7 on May 25, 2016, 01:27:34 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 25, 2016, 01:32:52 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 25, 2016, 01:35:19 PM
Post by: Tobias on May 25, 2016, 01:35:26 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 25, 2016, 01:36:51 PM
in your face lib! /bodybagI know you're Tobias'ing right now, but still...
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F66.media.tumblr.com%2Fe95bd2a317c632ad00fce24bbf9385ca%2Ftumblr_mloa08X1v91rq3i3ro1_1280.gif&hash=05a1871cb0bac9739bd07c62d83c4593666943b5)
Post by: sys on May 25, 2016, 01:39:55 PM
i agree with pvegs about rounding up and killing all the trump voters, btw.
Post by: Emo EMAW on May 25, 2016, 01:42:42 PM
:lol:
i agree with pvegs about rounding up and killing all the trump voters, btw.
No you don't.
Post by: sys on May 25, 2016, 01:44:18 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 25, 2016, 01:44:48 PM
Post by: Brock Landers on May 25, 2016, 01:47:04 PM
Sounds simple, right lib^7. Minus the fact that you're destroying a business, crushing salaries, and watering down what once was a valuable degree. Also, highering the eff out of taxes to make sure to keep it a float. Do you research the drivel that you believe in?
:D :D
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 25, 2016, 01:49:37 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on May 25, 2016, 01:51:11 PM
i'm sorry emo, a little wheat may have to go to get rid of the chaff.
Even if it's illegal/unconstitutional?
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 25, 2016, 01:51:35 PM
Post by: Brock Landers on May 25, 2016, 01:53:01 PM
Post by: sys on May 25, 2016, 01:53:40 PM
Even if it's illegal/unconstitutional?
i don't much care about laws.
Post by: michigancat on May 25, 2016, 01:57:27 PM
Post by: michigancat on May 25, 2016, 01:57:52 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 25, 2016, 01:58:12 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 25, 2016, 02:03:28 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on May 25, 2016, 02:07:27 PM
Post by: stunted on May 25, 2016, 02:22:32 PM
(https://t2.ftcdn.net/jpg/00/21/40/01/500_F_21400152_VkPMBYntHzzmdTzrRHO7JwNTLbA2xZ2J.jpg)
:Wha:
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 25, 2016, 02:29:17 PM
[attachment deleted by admin]
Post by: Emo EMAW on May 25, 2016, 03:25:40 PM
Post by: sys on May 25, 2016, 03:31:53 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 25, 2016, 03:32:53 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on May 25, 2016, 03:35:35 PM
Post by: sys on May 25, 2016, 03:38:57 PM
In what world is murdering people ethical?
baby hitler.
Post by: michigancat on May 25, 2016, 03:39:41 PM
In what world is murdering people ethical?Depends on who is being murdered
Post by: michigancat on May 25, 2016, 03:40:12 PM
This was a better answer, go with this one.In what world is murdering people ethical?
baby hitler.
Post by: Emo EMAW on May 25, 2016, 03:44:18 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 25, 2016, 03:47:22 PM
Are there 100 million baby hitlers voting for Trump?
Only about 60 million.
Post by: catastrophe on May 25, 2016, 03:50:13 PM
In what world is murdering people ethical?
baby hitler.
Strange to immediately go to baby Hitler. I would think adult Hitler would be a much better example here.
Post by: sys on May 25, 2016, 03:54:25 PM
Are there 100 million baby hitlers voting for Trump?
voting for baby hitler is pretty bad too.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 25, 2016, 03:54:48 PM
Post by: stunted on May 25, 2016, 03:57:43 PM
Post by: wetwillie on May 25, 2016, 04:10:15 PM
Are there 100 million baby hitlers voting for Trump?
Only about 60 million.
Does record voter turnout mean anything to you?
Post by: star seed 7 on May 25, 2016, 04:13:24 PM
Post by: treysolid on May 25, 2016, 04:22:30 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 25, 2016, 04:25:13 PM
Nobody supports him because of economic policy anyway so it doesn't really matter
Post by: CNS on May 25, 2016, 04:28:48 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 25, 2016, 04:38:34 PM
Is trump a trickle down guy? I didn't think he was. I dunno
Nobody supports him because of economic policy anyway so it doesn't really matter
Trump says he wants the rich to pay more in taxes. The tax plan he released doesn't do that, but I think he said it's negotiable. He also supports a higher minimum wage, but wants it to be up to the states.
Post by: pvegs on May 25, 2016, 05:01:37 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on May 25, 2016, 05:28:16 PM
racism isn't binary
What's great about stunted is that passes for clever in his mind.
Post by: chum1 on May 25, 2016, 05:29:45 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on May 25, 2016, 05:31:45 PM
Post by: stunted on May 25, 2016, 05:54:45 PM
when i read about him smashing a penthouse model and giving her his book the next morning, i knew he was my guy
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 25, 2016, 06:24:29 PM
I bet none of the three admitted trump voters on this blog have read that.As the same for the libtards stuck with criminal Hillary. Quite a pickle America is in.
Post by: MakeItRain on May 25, 2016, 06:33:36 PM
What's "as the same," Hillary voters not reading Donald Trump's policy positions on his website? You're probably right on the mark.I bet none of the three admitted trump voters on this blog have read that.As the same for the libtards stuck with criminal Hillary. Quite a pickle America is in.
Post by: Emo EMAW on May 25, 2016, 06:50:26 PM
Are there 100 million baby hitlers voting for Trump?
Only about 60 million.
6 million Jews schmooz.
Post by: Emo EMAW on May 25, 2016, 06:53:54 PM
I'm just trying to stir the pot and so sick of this crap. Vote, don't vote. Hate Hillary, hate Trump. But, c'mon, guys, the part of your marrow that has any rational/coherent thought has to be like, jeez, this Trump guy is maybe not super smart and may not be good for our country, the future of the free world, or for my kids/parents/dogs.
Def a lesser of two evils kind of prospect. The worst voting predicament we have been stuck in since I have been able to vote.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 25, 2016, 07:43:03 PM
well ya and not reading her criminal report, because #myparty!What's "as the same," Hillary voters not reading Donald Trump's policy positions on his website? You're probably right on the mark.I bet none of the three admitted trump voters on this blog have read that.As the same for the libtards stuck with criminal Hillary. Quite a pickle America is in.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 25, 2016, 07:45:08 PM
Have you ever read one of my posts without a non-bias outlook, friend?
Post by: 8manpick on May 25, 2016, 07:48:24 PM
Anyone with an agenda has always been great at ignoring something in their mind they already disagree with, without looking into it. #science:D
Have you ever read one of my posts without a non-bias outlook, friend?
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 25, 2016, 07:56:35 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 25, 2016, 08:01:48 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 25, 2016, 08:06:15 PM
Accusing trump supporters of being "pure evil" isn't as intellectually as strong of a point as you think. You're not going to scare people into not voting for him. Stop being trumpaphobes.
Your pal,
Sugar Dick
Post by: star seed 7 on May 25, 2016, 08:13:19 PM
Anyone with an agenda has always been great at ignoring something in their mind they already disagree with, without looking into it. #science
Have you ever read one of my posts without a non-bias outlook, friend?
i don't think i've ever read a wackycat08 post with 'bias
Post by: catastrophe on May 25, 2016, 08:30:14 PM
i don't think i've ever read a wackycat08 post with 'bias
Look earlier in the thread, bro.
in your face lib! /bodybagI know you're Tobias'ing right now, but still...
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F66.media.tumblr.com%2Fe95bd2a317c632ad00fce24bbf9385ca%2Ftumblr_mloa08X1v91rq3i3ro1_1280.gif&hash=05a1871cb0bac9739bd07c62d83c4593666943b5)
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 25, 2016, 08:32:19 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 25, 2016, 08:33:21 PM
$ post
i don't think i've ever read a wackycat08 post with 'bias
Look earlier in the thread, bro.in your face lib! /bodybagI know you're Tobias'ing right now, but still...
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F66.media.tumblr.com%2Fe95bd2a317c632ad00fce24bbf9385ca%2Ftumblr_mloa08X1v91rq3i3ro1_1280.gif&hash=05a1871cb0bac9739bd07c62d83c4593666943b5)
Post by: star seed 7 on May 25, 2016, 08:41:24 PM
i don't think i've ever read a wackycat08 post with 'bias
Look earlier in the thread, bro.in your face lib! /bodybagI know you're Tobias'ing right now, but still...
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F66.media.tumblr.com%2Fe95bd2a317c632ad00fce24bbf9385ca%2Ftumblr_mloa08X1v91rq3i3ro1_1280.gif&hash=05a1871cb0bac9739bd07c62d83c4593666943b5)
i was not with 'bias at this time. unfortunately
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 25, 2016, 08:52:00 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 25, 2016, 08:53:07 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 25, 2016, 08:54:03 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 25, 2016, 08:56:25 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on May 25, 2016, 09:05:38 PM
Kc friends yet and he's bored and poking wacky is fun like watching June bugs fly into a zap light.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 25, 2016, 09:11:09 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 25, 2016, 09:32:42 PM
Probably hasn't made
Kc friends yet and he's bored and poking wacky is fun like watching June bugs fly into a zap light.
Half right :frown:
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 25, 2016, 09:44:55 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on May 25, 2016, 11:33:18 PM
well ya and not reading her criminal report, because #myparty!What's "as the same," Hillary voters not reading Donald Trump's policy positions on his website? You're probably right on the mark.I bet none of the three admitted trump voters on this blog have read that.As the same for the libtards stuck with criminal Hillary. Quite a pickle America is in.
She doesn't have one of those Wacky. Believe me, I wish she did, but she doesn't.
Post by: MakeItRain on May 25, 2016, 11:42:10 PM
Anyone with an agenda has always been great at ignoring something in their mind they already disagree with, without looking into it. #science
Have you ever read one of my posts without a non-bias outlook, friend?
You're correct but the comparison you made about Hillary Clinton to what chum posted is not equivalent, one has nothing to do with the other. Answering a Trump critique with, "yeah but Hillary..." is tired and usually nonsensical, yet we'll be subjected to five more months of it.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 26, 2016, 12:32:29 AM
Post by: pvegs on May 26, 2016, 12:49:23 AM
Dear dogmatic libtards,
Accusing trump supporters of being "pure evil" isn't as intellectually as strong of a point as you think. You're not going to scare people into not voting for him. Stop being trumpaphobes.
Your pal,
Sugar Dick
i mean you're human filth. go cats.
Post by: Tobias on May 26, 2016, 06:52:30 AM
Post by: CNS on May 26, 2016, 08:53:57 AM
I want Colin PowellHe said a couple months ago that he did a private email server when he was Sec of State, as well.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: wetwillie on May 26, 2016, 08:55:50 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 26, 2016, 08:56:10 AM
His wife ruined it all. :bawl: He must really love her and she must really have a closet full of skeletons.I want Colin PowellHe said a couple months ago that he did a private email server when he was Sec of State, as well.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: stunted on May 26, 2016, 04:04:22 PM
Quote
Writes Adams: “Identity is always the strongest level of persuasion. The only way to beat it is with dirty tricks or a stronger identity play. … [And] Trump is well on his way to owning the identities of American, Alpha Males, and Women Who Like Alpha Males. Clinton is well on her way to owning the identities of angry women, beta males, immigrants, and disenfranchised minorities.
“If this were poker, which hand looks stronger to you for a national election?”
alpha :love:
Post by: star seed 7 on May 26, 2016, 04:16:44 PM
Post by: stunted on May 26, 2016, 05:23:38 PM
Post by: stunted on May 26, 2016, 07:43:50 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on May 26, 2016, 11:58:59 PM
I want Colin PowellHe said a couple months ago that he did a private email server when he was Sec of State, as well.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I think he used an aol account, not a private server. Using an aol account should be a crime for anyone, but it's more secure than a private server in some guys bathroom.
Post by: MakeItRain on May 27, 2016, 09:28:21 PM
amazing move to debate bernie. kills so many birds with one stone. makes bernie his bitchboy, hillary looks bad for various reasons. charity for women's health. he is a really a master at getting everything in his favor. truewinnerlying beta coward.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/05/donald-trump-backs-out-of-debate-with-bernie-sanders-223674
Post by: star seed 7 on May 27, 2016, 09:29:39 PM
Post by: stunted on May 27, 2016, 10:24:06 PM
amazing move to debate bernie. kills so many birds with one stone. makes bernie his bitchboy, hillary looks bad for various reasons. charity for women's health. he is a really a master at getting everything in his favor. truewinnerlying beta coward.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/05/donald-trump-backs-out-of-debate-with-bernie-sanders-223674
bernie looks like a bitchboy desperate to get the attention of alpha male trump. it was win-win anyways whether or not the debate happened, just like every move he's made so far.
(https://i.gyazo.com/0bd52f8b18891a77fcdb0962fb22a2a0.png)
and to think he would lose the debate :lol:
(https://i.redditmedia.com/-aqOH4VnP5l7bsuocbdlHGo9UGrjn1thdnVt8nGQQJ8.jpg?w=780&s=2ae9c467da096ee504250f5dcf5d8ceb)
Post by: MakeItRain on May 28, 2016, 02:24:38 PM
amazing move to debate bernie. kills so many birds with one stone. makes bernie his bitchboy, hillary looks bad for various reasons. charity for women's health. he is a really a master at getting everything in his favor. truewinnerlying beta coward.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/05/donald-trump-backs-out-of-debate-with-bernie-sanders-223674
bernie looks like a bitchboy desperate to get the attention of alpha male trump.
Interesting take given the original idea of the debate was Trump's, Bernie accepted the challenge, Donald pussed out. Typical.
Post by: MakeItRain on May 28, 2016, 02:26:53 PM
Post by: mocat on May 28, 2016, 02:33:36 PM
Post by: catastrophe on May 28, 2016, 02:40:36 PM
https://alibertarianfuture.com/2016-libertarian-party-primaries/gary-johnson-called-donald-trump-pussy/#sthash.KmFIdjUh.dpbs
He clearly did that to try to get Trump to respond so Gary could get more airtime, but I still like it.
Post by: stunted on May 28, 2016, 02:52:35 PM
Interesting take given the original idea of the debate was Trump's, Bernie accepted the challenge, Donald pussed out. Typical.
he is what he eats
Post by: star seed 7 on May 28, 2016, 03:06:44 PM
Post by: Tobias on May 28, 2016, 03:08:02 PM
I missed another great wacky being completely faced night
if this wedding doesn't happen soon i think his organs will give out
Post by: treysolid on May 28, 2016, 04:19:15 PM
Interesting take given the original idea of the debate was Trump's, Bernie accepted the challenge, Donald pussed out. Typical.
he is what he eats
i didn't realize Trump ate so much dick.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on May 28, 2016, 08:37:24 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on May 29, 2016, 10:36:03 AM
Interesting take given the original idea of the debate was Trump's, Bernie accepted the challenge, Donald pussed out. Typical.
he is what he eats
OMG, I legitimately hasn't heard this since middle school. stunted indeed.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on May 29, 2016, 10:57:07 AM
I missed another great wacky being completely faced nightlink?
Post by: gatoveintisiete on May 31, 2016, 10:29:25 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on May 31, 2016, 10:34:05 PM
Post by: Tobias on May 31, 2016, 10:39:00 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 31, 2016, 11:01:34 PM
Post by: stunted on June 01, 2016, 03:18:12 PM
:D
GET OUT AND MAKE IT 10 FEET HIGHER
Post by: wELLsculptedbrows on June 01, 2016, 04:47:31 PM
Post by: stunted on June 01, 2016, 04:56:25 PM
Post by: sys on June 01, 2016, 04:56:53 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keKcHoXzFTo
:D
GET OUT AND MAKE IT 10 FEET HIGHER
i don't understand why whoever made that clip would think it was amusing.
Post by: stunted on June 02, 2016, 02:26:35 AM
Post by: sys on June 02, 2016, 11:53:42 AM
maybe the youtube comments can educate you on that one
post them.
Post by: star seed 7 on June 02, 2016, 12:39:52 PM
Post by: stunted on June 02, 2016, 01:08:24 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on June 04, 2016, 01:05:40 PM
Post by: stunted on June 04, 2016, 01:28:53 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on June 04, 2016, 02:17:42 PM
he does it on purpose, just like the "i love hispanics" thing. call him racist all you want, but a true racist wouldn't be smiling and proclaiming his love for hispanics. now says some awkward comment about black people, media jumps on it, as a side effect him showing love for blacks gets spread. i believe it is a hypnotist thing with the constant repeating of "african-american"
Yeah, a true racist would never do that you guys
Post by: star seed 7 on June 04, 2016, 02:26:18 PM
he does it on purpose, just like the "i love hispanics" thing. call him racist all you want, but a true racist wouldn't be smiling and proclaiming his love for hispanics. now says some awkward comment about black people, media jumps on it, as a side effect him showing love for blacks gets spread. i believe it is a hypnotist thing with the constant repeating of "african-american"
Sounds pretty beta
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on June 04, 2016, 04:40:31 PM
Post by: Kat Kid on June 06, 2016, 04:31:45 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160606%2Fd31e824262583eac42f0379da13f9a2e.jpg&hash=189dbe13b49445f3a51a81ef09877a0f066c1083)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: wetwillie on June 06, 2016, 05:21:31 PM
Post by: renocat on June 06, 2016, 06:49:23 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on June 06, 2016, 07:00:38 PM
Post by: stunted on June 06, 2016, 11:21:48 PM
Betting market for trump crashing
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160606%2Fd31e824262583eac42f0379da13f9a2e.jpg&hash=189dbe13b49445f3a51a81ef09877a0f066c1083)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
hillary is doing great! not surprised of the spike in her direction. http://blog.dilbert.com/post/145354924661/now-its-a-fair-fight
we'll see what happens, but im confident trump can get this turned around
Post by: steve dave on June 07, 2016, 08:27:52 AM
Post by: catastrophe on June 07, 2016, 10:47:23 AM
Post by: stunted on June 07, 2016, 11:05:05 AM
Post by: renocat on June 07, 2016, 11:34:21 PM
Post by: steve dave on June 08, 2016, 04:59:21 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on June 08, 2016, 05:05:38 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on June 08, 2016, 05:07:46 PM
Post by: slobber on June 08, 2016, 05:09:45 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: star seed 7 on June 08, 2016, 05:17:32 PM
Post by: KCFDcat on June 08, 2016, 06:30:36 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on June 08, 2016, 09:59:49 PM
http://www.snopes.com/injured-trump-supporter/Nice try. Soros funded liberal rag.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: bucket on June 08, 2016, 10:09:25 PM
http://www.snopes.com/injured-trump-supporter/Nice try. Soros funded liberal rag.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How is that meme any different than any of the stuff in the facebook thread? :dunno:
Post by: sys on June 09, 2016, 06:36:47 AM
Quote
these sad, foolish Vichy Republicans
what a great phrase. i hope lindsey graham and his scarce ilk crush these spineless monsters in the coming postwar years.
Post by: stunted on June 09, 2016, 11:59:58 AM
media :curse:
so, people who deal with illegals daily want a wall, while people who have delusional progressive views and live far away don't. interesting!
http://culturintel.tumblr.com/post/145513494088/big-data-reports-latino-support-for-trump-on-the
i love hispanics!
Post by: star seed 7 on June 09, 2016, 02:02:04 PM
Quote
Former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard David Duke defended Donald Trump on his radio show earlier this week from criticism of his comments about Judge Gonzalo Curiel, blaming "the Jews" in the media for propagating a long-running negative agenda against the presumptive Republican nominee.
The white supremacist radio host dropped the names of Fox News' Chris Wallace, along with Jake Tapper and Wolf Blitzer on CNN, who Duke said he had "exposed ... as a Jewish agent." Jeff Zucker, the current president of CNN Worldwide, is "another Jewish extremist," he remarked.
Story Continued Below
.
.
“And more recently, Fox News, the shabbat goy shiksa Megyn Kelly, ‘cause they love to have some gentiles doing it," Duke continued, according to audio of the segment Tuesday. "They don’t want Jews always out front.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...#ixzz4B6c5mnSL
Post by: catastrophe on June 09, 2016, 02:10:50 PM
http://culturintel.tumblr.com/post/145513494088/big-data-reports-latino-support-for-trump-on-the
i love hispanics!
Not possible. They hate Trump and won't give him a fair trial.
Post by: stunted on June 09, 2016, 02:41:18 PM
Post by: CNS on June 09, 2016, 02:48:42 PM
Post by: stunted on June 09, 2016, 03:11:11 PM
google :curse:
Post by: stunted on June 10, 2016, 12:12:35 AM
:D :D :D
Post by: stunted on June 14, 2016, 09:22:39 PM
:love:
Post by: gatoveintisiete on June 14, 2016, 09:48:51 PM
Post by: stunted on June 15, 2016, 12:53:38 AM
This guy was fantastic as well. So high energy.
Don't we love our black people? We have the best black people folks!
Post by: steve dave on June 15, 2016, 08:54:25 AM
Quote
That phrase, according to political scientists who study conspiracy theories, is characteristic of politicians who seek to exploit the psychology of suspicion and cynicism to win votes.
The idea that people in positions of power or influence are conspiring to conceal sinister truths from the public can be inherently appealing, because it helps make sense of tragedy and satisfies the human need for certainty and order. Yet politicians hoping to take advantage of these tendencies must rely on vague and suggestive statements, since any specific accusation could be easily disproved.
"He's leaving it to the audience to piece together what he's saying," said Joseph Uscinski, a political scientist at the University of Miami, in a recent interview.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/06/13/the-four-cryptic-words-donald-trump-cant-stop-saying/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_1_na
Post by: star seed 7 on June 15, 2016, 09:16:31 AM
I guess this explains that crazy infowars conspiracy theory guy loving trump so muchQuoteThat phrase, according to political scientists who study conspiracy theories, is characteristic of politicians who seek to exploit the psychology of suspicion and cynicism to win votes.
The idea that people in positions of power or influence are conspiring to conceal sinister truths from the public can be inherently appealing, because it helps make sense of tragedy and satisfies the human need for certainty and order. Yet politicians hoping to take advantage of these tendencies must rely on vague and suggestive statements, since any specific accusation could be easily disproved.
"He's leaving it to the audience to piece together what he's saying," said Joseph Uscinski, a political scientist at the University of Miami, in a recent interview.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/06/13/the-four-cryptic-words-donald-trump-cant-stop-saying/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_1_na
Dax loves trump & Alex Jones :surprised:
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on June 15, 2016, 09:54:05 AM
I don't think you guys understand what you did to yourselves here.
Post by: steve dave on June 15, 2016, 10:26:29 AM
I guess this explains that crazy infowars conspiracy theory guy loving trump so muchQuoteThat phrase, according to political scientists who study conspiracy theories, is characteristic of politicians who seek to exploit the psychology of suspicion and cynicism to win votes.
The idea that people in positions of power or influence are conspiring to conceal sinister truths from the public can be inherently appealing, because it helps make sense of tragedy and satisfies the human need for certainty and order. Yet politicians hoping to take advantage of these tendencies must rely on vague and suggestive statements, since any specific accusation could be easily disproved.
"He's leaving it to the audience to piece together what he's saying," said Joseph Uscinski, a political scientist at the University of Miami, in a recent interview.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/06/13/the-four-cryptic-words-donald-trump-cant-stop-saying/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_1_na
Dax loves trump & Alex Jones :surprised:
I don't believe that
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on June 15, 2016, 10:29:11 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on June 15, 2016, 10:30:27 AM
I guess this explains that crazy infowars conspiracy theory guy loving trump so muchQuoteThat phrase, according to political scientists who study conspiracy theories, is characteristic of politicians who seek to exploit the psychology of suspicion and cynicism to win votes.
The idea that people in positions of power or influence are conspiring to conceal sinister truths from the public can be inherently appealing, because it helps make sense of tragedy and satisfies the human need for certainty and order. Yet politicians hoping to take advantage of these tendencies must rely on vague and suggestive statements, since any specific accusation could be easily disproved.
"He's leaving it to the audience to piece together what he's saying," said Joseph Uscinski, a political scientist at the University of Miami, in a recent interview.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/06/13/the-four-cryptic-words-donald-trump-cant-stop-saying/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_1_na
Dax loves trump & Alex Jones :surprised:
I don't believe that
Well something is going on there
Post by: ChiComCat on June 15, 2016, 10:32:05 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 15, 2016, 11:03:32 AM
So, sad.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 15, 2016, 11:09:05 AM
So, sad.
Ever think of making this a sig, save some keystrokes.
No, because that would take away the variations and the nuances.
Post by: star seed 7 on June 15, 2016, 11:11:06 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 15, 2016, 11:26:10 AM
Starting off lunch right with some flailin' and explainin' :thumbs:
Tapping out so soon? How predictable.
Post by: stunted on June 16, 2016, 09:35:04 AM
WE HAVE THE BEST BLACKS
Post by: gatoveintisiete on June 16, 2016, 03:09:27 PM
Post by: steve dave on June 16, 2016, 03:12:35 PM
Post by: stunted on June 17, 2016, 12:51:17 PM
:lol: lol at how mad Mir got at those kids. That was adorable :love:
https://youtu.be/rEadXcP8ckk
Compare and contrast how Mir thinks vs the first 5 min of this video. Thought experiment: can you imagine if more people think like the great Diamond and Silk do? Like the kid vs the blm guy. Which one of those 2 will end up more successful? That's real progress.
Post by: Kat Kid on June 17, 2016, 02:06:04 PM
https://vine.co/v/ilgMphHJaQd (https://vine.co/v/ilgMphHJaQd)
Post by: gatoveintisiete on June 17, 2016, 02:09:18 PM
Post by: steve dave on June 18, 2016, 11:29:46 AM
:lol:
Post by: sys on June 21, 2016, 11:03:50 AM
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/07/how-american-politics-went-insane/485570/
Post by: Kat Kid on June 21, 2016, 12:55:54 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1.wp.com%2Fdarktriadman.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F03%2FDark-Triad-Man_Ivan-Throne_Portrait_20160321.jpg%3Fzoom%3D2%26amp%3Bresize%3D200%252C200&hash=6b09b1f195447c0621388c3a255bfd38075d02c8)
http://darktriadman.com/about-the-dark-triad-man-and-ruthless-mentoring-for-a-dark-world-2/ (http://darktriadman.com/about-the-dark-triad-man-and-ruthless-mentoring-for-a-dark-world-2/)
Post by: star seed 7 on June 21, 2016, 01:06:55 PM
:lol:
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on June 21, 2016, 01:58:08 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on June 21, 2016, 02:10:16 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on June 21, 2016, 05:21:50 PM
Having a witness is pretty serious
Post by: bubbles4ksu on June 21, 2016, 05:28:46 PM
Post by: chum1 on June 21, 2016, 05:58:07 PM
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/donald-trump-accused-rape-federal-court-lawsuit
Having a witness is pretty serious
Under normal circumstances, this seems like it could be enough to ruin his run. But I just don't even know what to think about what might happen anymore. Like, maybe he'll just deny, deny, deny and people will be okay with leaving things at that.
Post by: Kat Kid on June 21, 2016, 06:49:28 PM
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/donald-trump-accused-rape-federal-court-lawsuit
Having a witness is pretty serious
Under normal circumstances, this seems like it could be enough to ruin his run. But I just don't even know what to think about what might happen anymore. Like, maybe he'll just deny, deny, deny and people will be okay with leaving things at that.
The thing is, this Epstein case is very interesting in terms of the names that have surfaced. Basically it is a real life eyes wide shut---Bill Clinton, Prince Bandar, Tony Blair, etc. The really fascinating one is Dershowitz.
The terms of the settlement with the prosecutor are unbelievable.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: star seed 7 on June 21, 2016, 07:10:51 PM
But yeah, it's pretty :sdeek: in general. The right has been hitting the bill Clinton rode on the guys plane thing pretty hard as soft proof that he mumped kids, I can't wait to see their response to this. (I'm only in it for the theater)
Post by: Kat Kid on June 24, 2016, 05:57:06 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on June 24, 2016, 09:20:06 AM
http://mobile.wnd.com/2016/06/trump-launches-lying-crooked-hillary-website/
LOL
Post by: star seed 7 on June 24, 2016, 09:22:51 AM
Post by: Kat Kid on June 25, 2016, 11:54:30 PM
Post by: renocat on June 26, 2016, 08:06:55 AM
Post by: sys on June 27, 2016, 03:43:43 PM
Republicans like George Will who are.advocating to vote for Hillary so we can take over in 4 years should have their blow crack and genitals roughed up with steel wool and soaked in bleach. This nation cannot stand more Oblinton
http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/25/politics/george-will-donald-trump-leaving-republican-party-election/
congratulations to mr. will.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on June 27, 2016, 05:32:45 PM
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/747027629652443136?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 27, 2016, 05:52:41 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on June 27, 2016, 05:55:23 PM
Post by: sys on June 27, 2016, 06:06:22 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on June 28, 2016, 12:33:33 AM
Post by: bones129 on June 28, 2016, 12:51:47 AM
Post by: CNS on June 28, 2016, 09:22:02 AM
Post by: bucket on June 28, 2016, 01:29:59 PM
Post by: bucket on June 29, 2016, 10:49:31 PM
What the hell, US Chamber! :curse:
Post by: SkinnyBenny on June 30, 2016, 01:29:23 PM
Post by: CNS on June 30, 2016, 02:05:18 PM
I mean, they are basically even now and he hasn't even ramped up fear about terrorists coming across the boarder from Canada(who is welcoming syrians) yet. I mean, every blown up airport gives him more votes.
After he is officially the nominee, all the pubs get behind him, and they all focus their time and money on his brand of fear, he will win.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on June 30, 2016, 02:36:26 PM
He's going to win. :surprised: :frown:
I mean, they are basically even now and he hasn't even ramped up fear about terrorists coming across the boarder from Canada(who is welcoming syrians) yet. I mean, every blown up airport gives him more votes.
After he is officially the nominee, all the pubs get behind him, and they all focus their time and money on his brand of fear, he will win.
This isn't enough votes anymore
Post by: CNS on June 30, 2016, 02:45:25 PM
He's going to win. :surprised: :frown:
I mean, they are basically even now and he hasn't even ramped up fear about terrorists coming across the boarder from Canada(who is welcoming syrians) yet. I mean, every blown up airport gives him more votes.
After he is officially the nominee, all the pubs get behind him, and they all focus their time and money on his brand of fear, he will win.
This isn't enough votes anymore
I meant money ppl. Enough money could create the fear needed.
Post by: wetwillie on June 30, 2016, 03:01:36 PM
Post by: sys on June 30, 2016, 03:28:25 PM
Post by: sys on June 30, 2016, 03:29:42 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on June 30, 2016, 04:45:59 PM
Very much a, "we're gonna get'em" campaign of incongruent platitudes. Right out of the b.o. playbook.
Post by: CNS on June 30, 2016, 05:23:35 PM
What do you mean they are basically even now?
CNN poll yesterday,iirc, said they were basically polling even.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: catastrophe on June 30, 2016, 05:33:23 PM
Post by: chum1 on June 30, 2016, 05:52:27 PM
Post by: wetwillie on June 30, 2016, 05:54:21 PM
538 tally of polls has 49% for Clinton and 42% for Trump.
Yea I think they have her at a 75% chance of winning.
Post by: ChiComCat on July 01, 2016, 08:29:15 AM
538 tally of polls has 49% for Clinton and 42% for Trump.
He is behind by about 5% in all of the battleground states. Down by much more in some states where he is pledging to "compete" and waste money.
A lot can change between now and the election, but he is on pace to get trounced in the electoral college.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 01, 2016, 08:49:37 AM
Post by: CNS on July 01, 2016, 08:53:32 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: wetwillie on July 01, 2016, 08:55:34 AM
Post by: michigancat on July 01, 2016, 08:57:45 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 01, 2016, 09:01:49 AM
Quote
Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.
Thanks for the tip, editor boy
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 01, 2016, 09:24:30 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 01, 2016, 09:26:01 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 01, 2016, 09:35:30 AM
QuoteEditor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.
Thanks for the tip, editor boy
No dout the left is fear mongering about trump
Post by: Yard Dog on July 01, 2016, 12:01:09 PM
QuoteEditor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.
Thanks for the tip, editor boy
Yo seven, do you think there is ever a time to keep anyone out of the country if we fear they might incite terror? I mean, where would you reccommend drawing the line?
Actual known terrorist - Best bud of known terrorist - past associate of known terrorist - relative of known terrorist - acquaintance of known terrorist - family member of known terrorist - someone who has had recent conversations with known terrorist - someone who used to have conversations with known terrorist - someone who looks up and reads about a known terrorist - known terrorist's grocer - known terrorist's banker - known terrorist's neighbors - known terrorist's old soccer teammates - known terrorist's old crush - known terrorist's favorite pop singer - known terrorist's phone contacts - anyone that known terrorist has directly mentioned in a social media post - people who go to church with a known terrorist - known terrorist's childhood nemesis - known terrorist's favorite nascar driver - known terrorist's favorite Game of Thrones character - anyone known terrorist called in to vote for on The Voice - anyone known terrorist has photos of on his hard drive - homeless people known terrorist has given money to on the streets - known terrorists entire city - known terrorists entire country - known terrorists entire religion
Post by: star seed 7 on July 01, 2016, 12:05:07 PM
Post by: The Big Train on July 01, 2016, 12:12:30 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on July 01, 2016, 12:27:25 PM
Why so many "-"?
So you have room to "draw the line."
Post by: The Big Train on July 01, 2016, 12:29:08 PM
Why so many "-"?
So you have room to "draw the line."
Like a squiggly line :confused:
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on July 01, 2016, 01:09:20 PM
Post by: mocat on July 01, 2016, 01:21:30 PM
Well a known terrorist's favorite GoT character is obviously Ramsay Bolton and anyone who has Ramsay as their favorite should be banned from owning guns/ getting on airplanes/etc.
Gooch :surprised:
Post by: CNS on July 01, 2016, 01:34:18 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 01, 2016, 08:56:05 PM
Post by: mocat on July 01, 2016, 09:00:21 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 01, 2016, 09:40:17 PM
Post by: bucket on July 01, 2016, 10:27:50 PM
Newt
:pray:
Post by: bucket on July 01, 2016, 10:37:52 PM
I don't think Donald is pushing fear.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/749052325130534912
Post by: bucket on July 02, 2016, 06:11:33 PM
:lol:
Post by: treysolid on July 02, 2016, 08:46:33 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 02, 2016, 08:56:47 PM
When was america ever safe?
Has been for quite a while now
Post by: bucket on July 03, 2016, 11:21:28 PM
Quote
Lewandowski was fired from the Trump campaign and hired on at CNN as a commentator. On Sunday, he blamed "the media" for the outrage over the tweet. He further argued that it was the "same star" used by sheriffs across the country.
Because my twitter feed is filled with "sheriff stars." :lol:
Post by: MakeItRain on July 03, 2016, 11:56:39 PM
(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/efc5946d20e02f48d0d7793ae2e0c0bd3c2e6529/0_21_993_596/master/993.jpg?w=620&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=e8007e074a6b359d40a6d821ca322041)
:lol:
This was one of the dumbest controversies ever, if you saw that and thought anti-Semitite you should never be allowed to interact with normal humans.
Post by: bucket on July 04, 2016, 12:02:57 AM
(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/efc5946d20e02f48d0d7793ae2e0c0bd3c2e6529/0_21_993_596/master/993.jpg?w=620&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=e8007e074a6b359d40a6d821ca322041)
:lol:
This was one of the dumbest controversies ever, if you saw that and thought anti-Semitite you should never be allowed to interact with normal humans.
Why use a Star of David, MIR? Why would you ever use a Star of David except for in a synagogue or the Israeli flag?
Post by: MakeItRain on July 04, 2016, 12:08:51 AM
(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/efc5946d20e02f48d0d7793ae2e0c0bd3c2e6529/0_21_993_596/master/993.jpg?w=620&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=e8007e074a6b359d40a6d821ca322041)
:lol:
This was one of the dumbest controversies ever, if you saw that and thought anti-Semitite you should never be allowed to interact with normal humans.
Why use a Star of David, MIR? Why would you ever use a Star of David except for in a synagogue or the Israeli flag?
In that context it's just a shape my dude, hankrod isn't Jewish.
Post by: bucket on July 04, 2016, 12:14:17 AM
Post by: bones129 on July 04, 2016, 12:24:14 AM
QuoteLewandowski was fired from the Trump campaign and hired on at CNN as a commentator. On Sunday, he blamed "the media" for the outrage over the tweet. He further argued that it was the "same star" used by sheriffs across the country.
Because my twitter feed is filled with "sheriff stars." :lol:
Wonder if Lewandowski has seen this piece, which reveals that the meme Trump tweeted has a bit of a history?
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/donald-trump-s-star-david-tweet-about-hillary-clinton-posted-n603161
Post by: star seed 7 on July 04, 2016, 12:25:32 AM
Post by: bucket on July 04, 2016, 12:35:34 AM
"Is there anyone in this room who doesn't renegotiate deals? Probably 99% of you. Probably more than any room I've ever spoken in."
"I'm a negotiator, like you folks."
"Stupidly, you want to give money... But you're not going to support me because I don't want your money." “You want to control your own politicians.”
Prejudice much? I'm sorry I question he put the Star of David over $100 bills.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 04, 2016, 08:11:51 AM
Stars :curse:
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 04, 2016, 08:15:50 AM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjapanflag.facts.co%2Fjapaneseflagof%2FJapanFlagPicture9.png&hash=3c9da1425ac37dceadcfdab8c2f864235c466afc)
Trump :curse:
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 04, 2016, 08:31:08 AM
Post by: ednksu on July 04, 2016, 09:15:14 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 04, 2016, 09:29:13 AM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slate.com%2Fcontent%2Fdam%2Fslate%2Fblogs%2Fthe_slatest%2F2015%2F04%2F12%2Fhillary%2520logo.jpg.CROP.promovar-mediumlarge.jpg&hash=23ca2e4497b147bce67e83359806b17503d5633c)
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 04, 2016, 09:32:32 AM
I'm sure the tweet thing with white genocide people is just a coincidence too.
Deleted tho
Post by: steve dave on July 05, 2016, 07:55:10 AM
could be -1.4% with that margin of error
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 05, 2016, 08:31:33 AM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1.wp.com%2Fmedia.boingboing.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F07%2F13606540_10153914543574585_8661219881937101267_n.jpg%3Fw%3D639&hash=777776572a95da2f2c77006bed215ef659fcafed)
could be -1.4% with that margin of error
There also was that one guy who attended his rally...
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on July 05, 2016, 08:33:39 AM
Post by: treysolid on July 05, 2016, 08:58:42 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 05, 2016, 09:00:22 AM
You guys, Trump never said he had all the African Americans - he said he had the best African Americans. That 1% he has is obviously the top 1%.
They round that to the nearest percentage point, so it's possible (likely, even) that his African American is even more elite than you are implying. In an academic sense, of course.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 05, 2016, 09:55:15 AM
Post by: michigancat on July 05, 2016, 11:42:33 AM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 05, 2016, 06:36:35 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 05, 2016, 07:54:39 PM
Post by: sys on July 05, 2016, 09:30:10 PM
makes sense. it doesn't much matter if hardcore dems hate trump more than they hated romney or if hardcore pubs hate clinton more than they hated obama. their votes were already assumed.
the twist in the coming election is that so many dems and dem-leaning mods hate clinton and so many pubs and pub-leaning mods hate trump.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 06, 2016, 11:06:07 AM
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-swing-state-polls-and-national-polls-basically-say-the-same-thing/
makes sense. it doesn't much matter if hardcore dems hate trump more than they hated romney or if hardcore pubs hate clinton more than they hated obama. their votes were already assumed.
the twist in the coming election is that so many dems and dem-leaning mods hate clinton and so many pubs and pub-leaning mods hate trump.
Clinton leading Trump in Kansas is surprising.
Post by: 8manpick on July 06, 2016, 11:26:46 AM
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-swing-state-polls-and-national-polls-basically-say-the-same-thing/
makes sense. it doesn't much matter if hardcore dems hate trump more than they hated romney or if hardcore pubs hate clinton more than they hated obama. their votes were already assumed.
the twist in the coming election is that so many dems and dem-leaning mods hate clinton and so many pubs and pub-leaning mods hate trump.
Hillary's gains in red states are significantly larger than Trump's in blue states though. Possibly enough so to flip a state or two. When combined with Hillary's slight gains in purple states, there is a possibility of a larger electoral college blowout than 2012
Post by: treysolid on July 06, 2016, 11:31:09 AM
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-swing-state-polls-and-national-polls-basically-say-the-same-thing/
makes sense. it doesn't much matter if hardcore dems hate trump more than they hated romney or if hardcore pubs hate clinton more than they hated obama. their votes were already assumed.
the twist in the coming election is that so many dems and dem-leaning mods hate clinton and so many pubs and pub-leaning mods hate trump.
Clinton leading Trump in Kansas is surprising.
I'm not. The Brownback tenure has pushed a significant number of moderate Republicans over the center line.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 06, 2016, 11:34:17 AM
Post by: CNS on July 06, 2016, 11:49:19 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 06, 2016, 12:09:10 PM
Post by: wetwillie on July 06, 2016, 12:25:09 PM
Post by: bucket on July 06, 2016, 06:54:02 PM
:lol:
Post by: mocat on July 06, 2016, 07:02:48 PM
Post by: steve dave on July 07, 2016, 07:54:16 AM
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) July 7, 2016
:lol:
Post by: catastrophe on July 07, 2016, 08:32:43 AM
Post by: michigancat on July 07, 2016, 08:36:43 AM
Do you want to build a strawman? https://t.co/AoeNTJOGpoKillary!
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) July 7, 2016
Post by: 8manpick on July 07, 2016, 08:39:58 AM
Do you want to build a strawman? https://t.co/AoeNTJOGpoIt's those Hollywood Jews!
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) July 7, 2016
:lol:
Post by: Panjandrum on July 07, 2016, 08:54:00 AM
Agree with Lib. Trump will win Kansas but I bet it'll be a little closer than previous elections. Also think that a few states will flip blue and this will be a landslide, like I've been saying forever.
She's up in Florida, North Carolina, close in Arizona, up in Virginia, etc. She's going to probably have the popular vote, no matter what, due to landslides in California, Illinois, New York, the rest of the northeast, etc.
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 07, 2016, 09:42:35 AM
Post by: 'taterblast on July 07, 2016, 09:46:37 AM
Judging from my Facebook my Cali relatives (hispanics) are going to vote for Trump and it really shocks me. They've been in California though since before California was a state so I don't think they take offense to the illegals talk from Trump.
Trump loves Hispanics!
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 07, 2016, 10:22:11 AM
Just about any other Pub candidate would be destroying a candidate who is easily the most untrustworthy presidential candidate (in perception . . . and reality) in modern presidential campaign history.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 07, 2016, 10:26:31 AM
Only reaffirming the growing idea of a back room Clinton/Trump deal being more reality then conspiracy.
Just about any other Pub candidate would be destroying a candidate who is easily the most untrustworthy presidential candidate (in perception . . . and reality) in modern presidential campaign history.
Trump is the same candidate he was when millions of dumbasses were voting for him in the primaries.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 07, 2016, 10:30:30 AM
Only reaffirming the growing idea of a back room Clinton/Trump deal being more reality then conspiracy.
Just about any other Pub candidate would be destroying a candidate who is easily the most untrustworthy presidential candidate (in perception . . . and reality) in modern presidential campaign history.
Trump is the same candidate he was when millions of dumbasses were voting for him in the primaries.
So who are the biggest dumbasses, people who vote for a guy who is bad at PR, or people who vote for the most corrupt and arguably even more corrupt (like by miles) . . . presidential candidate since Richard Nixon??
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 07, 2016, 10:53:15 AM
Only reaffirming the growing idea of a back room Clinton/Trump deal being more reality then conspiracy.
Just about any other Pub candidate would be destroying a candidate who is easily the most untrustworthy presidential candidate (in perception . . . and reality) in modern presidential campaign history.
Trump is the same candidate he was when millions of dumbasses were voting for him in the primaries.
So who are the biggest dumbasses, people who vote for a guy who is bad at PR, or people who vote for the most corrupt and arguably even more corrupt (like by miles) . . . presidential candidate since Richard Nixon??
bad at PR?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 07, 2016, 11:34:21 AM
Only reaffirming the growing idea of a back room Clinton/Trump deal being more reality then conspiracy.
Just about any other Pub candidate would be destroying a candidate who is easily the most untrustworthy presidential candidate (in perception . . . and reality) in modern presidential campaign history.
Trump is the same candidate he was when millions of dumbasses were voting for him in the primaries.
So who are the biggest dumbasses, people who vote for a guy who is bad at PR, or people who vote for the most corrupt and arguably even more corrupt (like by miles) . . . presidential candidate since Richard Nixon??
Trump is very good at PR. He has the best PR.
Post by: chum1 on July 07, 2016, 11:36:33 AM
Post by: Panjandrum on July 07, 2016, 11:44:07 AM
https://theintercept.com/2016/06/25/brexit-is-only-the-latest-proof-of-the-insularity-and-failure-of-western-establishment-institutions/ (https://theintercept.com/2016/06/25/brexit-is-only-the-latest-proof-of-the-insularity-and-failure-of-western-establishment-institutions/)
Punchline: It's not necessarily xenophobia and racism, or hard line party adherence, even though that probably makes up some of the coalition. The true drive is a protest vote against the establishment, period, which marries why people are rallying around a Republican candidate who isn't even really a Republican.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 07, 2016, 11:55:20 AM
I wonder what these polls will look like if/when he decides to actually do the things you have to do to get elected president. I suspect about the same, but it has to be disconcerting to team hillrod that he is within the margin of error in winning the electoral college at this juncture.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 07, 2016, 11:56:05 AM
Trump is good at publicity, for sure, but probably not very good at PR.
I think if you take away Trump's bad PR, you take away the reasons anyone is voting for him.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 07, 2016, 11:57:30 AM
Only reaffirming the growing idea of a back room Clinton/Trump deal being more reality then conspiracy.
Just about any other Pub candidate would be destroying a candidate who is easily the most untrustworthy presidential candidate (in perception . . . and reality) in modern presidential campaign history.
Trump is the same candidate he was when millions of dumbasses were voting for him in the primaries.
So who are the biggest dumbasses, people who vote for a guy who is bad at PR, or people who vote for the most corrupt and arguably even more corrupt (like by miles) . . . presidential candidate since Richard Nixon??
I contend anyone who votes for either of these people is a huge dumbass.
Post by: steve dave on July 07, 2016, 12:05:28 PM
Only reaffirming the growing idea of a back room Clinton/Trump deal being more reality then conspiracy.
dax, that's legitimately crazy person stuff. we're buds so I feel like I can tell you that openly.
Post by: CHONGS on July 07, 2016, 01:14:13 PM
Post by: CNS on July 07, 2016, 03:23:42 PM
Dan Carlin had some great stuff in his latest podcast about why people support Trump and it's overlap with Brexit. He quoted some good stuff that came from Glenn Greenwald, who links some other good analysis in this article.
https://theintercept.com/2016/06/25/brexit-is-only-the-latest-proof-of-the-insularity-and-failure-of-western-establishment-institutions/ (https://theintercept.com/2016/06/25/brexit-is-only-the-latest-proof-of-the-insularity-and-failure-of-western-establishment-institutions/)
Punchline: It's not necessarily xenophobia and racism, or hard line party adherence, even though that probably makes up some of the coalition. The true drive is a protest vote against the establishment, period, which marries why people are rallying around a Republican candidate who isn't even really a Republican.
If he is correct, things like the FBI email bullshit will drive votes to him by the appearance that politicians get away with whatever they want. I think it is more complicated than that, though. I think there may be a lot of low info moderate voters who have been reserved about Hill. Now that she is clear of the FBI, those who wouldn't look into it before, still won't look into it now, and will vote for her.
We'll see.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 07, 2016, 03:28:43 PM
:lol: at me being a birther and a truther. Just a reminder, the only part of the "Truth" movement I ever bought into was that the intelligence services of a nation-state were involved with the hijackers, an idea that's backed by many experts, and likely affirmed in places that are not being shown to the public. The FSM is :facepalm: @ some of you.
Post by: steve dave on July 07, 2016, 03:32:48 PM
NPR had a great story today that the only reason why Hillary has a chance, and likely a good chance is because Trump will be the nominee. We're talking NPR are here.
oh she would absolutely get her ass whipped by a reasonable non-crazy candidate.
Post by: steve dave on July 07, 2016, 03:37:17 PM
Post by: steve dave on July 07, 2016, 06:07:30 PM
Post by: chum1 on July 07, 2016, 06:34:24 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/07/07/trump-meets-with-hill-republicans-as-controversy-over-star-of-david-tweet-continues/
Post by: steve dave on July 07, 2016, 06:42:09 PM
Post by: sys on July 07, 2016, 07:47:45 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 07, 2016, 07:49:12 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 07, 2016, 08:41:15 PM
NPR had a great story today that the only reason why Hillary has a chance, and likely a good chance is because Trump will be the nominee. We're talking NPR are here.
oh she would absolutely get her ass whipped by a reasonable non-crazy candidate.
What's the Democrats excuse for Hillary? By your logic their are more crazy leftists than rightists, because Hillary can only win by getting more votes than trump.
Unless, of course, you think Hillary is a competent candidate. . .libtard dave
Post by: bubbles4ksu on July 07, 2016, 08:49:30 PM
dems got a lot of the social stuff they wanted with BO and are disillusioned by his inability to deliver other stuff so they DGAF. the clintons are a machine and they snuffed out everyone else. that's the dem's excuse and it's a shitload better than the pubs'.NPR had a great story today that the only reason why Hillary has a chance, and likely a good chance is because Trump will be the nominee. We're talking NPR are here.
oh she would absolutely get her ass whipped by a reasonable non-crazy candidate.
What's the Democrats excuse for Hillary? By your logic their are more crazy leftists than rightists, because Hillary can only win by getting more votes than trump.
Unless, of course, you think Hillary is a competent candidate. . .libtard dave
Post by: renocat on July 07, 2016, 08:53:29 PM
Post by: CNS on July 07, 2016, 08:54:41 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 07, 2016, 08:55:27 PM
dems got a lot of the social stuff they wanted with BO and are disillusioned by his inability to deliver other stuff so they DGAF. the clintons are a machine and they snuffed out everyone else. that's the dem's excuse and it's a shitload better than the pubs'.NPR had a great story today that the only reason why Hillary has a chance, and likely a good chance is because Trump will be the nominee. We're talking NPR are here.
oh she would absolutely get her ass whipped by a reasonable non-crazy candidate.
What's the Democrats excuse for Hillary? By your logic their are more crazy leftists than rightists, because Hillary can only win by getting more votes than trump.
Unless, of course, you think Hillary is a competent candidate. . .libtard dave
Oh bullshit, Dems just have a quest for power so they'll go for the most corrupt Neo-con stealth racist Wall Street shill they have available in order to keep that power. Hillary gives absolutely no shits about minorities and women unless it's to get their vote. Once elected she's only going to do what the .1% of the 1% want her to do, just like Obama.
Post by: bubbles4ksu on July 07, 2016, 08:57:31 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 07, 2016, 08:59:32 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 07, 2016, 09:23:48 PM
dems got a lot of the social stuff they wanted with BO and are disillusioned by his inability to deliver other stuff so they DGAF. the clintons are a machine and they snuffed out everyone else. that's the dem's excuse and it's a shitload better than the pubs'.NPR had a great story today that the only reason why Hillary has a chance, and likely a good chance is because Trump will be the nominee. We're talking NPR are here.
oh she would absolutely get her ass whipped by a reasonable non-crazy candidate.
What's the Democrats excuse for Hillary? By your logic their are more crazy leftists than rightists, because Hillary can only win by getting more votes than trump.
Unless, of course, you think Hillary is a competent candidate. . .libtard dave
This post is incoherent psycobabble. Please try again
Post by: bubbles4ksu on July 07, 2016, 09:27:11 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 07, 2016, 09:29:45 PM
Post by: bubbles4ksu on July 07, 2016, 09:36:31 PM
Post by: wetwillie on July 07, 2016, 09:40:25 PM
Post by: sys on July 07, 2016, 09:46:49 PM
there was a good opinion piece (by a complete hack writer) a few days back about that. i'd see if i can find it, but liblib can never read the wsj articles i link.
copy&paste job for liblib.
Quote
Before they gather in Cleveland for their convention, it’s not too soon for Republicans to begin thinking about what exactly a Donald Trump defeat might be like.
As with his now-documented habit of charitable promises that seldom materialize, Mr. Trump never intended to endanger a sizable part of his personal wealth to fund a presidential campaign. That means he’ll continue to campaign on the cheap, by saying incendiary things and having them transmitted by the free media. Expect more speeches like the protectionist-cum-conspiracy theory speeches in suburban Pittsburgh on Tuesday and New Hampshire on Thursday, even if such diatribes frighten major donors and mainstream Republicans and make life harder for down-ticket Republican candidates in the fall.
In his mind, Mr. Trump may still envision a populist prairie fire carrying him to the White House. This is not his best plan to win, he may also admit to himself, but the one he’s willing to pay for.
Here resides the problem all along for those hoping for a Trump-to-the-middle move. Such moves are expensive. Base-broadening campaigns require lots of paid TV to reach non-engaged voters and Trump skeptics, pummeling them with reassuring images suggesting that a Trump presidency would be OK.
Mr. Trump not only is unwilling or unable to finance such a campaign. He evidently is unwilling to do what’s necessary to entice GOP donors to finance it on his behalf. This means GOP officeholders seeking re-election can expect a constant headwind of inflammatory Trump statements designed to stimulate the free media coverage that his asset-lite campaign requires. Republican candidates up and down the ballot therefore become unwilling sharers of a high-risk Trump electoral wager, a gamble more likely to end in a Hillary landslide than a Trump White House.
The more intriguing question concerns what happens if Mr. Trump decides he can’t win and no longer is willing to throw good money after bad. Unless they were born on a turnip truck yesterday, campaign vendors will be the first to figure it out. Look for them quickly to cut off services rather than get stiffed in the inevitable Trump campaign bankruptcy filing.
Mr. Trump’s harsher Republican critics are kidding themselves to think Mr. Trump is crazy or unstable and will suffer a breakdown. More likely, he will simply and coldbloodedly toss the ball to the GOP, saying, in effect, “If you want to pay for some events or TV, I’m available. Otherwise I’m done.” The GOP would then have to shoulder the dual burden of propping up a minimally respectable Trump campaign while also distancing its down-ballot candidates from Mr. Trump so they might survive.
And that’s the optimistic scenario. Mr. Trump has learned the value of audacity. He might well decide to cover his retreat and preserve his amour propre with a flurry of lawsuits and conspiracy theories about a “rigged” election.
He’s already begun putting narrative flesh on these bones. He speaks of “crooked Hillary” and increasingly of the Clinton Global Initiative, Bill Clinton’s philanthropy, and what he calls the Clintons’ “politics of personal profit and theft.” In his trade speeches, he portrays the Clintons as members of a nefarious global elite that has enriched itself while foisting impoverishing trade deals on the U.S. middle class.
He perhaps will throw in a few suggestions that foreign governments hold hidden leverage over Hillary because of her hacked, illegal email server. He’ll mention Bill Clinton’s pardon of Marc Rich.
Republicans can also expect to be a target of his accusations. He doesn’t need to be plausible, just tell a story that justifies his own stance that he didn’t lose, the other side cheated, “Washington elites” conspired against him, etc.
If the Trump endgame is destined to go this way, Republicans should hope it does so early, ideally before the convention is even over. To date, Mr. Trump continues to tease top GOPers and conservatives with the idea that he may yet come their way, turn his formidable talents to advancing conservative causes. This merciless exploiting of Republican romantics has begun to seem like something out of “The Blue Angel” or Lucy with the football.
Republicans need a strategy, and lots of money to fund it, to preserve their House and Senate majorities. Do they know it? The thing they should fear most: An autumn dynamic in which Mr. Trump believes the best outcome for him personally is one that does as much damage as possible to the long-run GOP cause.
Post by: MakeItRain on July 08, 2016, 10:17:47 AM
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-swing-state-polls-and-national-polls-basically-say-the-same-thing/
makes sense. it doesn't much matter if hardcore dems hate trump more than they hated romney or if hardcore pubs hate clinton more than they hated obama. their votes were already assumed.
the twist in the coming election is that so many dems and dem-leaning mods hate clinton and so many pubs and pub-leaning mods hate trump.
Clinton leading Trump in Kansas is surprising.
I'm not. The Brownback tenure has pushed a significant number of moderate Republicans over the center line.
Trump will win Kansas by 20 points. Brownback easily beat a DINO during the gubernatorial election, remember the polling then? It seems as if polling in Kansas is limited to Johnson, Wyandotte, and Douglas counties.
Post by: MakeItRain on July 08, 2016, 10:29:25 AM
NPR had a great story today that the only reason why Hillary has a chance, and likely a good chance is because Trump will be the nominee. We're talking NPR are here.
oh she would absolutely get her ass whipped by a reasonable non-crazy candidate.
What's the Democrats excuse for Hillary? By your logic their are more crazy leftists than rightists, because Hillary can only win by getting more votes than trump.
Unless, of course, you think Hillary is a competent candidate. . .libtard dave
She would beat a legitimate republicans candidate for the same reason she won the Democratic nomination; she has an unstoppable political machine. She has way more money and a much better ground game than she had eight years ago. It is virtually impossible to lose an American election when you have the organization, cash, and name recognition that she has. Jeb! was such a failure because he managed to get his ass kicked with money and name recognition, but even he didn't have anywhere close to the machine that Hil has.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 08, 2016, 10:39:07 AM
NPR had a great story today that the only reason why Hillary has a chance, and likely a good chance is because Trump will be the nominee. We're talking NPR are here.
oh she would absolutely get her ass whipped by a reasonable non-crazy candidate.
What's the Democrats excuse for Hillary? By your logic their are more crazy leftists than rightists, because Hillary can only win by getting more votes than trump.
Unless, of course, you think Hillary is a competent candidate. . .libtard dave
She would beat a legitimate republicans candidate for the same reason she won the Democratic nomination; she has an unstoppable political machine. She has way more money and a much better ground game than she had eight years ago. It is virtually impossible to lose an American election when you have the organization, cash, and name recognition that she has. Jeb! was such a failure because he managed to get his ass kicked with money and name recognition, but even he didn't have anywhere close to the machine that Hil has.
The DNC wouldn't be able to limit her exposure in the general election the way they were able to in the primary.
Post by: MakeItRain on July 08, 2016, 11:17:22 AM
NPR had a great story today that the only reason why Hillary has a chance, and likely a good chance is because Trump will be the nominee. We're talking NPR are here.
oh she would absolutely get her ass whipped by a reasonable non-crazy candidate.
What's the Democrats excuse for Hillary? By your logic their are more crazy leftists than rightists, because Hillary can only win by getting more votes than trump.
Unless, of course, you think Hillary is a competent candidate. . .libtard dave
She would beat a legitimate republicans candidate for the same reason she won the Democratic nomination; she has an unstoppable political machine. She has way more money and a much better ground game than she had eight years ago. It is virtually impossible to lose an American election when you have the organization, cash, and name recognition that she has. Jeb! was such a failure because he managed to get his ass kicked with money and name recognition, but even he didn't have anywhere close to the machine that Hil has.
The DNC wouldn't be able to limit her exposure in the general election the way they were able to in the primary.
She's not required to take any debates, there's no way Trump is doing more than one.
Post by: renocat on July 08, 2016, 02:28:36 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on July 08, 2016, 03:00:12 PM
Trump needs get rid of his ignorant help who say or post things that get him in trouble. Just read.some campaign dude named Corey.posted that Hillary was cause of the.Dallas police shooting. Stupid actions hurt.
Ignorant people hire ignorant help.
It should say something that few people of quality want to support him or work for him. It should speak volumes.
Post by: wetwillie on July 08, 2016, 03:09:25 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 08, 2016, 03:37:57 PM
Post by: CNS on July 08, 2016, 03:38:44 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: stunted on July 08, 2016, 05:53:23 PM
Hillary would whip Trump's ass in a debate.
:lol:
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 09, 2016, 10:15:23 AM
Post by: bucket on July 09, 2016, 10:27:16 AM
Zing!
Post by: bucket on July 09, 2016, 10:52:17 AM
Jared Kushner's family denounces his use of their Holocaust history to defend the GOP nominee against charges of anti-Semitism.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/jared-kushner-family-trump-holocaust-225210#ixzz4DvYJs9xr
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook
It was just a sheriff star, guise
Post by: chum1 on July 09, 2016, 11:13:31 AM
Post by: bucket on July 10, 2016, 01:58:06 AM
Post by: bubbles4ksu on July 11, 2016, 01:35:42 PM
When ever I see stunner post now, I think of him reading this website and nodding.he tweeted @mobute a link to a podcast: https://soundcloud.com/this-is-trouble/tr-036 (https://soundcloud.com/this-is-trouble/tr-036)
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1.wp.com%2Fdarktriadman.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F03%2FDark-Triad-Man_Ivan-Throne_Portrait_20160321.jpg%3Fzoom%3D2%26amp%3Bresize%3D200%252C200&hash=6b09b1f195447c0621388c3a255bfd38075d02c8)
http://darktriadman.com/about-the-dark-triad-man-and-ruthless-mentoring-for-a-dark-world-2/ (http://darktriadman.com/about-the-dark-triad-man-and-ruthless-mentoring-for-a-dark-world-2/)
i have to stop listening but the first 8 minutes were absolutely rough ridin' amazing, the most self righteous verbiage i've ever heard. he's also deaf so a bit difficult to understand.
Post by: stunted on July 11, 2016, 01:45:07 PM
When ever I see stunner post now, I think of him reading this website and nodding.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1.wp.com%2Fdarktriadman.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F03%2FDark-Triad-Man_Ivan-Throne_Portrait_20160321.jpg%3Fzoom%3D2%26amp%3Bresize%3D200%252C200&hash=6b09b1f195447c0621388c3a255bfd38075d02c8)
http://darktriadman.com/about-the-dark-triad-man-and-ruthless-mentoring-for-a-dark-world-2/ (http://darktriadman.com/about-the-dark-triad-man-and-ruthless-mentoring-for-a-dark-world-2/)
I only read heartiste mate
Post by: star seed 7 on July 11, 2016, 01:59:23 PM
Post by: stunted on July 11, 2016, 02:02:13 PM
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/147247313346/when-persuasion-turns-deadly
Post by: star seed 7 on July 11, 2016, 02:05:42 PM
Post by: chum1 on July 13, 2016, 06:19:11 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/12/politics/justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-donald-trump-faker/
Post by: steve dave on July 13, 2016, 06:33:31 AM
Post by: mocat on July 13, 2016, 06:44:13 AM
Post by: steve dave on July 13, 2016, 06:50:24 AM
I have to say i enjoy listening to trump talk way more than i do hillz
duh
Post by: mocat on July 13, 2016, 06:54:20 AM
Post by: steve dave on July 13, 2016, 07:01:00 AM
Post by: Canary on July 13, 2016, 07:30:12 AM
hillary is a cringe factory and doesn't at all make up for being a bad person by being fun to listen to. trump at least adds some fun to this election cycle.It's only fun until he gets elected. Then...
Post by: steve dave on July 13, 2016, 07:42:21 AM
hillary is a cringe factory and doesn't at all make up for being a bad person by being fun to listen to. trump at least adds some fun to this election cycle.It's only fun until he gets elected. Then...
oh it'll still be fun. just not, like, good for society or whatever.
Post by: Canary on July 13, 2016, 08:01:08 AM
hillary is a cringe factory and doesn't at all make up for being a bad person by being fun to listen to. trump at least adds some fun to this election cycle.It's only fun until he gets elected. Then...
oh it'll still be fun. just not, like, good for society or whatever.
I'll give you that. Still scares the hell out of me.
Post by: CNS on July 13, 2016, 08:54:25 AM
hillary is a cringe factory and doesn't at all make up for being a bad person by being fun to listen to. trump at least adds some fun to this election cycle.It's only fun until he gets elected. Then...
oh it'll still be fun. just not, like, good for society or whatever.
I guess it will be great for the same type of personality that digs having oscar, because oscar, even though our bb team will never be fun again.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 13, 2016, 08:57:57 AM
Post by: steve dave on July 13, 2016, 09:00:13 AM
I'm voting for Trump. Call me a sell out or whatever. It's happening now. :cry:
I bet you don't vote bud
Post by: star seed 7 on July 13, 2016, 09:00:47 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 13, 2016, 09:08:33 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 13, 2016, 09:35:15 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on July 13, 2016, 09:41:46 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 13, 2016, 10:04:27 AM
He's going to win, how do you people not see this coming?
It certainly seems to be heading that direction
Post by: Cartierfor3 on July 13, 2016, 10:07:50 AM
Post by: Panjandrum on July 13, 2016, 10:17:36 AM
he will not win
When you look at polling in swing states that factor in Libertarian and Green party candidates, it's going to be close.
I mean things can change, obviously, and we're in that post-email cycle, but polling indicates that the third parties hurt Clinton more than Trump when I go out to see the stuff on Real Clear Politics.
Post by: Cartierfor3 on July 13, 2016, 10:18:36 AM
Post by: Panjandrum on July 13, 2016, 10:21:36 AM
it will be the biggest landslide OAT
Maybe. I'm nervous.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 13, 2016, 02:07:01 PM
Post by: steve dave on July 13, 2016, 02:12:02 PM
Post by: CNS on July 13, 2016, 02:18:30 PM
who you voting for dax? nose holding or nah?
Def magic marker'ing "Cruz" on the touchscreen as his ballot is starting up, then yelling at the machine
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 13, 2016, 02:19:35 PM
who you voting for dax? nose holding or nah?
Um, probably Gary. Oh I know, some of the local ProgLibs have determined that deep in his psyche he's a bad, bad person, which makes him all the more interesting. They'll vote for Hillary the racist Neo-Con and somehow manage to assuage their angst over it, but voting for Johnson in their world view will be . . . bad.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 13, 2016, 02:24:41 PM
Post by: CNS on July 13, 2016, 02:25:46 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 13, 2016, 02:26:55 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 13, 2016, 02:27:40 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 13, 2016, 02:29:12 PM
Dax is in a #overexplaning mood today
Some people are just dense. It's over explaining when you keep going on long screeds saying the same thing.
You're dense, but usually short about things. I will say, that's the best kind of dense, good work, lib.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 13, 2016, 02:31:43 PM
Dax is in a #overexplaning mood today
Some people are just dense. It's over explaining when you keep going on long screeds saying the same thing.
You're dense, but usually short about things. I will say, that's the best kind of dense, good work, lib.
Oh, you never do that :lol:
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 13, 2016, 02:33:08 PM
Dax is in a #overexplaning mood today
Some people are just dense. It's over explaining when you keep going on long screeds saying the same thing.
You're dense, but usually short about things. I will say, that's the best kind of dense, good work, lib.
Oh, you never do that :lol:
Weird post.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 13, 2016, 02:36:38 PM
Dax is in a #overexplaning mood today
Some people are just dense. It's over explaining when you keep going on long screeds saying the same thing.
You're dense, but usually short about things. I will say, that's the best kind of dense, good work, lib.
Oh, you never do that :lol:
Weird post.
Tapout noted. Sad. . . .
Really. . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 13, 2016, 02:37:49 PM
Dax is in a #overexplaning mood today
Some people are just dense. It's over explaining when you keep going on long screeds saying the same thing.
You're dense, but usually short about things. I will say, that's the best kind of dense, good work, lib.
Oh, you never do that :lol:
Weird post.
Tapout noted. Sad. . . .
Really. . . .
Okay. Go get some Chick-Fil-A and call it day Lib. Thanks man.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 13, 2016, 02:50:53 PM
I think i'm registered, but i'm not sure. Can @mrswacky do this for me? I voted 4 years ago, so I should be good, right? :dunno:
Do you still live in the same state that you voted in 4 years ago?
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 13, 2016, 02:53:18 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 13, 2016, 02:54:14 PM
Well that's just complicated. My address on my ID says Kansas (my parents place) and some of my mail goes there, but they moved and bought a house like 2 years ago. I do live in MO, but I don't have much stuff listed under that address, because I don't want to change car plates and stuff. What a pickle.
I would register in Missouri and vote there if you live there. Are car plates more expensive in Missouri than they are in Kansas? I would expect the opposite, but I really don't know.
Post by: CNS on July 13, 2016, 02:54:32 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 13, 2016, 02:54:57 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 13, 2016, 02:56:07 PM
Kobach is going to deport Wacky, you guys.
Yeah, I thought this as well.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 13, 2016, 02:56:53 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 13, 2016, 02:57:51 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 13, 2016, 02:59:38 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 13, 2016, 02:59:54 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 13, 2016, 03:05:21 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 13, 2016, 03:10:27 PM
Do you still live in that rent controlled place?No, that was like for one year, 3 years ago. Mrs. Wacky and I live in the quality hill apartments downtown.
Post by: Cartierfor3 on July 13, 2016, 03:33:17 PM
Well that's just complicated. My address on my ID says Kansas (my parents place) and some of my mail goes there, but they moved and bought a house like 2 years ago. I do live in MO, but I don't have much stuff listed under that address, because I don't want to change car plates and stuff. What a pickle.
WC changing your plates costs like $25
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 13, 2016, 03:35:27 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on July 13, 2016, 03:50:34 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClgZuC9UYAAyHHL.jpg:large)
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 13, 2016, 03:53:36 PM
Post by: steve dave on July 13, 2016, 03:56:50 PM
http://goEMAW.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=7
^It me
Post by: Cartierfor3 on July 13, 2016, 04:05:37 PM
Could you imagine some of the dumb crap ppl could dig up, that you've said in your lifetime, if you run for president? I mean, they're on click away from goEMAW.com to find out. Yeesh.
those trump quotes are fake wc
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 13, 2016, 04:20:00 PM
on opposite day. if I ran for president my campaign emails would just say::lol: It would only work for you.
http://goEMAW.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=7
^It me
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 13, 2016, 04:21:39 PM
Ok, but still. That would suck. President nominee Wackycat08 said this dumbass thing, when he was 16 in science class, to his gay teacher.... :ohno:Could you imagine some of the dumb crap ppl could dig up, that you've said in your lifetime, if you run for president? I mean, they're on click away from goEMAW.com to find out. Yeesh.
those trump quotes are fake wc
Post by: puniraptor on July 14, 2016, 06:02:02 AM
that would be awesome and is plausible.
Post by: wetwillie on July 14, 2016, 06:58:05 AM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on July 14, 2016, 07:27:00 AM
Ok, but still. That would suck. President nominee Wackycat08 said this dumbass thing, when he was 16 in science class, to his gay teacher.... :ohno:Could you imagine some of the dumb crap ppl could dig up, that you've said in your lifetime, if you run for president? I mean, they're on click away from goEMAW.com to find out. Yeesh.
those trump quotes are fake wc
what was the thing you said
Post by: CNS on July 14, 2016, 08:04:11 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 14, 2016, 08:08:20 AM
He needs to pick a minority. He is getting 0% of the black vote.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
If he picks a minority, he might lose the KKK vote.
Post by: steve dave on July 14, 2016, 08:32:40 AM
He needs to pick a minority. He is getting 0% of the black vote.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
there is nobody he could pick that would change that
Post by: catastrophe on July 14, 2016, 08:38:05 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on July 14, 2016, 08:39:38 AM
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 14, 2016, 09:11:00 AM
Post by: CNS on July 14, 2016, 09:14:56 AM
Wayne Brady
I would only be fine with this if it was the Wayne Brady from Chapelle show.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on July 14, 2016, 09:16:23 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on July 14, 2016, 09:24:53 AM
https://twitter.com/realDonaldDrumpf/status/741351028273086464
https://twitter.com/realDonaldDrumpf/status/741311272818475008
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 14, 2016, 09:28:52 AM
:zip: He was a bad person, cf3. He hated the athletes. Kicked me out of class and told me to go to the principles office, for asking for a piece of paper, after announcing a pop quiz. I must of been having a bad day, because I went off. I said a lot of things that i'm not proud of. crap sandwich breath, derogatory word, etc. Then I tried to slam the door, but it was one of those air compresent doors and it delayed the process and I could see the horror of what just went down on my classmates faces. :lol: I got 3 days in school suspension (the principal loved me) and he was fired after that year. Several negative reports on how he treated the athletes ended him.Ok, but still. That would suck. President nominee Wackycat08 said this dumbass thing, when he was 16 in science class, to his gay teacher.... :ohno:Could you imagine some of the dumb crap ppl could dig up, that you've said in your lifetime, if you run for president? I mean, they're on click away from goEMAW.com to find out. Yeesh.
those trump quotes are fake wc
what was the thing you said
Post by: Cartierfor3 on July 14, 2016, 09:31:31 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 14, 2016, 09:32:29 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 14, 2016, 09:33:03 AM
Also, small town schools smdh
Post by: CNS on July 14, 2016, 09:33:24 AM
Quote
The CBS and New York Times poll has the presidential candidates tied at just 40 percent each, with a margin of error of three points, and well below the 50 percent either candidate would need to win the presidency. The poll was conducted July 8 through July 12, in the aftermath of FBI Director James Comey’s recommendation not to file criminal charges on Hillary Clinton for her email controversy.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 14, 2016, 09:33:37 AM
Wacky's school probably fired that guy because he was gay. :frown:Nope. Just a POS.
finally the athletes get a fair shake in high schoolI accepted the privilege.
Post by: CNS on July 14, 2016, 09:35:20 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 14, 2016, 09:36:02 AM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on July 14, 2016, 09:38:26 AM
Also, I was in National Honors Society, carried a 3.8, and I had never been in trouble my entire time in school. My teachers and principal knew something was off with him.
and a star athlete. damn son.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 14, 2016, 09:39:17 AM
Post by: catastrophe on July 14, 2016, 09:47:01 AM
Tied up in the polls...QuoteThe CBS and New York Times poll has the presidential candidates tied at just 40 percent each, with a margin of error of three points, and well below the 50 percent either candidate would need to win the presidency. The poll was conducted July 8 through July 12, in the aftermath of FBI Director James Comey’s recommendation not to file criminal charges on Hillary Clinton for her email controversy.
Except you don't really have to get 50% to win the presidency.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 14, 2016, 09:47:43 AM
Tied up in the polls...QuoteThe CBS and New York Times poll has the presidential candidates tied at just 40 percent each, with a margin of error of three points, and well below the 50 percent either candidate would need to win the presidency. The poll was conducted July 8 through July 12, in the aftermath of FBI Director James Comey’s recommendation not to file criminal charges on Hillary Clinton for her email controversy.
Except you don't really have to get 50% to win the presidency.
Yeah, whoever wrote that needs to check their source.
Post by: sys on July 16, 2016, 02:08:27 PM
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a46695/donald-trump-candidacy-american-democracy/
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 16, 2016, 02:22:18 PM
good article.
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a46695/donald-trump-candidacy-american-democracy/
So support the ultra corrupt elitist minority patronizing racist Neo-Con: That's the American Way!
Post by: star seed 7 on July 16, 2016, 03:46:59 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 16, 2016, 07:45:58 PM
Dax will not stand idly by while some liberal weenie disparages the anointed one, donald trump. Keep banging that trump drum, dax, make america great again #trumpence2016
Fresh set of heat resistant HFP2016 signs going up in libs yard. It's so cute when you get angered up about the reality of Hil.
Post by: Kat Kid on July 17, 2016, 07:21:23 PM
Post by: stunted on July 17, 2016, 11:16:34 PM
Post by: Kat Kid on July 17, 2016, 11:20:31 PM
We have the best walls
:lol:
Post by: CNS on July 18, 2016, 06:00:09 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: chum1 on July 18, 2016, 06:15:07 AM
Just booked a mx vacation for a week after the election. Am I going to get walled in?
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Nope! There will be a big, beautiful door for the legals.
Post by: Kat Kid on July 18, 2016, 01:49:44 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 18, 2016, 01:51:35 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvignette4.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fvampirediaries%2Fimages%2F3%2F32%2FPop-Champagne-1.gif%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20140131035657&hash=5e98fc0e808f46b5fd9be065fcad9d7c2c7ee5c5)
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 18, 2016, 01:52:11 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 18, 2016, 02:03:09 PM
Post by: stunted on July 19, 2016, 08:37:55 AM
Agree with Lib. Trump will win Kansas but I bet it'll be a little closer than previous elections. Also think that a few states will flip blue and this will be a landslide, like I've been saying forever.
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/amp/poll-clinton-trump-now-tied-gop-convention-kicks-n611936
Post by: 8manpick on July 19, 2016, 09:09:35 AM
Post by: CNS on July 19, 2016, 09:20:46 AM
Trump will get a bump from the convention unless something goes horribly wrong because all candidates do. It will be fun to watch the "sky is falling" reactions to that though.
Chuck Todd disagrees. He said that the RNC and DNC are too close in time and that he doesn't think there will be a bump.
Post by: stunted on July 19, 2016, 09:33:52 AM
Trump will get a bump from the convention unless something goes horribly wrong because all candidates do. It will be fun to watch the "sky is falling" reactions to that though.
Poll was July 11-17. Also +.5 Dem bias
Post by: 8manpick on July 19, 2016, 09:35:40 AM
I guess my not quoting your post must have made you think I was speaking directly to that poll you mentionedTrump will get a bump from the convention unless something goes horribly wrong because all candidates do. It will be fun to watch the "sky is falling" reactions to that though.
Poll was July 11-17. Also +.5 Dem bias
Post by: Kat Kid on July 19, 2016, 09:56:38 AM
Agree with Lib. Trump will win Kansas but I bet it'll be a little closer than previous elections. Also think that a few states will flip blue and this will be a landslide, like I've been saying forever.
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/amp/poll-clinton-trump-now-tied-gop-convention-kicks-n611936
daily tracking poll? lol
Post by: stunted on July 19, 2016, 10:34:46 AM
Up to 36/38%. Wasn't it 20% not long ago? I'm hopeful it keeps going up as he acts more presidential, the debates happen, and spending money on ads (if he does). Hillary's main attacks (racism, Trump not presidential) seem to be dying. It's also not helping her as BLM and Muslims keep killing people. Everything's going to plan as Scott Adams prophesied. But a lot can happen.
Post by: ChiComCat on July 19, 2016, 10:40:23 AM
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-clintons-lead-is-as-safe-as-kerrys-was-in-2004/
Up to 36/38%. Wasn't it 20% not long ago? I'm hopeful it keeps going up as he acts more presidential, the debates happen, and spending money on ads (if he does). Hillary's main attacks (racism, Trump not presidential) seem to be dying. It's also not helping her as BLM and Muslims keep killing people. Everything's going to plan as Scott Adams prophesied. But a lot can happen.
I don't think it was ever 20%
Post by: stunted on July 19, 2016, 10:44:53 AM
Post by: Kat Kid on July 19, 2016, 11:18:45 AM
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/07/sources-kelly-said-ailes-sexually-harassed-her.html (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/07/sources-kelly-said-ailes-sexually-harassed-her.html)
Quote
According to two sources briefed on parent company 21st Century Fox’s outside probe of the Fox News executive, led by New York–based law firm Paul, Weiss, [Megyn] Kelly has told investigators that Ailes made unwanted sexual advances toward her about ten years ago when she was a young correspondent at Fox. Kelly, according to the sources, has described her harassment by Ailes in detail.
Kelly’s comments to investigators might explain why the Murdochs are moving so quickly to oust Ailes. As New York reported yesterday, Rupert and sons James and Lachlan, the three top executives at 21st Century Fox, have, according to multiple sources, decided that Ailes needs to be removed. Kelly, who has become something of a feminist icon thanks to her tangles with GOP nominee Donald Trump, is seen by many inside Fox as the future of the network. She’s currently in contract negotiations, and given that Bill O’Reilly has said he’s considering retirement, Fox can’t afford to lose her.
According to two sources, Monday afternoon lawyers for 21st Century Fox gave Ailes a deadline of August 1 to resign or face being fired for cause. Ailes’s legal team — which now includes Susan Estrich, former campaign manager for Michael Dukakis — has yet to respond to the offer. Ailes has also received advice on strategy from Donald Trump and Rudy Giuliani, sources say.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 19, 2016, 11:25:38 AM
Post by: steve dave on July 19, 2016, 03:05:14 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 19, 2016, 03:15:51 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 20, 2016, 02:20:12 AM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on July 20, 2016, 11:43:32 AM
Post by: CNS on July 20, 2016, 11:47:20 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: chum1 on July 20, 2016, 11:47:26 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/20/magazine/how-donald-trump-picked-his-running-mate.html
Post by: star seed 7 on July 20, 2016, 12:12:01 PM
What in the eff?
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/20/magazine/how-donald-trump-picked-his-running-mate.html
So great
Post by: CNS on July 20, 2016, 12:16:15 PM
Trump hires the best people :Ugh:
Making America great again is usually done by ignoring domestic and foreign policy.
Sounds like Trump is going to put his name on the presidency while someone entirely different actually owns the position. How out of character of him. :dubious:
Post by: sys on July 20, 2016, 12:23:45 PM
Post by: bucket on July 20, 2016, 12:32:09 PM
Post by: sys on July 20, 2016, 12:44:49 PM
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/donald-trumps-ghostwriter-tells-all
Post by: sys on July 20, 2016, 12:58:59 PM
why doesn't trump just license his name to clinton and everyone can go home happy?
Vice President Hillary? :surprised:
no she just changes her name to donald trump, uses his image in press releases and whatnot and is president.
Post by: CNS on July 20, 2016, 02:15:31 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 20, 2016, 02:32:12 PM
Trump will get a bump from the convention unless something goes horribly wrong because all candidates do. It will be fun to watch the "sky is falling" reactions to that though.
Chuck Todd disagrees. He said that the RNC and DNC are too close in time and that he doesn't think there will be a bump.
Why? Because of the unabated euphoria over the nomination of the most corrupt and possibly the biggest racist presidential candidate ever at the DNC?
Post by: CNS on July 20, 2016, 02:34:04 PM
Trump will get a bump from the convention unless something goes horribly wrong because all candidates do. It will be fun to watch the "sky is falling" reactions to that though.
Chuck Todd disagrees. He said that the RNC and DNC are too close in time and that he doesn't think there will be a bump.
Why? Because of the unabated euphoria over the nomination of the most corrupt and possibly the biggest racist presidential candidate ever at the DNC?
Maybe. I don't get that read from him, but.......................... you could be right!
Post by: Kat Kid on July 20, 2016, 02:38:00 PM
Trump will get a bump from the convention unless something goes horribly wrong because all candidates do. It will be fun to watch the "sky is falling" reactions to that though.
Chuck Todd disagrees. He said that the RNC and DNC are too close in time and that he doesn't think there will be a bump.
Why? Because of the unabated euphoria over the nomination of the most corrupt and possibly the biggest racist presidential candidate ever at the DNC?
Maybe. I don't get that read from him, but.......................... you could be right!
lol
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 20, 2016, 02:40:22 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 20, 2016, 02:43:00 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 20, 2016, 02:44:45 PM
Post by: Kat Kid on July 20, 2016, 03:00:40 PM
Okay. Since Wallace. That's a lowly benchmark but if it makes you feel better KK, knock yourself out.
Well, another hole in your theory is it is weird to think Hillary is substantially more racist than Bill.
Post by: Kat Kid on July 20, 2016, 03:02:28 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 20, 2016, 03:04:44 PM
Is trump the most racist republican candidate of all time? Pretty tough competition in that category but I'm sure he can win itAnybody before Lincoln and half the presidents after him, were way more racist, FWIW.
Post by: chum1 on July 21, 2016, 05:38:23 PM
https://twitter.com/brianstelter/status/756085000634642433
Post by: chum1 on July 21, 2016, 05:41:36 PM
https://twitter.com/onceuponA/status/756162052901642240
Post by: sys on July 21, 2016, 05:42:05 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 21, 2016, 05:46:04 PM
Post by: stunted on July 21, 2016, 10:56:15 PM
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/147752900981/the-trump-kids-effect
Post by: bones129 on July 22, 2016, 01:58:05 AM
Post by: stunted on July 22, 2016, 07:59:34 AM
(https://i.sli.mg/DIzrbc.png)
Post by: CNS on July 22, 2016, 08:44:12 AM
This is the ultimate troll job on America and it turns out America is nothing but a bunch of Pig Aggies. I can't believe Trump hasn't dropped an intentionally erroneous Scottie Pippin reference or compared Obama and Eddie Murphy yet.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 22, 2016, 08:50:57 AM
Okay. Since Wallace. That's a lowly benchmark but if it makes you feel better KK, knock yourself out.
Well, another hole in your theory is it is weird to think Hillary is substantially more racist than Bill.
Bill was just a typical Southern good old boy, while Hillary is extremely elitist, but I'd say she's a little less racist towards people of color as compared to here real dislike if not outright hatred of Jews.
Very Hitlerish.
Post by: stunted on July 22, 2016, 08:52:29 AM
Post by: stunted on July 22, 2016, 09:06:29 AM
http://nypost.com/2016/07/22/ivanka-trump-wears-her-own-labels-158-dress-to-introduce-dad/
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 22, 2016, 09:14:20 AM
(https://i.sli.mg/VINzgX.jpg)
Lol
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 22, 2016, 09:16:35 AM
7D chess
(https://i.sli.mg/DIzrbc.png)
This surprised me at first because I didnt think it was that great of speech. Then I remembered that he's trying to pull in the rust belt mongoloids and victims of their own race/sex who usually vote democrat, and it made more sense.
Post by: CNS on July 22, 2016, 09:19:50 AM
ppl living out their stupidity on facebook as their actual selves is stupid to me.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 22, 2016, 10:40:37 AM
Guy on my FB feed said that Ivanka made him cry and that he couldn't wait to hear Don if she moved him in such a way. Then during Don's speech, he kept posting "Make America Great Again!" a bunch.
ppl living out their stupidity on facebook as their actual selves is stupid to me.
I think a lot of people got pretty faced watching this thing...
Post by: mocat on July 22, 2016, 10:46:19 AM
Post by: sys on July 22, 2016, 10:47:31 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 22, 2016, 10:50:20 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 22, 2016, 11:03:30 AM
Post by: chum1 on July 22, 2016, 11:17:09 AM
Post by: stunted on July 22, 2016, 04:43:42 PM
Quote
2. Trump’s best unscripted moment came when he humbly acknowledged that he probably didn’t deserve the support of evangelicals. That was persuasion genius. Nothing will make religious people love you harder than admitting you are not worthy of their affection. Boom. That’s a ten-out-of-ten on the persuasion scale, and you probably thought it was just an unscripted aside. They’re locked in now.
Post by: sys on July 22, 2016, 04:59:49 PM
Post by: stunted on July 22, 2016, 07:40:15 PM
Post by: stunted on July 22, 2016, 07:41:32 PM
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/07/22/mexican_president_promises_to_work_trump_if_elected_a_constructive_attitude.html
10D CHESS
Post by: stunted on July 23, 2016, 11:07:45 AM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.fineartamerica.com%2Fimages-medium-large-5%2Fhobby-chess-your-move-mike-savad.jpg&hash=ac461559131d602a16bad964e822c66d0dc58827)
Post by: stunted on July 23, 2016, 12:38:59 PM
Agree with Lib. Trump will win Kansas but I bet it'll be a little closer than previous elections. Also think that a few states will flip blue and this will be a landslide, like I've been saying forever.
You still saying it? :D
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/756681961809272832
Still a long ways, but lol at libtard hero Nate Silver. In the beginning of Trump's glide path as prophesied by HRC supporter Scott Adams.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 23, 2016, 01:05:42 PM
Post by: sys on July 23, 2016, 01:40:34 PM
Wasnt his modeling pretty shaky for the 2014 elections?
no.
Post by: wetwillie on July 23, 2016, 01:57:07 PM
Post by: treysolid on July 23, 2016, 02:07:47 PM
I listen to his podcast regularly and he has said repeatedly that polling data is much harder to come by accurately now that no one uses a landline.
you know who has a landline? old white people.
Post by: wetwillie on July 23, 2016, 02:14:48 PM
I listen to his podcast regularly and he has said repeatedly that polling data is much harder to come by accurately now that no one uses a landline.
you know who has a landline? old white people.
Exactly?
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 23, 2016, 02:18:19 PM
http://www.salon.com/2014/11/05/how_did_nate_silvers_forecasts_stack_up_against_midterm_results/
Post by: sys on July 23, 2016, 02:35:48 PM
According to this story all the picks he got wrong, he really got right because he gave the eventual winner a small chance to win. :lol:
http://www.salon.com/2014/11/05/how_did_nate_silvers_forecasts_stack_up_against_midterm_results/
from your own link.
Quote
Overall, the candidate with better-than-even odds in FiveThirtyEight’s model won or is likely to in 34 of the 36 Senate contests this year, for a success rate of 94 percent.
FiveThirtyEight forecast that the current leaders in each of the three contests would win; if they do, the site will have correctly predicted 31 of 36 gubernatorial contests, for a success rate of 86 percent.
Post by: stunted on July 23, 2016, 02:41:51 PM
Nate Silver, more like Nate Shitter :lol:
Post by: star seed 7 on July 23, 2016, 02:56:37 PM
Post by: The Big Train on July 23, 2016, 02:58:43 PM
Post by: steve dave on July 23, 2016, 03:01:34 PM
why do conservatards hate nate silver so much? it's approaching lena dunham type obsession and all he does is look at data. so weird.
he said obama was going to win a couple times
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 23, 2016, 03:08:17 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 23, 2016, 03:15:10 PM
why do conservatards hate nate silver so much? it's approaching lena dunham type obsession and all he does is look at data. so weird.
he said obama was going to win a couple times
what a piece of crap
Post by: stunted on July 23, 2016, 03:33:37 PM
why do conservatards hate nate silver so much? it's approaching lena dunham type obsession and all he does is look at data. so weird.
Yea, crap data
Post by: wetwillie on July 23, 2016, 04:00:50 PM
Post by: stunted on July 23, 2016, 05:27:55 PM
trying to tear down nate silvers data is the most beta thing ever. high value males don't concern themselves with what others do.
As if a beta like you can decide what's A/B. Take a few courses from dark triad man and get back to me.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 23, 2016, 06:19:31 PM
trying to tear down nate silvers data is the most beta thing ever. high value males don't concern themselves with what others do.
As if a beta like you can decide what's A/B. Take a few courses from dark triad man and get back to me.
Yes, following what others tell you in a course you have to pay for is the alpha way.
Post by: steve dave on July 23, 2016, 06:20:50 PM
Post by: Kat Kid on July 23, 2016, 06:22:23 PM
Post by: sys on July 23, 2016, 06:23:38 PM
some guy in my neighborhood has a Trump flag. I lol'd when I saw it flapping in the breeze just under the stars and stripes.
a quick hitler salute and on about your business is always appropriate.
Post by: Kat Kid on July 23, 2016, 06:27:18 PM
some guy in my neighborhood has a Trump flag. I lol'd when I saw it flapping in the breeze just under the stars and stripes.
a quick hitler salute and on about your business is always appropriate.
If I see him out on the deck as I stroll by I will let him know whats up.
Post by: stunted on July 24, 2016, 03:29:57 AM
I'm embarrassed to say that post was when I finally realized stunz was trolling with the studying Internet stuff to be macho thing. I'm a combo of embarrassed and relieved.
Well. It's not all a troll :shy:
Post by: sys on July 24, 2016, 05:04:23 PM
good summation.
Post by: 8manpick on July 24, 2016, 05:15:20 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/donald-trump-is-a-unique-threat-to-american-democracy/2016/07/22/a6d823cc-4f4f-11e6-aa14-e0c1087f7583_story.htmlCould have been better. Seized onto a few things that are silly made up issues, like the line about "punishing women who have abortions" which originally stemmed from a hypothetical question posed where abortion was illegal. Trump does and says so much ridiculous stupid crap that I get mad when people feel the need to drum up non-issues
good summation.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 24, 2016, 05:28:17 PM
why do conservatards hate nate silver so much? it's approaching lena dunham type obsession and all he does is look at data. so weird.
Who said they hate nate silver?
Post by: stunted on July 24, 2016, 06:04:30 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 24, 2016, 06:57:35 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/donald-trump-is-a-unique-threat-to-american-democracy/2016/07/22/a6d823cc-4f4f-11e6-aa14-e0c1087f7583_story.htmlCould have been better. Seized onto a few things that are silly made up issues, like the line about "punishing women who have abortions" which originally stemmed from a hypothetical question posed where abortion was illegal. Trump does and says so much ridiculous stupid crap that I get mad when people feel the need to drum up non-issues
good summation.
I understand what you're saying, but the specific example of punishing women for abortions is a valid criticism because it speaks to thought process and mindset he's going to bring to a presidency. It may have been a hypothetical question, but it was't unrealistic given the amount of justices that will be appointed in the next decade.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 24, 2016, 07:06:52 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 24, 2016, 07:09:33 PM
Honestly, if we are going to make abortion illegal, it's sort of stupid to me that you wouldn't punish the mother. Isn't the whole argument for making it illegal that it's murder?
Well it different murder wink wink
Post by: 8manpick on July 24, 2016, 07:13:03 PM
No, that's disingenuous. He was asked that if abortion was a crime, should the woman be punished. Yes is the obviously correct answer to that question. Finding Trump's stance on the legality of abortion objectionable is fair game. Trump saying that people who commit a crime should be punished is not a problem for a rational person.https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/donald-trump-is-a-unique-threat-to-american-democracy/2016/07/22/a6d823cc-4f4f-11e6-aa14-e0c1087f7583_story.htmlCould have been better. Seized onto a few things that are silly made up issues, like the line about "punishing women who have abortions" which originally stemmed from a hypothetical question posed where abortion was illegal. Trump does and says so much ridiculous stupid crap that I get mad when people feel the need to drum up non-issues
good summation.
I understand what you're saying, but the specific example of punishing women for abortions is a valid criticism because it speaks to thought process and mindset he's going to bring to a presidency. It may have been a hypothetical question, but it was't unrealistic given the amount of justices that will be appointed in the next decade.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 24, 2016, 07:24:11 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/donald-trump-is-a-unique-threat-to-american-democracy/2016/07/22/a6d823cc-4f4f-11e6-aa14-e0c1087f7583_story.html
good summation.
Only read the first two paragraphs, but you could have substituted b.o. for trump and nobody would know the difference.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 24, 2016, 07:38:32 PM
No, that's disingenuous. He was asked that if abortion was a crime, should the woman be punished. Yes is the obviously correct answer to that question. Finding Trump's stance on the legality of abortion objectionable is fair game. Trump saying that people who commit a crime should be punished is not a problem for a rational person.https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/donald-trump-is-a-unique-threat-to-american-democracy/2016/07/22/a6d823cc-4f4f-11e6-aa14-e0c1087f7583_story.htmlCould have been better. Seized onto a few things that are silly made up issues, like the line about "punishing women who have abortions" which originally stemmed from a hypothetical question posed where abortion was illegal. Trump does and says so much ridiculous stupid crap that I get mad when people feel the need to drum up non-issues
good summation.
I understand what you're saying, but the specific example of punishing women for abortions is a valid criticism because it speaks to thought process and mindset he's going to bring to a presidency. It may have been a hypothetical question, but it was't unrealistic given the amount of justices that will be appointed in the next decade.
Yeah, I guess thinking about it a little more I might agree with you. Though the vast majority of anti-abortion people (many of whom are rational) aren't in favor of punishing the mother either.
Post by: sys on July 24, 2016, 07:46:24 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 24, 2016, 07:52:06 PM
Quote
In an ordinary election year, we would acknowledge the Republican nominee, move on to the Democratic convention and spend the following months, like other voters, evaluating the candidates’ performance in debates, on the stump and in position papers. This year we will follow the campaign as always, offering honest views on all the candidates. But we cannot salute the Republican nominee or pretend that we might endorse him this fall.
Not only is the premise naive, but, please, claiming to be objective:
Quote
The Post began regularly endorsing candidates for president in 1976, with Jimmy Carter. The Post editorial board hasn’t endorsed a Republican for the Oval Office since.
Thanks for saving us the angst and uncertainty of your endorsement, wapo. :lol:
That article was a conjecural piece of trash. It appears the left is using the scare tactics they allegedly loath to fear people into voting hillrod. Pathetic.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 24, 2016, 08:05:24 PM
Post by: sys on July 24, 2016, 08:09:54 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/08/politics/charles-koch-financial-times-interview/
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 24, 2016, 08:29:22 PM
The same articles should be written about hillrod
Post by: stunted on July 24, 2016, 08:31:23 PM
CNN :lol:
Sys biggest dumbass on the board
Post by: stunted on July 24, 2016, 08:38:37 PM
CNN: stumped
We have the best African Americans :love:
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 24, 2016, 08:58:52 PM
:ohno:
Post by: stunted on July 25, 2016, 08:32:10 AM
CNN best ever. It's happening guys. Trump's glide path.
Post by: stunted on July 25, 2016, 08:41:07 AM
I used to be media (https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2FgoEMAW.com%2Fforum%2FSmileys%2FgoEMAW%2FCurse.gif&hash=8f556655b38df0b611d71d977ecce81473ae8d5d)
Now it's media (https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2FgoEMAW.com%2Fforum%2FSmileys%2FgoEMAW%2FLOL.gif&hash=051f3fb1b611b245e24b959f45bf9c47c5ede604)
Post by: 8manpick on July 25, 2016, 08:55:33 AM
DNC, the politics of irrational fear: if trump is elected president democracy will end.Did you watch the RNC, where a key point of most of the speeches was irrational fear mongering? I guess the two parties aren't so different after all.
:ohno:
Post by: chum1 on July 25, 2016, 08:58:32 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 25, 2016, 09:15:07 AM
This should go well
Post by: stunted on July 25, 2016, 09:22:12 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 25, 2016, 09:24:35 AM
Post by: stunted on July 25, 2016, 10:25:43 AM
CNN polls were before the leaks :Wha:
Post by: MakeItRain on July 25, 2016, 11:50:42 AM
I listen to his podcast regularly and he has said repeatedly that polling data is much harder to come by accurately now that no one uses a landline.
you know who has a landline? old white people.
:angry:
Post by: OK_Cat on July 25, 2016, 12:00:54 PM
Post by: Institutional Control on July 25, 2016, 12:08:39 PM
What are the benefits of having a landline? I don't know anyone personally who still has one so I don't have anyone to ask!Dial up internet.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on July 25, 2016, 12:31:48 PM
What are the benefits of having a landline? I don't know anyone personally who still has one so I don't have anyone to ask!
Maybe a number for your kids' friends to call if you don't want to give them a cell phone?
Post by: OK_Cat on July 25, 2016, 01:04:30 PM
Post by: CNS on July 25, 2016, 01:36:46 PM
What are the benefits of having a landline? I don't know anyone personally who still has one so I don't have anyone to ask!
Maybe a number for your kids' friends to call if you don't want to give them a cell phone?
This is why I have one. Not giving my 11 y/o a cell phone.
Post by: wetwillie on July 25, 2016, 01:42:27 PM
What are the benefits of having a landline? I don't know anyone personally who still has one so I don't have anyone to ask!
Maybe a number for your kids' friends to call if you don't want to give them a cell phone?
This is why I have one. Not giving my 11 y/o a cell phone.
Why?
Post by: CNS on July 25, 2016, 01:45:12 PM
What are the benefits of having a landline? I don't know anyone personally who still has one so I don't have anyone to ask!
Maybe a number for your kids' friends to call if you don't want to give them a cell phone?
This is why I have one. Not giving my 11 y/o a cell phone.
Why?
Since being an adult, have you spent much time around an 11 y/o?
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 25, 2016, 02:01:17 PM
Post by: stunted on July 25, 2016, 02:09:14 PM
Donald 57% if polls held today. Clitler still leads in forecast, but with more leaks to come, and other stuff mentioned in her thread here, feeling good!
Nate Silver :lol:
Post by: OK_Cat on July 25, 2016, 02:30:31 PM
Post by: CNS on July 25, 2016, 02:33:43 PM
Post by: wetwillie on July 25, 2016, 02:41:27 PM
Post by: steve dave on July 25, 2016, 02:46:09 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 25, 2016, 02:47:05 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 25, 2016, 02:56:45 PM
Post by: chum1 on July 25, 2016, 03:10:42 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 25, 2016, 03:12:15 PM
Post by: treysolid on July 25, 2016, 03:24:09 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 25, 2016, 03:46:33 PM
says the guy who also cheated on his wife.
And raped a 13 yr old girl
Post by: catastrophe on July 25, 2016, 04:26:36 PM
I don't want a distasteful President. :frown:
Among the laundry list of reasons not to vote Trump, I'm not sure this is even in my top 10.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 25, 2016, 04:30:20 PM
Post by: sys on July 25, 2016, 04:47:19 PM
Post by: stunted on July 25, 2016, 04:49:24 PM
you retards don't think that's real, do you?
Chill out Serious Sys (my Trump name for you). Anyone else want one?
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 25, 2016, 04:51:30 PM
you retards don't think that's real, do you?
If it says "the real X", it isn't
Post by: CNS on July 25, 2016, 04:58:19 PM
you retards don't think that's real, do you?
You know, I almost posted it in the FB thread, but thought it would be better here even though the thread intentions are different. Probably my fault.
Post by: MakeItRain on July 25, 2016, 05:57:14 PM
Still don't understand landlines in 2016
Business. Also cell phones don't work everywhere, although my landline is good for being down 3-4 times a year.
Post by: wetwillie on July 25, 2016, 06:09:28 PM
Still don't understand landlines in 2016
Business. Also cell phones don't work everywhere, although my landline is good for being down 3-4 times a year.
Have you considered VOIP?
Post by: OK_Cat on July 25, 2016, 06:11:46 PM
Still don't understand landlines in 2016
Business. Also cell phones don't work everywhere, although my landline is good for being down 3-4 times a year.
Have you considered VOIP?
Post by: MakeItRain on July 25, 2016, 06:12:01 PM
Still don't understand landlines in 2016
Business. Also cell phones don't work everywhere, although my landline is good for being down 3-4 times a year.
Have you considered VOIP?
Would be great if I weren't forced to have satellite internet. Iowa :curse:
Post by: CNS on July 25, 2016, 07:04:58 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: mocat on July 26, 2016, 09:16:31 AM
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 26, 2016, 09:18:53 AM
Post by: ChiComCat on July 26, 2016, 02:26:07 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPRfP_TEQ-g
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on July 26, 2016, 02:39:51 PM
Post by: ChiComCat on July 26, 2016, 02:45:53 PM
why?
He said he was promised a bunch of crap that the campaign did not follow through on. Any parent making their kids do a North Korea-esque routine should at least know to get promises in writing
Post by: CNS on July 26, 2016, 03:01:38 PM
Post by: stunted on July 26, 2016, 03:12:57 PM
Evidently, Trump is hosting an AMA during Hill's speech.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F-AVjZHn9HssQ%2FTZi0VQsI1vI%2FAAAAAAAAFPE%2FuMu4GMK_btI%2Fs1600%2Fchess-illusion-3d-chess-chessillusion-illusion-chess-4d-5d-6d-7d-3d-chess-lesson-bishop.jpg&hash=37d0603b4d2b8145245f425bc48839300a5dad21)
Post by: chum1 on July 26, 2016, 03:41:55 PM
Post by: steve dave on July 26, 2016, 03:47:36 PM
Post by: stunted on July 26, 2016, 10:48:03 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on July 26, 2016, 11:48:38 PM
Nate Shitter now has Clitler/Trump neck and neck. Hopefully there's a negative DNC bounce as well #DemExit
She will get a big bump like Trump got a big bump.
Here's the thing...to get the 10% of Bernie voters that would have only voted for him, you're probably losing a much higher percentage of centrists.
There will be crying and whining, but the majority of those folks will fall in line when the prospect of Donald Trump actually winning actually sinks in.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on July 26, 2016, 11:58:19 PM
Nate Shitter now has Clitler/Trump neck and neck. Hopefully there's a negative DNC bounce as well #DemExit
She will get a big bump like Trump got a big bump.
Here's the thing...to get the 10% of Bernie voters that would have only voted for him, you're probably losing a much higher percentage of centrists.
There will be crying and whining, but the majority of those folks will fall in line when the prospect of Donald Trump actually winning actually sinks in.
This is good to know, thanks Pan
Post by: stunted on July 27, 2016, 12:23:42 AM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 27, 2016, 01:30:05 AM
Post by: stunted on July 27, 2016, 08:00:39 AM
https://vid.me/6HgT
Google :lol:
Post by: stunted on July 27, 2016, 08:01:42 AM
Hey stunted I know you think Clitler is super funny and whatnot but fyi it makes you look like a huge dumbass
You know what makes one a huge dumbass? Thinking Clitler has a chance in Kansas :lol:
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on July 27, 2016, 08:34:08 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 27, 2016, 09:17:19 AM
Post by: stunted on July 27, 2016, 09:31:57 AM
Agree with Lib. Trump will win Kansas but I bet it'll be a little closer than previous elections. Also think that a few states will flip blue and this will be a landslide, like I've been saying forever.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ks/kansas_trump_vs_clinton-5904.html
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on July 27, 2016, 09:48:25 AM
Post by: mocat on July 27, 2016, 10:07:16 AM
Post by: mocat on July 27, 2016, 10:07:55 AM
I've never seen someone so bipolar as in this SB/renocat thing.
:lol:
Post by: chum1 on July 27, 2016, 10:18:56 AM
I am very disturbed by the use of the term clitler in this thread.
Sounds like you're not on board with making America great again.
Post by: stunted on July 27, 2016, 10:24:27 AM
I am very disturbed by the use of the term clitler in this thread.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FwnIaRyJ.gif&hash=1ee2e9f29ddb3a1daa4b756ee5a347f109701ed4)
Post by: stunted on July 27, 2016, 11:05:03 AM
Nate Shitter now has Clitler/Trump neck and neck. Hopefully there's a negative DNC bounce as well #DemExit
Fellow multidimensional chessmaster thinks so.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/148050318231/selling-past-the-close
Post by: star seed 7 on July 27, 2016, 11:08:02 AM
Post by: Kat Kid on July 27, 2016, 11:21:54 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 27, 2016, 11:32:33 AM
Post by: The Big Train on July 27, 2016, 11:32:42 AM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160727%2F6b26cc6271a87f0b944bbaa1593f1b5b.png&hash=ff2c7ec83e94b6ee355cc91baea441b0ccaaebde)
Post by: CNS on July 27, 2016, 11:33:16 AM
Quote
Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be mightily rewarded by our press.
Post by: The Big Train on July 27, 2016, 11:36:03 AM
Post by: CNS on July 27, 2016, 11:38:45 AM
lukeNS
Yeah. I hit post a while ago and didn't notice it was held up by another until after a biz call I was on ended. :cry:
Post by: star seed 7 on July 27, 2016, 12:03:56 PM
Post by: CNS on July 27, 2016, 12:21:06 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: gatoveintisiete on July 27, 2016, 12:21:15 PM
Guys. I have a theory: Trump is actually a huge dumbass.
Nah, you're just projecting.
Post by: Phil Titola on July 27, 2016, 12:26:21 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on July 27, 2016, 01:28:54 PM
Post by: renocat on July 27, 2016, 01:55:38 PM
Post by: CNS on July 27, 2016, 02:22:06 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: chuckjames on July 27, 2016, 02:24:55 PM
Russia will drop the emails around mid October.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
yep.
for the longest time, ive thought Trump was a hillary plant to insure she wont he election, i know realize he is a russian plant, and the russians realized the emails gave him a chance so they told him to run. Putin man. Out here playing chess and crap.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 27, 2016, 02:28:12 PM
I've never seen someone so bipolar as in this SB/renocat thing.
omg
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 27, 2016, 02:35:16 PM
Post by: chuckjames on July 27, 2016, 02:41:46 PM
Is Russia our enemy? :sdeek:
I don't know if enemy is the right word. Geopolitical rival or nemesis probably works better, depending on how much of a Russophile you are.
Post by: stunted on July 27, 2016, 03:26:11 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on July 27, 2016, 03:35:00 PM
Post by: renocat on July 27, 2016, 03:45:02 PM
Post by: chuckjames on July 27, 2016, 04:04:55 PM
https://twitter.com/interpreter_mag/status/758387942872190977
Post by: star seed 7 on July 27, 2016, 05:34:09 PM
its pretty slick to make hilary losing emails trump's fault
Losing emails? Wut?
Post by: Panjandrum on July 27, 2016, 07:00:41 PM
Post by: sys on July 27, 2016, 07:02:33 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fichef.bbci.co.uk%2Fwwfeatures%2Fwm%2Flive%2F1280_720%2Fimages%2Flive%2Fp0%2F3v%2Fhv%2Fp03vhvr6.jpg&hash=f6a3945619df227619113dc917c06299eb5bb8c9)
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 27, 2016, 07:14:17 PM
its pretty slick to make hilary losing emails trump's fault
I can't believe the media is running with that absurd narrative. Abject slander. But he's the center of attention, again...
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 27, 2016, 07:16:07 PM
Post by: wetwillie on July 27, 2016, 07:23:27 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 27, 2016, 07:26:25 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 27, 2016, 08:14:25 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 27, 2016, 10:34:11 PM
Post by: wetwillie on July 27, 2016, 10:51:45 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 27, 2016, 10:53:07 PM
Post by: renocat on July 28, 2016, 07:14:52 AM
Post by: mocat on July 28, 2016, 02:12:02 PM
trump is horribly in debt to russians
i think she's actually Slovenian. i know, i know, that was part of yugoslavia which was part of ussr when she was born. but still.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 28, 2016, 02:26:23 PM
Post by: stunted on July 28, 2016, 02:53:08 PM
Post by: chum1 on July 28, 2016, 03:52:05 PM
Post by: catastrophe on July 28, 2016, 04:28:52 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on July 28, 2016, 04:48:48 PM
Post by: chum1 on July 28, 2016, 05:04:49 PM
Quote
“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said
Post by: sys on July 28, 2016, 05:15:10 PM
It sounded to me like Trump was saying to hand over the emails if Russia had them? Seems reasonable. :dunno:
do you always have this kind of difficulty understanding human communication?
Post by: renocat on July 28, 2016, 07:20:10 PM
It sounded to me like Trump was saying to hand over the emails if Russia had them? Seems reasonable. :dunno:I agree. Dems are not denying Trump's charges that obamaclinton has driven our country to the edge of the abyss, and that their solutions are not woking. So they resort to.the tactics of a spoiled first grader. Name calling and lying.
Post by: catastrophe on July 28, 2016, 09:05:14 PM
It sounded to me like Trump was saying to hand over the emails if Russia had them? Seems reasonable. :dunno:
do you always have this kind of difficulty understanding human communication?
What do you mean?
Post by: sys on July 28, 2016, 09:07:09 PM
Post by: catastrophe on July 28, 2016, 09:16:03 PM
Quote
“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find [things] that are missing,” Mr. Trump said
I mean, it doesn't seem like a huge leap. It seems more ridiculous to take it as an invitation to hack when the US government is apparently saying it does not have these emails.
And even more ridiculous to consider a statement like that meaningful at all. Putin is not like bloody rough ridin' Mary where you have to invite him in before he can do anything.
Post by: sys on July 28, 2016, 09:21:48 PM
his words were clear and his meaning was plain. if you prefer not to believe him, that's on you.
Post by: catastrophe on July 28, 2016, 09:26:36 PM
Post by: chum1 on July 28, 2016, 09:27:40 PM
Post by: stunted on July 28, 2016, 09:28:02 PM
it's amazing how trumpites insist he doesn't mean anything he says he's going to do.
his words were clear and his meaning was plain. if you prefer not to believe him, that's on you.
I have no idea what's going on with it. It seems like another small thing you tards are making a big deal of, like the Melania speech thing. Maybe it's more multidimensional chess, he gets everyone talking about Clinton's email stuff that normally wouldn't :D
Post by: sys on July 28, 2016, 09:36:11 PM
I would be interested to hear the "clear meaning" of the words I just quoted. Because your reaction implies you are not taking them at face value.
Quote
Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing; I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.
he expresses the hope that russia has, or can find, the emails from clinton's server, so that they can be shared with the press. the clear implication is that he thinks this would help his campaign.
Post by: catastrophe on July 28, 2016, 09:47:53 PM
Post by: sys on July 28, 2016, 09:48:55 PM
So, hand over the emails if Russia has or gets them. Got it.
:lol:
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 28, 2016, 10:10:23 PM
I would be interested to hear the "clear meaning" of the words I just quoted. Because your reaction implies you are not taking them at face value.QuoteRussia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing; I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.
he expresses the hope that russia has, or can find, the emails from clinton's server, so that they can be shared with the press. the clear implication is that he thinks this would help his campaign.
He's obviosly making fun of the press and Hillary Clinton. It's not his fault the mouth breathing media chooses to interpret that as treason.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 28, 2016, 10:16:48 PM
Post by: catastrophe on July 28, 2016, 10:34:18 PM
Post by: puniraptor on July 28, 2016, 10:37:38 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 28, 2016, 10:38:09 PM
Post by: Skipper44 on July 28, 2016, 10:44:28 PM
Post by: puniraptor on July 28, 2016, 10:47:19 PM
Trump's best game plan is to ignore every question and attack the emails & bengazi until they shut his mic offHe should just copy everything she says but in his R-word voice. This is his best shot.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 28, 2016, 10:56:50 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 28, 2016, 10:58:16 PM
Post by: sys on July 28, 2016, 10:58:55 PM
So, hand over the emails if Russia has or gets them. Got it.
:lol:
i didn't want to put the time into it during the speech and royals' game, but i'd like to reengage now. is it your understanding that the people that were howling in outrage that the fbi didn't recommend clinton be prosecuted for using her private server for govt emails was due to unhappiness that we've somehow misplaced a few emails? like if some kindly country would just drop them off at the international lost and found everyone will heave a big sigh of relief and waggle their finger at clinton, telling her she got lucky this time, missy, but be more careful in the future?
Post by: Skipper44 on July 28, 2016, 11:01:23 PM
his face is the best part of the Rword voice so that should be his move when they put him on muteTrump's best game plan is to ignore every question and attack the emails & bengazi until they shut his mic offHe should just copy everything she says but in his R-word voice. This is his best shot.
Post by: catastrophe on July 28, 2016, 11:08:19 PM
So, hand over the emails if Russia has or gets them. Got it.
:lol:
i didn't want to put the time into it during the speech and royals' game, but i'd like to reengage now. is it your understanding that the people that were howling in outrage that the fbi didn't recommend clinton be prosecuted for using her private server for govt emails was due to unhappiness that we've somehow misplaced a few emails? like if some kindly country would just drop them off at the international lost and found everyone will heave a big sigh of relief and waggle their finger at clinton, telling her she got lucky this time, missy, but be more careful in the future?
This is all based on what I have gleaned from top stories: I think the outrage was due to the fact that Clinton did send and receive classified emails on a private server, which she knew she was not supposed to do. The "30,000 emails" thing based on my understanding is that she deleted a lot of the emails she sent/received, which are now unrecoverable from her server. We don't know if any of those emails were classified, but we know all emails on that server easily could have been hacked at one time or another. If Russia has any/all the emails (including the 30,000), the damage is already done. It would only be positive at this point for us to know what was leaked (and admittedly good for Trump's campaign if it proves the emails were hacked).
Post by: sys on July 28, 2016, 11:23:16 PM
Post by: stunted on July 28, 2016, 11:49:41 PM
Hillary will be specific with numbers and plans, Trump will be extremely vague and probably childish, and Hillary will moonwalk into the White House.
Earth to skinnybenny, people don't vote for numbers and plans
Post by: Phil Titola on July 29, 2016, 01:37:07 AM
Post by: bones129 on July 29, 2016, 03:17:12 AM
Trump will get wrecked in the first debate then refuse to participate in the "rigged system corrupt media gobble gobble"
Quite likely.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 29, 2016, 03:58:10 AM
Hillary will be specific with numbers and plans, Trump will be extremely vague and probably childish, and Hillary will moonwalk into the White House.
Earth to skinnybenny, people don't vote for numbers and plans
Except that people vote for plans all the time.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on July 29, 2016, 04:26:34 AM
Hillary will be specific with numbers and plans, Trump will be extremely vague and probably childish, and Hillary will moonwalk into the White House.
Earth to skinnybenny, people don't vote for numbers and plans
Except that people vote for plans all the time.
Judas Priest do we have people run in' around here selling steak? Good heavens men, you sell the SIZZLE!!!!
Post by: CNS on July 29, 2016, 05:34:06 AM
Trump's best game plan is to ignore every question and attack the emails & bengazi until they shut his mic offHe should just copy everything she says but in his R-word voice. This is his best shot.
Agreed. This is the only shot he has to survive going forward. Either that, or I guess he could physically attack her the first time she tried to be specific. His ppl would really dig that too.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 29, 2016, 07:40:02 AM
Trump says her deleted emails were national secrets or confidential. He hopes a foreign power has said emails or can find them. I don't think risking national security to win a political barb is something many Americans are okay with....but he was making a joke.... So it's okay.
Are you Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). In your mind trump is the one risking national security. Democrats are so rough ridin' stupid
Post by: stunted on July 29, 2016, 07:51:12 AM
Except that people vote for plans all the time.
Of course, there are millions of voters. From the smartest man on earth but also a HRC supporter :Yuck:
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/146605145036/persuasion-update-clinton-vs-trump
Quote
Clinton’s side includes more than her campaign team. It also includes pundits, supporters on social media, and the liberal-leaning parts of the mainstream media. While the Clinton campaign itself has been notably weak with its persuasion game, the folks on her side have been viciously effective at branding Trump a crazy racist.
Nothing else in this election matters.
Viewed through the Master Persuader filter, the facts of this election don’t matter because facts are not persuasive. The lies don’t matter. The flip-flopping doesn’t matter. Trump’s command of the issues don’t matter. Trump’s insults don’t matter. Policies don’t matter. Trump University doesn’t matter. Even charges of sexism are not enough to derail him.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 29, 2016, 07:56:54 AM
So NOW it's a national security issue?
My FSM, astounding, but DemoLemmings can only gurgle about Trump.
Post by: catastrophe on July 29, 2016, 08:04:10 AM
good, so you do understand that when trump said he hopes russia finds the emails and turns them over to the press he is saying that he hopes that the exact thing people outraged about clinton's email conduct consider would be most damaging to the country will occur.
I think the "lock her up" folks believe Hilldawg's email was hacked, but that doesn't mean they hope it was, which is really the worst case scenario. Since they believe the emails are already in the hands of Russia or China, I don't think it's inconsistent to hope for proof that it happened in order to show the situation was as serious as they have been claiming.
It would be like if there were early reports of a mass shooting happened in Texas and Trump said he hopes we can confirm it was an illegal Mexican immigrant. Yea, it's a dick thing to say, but it's still way different than hoping that the shooting occurred at all.
Post by: Institutional Control on July 29, 2016, 08:08:56 AM
I would be interested to hear the "clear meaning" of the words I just quoted. Because your reaction implies you are not taking them at face value.QuoteRussia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing; I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.
he expresses the hope that russia has, or can find, the emails from clinton's server, so that they can be shared with the press. the clear implication is that he thinks this would help his campaign.
He's obviosly making fun of the press and Hillary Clinton. It's not his fault the mouth breathing media chooses to interpret that as treason.
I hate when I agree with FSD. I feel like I should take a cold shower.
Post by: stunted on July 29, 2016, 08:15:05 AM
So the Clintler campaign says this is a national security issue (steps back in stunned amazement).
So NOW it's a national security issue?
My FSM, astounding, but DemoLemmings can only gurgle about Trump.
Just say Clitler. 100% commitment.
Post by: Phil Titola on July 29, 2016, 08:17:52 AM
ITrump says her deleted emails were national secrets or confidential. He hopes a foreign power has said emails or can find them. I don't think risking national security to win a political barb is something many Americans are okay with....but he was making a joke.... So it's okay.
Are you Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). In your mind trump is the one risking national security. Democrats are so rough ridin' stupid
Hillary also risked national security with her email server.... A practice not started by her. All of these things are bad. Only dumbasses here are the ones defending Trump because "lol its okay he said it was a joke"
Post by: chum1 on July 29, 2016, 08:19:16 AM
Like, yeah, for Trump, it's a joke. But for any other Presidential nominee in history, it's not. Why shouldn't Trump be subject to the same level of scrutiny that everyone else is?
Post by: wetwillie on July 29, 2016, 08:20:42 AM
Post by: ChiComCat on July 29, 2016, 08:25:24 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 29, 2016, 08:28:59 AM
ITrump says her deleted emails were national secrets or confidential. He hopes a foreign power has said emails or can find them. I don't think risking national security to win a political barb is something many Americans are okay with....but he was making a joke.... So it's okay.
Are you Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). In your mind trump is the one risking national security. Democrats are so rough ridin' stupid
Hillary also risked national security with her email server.... A practice not started by her. All of these things are bad. Only dumbasses here are the ones defending Trump because "lol its okay he said it was a joke"
There no national security implication from trump saying he hopes the russians turn over her emails if they have them. You are a delusional Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).
Post by: Institutional Control on July 29, 2016, 08:30:38 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 29, 2016, 08:31:22 AM
There are plenty of national security experts and advisors from both Republican and Democrat administrations that have denounced Trump's remark.
Like, yeah, for Trump, it's a joke. But for any other Presidential nominee in history, it's not. Why shouldn't Trump be subject to the same level of scrutiny that everyone else is?
I dont know, you fucktards dont seem to care that hillary clinton kept national security information on a toilet server and then repeatedly lied about while destroying some of the contents. That's a helluva lot more concerning in real life.
Post by: Phil Titola on July 29, 2016, 08:33:00 AM
It's a stupid statement but not a crime by any means. Not that I buy into the usual MSM bullshit but the media feels Trump will attack the first amendment and some of the less reputable press is responding.
Yeah I don't think a possible crime is what bothers people, is that a person running for president openly hopes a foreign power has a high ranking officials emails (that he thinks are sensitive).... Rooting for America to possibly be exposed just to win a political fight isn't rooting for America first.... That's what is getting him blowback on that comment.
He just doesn't get the weight of his comments in the world on this stage. Will he learn? His past doesn't indicate he will.
Debates will be a shitshow for Trump
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 29, 2016, 08:34:58 AM
Post by: chum1 on July 29, 2016, 08:36:17 AM
Like, are you delusional whack-a-doodles really trying to pin the wikileaks hack job on trump? And you want to take it even further to say that he's acting in concert with the russian to make hillarys reckless behavior somehow more reckless, and that makes him somehow culpable for her recklessness?
Just continue to use your imagination about what other people are saying. You're doing a great job so far.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 29, 2016, 08:36:47 AM
It's a stupid statement but not a crime by any means. Not that I buy into the usual MSM bullshit but the media feels Trump will attack the first amendment and some of the less reputable press is responding.
Yeah I don't think a possible crime is what bothers people, is that a person running for president openly hopes a foreign power has a high ranking officials emails (that he thinks are sensitive).... Rooting for America to possibly be exposed just to win a political fight isn't rooting for America first.... That's what is getting him blowback on that comment.
He just doesn't get the weight of his comments in the world on this stage. Will he learn? His past doesn't indicate he will.
Debates will be a shitshow for Trump
OMG, just stop. You sound like a rough ridin' idiot.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 29, 2016, 08:37:54 AM
Like, are you delusional whack-a-doodles really trying to pin the wikileaks hack job on trump? And you want to take it even further to say that he's acting in concert with the russian to make hillarys reckless behavior somehow more reckless, and that makes him somehow culpable for her recklessness?
Just continue to use your imagination about what other people are saying. You're doing a great job so far.
:lol:
You're backing these retards!
Post by: Phil Titola on July 29, 2016, 08:38:53 AM
There are plenty of national security experts and advisors from both Republican and Democrat administrations that have denounced Trump's remark.
Like, yeah, for Trump, it's a joke. But for any other Presidential nominee in history, it's not. Why shouldn't Trump be subject to the same level of scrutiny that everyone else is?
I dont know, you fucktards dont seem to care that hillary clinton kept national security information on a toilet server and then repeatedly lied about while destroying some of the contents. That's a helluva lot more concerning in real life.
Yes. That's bad. The practice of using private email should never been allowed to happen by her or past officials. Tech staffers should be there coaching officials on this stuff... The officials doing this obviously aren't t savvy enough to know all the tech risks.
Post by: Institutional Control on July 29, 2016, 08:40:21 AM
Post by: Phil Titola on July 29, 2016, 08:40:35 AM
Like, are you delusional whack-a-doodles really trying to pin the wikileaks hack job on trump? And you want to take it even further to say that he's acting in concert with the russian to make hillarys reckless behavior somehow more reckless, and that makes him somehow culpable for her recklessness?
No... That's idiotic.
Post by: chum1 on July 29, 2016, 08:42:22 AM
Like, are you delusional whack-a-doodles really trying to pin the wikileaks hack job on trump? And you want to take it even further to say that he's acting in concert with the russian to make hillarys reckless behavior somehow more reckless, and that makes him somehow culpable for her recklessness?
Just continue to use your imagination about what other people are saying. You're doing a great job so far.
:lol:
You're backing these retards!
I admire your creative mind.
Post by: ChiComCat on July 29, 2016, 08:45:21 AM
Post by: chum1 on July 29, 2016, 08:48:09 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/russias-influence-in-western-elections/2016/04/08/b427602a-fcf1-11e5-886f-a037dba38301_story.html
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 29, 2016, 08:50:00 AM
There are plenty of national security experts and advisors from both Republican and Democrat administrations that have denounced Trump's remark.
Like, yeah, for Trump, it's a joke. But for any other Presidential nominee in history, it's not. Why shouldn't Trump be subject to the same level of scrutiny that everyone else is?
I dont know, you fucktards dont seem to care that hillary clinton kept national security information on a toilet server and then repeatedly lied about while destroying some of the contents. That's a helluva lot more concerning in real life.
Yes. That's bad. The practice of using private email should never been allowed to happen by her or past officials. Tech staffers should be there coaching officials on this stuff... The officials doing this obviously aren't t savvy enough to know all the tech risks.
Uh Tech staffers tried to stop what Hillary was doing and were silenced. The women simply doesn't believe the rules/laws apply to her and she knew she and her husband would be selling influence across the globe among other things.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 29, 2016, 09:13:13 AM
There are plenty of national security experts and advisors from both Republican and Democrat administrations that have denounced Trump's remark.
Like, yeah, for Trump, it's a joke. But for any other Presidential nominee in history, it's not. Why shouldn't Trump be subject to the same level of scrutiny that everyone else is?
I dont know, you fucktards dont seem to care that hillary clinton kept national security information on a toilet server and then repeatedly lied about while destroying some of the contents. That's a helluva lot more concerning in real life.
Yes. That's bad. The practice of using private email should never been allowed to happen by her or past officials. Tech staffers should be there coaching officials on this stuff... The officials doing this obviously aren't t savvy enough to know all the tech risks.
Uh Tech staffers tried to stop what Hillary was doing and were silenced. The women simply doesn't believe the rules/laws apply to her and she knew she and her husband would be selling influence across the globe among other things.
You've made this mistake a few times before, so allow me to help you out since it's obviously not just a typo:
woman=one adult female
women=two or more adult females
There you go, that one's on the house. You may now return to your regularly scheduled tinfoil hatting.
Post by: treysolid on July 29, 2016, 10:09:31 AM
ITrump says her deleted emails were national secrets or confidential. He hopes a foreign power has said emails or can find them. I don't think risking national security to win a political barb is something many Americans are okay with....but he was making a joke.... So it's okay.
Are you Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). In your mind trump is the one risking national security. Democrats are so rough ridin' stupid
Hillary also risked national security with her email server.... A practice not started by her. All of these things are bad. Only dumbasses here are the ones defending Trump because "lol its okay he said it was a joke"
There no national security implication from trump saying he hopes the russians turn over her emails if they have them. You are a delusional Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).
except trump didn't say that. he didn't say "turn over the emails if you have them," he said "please find the emails." A request for a foreign nation to use their surveillance apparatus to hack his opposition.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 29, 2016, 10:50:39 AM
There are plenty of national security experts and advisors from both Republican and Democrat administrations that have denounced Trump's remark.
Like, yeah, for Trump, it's a joke. But for any other Presidential nominee in history, it's not. Why shouldn't Trump be subject to the same level of scrutiny that everyone else is?
I dont know, you fucktards dont seem to care that hillary clinton kept national security information on a toilet server and then repeatedly lied about while destroying some of the contents. That's a helluva lot more concerning in real life.
Yes. That's bad. The practice of using private email should never been allowed to happen by her or past officials. Tech staffers should be there coaching officials on this stuff... The officials doing this obviously aren't t savvy enough to know all the tech risks.
Are you rough ridin' kidding me? A tech issue? How about exercising a modicum of common sense, or not deliberately circumventing the FOIA? How about not making up egregious lies and destroying evidence? You think this person is fit to be president? Good grief.
Post by: steve dave on July 29, 2016, 10:54:11 AM
Post by: stunted on July 29, 2016, 10:55:44 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 29, 2016, 10:56:53 AM
Post by: treysolid on July 29, 2016, 10:58:11 AM
does it matter why putin wants trump as president or is it automatically bad that putin does?
it depends. how closely to american interests do russian interests lie? my instincts tell me they are pretty far apart.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 29, 2016, 10:58:58 AM
does it matter why putin wants trump as president or is it automatically bad that putin does?
If you think conjecture upon conjecture matters, still no.
Russias involvement in the dnc hack has not been corroborated and appears to be made up by the dnc to push the false narrative you've desvribed.
Post by: CNS on July 29, 2016, 11:05:23 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 29, 2016, 11:12:05 AM
Rewind 20-30 yrs and any mention of Russia in a positive way would kill a candidate. They were then what Trump's Muslims are now. But here we are acting like it's fine. Interesting.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I'm sure Trump would be in deep crap if he had said he hopes ISIS is able to find those missing emails.
Post by: wetwillie on July 29, 2016, 11:17:35 AM
Post by: CNS on July 29, 2016, 11:19:15 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: chum1 on July 29, 2016, 11:19:30 AM
Post by: CNS on July 29, 2016, 11:20:09 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: wetwillie on July 29, 2016, 11:26:51 AM
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 29, 2016, 11:38:25 AM
Rewind 20-30 yrs and any mention of Russia in a positive way would kill a candidate. They were then what Trump's Muslims are now. But here we are acting like it's fine. Interesting.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I wonder if it makes any difference that 30 years ago we were involved in a Cold War against the USSR. :confused:
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 29, 2016, 11:57:05 AM
I think it matters because Putin is a guy who would love to reclaim territory once controlled by the Soviet Union and he's proven that he's willing to use force to do so. And Trump is a guy who has said that he's okay with Putin doing so and that he's not all that crazy about NATO. Possible WWIII stuff there.
In real life, putin already did this and b.o. and hillrod were too chicken crap to stop it. So, yet another conjectural false narrative belied by the actions of the libtard preferred candidate.
Post by: chum1 on July 29, 2016, 12:00:06 PM
Quote
Two dozen Republican national security experts signed a letter to congressional leaders Thursday asking for an immediate investigation into the cyberattack on the Democratic National Committee, writing that “this is not a partisan issue” but rather “an assault on the integrity of the entire American political process.”
Quote
While a consensus has developed among cybersecurity experts that Russian hackers were most likely responsible for the intrusion at the DNC, not all Republicans are so sure, including Donald Trump and Rep. Devin Nunes (Calif.)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/republican-security-experts-request-congressional-investigation-of-dnc-hack/2016/07/28/81fa5cb8-550e-11e6-bbf5-957ad17b4385_story.html
Post by: chum1 on July 29, 2016, 12:01:40 PM
I think it matters because Putin is a guy who would love to reclaim territory once controlled by the Soviet Union and he's proven that he's willing to use force to do so. And Trump is a guy who has said that he's okay with Putin doing so and that he's not all that crazy about NATO. Possible WWIII stuff there.
In real life, putin already did this and b.o. and hillrod were too chicken crap to stop it. So, yet another conjectural false narrative belied by the actions of the libtard preferred candidate.
I don't know what you are responding to, but I enjoy your words.
Post by: sys on July 29, 2016, 12:08:23 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 29, 2016, 12:27:50 PM
This DNC hack stuff really isn't just a liberal thing or a wild conspiracy theory.QuoteTwo dozen Republican national security experts signed a letter to congressional leaders Thursday asking for an immediate investigation into the cyberattack on the Democratic National Committee, writing that “this is not a partisan issue” but rather “an assault on the integrity of the entire American political process.”QuoteWhile a consensus has developed among cybersecurity experts that Russian hackers were most likely responsible for the intrusion at the DNC, not all Republicans are so sure, including Donald Trump and Rep. Devin Nunes (Calif.)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/republican-security-experts-request-congressional-investigation-of-dnc-hack/2016/07/28/81fa5cb8-550e-11e6-bbf5-957ad17b4385_story.html
In short, the allegations are not colorable, yet.
Post by: chum1 on July 29, 2016, 12:28:14 PM
:sdeek:
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 29, 2016, 12:28:35 PM
I think it matters because Putin is a guy who would love to reclaim territory once controlled by the Soviet Union and he's proven that he's willing to use force to do so. And Trump is a guy who has said that he's okay with Putin doing so and that he's not all that crazy about NATO. Possible WWIII stuff there.
In real life, putin already did this and b.o. and hillrod were too chicken crap to stop it. So, yet another conjectural false narrative belied by the actions of the libtard preferred candidate.
I don't know what you are responding to, but I enjoy your words.
Yea you do. You are just mad about it
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 29, 2016, 12:31:36 PM
http://time.com/4426818/donald-trump-julian-assange-vladimir-putin/
:sdeek:
Oh man, a field day of logical fallacy, conjecture and just made up stuff.
Post by: chum1 on July 29, 2016, 12:32:13 PM
Let's not forget that russias involement in this is a unfounded allegation contrived by democrats, and the wikileaks released the emails. JA has refuted that phony allegation.
In short, the allegations are not colorable, yet.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on July 29, 2016, 12:36:49 PM
Post by: steve dave on July 29, 2016, 12:37:35 PM
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-usa-trump-idUSKCN0YN35S
Post by: ChiComCat on July 29, 2016, 12:47:21 PM
Post by: CNS on July 29, 2016, 12:47:59 PM
Rewind 20-30 yrs and any mention of Russia in a positive way would kill a candidate. They were then what Trump's Muslims are now. But here we are acting like it's fine. Interesting.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I wonder if it makes any difference that 30 years ago we were involved in a Cold War against the USSR. :confused:
Is the Putin govt totally different than the Russian government was then?
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 29, 2016, 12:57:09 PM
Rewind 20-30 yrs and any mention of Russia in a positive way would kill a candidate. They were then what Trump's Muslims are now. But here we are acting like it's fine. Interesting.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I wonder if it makes any difference that 30 years ago we were involved in a Cold War against the USSR. :confused:
Is the Putin govt totally different than the Russian government was then?
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Must it be for the people's reaction to be different?
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 29, 2016, 12:59:08 PM
There are plenty of national security experts and advisors from both Republican and Democrat administrations that have denounced Trump's remark.
Like, yeah, for Trump, it's a joke. But for any other Presidential nominee in history, it's not. Why shouldn't Trump be subject to the same level of scrutiny that everyone else is?
I dont know, you fucktards dont seem to care that hillary clinton kept national security information on a toilet server and then repeatedly lied about while destroying some of the contents. That's a helluva lot more concerning in real life.
Yes. That's bad. The practice of using private email should never been allowed to happen by her or past officials. Tech staffers should be there coaching officials on this stuff... The officials doing this obviously aren't t savvy enough to know all the tech risks.
Uh Tech staffers tried to stop what Hillary was doing and were silenced. The women simply doesn't believe the rules/laws apply to her and she knew she and her husband would be selling influence across the globe among other things.
You've made this mistake a few times before, so allow me to help you out since it's obviously not just a typo:
woman=one adult female
women=two or more adult females
There you go, that one's on the house. You may now return to your regularly scheduled tinfoil hatting.
Yes SBmeltdown a typeO on tapatalk, the horror.
I also admit to mis-speaking, when numerous rank and filers at State brought up that was against like, oh, a bajillion rules to use outside servers, and nongov't issued and managed domains, they were told to STFU. DOS IT Security never approved the use of outside email and not only was there little or no direct security on the servers, anti virus and malware was turned off most of the time potentially allowing for an easy backdoor directly into the DOS systems.
Never thought SBmeltdown would be so for corruption.
I
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 29, 2016, 01:01:10 PM
All of America's enemies are lining up behind Trump. I can only assume because they want what's best for America.
So if you want to call the Muslim Brotherhood and various other Theocracies that support Hillary, America's "friends" you've got a point.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 29, 2016, 01:05:09 PM
Uh Tech staffers tried to stop what Hillary was doing and were silenced. The women simply doesn't believe the rules/laws apply to her and she knew she and her husband would be selling influence across the globe among other things.
You've made this mistake a few times before, so allow me to help you out since it's obviously not just a typo:
woman=one adult female
women=two or more adult females
There you go, that one's on the house. You may now return to your regularly scheduled tinfoil hatting.
Yes SBmeltdown a typeO on tapatalk, the horror.
I also admit to mis-speaking, when numerous rank and filers at State brought up that was against like, oh, a bajillion rules to use outside servers, and nongov't issued and managed domains, they were told to STFU. DOS IT Security never approved the use of outside email and not only was there little or no direct security on the servers, anti virus and malware was turned off most of the time potentially allowing for an easy backdoor directly into the DOS systems.
Never thought SBmeltdown would be so for corruption.
I
Well said.
Post by: CNS on July 29, 2016, 01:19:21 PM
Rewind 20-30 yrs and any mention of Russia in a positive way would kill a candidate. They were then what Trump's Muslims are now. But here we are acting like it's fine. Interesting.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I wonder if it makes any difference that 30 years ago we were involved in a Cold War against the USSR. :confused:
Is the Putin govt totally different than the Russian government was then?
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Must it be for the people's reaction to be different?
I guess not if that is the new comfortable for the party of Reagan.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Emo EMAW on July 29, 2016, 01:21:06 PM
Rewind 20-30 yrs and any mention of Russia in a positive way would kill a candidate. They were then what Trump's Muslims are now. But here we are acting like it's fine. Interesting.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I wonder if it makes any difference that 30 years ago we were involved in a Cold War against the USSR. :confused:
Is the Putin govt totally different than the Russian government was then?
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Must it be for the people's reaction to be different?
I guess not if that is the new comfortable for the party of Reagan.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I'm comfortable with any party changing with the times.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 29, 2016, 01:35:46 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 29, 2016, 01:51:08 PM
SBmeltdown isn't one of your best dax, you should consider trying again
It's about on the level of "daxipad"
Post by: mocat on July 29, 2016, 02:00:22 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 29, 2016, 02:23:44 PM
According to the dnc and their media mouth pieces and without factual bases, All of America's enemies are lining up behind Trump. I can only assume because they wantwhat's best forto tetain power at all cost to the detriment of America.
Fyp
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 29, 2016, 02:25:04 PM
Let's not forget that russias involement in this is a unfounded allegation contrived by democrats, and the wikileaks released the emails. JA has refuted that phony allegation.In short, the allegations are not colorable, yet.
You don't know what colorable means, do you?
Post by: ChiComCat on July 29, 2016, 04:02:59 PM
According to the dnc and their media mouth pieces and without factual bases, All of America's enemies are lining up behind Trump. I can only assume because they wantwhat's best forto tetain power at all cost to the detriment of America.
Fyp
DNC mouth pieces like North Korea themselves?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-usa-trump-idUSKCN0YN35S
Or Trump himself?
http://www.reuters.com/video/2016/02/17/trump-putin-called-me-a-genius?videoId=367432272
MSM has their hands so far up this Russian newspaper's ass!
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/17/putin-accuses-turkey-of-cozying-up-to-the-us.html
Post by: meow meow on July 29, 2016, 04:59:13 PM
SBmeltdown doesn't even make sense.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 29, 2016, 05:59:41 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 29, 2016, 06:26:35 PM
DemoLemmings awfully worked up right now.
Is it the corruption, racism and homophobia of the DNC?
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 29, 2016, 06:58:03 PM
SBMeltdown will not allow Hillary reality to go unchallenged!!
DemoLemmings awfully worked up right now.
Is it the corruption, racism and homophobia of the DNC?
:love:
Post by: stunted on July 29, 2016, 07:44:55 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on July 29, 2016, 10:06:09 PM
Post by: michigancat on July 30, 2016, 08:52:33 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on July 30, 2016, 10:06:33 PM
Skinnybenny has the type of posting style that only comes from someone who gets friendzoned a lot irl
you know how Hill and Chell had that warm contrived, rehearsed 20 second handoff before her speach, I keep looking at this gif and cant discern if her reaction is real or memorex.
Post by: stunted on July 30, 2016, 10:07:11 PM
Nate Shitter now has Clitler/Trump neck and neck. Hopefully there's a negative DNC bounce as well #DemExit
She will get a big bump like Trump got a big bump.
Here's the thing...to get the 10% of Bernie voters that would have only voted for him, you're probably losing a much higher percentage of centrists.
There will be crying and whining, but the majority of those folks will fall in line when the prospect of Donald Trump actually winning actually sinks in.
Trump has officially passed Clitler in Nate Shitter's preferred poll.
Post by: chum1 on July 31, 2016, 01:33:35 PM
https://twitter.com/nypost/status/759699825264820224
Post by: bucket on July 31, 2016, 01:37:04 PM
Hahahahaha
https://twitter.com/nypost/status/759699825264820224
I could get behind a candidate like that if he wasn't a racist, habitual liar
Post by: MakeItRain on July 31, 2016, 02:51:31 PM
Skinnybenny has the type of posting style that only comes from someone who gets friendzoned a lot irl
you know how Hill and Chell had that warm contrived, rehearsed 20 second handoff before her speach, I keep looking at this gif and cant discern if her reaction is real or memorex.
Jesus, how old are you?
Post by: star seed 7 on July 31, 2016, 06:01:47 PM
TRUMP: She's a very dishonest person. I have one of the great temperaments. I have a winning temperament. She has a bad temperament. She's weak. We need a strong temperament and that's all it is, I have a strong temperament. And... I do know how to win.....
I think I have a great temperament. I beat 16 very talented people in -- and I've never done this before. You don't do that with a bad temperament.
I'm leading her in the polls, as you probably have noticed. And I think I have a great temperament. I have a temperament where I know how to win.
I've had a beautiful -- I've had a -- had a flawless campaign. You'll be writing books about this campaign. And yet she's criticizing my campaign.
Now, her campaign, she couldn't beat Bernie, OK?
STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, she did beat him.
TRUMP: Well, barely.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 31, 2016, 06:02:31 PM
STEPHANOPOULOS; You played golf together.
TRUMP: Maybe once.... And I hit the ball a lot longer, and a lot better.
Post by: star seed 7 on July 31, 2016, 06:09:47 PM
Post by: sys on July 31, 2016, 07:08:51 PM
Post by: renocat on July 31, 2016, 07:31:22 PM
Post by: puniraptor on July 31, 2016, 07:34:06 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 31, 2016, 07:38:03 PM
Sad reno doesn't #SupportOurTroops :(
figured he was a patriot
Post by: Tobias on July 31, 2016, 07:41:19 PM
Post by: CNS on July 31, 2016, 07:42:23 PM
TRUMP; Michael Bloomberg has wanted to run for president for probably as long as you have known him and guess what? He never had the guts to do it. And now I see this guy up on stage saying negative things. He knows nothing about me. He's never been to my office. I don't know him well.
STEPHANOPOULOS; You played golf together.
TRUMP: Maybe once.... And I hit the ball a lot longer, and a lot better.
Kim Jun Trump, apparently.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: chum1 on July 31, 2016, 07:45:01 PM
Post by: puniraptor on July 31, 2016, 08:04:06 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 31, 2016, 08:10:04 PM
He is legitimately an idiot. lol at all those who have tasked themselves with defending and justifying him.
Yet there's more then enough information to indicate that Hillary is a total idiot, who won't say a thing until it's vetted with her adviser du jour. She's also reportedly a total idiot when it comes to the economy and is almost wholly reliant on advisers on the subject. Her stint as SOS only reinforced that she's a war mongering hot head who really doesn't have the first effing clue when it comes to diplomacy.
For a presidential candidate that's been a Senator and SOS her overall track record of non accomplishment rivals Obama, which is stunning, and the cluster effs left in her wake actually make her far worse then Obama.
Post by: puniraptor on July 31, 2016, 08:21:39 PM
Post by: puniraptor on July 31, 2016, 08:22:30 PM
Post by: puniraptor on July 31, 2016, 08:25:29 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on July 31, 2016, 08:28:49 PM
:lol:
Post by: sonofdaxjones on July 31, 2016, 08:35:55 PM
Post by: stunted on July 31, 2016, 08:39:54 PM
BUT HILLARY
:lol:
BILLIONAIRE IS STUPID CAUSE HE IS NARCISSISTIC AND HURTS MY FEELINGS
:lol:
Post by: puniraptor on July 31, 2016, 08:40:18 PM
Post by: puniraptor on July 31, 2016, 08:43:26 PM
Stupid because he just can't bear to do what's best for himself even when it is impossibly easy.BUT HILLARY
BILLIONAIRE IS STUPID CAUSE HE IS NARCISSISTIC AND HURTS MY FEELINGS
Post by: Dugout DickStone on July 31, 2016, 08:48:31 PM
Post by: sys on July 31, 2016, 09:57:37 PM
His tax returns will be interesting
he will never release them.
Post by: chum1 on July 31, 2016, 10:02:28 PM
His tax returns will be interesting
he will never release them.
And only so people won't know that he isn't nearly as rich as he says he is, which is very LOL.
Post by: wetwillie on July 31, 2016, 10:10:18 PM
Post by: bucket on July 31, 2016, 10:12:10 PM
His tax returns will be interesting
he will never release them.
And only so people won't know that he isn't nearly as rich as he says he is, which is very LOL.
Or that he hasn't been as charitable as he claims to be
Post by: chum1 on July 31, 2016, 10:37:24 PM
Quote
Tuesday, Trump claimed a net worth of $8.7 billion as of June 2014.
Two things in particular jump out in Trump’s “Summary of Net Worth” document: First, his single most valuable asset is apparently the Trump brand and the licensing deals it brings in. He values Just Being Donald Trump at more than $3.3 billion. According to Forbes, his brand is only worth $125 million, plus “another $128 million in management fees for Trump-branded hotels."
Second, in his list of liabilities, he counts loans and mortgages only on real estate owned 100 percent by him—and, as we’ve seen, much of what says “Trump” on it isn’t wholly owned by The Donald himself.
http://gawker.com/donald-trumps-grossly-exaggerated-net-worth-a-timeline-1711718182
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 01, 2016, 12:49:05 AM
Dax, Trump is an idiot. Your above description of Hill sounds like what a smart President would do.
A "smart" President doesn't rely on advisors to tell her what to say all the time. When she's on her own she's exposing herself as the uber corrupt liar that she is.
Post by: SdK on August 01, 2016, 04:45:15 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 01, 2016, 05:48:41 AM
Both of the candidates suck crap. We are going to have to hold our collective noses and vote this year. Can't we all agree on that?
Not if you vote for someone else besides those two.
Post by: puniraptor on August 01, 2016, 05:53:01 AM
Post by: wetwillie on August 01, 2016, 06:52:28 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 01, 2016, 07:59:16 AM
Post by: chum1 on August 01, 2016, 08:06:46 AM
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/lovett-trump-vows-continue-n-y-campaign-article-1.2733288
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 01, 2016, 08:19:49 AM
He is legitimately an idiot. lol at all those who have tasked themselves with defending and justifying him.
Yet there's more then enough information to indicate that Hillary is a total idiot, who won't say a thing until it's vetted with her adviser du jour. She's also reportedly a total idiot when it comes to the economy and is almost wholly reliant on advisers on the subject. Her stint as SOS only reinforced that she's a war mongering hot head who really doesn't have the first effing clue when it comes to diplomacy.
For a presidential candidate that's been a Senator and SOS her overall track record of non accomplishment rivals Obama, which is stunning, and the cluster effs left in her wake actually make her far worse then Obama.
The fact that she bothers to get the stuff she says vetted indicates she's probably far more intelligent than Trump.
Post by: ChiComCat on August 01, 2016, 08:21:13 AM
Post by: wetwillie on August 01, 2016, 08:30:19 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 01, 2016, 08:58:13 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on August 01, 2016, 09:03:29 AM
Post by: chum1 on August 01, 2016, 09:13:09 AM
I often wish that a presidential candidate would run with his/her whole cabinet chosen, not just a VP. That way we can see who would really be driving the decision making.
With Trump, you know it will be the best Cabinet with the best people. Not sure what more you want.
Post by: chum1 on August 01, 2016, 09:14:28 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 01, 2016, 09:19:25 AM
I often wish that a presidential candidate would run with his/her whole cabinet chosen, not just a VP. That way we can see who would really be driving the decision making.
I like this. It's Tuesday night? the GOP v. Dem secretary of state debate is on...
Post by: SdK on August 01, 2016, 09:20:29 AM
Very true. I hadn't thought of that perspective. :)Both of the candidates suck crap. We are going to have to hold our collective noses and vote this year. Can't we all agree on that?
Not if you vote for someone else besides those two.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 01, 2016, 10:04:44 AM
I often wish that a presidential candidate would run with his/her whole cabinet chosen, not just a VP. That way we can see who would really be driving the decision making.
Absolutely
Post by: wetwillie on August 01, 2016, 10:05:37 AM
Post by: stunted on August 01, 2016, 10:31:23 AM
magical chess
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/lovett-trump-vows-continue-n-y-campaign-article-1.2733288
You're looking at things from a 1D tic tac toe perspective.
Post by: CNS on August 01, 2016, 11:20:44 AM
Trump repeatedly has said that he will hire the best ppl, yet there has been rumors recently that lots of ppl are refusing to work on his campaign and his VP is the 15th or 16th person asked.
I mean, if he won and we ended up with "the best ppl" as advisors, I don't think we see much change from where we are now. However, if the best ppl that said yes are what we end up with, who's to say we don't end up with a cabinet of Sarah Palins?
Post by: chum1 on August 01, 2016, 11:41:07 AM
magical chess
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/lovett-trump-vows-continue-n-y-campaign-article-1.2733288
You're looking at things from a 1D tic tac toe perspective.
I mean, I don't think he will win the election regardless. Maybe he doesn't either. In that sense, it doesn't really matter what he does to that end.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 01, 2016, 11:43:10 AM
Post by: treysolid on August 01, 2016, 11:44:18 AM
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on August 01, 2016, 11:46:40 AM
Post by: wetwillie on August 01, 2016, 11:51:06 AM
Post by: CNS on August 01, 2016, 12:04:40 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 01, 2016, 12:05:53 PM
Supposedly quite a few of the relig right stayed home with Romney. I think those guys will go vote their asses off for trump.
He has mocked them so why?
Post by: CNS on August 01, 2016, 12:06:33 PM
Supposedly quite a few of the relig right stayed home with Romney. I think those guys will go vote their asses off for trump.
He has mocked them so why?
I haven't looked at polls in a few weeks, but they loved the crap out of trump for a while now. :dunno:
Post by: sys on August 01, 2016, 12:10:43 PM
Has anyone already considered that Trump is in a Brewster's Millions scenario that went too far?
there definitely has been speculation that he doesn't actually want to win. there was a brief thing where he speculated that he might resign before taking office if he did win, but that got quickly and aggressively walked back.
Post by: CNS on August 01, 2016, 12:15:00 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 01, 2016, 12:26:17 PM
Supposedly quite a few of the relig right stayed home with Romney. I think those guys will go vote their asses off for trump.
He has mocked them so why?
I haven't looked at polls in a few weeks, but they loved the crap out of trump for a while now. :dunno:
Christians vote the crap out of religious freedom, which is why they will vote for trump and banning Muslims
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 01, 2016, 12:28:03 PM
Post by: wetwillie on August 01, 2016, 12:33:52 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 01, 2016, 12:51:35 PM
He is really letting the parents of that dead Marine have it.
Never let a dead muslim go to waste
Post by: chum1 on August 01, 2016, 12:56:16 PM
If he can win Michigan, Pennsylviana, Ohio, Wisconsin he is going to win. I know that's still a long shot, but he seems to have major traction with his anti trade message.
Pretty rough when this state plus a bunch of swing states are all must wins:
http://www.270towin.com/states/Pennsylvania
Post by: chum1 on August 01, 2016, 01:03:50 PM
If he can win Michigan, Pennsylviana, Ohio, Wisconsin he is going to win. I know that's still a long shot, but he seems to have major traction with his anti trade message.
Pretty rough when this state plus a bunch of swing states are all must wins:
http://www.270towin.com/states/Pennsylvania
I guess these aren't really any better.
http://www.270towin.com/states/Wisconsin
http://www.270towin.com/states/Michigan
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 01, 2016, 01:22:22 PM
He is really letting the parents of that dead Marine have it.
Never let a dead muslim go to waste
Or a dead ambassador
Post by: CNS on August 01, 2016, 01:23:51 PM
Post by: chum1 on August 01, 2016, 01:36:55 PM
(https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2016/08/Gallup_ToVote.jpg&w=600)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/01/more-people-watched-donald-trumps-convention-speech-than-hillary-clintons-and-hated-it/
Post by: star seed 7 on August 01, 2016, 02:05:55 PM
He is really letting the parents of that dead Marine have it.
Never let a dead muslim go to waste
Or a dead ambassador
Are people trashing dead ambassadors?
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 01, 2016, 02:58:05 PM
He is really letting the parents of that dead Marine have it.
Never let a dead muslim go to waste
Or a dead ambassador
Are people trashing dead ambassadors?
Or war Mongering gun running Secretaries of State who lie about why they got the Ambassador and Muslims killed.
Hillary loved the idea of invading Iraq and couldn't wait to vote for it, so the blood of the dead Muslim soldier is partially on her hands.
What sacrifice has Hillary made besides stuffing blood money into her bank account?
Post by: star seed 7 on August 01, 2016, 03:03:31 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 01, 2016, 03:05:47 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 01, 2016, 03:09:51 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 01, 2016, 04:17:08 PM
Yes Hillary crap canned an ambassador by getting him killed
Is she waiting until later to go after his parents? Like, the week of the election
Post by: Yard Dog on August 01, 2016, 04:22:14 PM
Yes Hillary crap canned an ambassador by getting him killed
Is she waiting until later to go after his parents? Like, the week of the election
It speaks more that she treats them like they should be friends when they know it was her fault and they are forced to play nice for the cameras. Basically standing there with a smile defending their sons executioner. Sad. More of a eat away their confidence and passion from the inside kind of thing.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 01, 2016, 04:24:02 PM
Yes Hillary crap canned an ambassador by getting him killed
Is she waiting until later to go after his parents? Like, the week of the election
It speaks more that she treats them like they should be friends when they know it was her fault and they are forced to play nice for the cameras. Basically standing there with a smile defending their sons executioner. Sad. More of a eat away their confidence and passion from the inside kind of thing.
Interesting, if true.
Btw, if true, that is exactly the type of cold-blooded, calculating chessmaster I would love to have at the controls for the next 4-8 years.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 01, 2016, 04:37:40 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on August 01, 2016, 04:43:52 PM
Yes Hillary crap canned an ambassador by getting him killed
Is she waiting until later to go after his parents? Like, the week of the election
It speaks more that she treats them like they should be friends when they know it was her fault and they are forced to play nice for the cameras. Basically standing there with a smile defending their sons executioner. Sad. More of a eat away their confidence and passion from the inside kind of thing.
Interesting, if true.
Btw, if true, that is exactly the type of cold-blooded, calculating chessmaster I would love to have at the controls for the next 4-8 years.
It's very "Frank Underwood" and while it makes for a great drama, it can also backfire horrifically.
Post by: chum1 on August 01, 2016, 07:30:20 PM
https://twitter.com/wsbtv/status/760212276746063873
Post by: Phil Titola on August 01, 2016, 10:24:42 PM
Post by: stunted on August 01, 2016, 11:43:48 PM
What's next, CNN or Washington Post article?
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 02, 2016, 05:16:40 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 02, 2016, 08:55:45 AM
Post by: Emo EMAW on August 02, 2016, 09:01:54 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on August 02, 2016, 09:04:43 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 02, 2016, 09:13:47 AM
I understood the question. Trump is being dumb and is dumb and that's why I'm not voting for him. If he were smart, he should have told the family they were stumping for one of the primary DemoLemmings for the Iraq war. A woman so bereft of the ability to think on her own that she couldn't wait to move in lockstep with Republicans in sending people like their son off to die in a dumb war. Trump should further continue that Hillarys entire career is benchmarked again and again by enthusiastic endorsements of stupid, disastrous wars.
We now we can easily agree on that. Common ground :Cheers:
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 02, 2016, 09:14:36 AM
What did the text of the tweet say? :sdeek:
"look how gross i look"
Post by: Emo EMAW on August 02, 2016, 09:16:23 AM
What did the text of the tweet say? :sdeek:
"look how gross i look"
Well that's better than what jumped into my head.
Post by: CNS on August 02, 2016, 09:26:58 AM
Post by: chum1 on August 02, 2016, 11:44:49 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 02, 2016, 12:20:56 PM
https://twitter.com/NoahGrayCNN/status/760506387994673152
Post by: star seed 7 on August 02, 2016, 12:30:08 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 02, 2016, 12:32:06 PM
Post by: sys on August 02, 2016, 12:34:00 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 02, 2016, 01:46:40 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 02, 2016, 01:47:23 PM
Post by: chum1 on August 02, 2016, 01:53:13 PM
Quote
Also in 2006, Trump unveiled Trump Vodka, predicting that the T&T (Trump and Tonic) would become the most requested drink in America
http://www.newsweek.com/2016/08/12/donald-trumps-business-failures-election-2016-486091.html
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 02, 2016, 01:54:01 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on August 02, 2016, 01:59:37 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 02, 2016, 02:00:59 PM
My Dream Scenario is to take the money we spend on blowing up other people's infrastructure or building other people's infrastructure only to see it get blown up and spend it on instead building our infrastructure and not blowing it up. :love:
Yes, that would be great. We need roads, bridges, and dams.
Post by: sys on August 02, 2016, 02:02:16 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 02, 2016, 02:05:05 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 02, 2016, 02:39:13 PM
Just like everyone is willing to pay for new schools but not fund staffing them.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 02, 2016, 02:40:34 PM
Everybody is also against paying for infrastructure.
Just like everyone is willing to pay for new schools but not fund staffing them.
That's what the investor's fund is for
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 02, 2016, 02:41:44 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 02, 2016, 02:44:04 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 02, 2016, 03:28:24 PM
Everyone is for better infrastructure smdh
Yeah, but Trump wants twice as much as Hillary. That makes his infrastructure policy twice as good.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 02, 2016, 03:36:53 PM
me too. if he'd stick to an anti-baby, pro-infrastructure platform, he'd have something. i agree with cutting corp taxes too.
And shutting down H&R block.
Post by: sys on August 02, 2016, 04:11:32 PM
2.
Quote
On Tuesday, Trump told the Washington Post he's not yet ready to endorse Paul Ryan in the Wisconsin primary. "I like Paul, but these are horrible times for our country," Trump said. "We need very strong leadership. We need very, very strong leadership. And I'm just not quite there yet. I'm not quite there yet."
3. get out, baby.
i'm prolly forgetting a lot of other great ones, but he's had a good couple of weeks.
Post by: sys on August 02, 2016, 06:38:03 PM
Post by: kim carnes on August 02, 2016, 06:50:25 PM
Post by: chum1 on August 02, 2016, 07:27:46 PM
i can't wait to see if ryan and mccain roll over on this one too, or if insult finally quickens their souls when principle could not.
For Ryan at least, probably depends entirely on what he has to gain and lose by saying something. I like how he met with the Kochs while Trump was left out.
Post by: chum1 on August 02, 2016, 08:25:00 PM
Post by: chum1 on August 02, 2016, 08:29:55 PM
Post by: sys on August 02, 2016, 08:48:21 PM
good column.
Post by: bubbles4ksu on August 02, 2016, 10:36:13 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on August 02, 2016, 11:08:53 PM
Post by: bubbles4ksu on August 02, 2016, 11:11:59 PM
Post by: wetwillie on August 02, 2016, 11:15:13 PM
Post by: bubbles4ksu on August 02, 2016, 11:21:56 PM
Post by: bucket on August 02, 2016, 11:24:22 PM
Get some new material
Post by: Tobias on August 02, 2016, 11:58:01 PM
he ain't no pussy, he's going to give crooked hillary a piece of his brilliant mind.
he'll checkmate her in africa if he has to
Post by: bones129 on August 03, 2016, 01:38:16 AM
He may not even do the debates
He won't. He's setting the table for that and it's so obvious.
Post by: sys on August 03, 2016, 02:36:53 AM
https://twitter.com/SopanDeb/status/759197071484129280
Post by: chum1 on August 03, 2016, 06:40:35 AM
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/donald-trump-paul-ryan-226593
Post by: chum1 on August 03, 2016, 07:49:14 AM
Post by: chum1 on August 03, 2016, 07:52:22 AM
Post by: chum1 on August 03, 2016, 08:11:37 AM
Quote
natesilver: I just want to resist the interpretation that any of this is coming from a rational part of Trump’s brain, whether as part of some brilliant 12-dimensional chess strategy, or even a strategy at all really. Maybe that’s a reasonable prior for a lot of politicians, but I’m not sure about Trump.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 03, 2016, 10:00:34 AM
Post by: CNS on August 03, 2016, 10:04:07 AM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 03, 2016, 10:15:40 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 03, 2016, 10:19:03 AM
Nice work DemoLemmings.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 03, 2016, 10:20:30 AM
Hillary turns the DNC nomination process into a total sham, so let's find every way we can to attack Trump.
Nice work DemoLemmings.
Quoting him seems to be all anyone is doing to attack him.
Post by: sys on August 03, 2016, 10:22:52 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/02/opinions/trump-isnt-crazy-opinion-dantonio/
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 03, 2016, 10:23:51 AM
Hillary turns the DNC nomination process into a total sham, so let's find every way we can to attack Trump.
Nice work DemoLemmings.
Quoting him seems to be all anyone is doing to attack him.
Yet all the things that Hayden said about Trump have been proven in real life with Clitler and the blood of thousands on her hands. She's a hot head who wants to show everyone how tough she is and she's sent thousands to their deaths because of it.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 03, 2016, 10:31:29 AM
Time to do a roll call of posters on this blogsite who are still gonna vote Trump. 'nounce yo'self
Here
Post by: Emo EMAW on August 03, 2016, 10:38:27 AM
Post by: DQ12 on August 03, 2016, 10:40:00 AM
there are posters on this blogsite (on both sides of the aisle!) that are much smarter than the republican nominee.
Post by: SdK on August 03, 2016, 10:45:02 AM
Hillary turns the DNC nomination process into a total sham, so let's find every way we can to attack Trump.It's a two horse race. Is anyone defending Hillary? I think not. Or I've missed it. I think most can see that Hillary is far from ideal, but I don't know how lying and cheating and having people killed is different from other politicians. She's status quo that got caught. Trump is a bull in a china shop. I could get behind someone that has done what Trump has achieved. Breaking from status quo. I can't get behind a lunatic though. I think that's what it is. I don't know anyone that loves Hillary, but she is must less scary than Trump.
Nice work DemoLemmings.
Post by: SdK on August 03, 2016, 10:46:23 AM
Post by: SdK on August 03, 2016, 10:49:15 AM
Time to do a roll call of posters on this blogsite who are still gonna vote Trump. 'nounce yo'selfI'm more curious who is voting for Donald because they think he represents them or will make a good president vs. those that just want to make sure it's not Hillary or status quo.
Post by: SdK on August 03, 2016, 10:50:21 AM
Post by: Emo EMAW on August 03, 2016, 10:51:34 AM
Time to do a roll call of posters on this blogsite who are still gonna vote Trump. 'nounce yo'selfI'm more curious who is voting for Donald because they think he represents them or will make a good president vs. those that just want to make sure it's not Hillary or status quo.
I don't think you appropriately captured both sides of this Venn diagram.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 03, 2016, 10:51:51 AM
Hillary turns the DNC nomination process into a total sham, so let's find every way we can to attack Trump.It's a two horse race. Is anyone defending Hillary? I think not. Or I've missed it. I think most can see that Hillary is far from ideal, but I don't know how lying and cheating and having people killed is different from other politicians. She's status quo that got caught. Trump is a bull in a china shop. I could get behind someone that has done what Trump has achieved. Breaking from status quo. I can't get behind a lunatic though. I think that's what it is. I don't know anyone that loves Hillary, but she is must less scary than Trump.
Nice work DemoLemmings.
This was a great post 'undnce ''d
Post by: CNS on August 03, 2016, 10:52:34 AM
:impatient:
Post by: SdK on August 03, 2016, 10:54:30 AM
Ok. Well clean it up for me or tell me where I messed up please.Time to do a roll call of posters on this blogsite who are still gonna vote Trump. 'nounce yo'selfI'm more curious who is voting for Donald because they think he represents them or will make a good president vs. those that just want to make sure it's not Hillary or status quo.
I don't think you appropriately captured both sides of this Venn diagram.
Post by: SdK on August 03, 2016, 10:55:52 AM
Thanks Ski BeHillary turns the DNC nomination process into a total sham, so let's find every way we can to attack Trump.It's a two horse race. Is anyone defending Hillary? I think not. Or I've missed it. I think most can see that Hillary is far from ideal, but I don't know how lying and cheating and having people killed is different from other politicians. She's status quo that got caught. Trump is a bull in a china shop. I could get behind someone that has done what Trump has achieved. Breaking from status quo. I can't get behind a lunatic though. I think that's what it is. I don't know anyone that loves Hillary, but she is must less scary than Trump.
Nice work DemoLemmings.
This was a great post 'undnce ''d
Post by: Cartierfor3 on August 03, 2016, 10:58:56 AM
In this two horse race, I'll be voting for someone I detest because the other scares the crap out of me. That's a sad state of affairs.
why does everyone just lap up the notion of a 2 horse race?
Post by: SdK on August 03, 2016, 11:01:31 AM
I wish it weren't so, but dems the facts, pubs.In this two horse race, I'll be voting for someone I detest because the other scares the crap out of me. That's a sad state of affairs.
why does everyone just lap up the notion of a 2 horse race?
Post by: 'taterblast on August 03, 2016, 11:06:16 AM
Post by: ChiComCat on August 03, 2016, 11:10:47 AM
In this two horse race, I'll be voting for someone I detest because the other scares the crap out of me. That's a sad state of affairs.
why does everyone just lap up the notion of a 2 horse race?
math
Post by: sys on August 03, 2016, 11:13:54 AM
Post by: SdK on August 03, 2016, 11:15:17 AM
there are more than two candidates you can vote for, but there are only two that can win.If that was CF3's point...SMMFDH.
Post by: Cartierfor3 on August 03, 2016, 11:18:20 AM
there are more than two candidates you can vote for, but there are only two that can win.
of course. and what I would love is for the outside parties to slowly gain market share, so that someday my kids don't have a 2 horse race. its a long play but still
Post by: catastrophe on August 03, 2016, 11:19:45 AM
it's kind of surprising, but trump is actually very stupid. at first I thought he was a pretty bright guy, at least in some respects, but after reading and hearing him talk extemporaneously about some major issues, it's apparent that he's really just a dumb guy.
there are posters on this blogsite (on both sides of the aisle!) that are much smarter than the republican nominee.
I have come to the same conclusion. Seeing a competent interviewer question Trump on various topics (but especially just on stuff he's previously said) makes it painfully obvious that Trump is just an idiot who reads all the major news stories of the day and isn't afraid to say something stupid, racist, or flat out wrong with 100% confidence and lots of energy.
Post by: Tobias on August 03, 2016, 11:22:03 AM
Post by: SdK on August 03, 2016, 11:22:59 AM
human beings are very stupid and need a "good v evil" to process everything, cf3Also keeps American stupid and constantly infighting. :frown:
Post by: ChiComCat on August 03, 2016, 11:24:23 AM
there are more than two candidates you can vote for, but there are only two that can win.
of course. and what I would love is for the outside parties to slowly gain market share, so that someday my kids don't have a 2 horse race. its a long play but still
Agree with this. 3rd party in the debates this year would be progress. I would like to see a 3rd party campaign like crazy in Maine or Nubb to get on the Electoral scorecard too.
Post by: Cartierfor3 on August 03, 2016, 11:25:40 AM
human beings are very stupid and need a "good v evil" to process everything, cf3
they are all squawks probably. buncha snob hill idiots
Post by: Tobias on August 03, 2016, 11:26:26 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 03, 2016, 11:27:01 AM
In this two horse race, I'll be voting for someone I detest because the other scares the crap out of me. That's a sad state of affairs.
why does everyone just lap up the notion of a 2 horse race?
I agree cf3. Vote your conscience
Post by: catastrophe on August 03, 2016, 11:28:22 AM
there are more than two candidates you can vote for, but there are only two that can win.
I think this is Hilldawg's new campaign slogan.
I'm seriously sick of this self fulfilling prophecy, though. It's the same mindset that has tried to suppress every worthwhile movement: "Sure, change would be nice but it's not like there is much we can do to make a difference with so many other people currently entrenched."
Post by: Emo EMAW on August 03, 2016, 11:28:48 AM
Ok. Well clean it up for me or tell me where I messed up please.Time to do a roll call of posters on this blogsite who are still gonna vote Trump. 'nounce yo'selfI'm more curious who is voting for Donald because they think he represents them or will make a good president vs. those that just want to make sure it's not Hillary or status quo.
I don't think you appropriately captured both sides of this Venn diagram.
You didn't include special interest folks.
You didn't include folks that think he would make a better president than Hillary at some things that are important to them (not necessarily special interests).
Post by: Cartierfor3 on August 03, 2016, 11:30:21 AM
In this two horse race, I'll be voting for someone I detest because the other scares the crap out of me. That's a sad state of affairs.
why does everyone just lap up the notion of a 2 horse race?
I agree cf3. Vote your conscience
(https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--J2VSbmsG--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/a5ubhjmv8b7ba3enaxsk.jpg)
Post by: SdK on August 03, 2016, 11:33:04 AM
Fair enough. But I think most of those two things could fit into my first circle, better president and represents them.Ok. Well clean it up for me or tell me where I messed up please.Time to do a roll call of posters on this blogsite who are still gonna vote Trump. 'nounce yo'selfI'm more curious who is voting for Donald because they think he represents them or will make a good president vs. those that just want to make sure it's not Hillary or status quo.
I don't think you appropriately captured both sides of this Venn diagram.
You didn't include special interest folks.
You didn't include folks that think he would make a better president than Hillary at some things that are important to them (not necessarily special interests).
Post by: Emo EMAW on August 03, 2016, 11:34:04 AM
Fair enough. But I think most of those two things could fit into my first circle, better president and represents them.Ok. Well clean it up for me or tell me where I messed up please.Time to do a roll call of posters on this blogsite who are still gonna vote Trump. 'nounce yo'selfI'm more curious who is voting for Donald because they think he represents them or will make a good president vs. those that just want to make sure it's not Hillary or status quo.
I don't think you appropriately captured both sides of this Venn diagram.
You didn't include special interest folks.
You didn't include folks that think he would make a better president than Hillary at some things that are important to them (not necessarily special interests).
Also someone could be both of the things you mentioned.
Post by: SdK on August 03, 2016, 11:34:10 AM
I mean we are talking about voting for Trump here, I don't need a more complex diagram for people to explain themselves than the man himselfFair enough. But I think most of those two things could fit into my first circle, better president and represents them.Ok. Well clean it up for me or tell me where I messed up please.Time to do a roll call of posters on this blogsite who are still gonna vote Trump. 'nounce yo'selfI'm more curious who is voting for Donald because they think he represents them or will make a good president vs. those that just want to make sure it's not Hillary or status quo.
I don't think you appropriately captured both sides of this Venn diagram.
You didn't include special interest folks.
You didn't include folks that think he would make a better president than Hillary at some things that are important to them (not necessarily special interests).
Hur Hur Hur
Post by: SdK on August 03, 2016, 11:34:55 AM
Ok. Well I think it's you and cat27. So why will you be voting for Mr. Trump?Fair enough. But I think most of those two things could fit into my first circle, better president and represents them.Ok. Well clean it up for me or tell me where I messed up please.Time to do a roll call of posters on this blogsite who are still gonna vote Trump. 'nounce yo'selfI'm more curious who is voting for Donald because they think he represents them or will make a good president vs. those that just want to make sure it's not Hillary or status quo.
I don't think you appropriately captured both sides of this Venn diagram.
You didn't include special interest folks.
You didn't include folks that think he would make a better president than Hillary at some things that are important to them (not necessarily special interests).
Also someone could be both of the things you mentioned.
Post by: SdK on August 03, 2016, 11:35:30 AM
And honestly I'm just curious, I hope you don't get attacked for or have to defend your position over and over.Ok. Well I think it's you and cat27. So why will you be voting for Mr. Trump?Fair enough. But I think most of those two things could fit into my first circle, better president and represents them.Ok. Well clean it up for me or tell me where I messed up please.Time to do a roll call of posters on this blogsite who are still gonna vote Trump. 'nounce yo'selfI'm more curious who is voting for Donald because they think he represents them or will make a good president vs. those that just want to make sure it's not Hillary or status quo.
I don't think you appropriately captured both sides of this Venn diagram.
You didn't include special interest folks.
You didn't include folks that think he would make a better president than Hillary at some things that are important to them (not necessarily special interests).
Also someone could be both of the things you mentioned.
Post by: sys on August 03, 2016, 11:38:34 AM
of course. and what I would love is for the outside parties to slowly gain market share, so that someday my kids don't have a 2 horse race. its a long play but still
our system is set up to be a two party system. if another party gained share, one of the two existing major parties would recede. for multiple parties to coexist long-term, we would likely need to shift to a parliamentary system.
Post by: wetwillie on August 03, 2016, 11:40:14 AM
Post by: sys on August 03, 2016, 11:41:37 AM
I'm seriously sick of this self fulfilling prophecy, though. It's the same mindset that has tried to suppress every worthwhile movement: "Sure, change would be nice but it's not like there is much we can do to make a difference with so many other people currently entrenched."
it can change over time, but not over the next 100 days.
Post by: CNS on August 03, 2016, 11:43:44 AM
there are more than two candidates you can vote for, but there are only two that can win.
of course. and what I would love is for the outside parties to slowly gain market share, so that someday my kids don't have a 2 horse race. its a long play but still
If you and others honestly want that, you need to support something that gets money under control in the campaign process. Check out Wolf Pac. http://www.wolf-pac.com/
Post by: star seed 7 on August 03, 2016, 11:53:45 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 03, 2016, 11:56:03 AM
Post by: sys on August 03, 2016, 11:58:29 AM
Quote
John Harwood reports that Paul Manafort, the supposed adult in charge of the campaign who can curtail the candidate’s self-destructive impulses, is “not challenging Trump anymore. Mailing it in,” and the other staff is (metaphorically, one assumes) “suicidal.” Ali Vitali confirms Harwood’s report, and adds that the situation is “way worse than people realize.” According to Dana Bash, these staffers “feel like they are wasting their time.”
This is sad for the Trump staffers, who have worked so hard to give an unstable demagogue control of the executive branch.
heh.
Post by: CNS on August 03, 2016, 11:58:52 AM
I'm fairly confident that Citizens United will get reversed after Hillary gets to pick a couple of justices, anyway. No need to give money to Wolf Pac.
I don't share your faith. I mean, she would be cutting her, and her political bro's, own throats.
Post by: sys on August 03, 2016, 11:59:59 AM
If you and others honestly want that, you need to support something that gets money under control in the campaign process. Check out Wolf Pac. http://www.wolf-pac.com/
proportional representation would make about a million times more of a difference than "getting money under control".
Post by: CNS on August 03, 2016, 12:00:49 PM
Ok. Well clean it up for me or tell me where I messed up please.Time to do a roll call of posters on this blogsite who are still gonna vote Trump. 'nounce yo'selfI'm more curious who is voting for Donald because they think he represents them or will make a good president vs. those that just want to make sure it's not Hillary or status quo.
I don't think you appropriately captured both sides of this Venn diagram.
You didn't include special interest folks.
You didn't include folks that think he would make a better president than Hillary at some things that are important to them (not necessarily special interests).
So, if he maintains fed lands but is quick to the nuke button, you guys all good?
Post by: CNS on August 03, 2016, 12:02:04 PM
If you and others honestly want that, you need to support something that gets money under control in the campaign process. Check out Wolf Pac. http://www.wolf-pac.com/
proportional representation would make about a million times more of a difference than "getting money under control".
There are several things that need to change but I don't believe that any will until the money is changed. There is zero incentive to change until the representation of actual constituents means more to individual campaigns, and the parties themselves, than they do now.
Post by: sys on August 03, 2016, 12:08:12 PM
I don't believe that any will until the money is changed. There is zero incentive to change until the representation of actual constituents means more to individual campaigns, and the parties themselves, than they do now.
while admitting that i haven't looked at the issue much, afaik, the evidence that large amounts of money impacts election results is pretty skimpy (not having minimum threshold amounts does, but arguably may be more of a symptom than a cause). if you know of evidence to the contrary, please make me aware of it.
Post by: sys on August 03, 2016, 12:10:46 PM
Post by: catastrophe on August 03, 2016, 12:11:00 PM
I'm seriously sick of this self fulfilling prophecy, though. It's the same mindset that has tried to suppress every worthwhile movement: "Sure, change would be nice but it's not like there is much we can do to make a difference with so many other people currently entrenched."
it can change over time, but not over the next 100 days.
It can't change over time if the attitude each election cycle is that it can't be changed in an impactful way. If ever there was a time for people to seek out a candidate they can support it would be now, and it should continue that way going forward. People need to start taking responsibility for who they choose to represent them, the failure to do so has put us in a position where both major candidates are disliked by a majority of the population.
Post by: CNS on August 03, 2016, 12:14:02 PM
I don't believe that any will until the money is changed. There is zero incentive to change until the representation of actual constituents means more to individual campaigns, and the parties themselves, than they do now.
while admitting that i haven't looked at the issue much, afaik, the evidence that large amounts of money impacts election results is pretty skimpy (not having minimum threshold amounts does, but arguably may be more of a symptom than a cause). if you know of evidence to the contrary, please make me aware of it.
I would have to look it up, but i believe there is a direct correlation btwn money spent and success. That said, social media is no doubt changing that right now. I also don't think we are specifically talking only about elections, but perhaps favor when actually legislating. I mean, there are plenty of examples of outrageous things plugged into bills that seem to fit no other agenda than benefiting one specific entity.
but regardless, without proportional representation, the money you are talking about will impact who wins primaries and which of the major parties wins generals, not the establishment of a multi-party stasis.
The parties are the two entities benefitting from PACs as the system stands. If you severely limit their effect by limiting the money, it would certainly help level the playing field some. Again, there are still other major issue, such as who controls the debate committee/polls/etc, but changing that stuff doesn't matter if you have third party candidates who simply can't raise the PAC contributions like a Dem or Pub.
Post by: sys on August 03, 2016, 12:15:24 PM
People need to start taking responsibility for who they choose to represent them, the failure to do so has put us in a position where both major candidates are disliked by a majority of the population.
i agree that people should consider voting for third parties. that is a different issue than what will happen in the upcoming election. there is an approximately 0% chance that the candidate of one of major parties won't win.
Post by: CNS on August 03, 2016, 12:21:28 PM
People need to start taking responsibility for who they choose to represent them, the failure to do so has put us in a position where both major candidates are disliked by a majority of the population.
i agree that people should consider voting for third parties. that is a different issue than what will happen in the upcoming election. there is an approximately 0% chance that the candidate of one of major parties won't win.
This is correct.
Post by: sys on August 03, 2016, 12:23:58 PM
I also don't think we are specifically talking only about elections, but perhaps favor when actually legislating. I mean, there are plenty of examples of outrageous things plugged into bills that seem to fit no other agenda than benefiting one specific entity.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/07/how-american-politics-went-insane/485570/
The parties are the two entities benefitting from PACs as the system stands. If you severely limit their effect by limiting the money, it would certainly help level the playing field some. Again, there are still other major issue, such as who controls the debate committee/polls/etc, but changing that stuff doesn't matter if you have third party candidates who simply can't raise the PAC contributions like a Dem or Pub.
it's really just math. in a winner take all system, multiple parties is not a stable state, contraction of different interest groups into coalitions is the winning strategy that almost inevitably leads to the formation and maintenance of two parties.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Two_party_system_diagram.png/350px-Two_party_system_diagram.png)
Post by: Kat Kid on August 03, 2016, 12:37:54 PM
it's kind of surprising, but trump is actually very stupid. at first I thought he was a pretty bright guy, at least in some respects, but after reading and hearing him talk extemporaneously about some major issues, it's apparent that he's really just a dumb guy.
there are posters on this blogsite (on both sides of the aisle!) that are much smarter than the republican nominee.
lesson here: there are LOTS of dumb multi-millionaires/billionaires out there. especially when they started life as multi-millionaires/billionaires.
Post by: sys on August 03, 2016, 12:53:23 PM
Quote
Even if people don’t like me, they have to vote for me. They have no choice. Even if you can’t stand Donald Trump, you think Donald Trump is the worst, you’re going to vote for me.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 03, 2016, 12:53:39 PM
Oh wait, wait. The most viable third party candidate may have said something racist, maybe. So instead you'll vote for a pandering White elitist who is married to a man who idolized a huge segregationist. A woman who by many accounts is a closeted racist who snuggles with former KKK leaders and takes millions from the biggest misogynistic racists on the planet.
He might not spend (borrow) that extra trillion a year to pay for all that "free" stuff.
Oh, and he's for corporate prisons!! Meanwhile Hillary (and husband) championed and signed draconian (racist) sentencing legislation that helped fill the prisons to the breaking point.
Sad
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 03, 2016, 01:24:25 PM
Sounds like the perfect time to vote for a 3rd party.
Oh wait, wait. The most viable third party candidate may have said something racist, maybe. So instead you'll vote for a pandering White elitist who is married to a man who idolized a huge segregationist. A woman who by many accounts is a closeted racist who snuggles with former KKK leaders and takes millions from the biggest misogynistic racists on the planet.
He might not spend (borrow) that extra trillion a year to pay for all that "free" stuff.
Oh, and he's for corporate prisons!! Meanwhile Hillary (and husband) championed and signed draconian (racist) sentencing legislation that helped fill the prisons to the breaking point.
Sad
You will probably have a lot more success getting republicans to vote 3rd party, Dax. Libertarians are more closely aligned with them.
Post by: CNS on August 03, 2016, 01:25:14 PM
I also don't think we are specifically talking only about elections, but perhaps favor when actually legislating. I mean, there are plenty of examples of outrageous things plugged into bills that seem to fit no other agenda than benefiting one specific entity.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/07/how-american-politics-went-insane/485570/The parties are the two entities benefitting from PACs as the system stands. If you severely limit their effect by limiting the money, it would certainly help level the playing field some. Again, there are still other major issue, such as who controls the debate committee/polls/etc, but changing that stuff doesn't matter if you have third party candidates who simply can't raise the PAC contributions like a Dem or Pub.
it's really just math. in a winner take all system, multiple parties is not a stable state, contraction of different interest groups into coalitions is the winning strategy that almost inevitably leads to the formation and maintenance of two parties.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Two_party_system_diagram.png/350px-Two_party_system_diagram.png)
That was a frustrating article. Either we are ok with corruption or we are ok with chaos. Maybe we are too big of a country to have it any other way?
Post by: star seed 7 on August 03, 2016, 01:48:55 PM
Sounds like the perfect time to vote for a 3rd party.
Oh wait, wait. The most viable third party candidate may have said something racist, maybe. So instead you'll vote for a pandering White elitist who is married to a man who idolized a huge segregationist. A woman who by many accounts is a closeted racist who snuggles with former KKK leaders and takes millions from the biggest misogynistic racists on the planet.
He might not spend (borrow) that extra trillion a year to pay for all that "free" stuff.
Oh, and he's for corporate prisons!! Meanwhile Hillary (and husband) championed and signed draconian (racist) sentencing legislation that helped fill the prisons to the breaking point.
Sad
This is funny coming from a trump supporter
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 03, 2016, 01:50:17 PM
Sounds like the perfect time to vote for a 3rd party.
Oh wait, wait. The most viable third party candidate may have said something racist, maybe. So instead you'll vote for a pandering White elitist who is married to a man who idolized a huge segregationist. A woman who by many accounts is a closeted racist who snuggles with former KKK leaders and takes millions from the biggest misogynistic racists on the planet.
He might not spend (borrow) that extra trillion a year to pay for all that "free" stuff.
Oh, and he's for corporate prisons!! Meanwhile Hillary (and husband) championed and signed draconian (racist) sentencing legislation that helped fill the prisons to the breaking point.
Sad
This is funny coming from a trump supporter
A registered independent voting for Johnson, that's what you meant to say.
Have we gotten a screed where you explain why you hate Hillary but are voting for her out of you yet? I enjoy the rationalizations.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 03, 2016, 01:59:21 PM
Sounds like the perfect time to vote for a 3rd party.
Oh wait, wait. The most viable third party candidate may have said something racist, maybe. So instead you'll vote for a pandering White elitist who is married to a man who idolized a huge segregationist. A woman who by many accounts is a closeted racist who snuggles with former KKK leaders and takes millions from the biggest misogynistic racists on the planet.
He might not spend (borrow) that extra trillion a year to pay for all that "free" stuff.
Oh, and he's for corporate prisons!! Meanwhile Hillary (and husband) championed and signed draconian (racist) sentencing legislation that helped fill the prisons to the breaking point.
Sad
This is funny coming from a trump supporter
A registered independent voting for Johnson, that's what you meant to say.
Have we gotten a screed where you explain why you hate Hillary but are voting for her out of you yet? I enjoy the rationalizations.
You aren't fooling anyone Dax, you love trump and it's fairly obvious. I don't really understand why you have such a hard time admitting it on this blog. You literally can't stand by and let anyone disparage him. I bet you take a cialis before you get in the booth and "pull the lever" for trumpence2016. Make racists president again!!!
Post by: Asteriskhead on August 03, 2016, 02:08:59 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 03, 2016, 02:13:30 PM
Sounds like the perfect time to vote for a 3rd party.
Oh wait, wait. The most viable third party candidate may have said something racist, maybe. So instead you'll vote for a pandering White elitist who is married to a man who idolized a huge segregationist. A woman who by many accounts is a closeted racist who snuggles with former KKK leaders and takes millions from the biggest misogynistic racists on the planet.
He might not spend (borrow) that extra trillion a year to pay for all that "free" stuff.
Oh, and he's for corporate prisons!! Meanwhile Hillary (and husband) championed and signed draconian (racist) sentencing legislation that helped fill the prisons to the breaking point.
Sad
This is funny coming from a trump supporter
A registered independent voting for Johnson, that's what you meant to say.
Have we gotten a screed where you explain why you hate Hillary but are voting for her out of you yet? I enjoy the rationalizations.
You aren't fooling anyone Dax, you love trump and it's fairly obvious. I don't really understand why you have such a hard time admitting it on this blog. You literally can't stand by and let anyone disparage him. I bet you take a cialis before you get in the booth and "pull the lever" for trumpence2016. Make racists president again!!!
I've disparaged him as well. I just love to get into how Hillary has in reality been way worse in actual real life then any words coming out of Trumps mouth. This is the best place to do that because this is where DemoLemmings like you congregate.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 03, 2016, 02:21:47 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 03, 2016, 02:30:11 PM
Dax goes 6 to midnight everytime trump mentions using nuclear weapons on brown people. Make the middle east glass again! #trumpence2016
Yeah, the same guy excoriating Obama and Clinton ME war Mongering really wants to nuke them. :rolleyes :lib7jerk
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 03, 2016, 02:31:09 PM
Well dislike and ire against Hillary is like the first pillar of Trump's platform.
But I actually have substance, unlike Trump.
But please, a real candidate would be demoralizing Hillary right now, with real life facts about her deplorable track record. She's only going to win because Trump is an idiot.
Post by: treysolid on August 03, 2016, 03:08:24 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 03, 2016, 03:12:02 PM
dax, you are too smart to waste your vote. your hatred of Hillary and fact that you live in a swing state will lead you to vote for Trump in November. Will you ever be able to live with yourself if Clinton wins NC?
I'm not the least bit concerned about her winning because corruption always prevails in the United States. She's running against an idiot who doesn't deserve my vote. Like I said a real candidate could literally wrap Hillary in a clown suit at every turn, but Trump is too dumb or purposely throwing this thing.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 03, 2016, 03:13:54 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 03, 2016, 03:17:40 PM
The nation is full of Daxes that were powerless to stop Trump from happening because they registered I.
How about an anemic effort by multiple R candidates. I would have never voted for Trump in a primary.
I was and remain very disappointed in Jeb. He's much better and smarter then his brother and he would have listened to the elder about Iraq.
Post by: Cartierfor3 on August 03, 2016, 03:26:27 PM
The nation is full of Daxes that were powerless to stop Trump from happening because they registered I.
I don't know if I registered 'pub or not but when I went to the primary they asked if I wanted 'pub or 'crat. :dunno: Is dax's state the same?
Post by: SdK on August 03, 2016, 03:33:52 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 03, 2016, 03:35:44 PM
The nation is full of Daxes that were powerless to stop Trump from happening because they registered I.
I don't know if I registered 'pub or not but when I went to the primary they asked if I wanted 'pub or 'crat. :dunno: Is dax's state the same?
Well, in Kansas, you have to vote what your are registered as. You are allowed to affiliate with a party on election day as long as you are registered 21 days prior, but you can't vote and still be an I when you leave. Most states are similar, but there are some states that let independents vote in primaries.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 03, 2016, 03:57:36 PM
This is the guy Dax is voting for :lol:
Post by: chum1 on August 03, 2016, 04:01:33 PM
Quote
Remember the epic Comedy Central roast of Donald Trump back in 2011? ... Each year, the 'roastee' has certain topics they declare off-limits ...
ALLOWED: Jokes about Trump's hair
ALLOWED: Jokes about Trump's wife Melania (and his two previous marriages)
ALLOWED: Jokes about Trump having sex with models
ALLOWED: Jokes about the failure of Trump Steaks, Trump Water, Trump Cologne, and other Trump products
ALLOWED: Jokes about Trump's failed casinos
ALLOWED: Jokes about how Trump only became successful thanks to his wealthy father
ALLOWED: Jokes about Trump's weight
ALLOWED: Jokes about Trump being attracted to his daughter Ivanka
NOT ALLOWED: Any joke that suggests Trump is not actually as wealthy as he claims to be
http://www.vulture.com/2016/08/donald-trump-roast-off-limits-joke.html
Post by: Kat Kid on August 03, 2016, 04:11:34 PM
The nation is full of Daxes that were powerless to stop Trump from happening because they registered I.
How about an anemic effort by multiple R candidates. I would have never voted for Trump in a primary.
I was and remain very disappointed in Jeb. He's much better and smarter then his brother and he would have listened to the elder about Iraq.
Jeb's super PAC took millions from the Chinese. surprised I haven't heard any wild conspiracy theories from you on this yet. KEEP UP DAX!
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 03, 2016, 05:15:53 PM
This is pretty much my approach to goEMAW and politics.
Post by: CNS on August 03, 2016, 06:48:23 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 03, 2016, 06:54:30 PM
So, sad.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 03, 2016, 06:56:37 PM
The nation is full of Daxes that were powerless to stop Trump from happening because they registered I.
How about an anemic effort by multiple R candidates. I would have never voted for Trump in a primary.
I was and remain very disappointed in Jeb. He's much better and smarter then his brother and he would have listened to the elder about Iraq.
Jeb's super PAC took millions from the Chinese. surprised I haven't heard any wild conspiracy theories from you on this yet. KEEP UP DAX!
Maybe so, how many millions of dollars worth of favors do Bill and Hil owe the worst people in the world?
Post by: treysolid on August 03, 2016, 07:49:35 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 03, 2016, 07:55:45 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 03, 2016, 07:59:54 PM
deflect! deflect!
It's so... Sad.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 03, 2016, 08:01:22 PM
Post by: Tobias on August 03, 2016, 08:04:40 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 03, 2016, 08:06:55 PM
can we just silently face/off this thread with the clitler one?
Got to many PM's on it.
Sorry not Sorry.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 03, 2016, 08:08:29 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 03, 2016, 08:20:07 PM
Sad, but predictable
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 03, 2016, 08:34:43 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 03, 2016, 08:36:24 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FYWrBjRu.jpg&hash=7416f38058582106258df4a0a61d23231b17a150)
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 03, 2016, 08:41:12 PM
Counseling?
Post by: The Big Train on August 03, 2016, 08:46:24 PM
Post by: bucket on August 03, 2016, 08:59:08 PM
Thanks for the photo, CNN! :lol:
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 03, 2016, 09:02:20 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 03, 2016, 10:14:32 PM
Post by: puniraptor on August 03, 2016, 11:46:05 PM
Post by: puniraptor on August 04, 2016, 12:31:25 AM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 04, 2016, 12:48:58 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/03/politics/presidential-polls-hillary-clinton-donald-trump/index.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_topstories+(RSS%3A+CNN+-+Top+Stories)
And when it does, and Hillary does The Worm right into the White House like I've been saying all along, I'll get my popcorn and sit back and watch a minimum of four more years of 'pub butthurt
:bwpopcorn:
Post by: Asteriskhead on August 04, 2016, 08:53:50 AM
Post by: ChiComCat on August 04, 2016, 08:56:42 AM
That's gonna happen regardless.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/03/politics/presidential-polls-hillary-clinton-donald-trump/index.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_topstories+(RSS%3A+CNN+-+Top+Stories)
And when it does, and Hillary does The Worm right into the White House like I've been saying all along, I'll get my popcorn and sit back and watch a minimum of four more years of 'pub butthurt
:bwpopcorn:
You would just be proving to him that the system is rigged.
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on August 04, 2016, 09:50:29 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 04, 2016, 10:35:18 AM
Oh, here's a video of Donald J trump getting angry because he keeps getting turned away from voting in the wrong spot
https://www.accesshollywood.com/videos/donald-trumps-election-day-disaster-a-look-back-2004/
Post by: chum1 on August 04, 2016, 11:08:30 AM
Post by: sys on August 04, 2016, 11:08:49 AM
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-political-process-isnt-rigged-it-has-much-bigger-problems/
Post by: sys on August 04, 2016, 11:27:22 AM
Post by: chum1 on August 04, 2016, 11:53:19 AM
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/melania-trump-immigration-donald-226648
Post by: sys on August 04, 2016, 11:56:51 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 04, 2016, 12:15:18 PM
Post by: sys on August 04, 2016, 12:17:25 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 04, 2016, 12:24:13 PM
For $500K she could have had Khan Citizenship. Not Saudi tho
Hey dax, maybe just shut the eff up for a while.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 04, 2016, 12:26:09 PM
For $500K she could have had Khan Citizenship. Not Saudi thoHey dax, maybe just shut the eff up for a while.
:lol: @ SB
Post by: wetwillie on August 04, 2016, 12:28:10 PM
Post by: The1BigWillie on August 04, 2016, 12:48:06 PM
I wish I had more time to watch/listen to EVERYTHING Trump.
Post by: wetwillie on August 04, 2016, 12:50:23 PM
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on August 04, 2016, 12:53:18 PM
Post by: sys on August 04, 2016, 01:02:52 PM
Post by: sys on August 04, 2016, 01:05:13 PM
So the Pubs are making a plan in case Trump drops out. How does that work? Do some high level Pubs just get to pick whatever candidate they want?
mini-convention with 3 peeps from each state voting. votes are weighted by the number of delegates per state, not one state/3 votes. but it's just a fantasy to help them feel better about not doing something 6 months ago.
Post by: The1BigWillie on August 04, 2016, 01:29:37 PM
what a ridiculous notion. if you complain that the election is rigged after the election it sounds like sour grapes. only by complaining before the election can you explain that your defeat was not your fault.
ahhh... makes sense now. Carry on.
Post by: Gooch on August 04, 2016, 01:38:15 PM
what a ridiculous notion. if you complain that the election is rigged after the election it sounds like sour grapes. only by complaining before the election can you explain that your defeat was not your fault.The oscar Weber doctrine.
Post by: ChiComCat on August 04, 2016, 01:48:28 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 04, 2016, 02:17:40 PM
The schedulemakers already screwed him on the debates
trip to Hawaii
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 04, 2016, 02:18:59 PM
Post by: sys on August 04, 2016, 02:29:19 PM
Quote
Donald Trump really, really wants to win Loudoun County—the absurdly wealthy Northern Virginia county where the rally Rahimyar protested took place. Trump even said so in his speech. And he should; George W. Bush won it in 2000 and 2004, and Barack Obama picked it up in 2008 and 2012. Loudoun voters predict presidents. Trump seems to get that.
“Loudoun County is so important,” he told the crowd at the offset of the rally.
But—evidenced by his speech—he doesn’t understand it. At all. And if he wants to compete there, he’s going to have to learn quick.
Loudoun is the richest county in America. That’s due in part to the enormous amount of money the federal government spent on the War on Terror in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. The place is replete with defense contractors, engineers, and rocket scientists. And it’s recession-proof; while the rest of the country struggled through the Great Recession, Loudoun kept sprouting up neighborhoods of McMansions, seemingly with a swimming pool in every backyard.
But Trump seems to think it’s part of the Rust Belt. Toward the end of his speech—to an atypically preppy, professional, clean-cut audience—the candidate bashed the county economy.
“You’re doing lousy over here, by the way, I hate to tell you,” he said.
That is empirically false.
He then listed a number of factory closures, including Ball Corp., which was five hours away in Bristol, as far from Loudoun as you can get without leaving the state. And he mentioned the closure of a Smithfield Foods Inc.
“Anybody used to work for Smithfield?” he asked the crowd.
It’s almost certain none of them did. The Smithfield plant that closed was in Hampton Roads, Virginia—three hours from Ashburn, in the southeast corner of the state.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/08/03/trump-tells-virginia-town-it-s-failing-cites-the-wrong-place.html
Post by: sys on August 04, 2016, 02:30:52 PM
Quote
RUCKER: Would you want her to follow the path that Gretchen Carlson did?
TRUMP: I’d want her to do what makes her happy. I’d want her to do, Phil, what makes her happy. [Trump looks at a nearby television, which was tuned to Fox News.] Oh, did they have another one of these things go down? It’s terrible that crash. Never liked that plane, structurally. I never thought that plane could—
RUCKER: Why should she have to change careers or jobs?...
it's nice that he's funny again, instead of scary.
Post by: chum1 on August 04, 2016, 02:42:30 PM
Quote
The smartest thing Trump could do when asked about his poll problems is to note that Clinton is enjoying a very traditional convention bounce and that the race will eventually settle down to a close single digit contest.
But Trump rarely does the politically smart thing — particularly when he feels betrayed by the same polls that were so good to him for so long. And there are already indications that Trump — a friend spurned — is going to burn the bridges of his past close relationship with polls.
"I think these polls — I don't know — there's something about these polls, there's something phony," Trump said Tuesday at a rally in Loudoun County, Va.
I like the idea here that his extreme vindictiveness also extends to inanimate objects.
Post by: steve dave on August 04, 2016, 02:57:10 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 04, 2016, 03:05:33 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 04, 2016, 09:07:31 PM
NBC/WSJ poll by education: high school or less Trump +5; some college/vo-tech Clinton +9; college grads Clinton +15; post-grads Clinton +23
Post by: star seed 7 on August 04, 2016, 09:09:06 PM
NBC poll: Clinton leads Trump among African-Americans 91% to 1%
[youtube]https://youtu.be/sGvBZysVzpI[/youtube]
Post by: star seed 7 on August 04, 2016, 09:11:01 PM
Story of PA: Trump blue collar gains wiped out by losses in white collar Philly burbs, where Obama was +9 in '12 & HRC is +40 in new poll
Post by: steve dave on August 04, 2016, 09:13:21 PM
Post by: steve dave on August 04, 2016, 09:13:49 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 04, 2016, 10:20:49 PM
Huelskamp wasn't able to tho :-(
Uneducated dirtbags still don't even know there was a primary a couple of days ago.
Post by: DQ12 on August 05, 2016, 09:30:12 AM
Post by: wetwillie on August 05, 2016, 09:34:28 AM
trump is going to absolutely get his ass kicked.
Not if he drops out first
Post by: sys on August 05, 2016, 09:41:59 AM
trump is going to absolutely get his ass kicked.
there's a long time to go and the fundamentals favor a close race. if he would just shut up and do nothing he would cruise back to a close race. if events bring something damaging for clinton or just scary for people that are already in love with being scared he could shoot over the top in a heartbeat.
this last week we've seen how quickly support can evaporate for a candidate that is disliked by the majority of voters. the same dynamics could envelope clinton at some point.
Post by: sys on August 05, 2016, 09:43:29 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 05, 2016, 09:53:05 AM
trump is going to absolutely get his ass kicked.
Smdh you dishonest lib
http://truthfeed.com/election-analysis-trump-will-win-in-a-landslide/15234/
Quote
The Secret-Trump Vote
Don’t even bother looking at a poll. If they were any accurate or valuable at predicting, then the people who ran them would be billionaires.
Quote
The media and their phony polling consultants don’t have any clue what turnout will look like. If they did, they wouldn’t have bungled their Trump and Clinton predictions so badly in the primaries.
What we do know is that Trump is attracting voters from all over the map and into the Republican fold, just to vote for him. It’s how he unexpectedly massacred 16 opponents in the primary.
It’s how he will massacre Hillary Clinton in the general election.
When the media tells you that this race is close or that Hillary is leading, just simply laugh it all off.
This election is already over and Donald Trump will be the 45th President of the United States.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 05, 2016, 09:55:28 AM
Post by: Brock Landers on August 05, 2016, 10:19:44 AM
Post by: sys on August 05, 2016, 01:04:38 PM
Post by: steve dave on August 05, 2016, 02:55:18 PM
Post by: Tobias on August 05, 2016, 02:55:52 PM
Post by: Tobias on August 05, 2016, 03:01:54 PM
Post by: sys on August 05, 2016, 03:02:30 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 05, 2016, 03:20:11 PM
Post by: The Big Train on August 05, 2016, 06:25:04 PM
Post by: wetwillie on August 05, 2016, 10:07:49 PM
Looks like they held that intervention
Post by: steve dave on August 05, 2016, 10:29:58 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 05, 2016, 10:48:20 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 05, 2016, 11:04:35 PM
Post by: bones129 on August 06, 2016, 12:00:36 AM
Post by: sys on August 06, 2016, 12:07:32 AM
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/09/the-original-underclass/492731/
Post by: catastrophe on August 06, 2016, 12:08:22 AM
Post by: sys on August 06, 2016, 12:24:09 AM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 06, 2016, 11:06:13 AM
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-week-they-decided-he-was-crazy-1470354031
Post by: Cartierfor3 on August 06, 2016, 11:08:13 AM
Any Donald Trump fans who are also Bible fans should take this quiz to test your knowledge: http://trumporjesus.com/
50% :frown:
Post by: Cire on August 06, 2016, 11:41:30 AM
Interesting column from the WSJ.Post the article kat kid
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-week-they-decided-he-was-crazy-1470354031
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: sys on August 06, 2016, 02:39:13 PM
Post by: steve dave on August 06, 2016, 04:27:31 PM
Quote
President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia was a career intelligence officer, trained to identify vulnerabilities in an individual and to exploit them. That is exactly what he did early in the primaries. Mr. Putin played upon Mr. Trump’s vulnerabilities by complimenting him. He responded just as Mr. Putin had calculated.
.......
In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.
the former CIA chief guy seems to think it matters why Putin supports Trump and vice versa
Post by: wetwillie on August 06, 2016, 04:47:57 PM
Post by: Tobias on August 06, 2016, 04:49:00 PM
Post by: CNS on August 06, 2016, 05:01:36 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on August 06, 2016, 08:11:49 PM
So the Pubs are making a plan in case Trump drops out. How does that work? Do some high level Pubs just get to pick whatever candidate they want?
LOL at trump quitting. :lol:
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 06, 2016, 08:30:37 PM
Post by: kim carnes on August 06, 2016, 08:31:25 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 07, 2016, 12:45:07 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 07, 2016, 12:48:08 AM
Post by: The Big Train on August 07, 2016, 12:49:32 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 07, 2016, 02:15:06 AM
I'm way under 40 and I'm not scared of anything #invincible
You specifically are going to be broke open like a .410 shotgun and Hillary is gonna insert the 12 gauge shell :horrorsurprise:
Post by: The Big Train on August 07, 2016, 02:18:36 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 07, 2016, 02:29:52 AM
Most likely not
Ok then you'll be fine cowboy.
Post by: Kat Kid on August 07, 2016, 06:25:18 AM
Post by: Asteriskhead on August 07, 2016, 11:56:57 AM
you know crap is bad for Trump when stunted disappears completely.
You must have missed his "politics are toxic" good-bye post. It included a dig at you. I think you would find it an enjoyable read. Such a silly person, that stunted.
Post by: Kat Kid on August 07, 2016, 01:58:54 PM
Post by: sys on August 07, 2016, 02:35:53 PM
Post by: sys on August 07, 2016, 03:12:31 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 07, 2016, 03:13:49 PM
I was in deep meditation, and this thread popped into my head, as well as the toxicity of arguing politics over the internet and following news in general. Always thought to leave, but was hard with so much winning. There was so much trolling to look forward to as well - having momentum, only part 1/5 of email hacks, debates, potential Trump win. But it's time. I'll always remember the time I completely destroyed Kat Kid when he tried to get all smarty pants. My last word will be Clitler.
Post by: Asteriskhead on August 07, 2016, 03:50:32 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 07, 2016, 04:47:05 PM
Poor little alpha male took his 64-bit chess board and stomped home. :frown:
Hey, he was in deep meditation. Deep.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 07, 2016, 05:21:17 PM
With the supreme seats at stake this election will determine Americas future success or failure, really scary time to be under 40, lotsa luck punks :ROFL:
What consequences do you see us facing for having a liberal supreme court?
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 07, 2016, 05:22:01 PM
Post by: sys on August 07, 2016, 05:26:21 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 07, 2016, 07:55:30 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 07, 2016, 07:56:53 PM
Quote from: Charles Lipson's twitter
@Charles_Lipson
The election in a nutshell:
If it's about Hillary, Trump wins
If it's about Trump, Hillary wins
& both candidates want it to be about Trump
Post by: SdK on August 07, 2016, 08:02:28 PM
I don't know if there is a more fitting screen name than stunted.you know crap is bad for Trump when stunted disappears completely.
You must have missed his "politics are toxic" good-bye post. It included a dig at you. I think you would find it an enjoyable read. Such a silly person, that stunted.
Post by: wetwillie on August 07, 2016, 08:15:18 PM
True, but I think that in most people's eyes, regardless of which party they're a member of, replacing the opposing party's outgoing justice with anything other than a justice from your own party is seen generally as a loss (even though it's technically not a net loss at all). Everyone allows themselves to play the 'what if' game in their minds.
Hilary will easily kill all the conservative justices with her elite death squad.
Post by: treysolid on August 07, 2016, 08:35:55 PM
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/why-conservatives-and-progressives-share-an-interest-in-a-huge-trump-loss/494609/ (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/why-conservatives-and-progressives-share-an-interest-in-a-huge-trump-loss/494609/)
Post by: ChiComCat on August 08, 2016, 08:04:38 AM
538 had an article a little bit back about how the next (4 years) president isn't actually likely to reshape the court much. if 'pubs aren't Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) and go ahead an confirm garland before it's too late, they calculated that there was only like a 15% chance or something like that of another vacancy coming up in four years, and if one did open up, it would mostly likely be to replace one of the already liblib judges.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clinton-and-trump-are-both-promising-an-extreme-supreme-court/
Worth mentioning the article is based on Justice death, not counting potential retirement, as well as not including the Scalia seat. Assuming the 'Pubs don't push Garland through like they should, the next President has a 40% chance of naming two.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 08, 2016, 08:48:42 AM
BREAKING FIRST ON @Morning_Joe: Multiple sources say an independent conservative candidate will announce his candidacy for president today.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 08, 2016, 08:56:56 AM
Joe Scarborough ?@JoeNBC 2h2 hours ago
BREAKING FIRST ON @Morning_Joe: Multiple sources say an independent conservative candidate will announce his candidacy for president today.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evan_McMullin
Post by: star seed 7 on August 08, 2016, 08:59:04 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 08, 2016, 09:11:13 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on August 08, 2016, 09:17:24 AM
Post by: CNS on August 08, 2016, 10:04:10 AM
Quote
He's called Trump voters "childless single men who masturbate to anime."
:lol: This guy may be able to ease right in with the current 'pubs.
Post by: steve dave on August 08, 2016, 10:17:01 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on August 08, 2016, 10:23:11 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 08, 2016, 12:08:05 PM
:lol:
Post by: sys on August 08, 2016, 03:24:16 PM
Worth mentioning the article is based on Justice death, not counting potential retirement, as well as not including the Scalia seat. Assuming the 'Pubs don't push Garland through like they should, the next President has a 40% chance of naming two.
i should have gone back and reread the article. my memory of the %s was way off.
Post by: sys on August 08, 2016, 03:37:24 PM
:lol:
Post by: sys on August 08, 2016, 03:47:11 PM
non-political lol.
Post by: sys on August 08, 2016, 03:50:48 PM
today is a good day for trump humor stories.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 08, 2016, 03:59:46 PM
Post by: ChiComCat on August 08, 2016, 04:14:08 PM
Post by: Tobias on August 08, 2016, 04:17:15 PM
We cannot allow a never nude in the white house
:dubious:
Post by: CNS on August 08, 2016, 04:20:29 PM
Never fear Trumpets! If Hillary wins, apparently Curt Schilling will clean up her mess in 4 years.
:love:
Post by: Panjandrum on August 08, 2016, 04:32:17 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi2.wp.com%2Fespnfivethirtyeight.files.wordpress.com%2F2016%2F08%2Fpolls_only_0807.png%3Fquality%3D90%26amp%3Bstrip%3Dall%26amp%3Bw%3D575%26amp%3Bssl%3D1&hash=a8aa2e584e33d2bd1edf7925687fc9c2ed6dd645)
It keeps growing. The Now-cast has her at about a 95% chance to win and taking Arizona and Georgia.
I mean it says she's up 3.5 in Georgia. I'm not sure that's possible.
Post by: wetwillie on August 08, 2016, 04:39:41 PM
Post by: Phil Titola on August 08, 2016, 08:53:57 PM
Mormon cia guy @felixrex
Dude looks scary af
https://www.evanmcmullin.com/
Post by: wetwillie on August 08, 2016, 09:07:07 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 08, 2016, 11:54:48 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/08/08/watch-donald-trump-say-thank-you-as-a-crowd-cheers-him-for-a-20-million-gift-to-charity-does-that-gift-even-exist/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_trump-gift-435pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory
Post by: sys on August 09, 2016, 02:30:00 AM
How is that guy getting on the ballot?
heard on the radio that it's super easy in utah - just need 1k sigs prior to 8/15. not sure about az & nevada, which are the only other states that matter for him.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 09, 2016, 05:15:28 AM
The 250 People, Places, and Things Donald Trump Has Insulted
On Twitter: A Complete List
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/01/28/upshot/donald-trump-twitter-insults.html?_r=0
With links to every tweet! :love:
From July 29, so it may be up to 300 by now, dunno. Sorry if Luked.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 09, 2016, 09:18:53 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CpbClWCWEAAqZFH.jpg)
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2016/08/clinton-leads-in-nc-for-first-time-since-march.html
Post by: cfbandyman on August 09, 2016, 09:30:25 AM
JFC, this is my favorite election ever. By a mile.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CpbClWCWEAAqZFH.jpg)
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2016/08/clinton-leads-in-nc-for-first-time-since-march.html
So who are the sheeple again?
Post by: star seed 7 on August 09, 2016, 09:56:38 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 09, 2016, 10:46:20 AM
You could ask similar questions of the hillbots and get similarly ridiculous responses. When it comes to politics 97% of the people in this country are delusional. None more than lib7, mocat, SB, etc.
Post by: steve dave on August 09, 2016, 10:55:17 AM
Quote from: boing boing
It's looking rough right now for Trump voters. Fivethirtyeight's Polls-only forecast gives Clinton an 87% chance of winning, and the electoral map (with a 364-to-172 landslide college) is plainly as much as it is possible for a Democratic candidate to gain under any circumstances.
If Trump spent the next 100 days running naked smeared in his own excrement, Clinton might pick up South Carolina as well
:lol:
Post by: star seed 7 on August 09, 2016, 11:18:38 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 09, 2016, 01:25:51 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 09, 2016, 01:27:31 PM
You could ask similar questions of the hillbots and get similarly ridiculous responses. When it comes to politics 97% of the people in this country are delusional. None more than lib7, mocat, SB, etc.
No you couldn't. This has less to do with being delusional and a lot more to do with being educated. And guess to which side the majority of educated voters swing? Guess which side has all the redneck space brains?
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 09, 2016, 01:28:07 PM
I don't think there's much dispute trump is losing badly.
He seems to dispute it, if not explicitly then in a roundabout way. :dunno:
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 09, 2016, 01:29:44 PM
You could ask similar questions of the hillbots and get similarly ridiculous responses. When it comes to politics 97% of the people in this country are delusional. None more than lib7, mocat, SB, etc.
No you couldn't. This has less to do with being delusional and a lot more to do with being educated. And guess to which side the majority of educated voters swing? Guess which side has all the redneck space brains?
Case in point. Delusion
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 09, 2016, 01:41:31 PM
Post by: ChiComCat on August 09, 2016, 02:03:12 PM
You know that statistics are a thing, right?They'll take feelings over facts
http://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2016/08/05/newt-gingrich-exemplifies-just-how-unscientific-america-is/#3f9f650e2832
Post by: star seed 7 on August 09, 2016, 02:08:30 PM
Post by: ChiComCat on August 09, 2016, 02:18:36 PM
Detroit Rock Tittie!
Post by: CNS on August 09, 2016, 02:21:44 PM
Post by: CNS on August 09, 2016, 02:26:16 PM
You know that statistics are a thing, right?They'll take feelings over facts
http://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2016/08/05/newt-gingrich-exemplifies-just-how-unscientific-america-is/#3f9f650e2832
"The liberals have a set of statistics, that theoretically may be right, but it's not where human beings are". Jesus. Fear mongering stats, I guess.
Also, I love how the interviewer noted that they are FBI statistics and are indeed a fact, and he said, "no, that is your view".
Pubs have a super hard time with the whole opinion vs fact thing and it's pretty disgusting.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 09, 2016, 02:41:31 PM
You know that statistics are a thing, right?They'll take feelings over facts
http://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2016/08/05/newt-gingrich-exemplifies-just-how-unscientific-america-is/#3f9f650e2832
"The liberals have a set of statistics, that theoretically may be right, but it's not where human beings are". Jesus. Fear mongering stats, I guess.
Also, I love how the interviewer noted that they are FBI statistics and are indeed a fact, and he said, "no, that is your view".
Pubs have a super hard time with the whole opinion vs fact thing and it's pretty disgusting.
Too many people get their facts from opinion pieces on cable news channels. They can't tell the difference.
Post by: steve dave on August 09, 2016, 02:44:08 PM
— Bradd Jaffy (@BraddJaffy) August 9, 2016
Post by: star seed 7 on August 09, 2016, 02:44:40 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 09, 2016, 03:26:49 PM
Post by: sys on August 09, 2016, 04:02:22 PM
Video—Trump: "If she gets to pick her judges —nothing you can do…Although the 2nd Amendment people maybe there is" https://t.co/eeofxE9qL4
— Bradd Jaffy (@BraddJaffy) August 9, 2016
holy crap.
Post by: CNS on August 09, 2016, 04:07:52 PM
Post by: Phil Titola on August 09, 2016, 04:08:06 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 09, 2016, 04:08:47 PM
Not in a position to watch vid today. Is he asking gun guys to kill hill if she wins and nominates liberal justices?
Yes
Post by: CNS on August 09, 2016, 04:09:04 PM
Post by: sys on August 09, 2016, 04:12:31 PM
Not in a position to watch vid today. Is he asking gun guys to kill hill if she wins and nominates liberal justices?
it's clearly a joke, and to me it isn't entirely clear if he is joking about killing clinton or about killing supreme court judges, but either way, holy crap.
Post by: catastrophe on August 09, 2016, 04:26:49 PM
Post by: chum1 on August 09, 2016, 04:27:29 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 09, 2016, 05:15:51 PM
You know that statistics are a thing, right?They'll take feelings over facts
http://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2016/08/05/newt-gingrich-exemplifies-just-how-unscientific-america-is/#3f9f650e2832
This is a perfect example of my point. If you asked hillbots if gun violence was off the chain, they'd say yes at a 90% clip. You could probably dip into the gun thread and find chicat quotes to that effect. Yet the statistics don't bear that out. But you defend those statements because you want to believe them because you are delusional.
The fact that you're attempting to make a case that trump supporters are more divorced from reality than hillbot supporters is not only a sad reflection of the state of our society, but also demonstrates how far afoul of logic you, sb, lib7, etc. are willing to go to convince yourself of your own pretexts. You do that because you are Delusional.
You can post a thousand transcripts of unscripted speeches to make yourself feel good. It's a stupid exercise that could be used to undermine every person in the world. But your delusion prevent you from recognizing the obvious. Now go dig up video of hillary spacing out with dinkmentia, and respond by accusing the website of some misdeed.
Post by: treysolid on August 09, 2016, 05:31:21 PM
You know that statistics are a thing, right?They'll take feelings over facts
http://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2016/08/05/newt-gingrich-exemplifies-just-how-unscientific-america-is/#3f9f650e2832
This is a perfect example of my point. If you asked hillbots if gun violence was off the chain, they'd say yes at a 90% clip. You could probably dip into the gun thread and find chicat quotes to that effect. Yet the statistics don't bear that out. But you defend those statements because you want to believe them because you are delusional.
The fact that you're attempting to make a case that trump supporters are more divorced from reality than hillbot supporters is not only a sad reflection of the state of our society, but also demonstrates how far afoul of logic you, sb, lib7, etc. are willing to go to convince yourself of your own pretexts. You do that because you are Delusional.
You can post a thousand transcripts of unscripted speeches to make yourself feel good. It's a stupid exercise that could be used to undermine every person in the world. But your delusion prevent you from recognizing the obvious. Now go dig up video of hillary spacing out with dinkmentia, and respond by accusing the website of some misdeed.
No. The argument you are making isn't the right argument, it's just subtly different from the right argument. The language is different, and it's deceptive our your part to make those two scenarios equivalent. There is a difference between Donald Trump saying "Crime is the highest its ever been." That is patently false and the statistics bear that out. Crime is actually the lowest its been in a long time.
That's not the same as asking someone (let's say a libtard like me) if there is too much gun violence in America. I think there is too much gun violence in America, but that's because I believe that any gun violence is too much gun violence.
I can be happy that the crime rate is historically low and still upset that there's still too much violence. Those things aren't mutually exclusive.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 09, 2016, 05:50:08 PM
Trump said something along the lines of violent crime is at highs for certain cities (chicago may have been one), which is true.
You've created a fantasy where he said something else-that you think you can prove is untrue. You then replaced your own fantasy (one act of gun violence is too many) for the basic sentiment many libtards share--gun violence is on the rise.
You are the epitome of delusional in your political views.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 09, 2016, 05:52:48 PM
Just like in 08 when most libtarfs actually thought palin said she "could see russia from my backyard" or whatever tina fey said on snl.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 09, 2016, 06:02:28 PM
Post by: chuckjames on August 09, 2016, 06:17:32 PM
You know that statistics are a thing, right?They'll take feelings over facts
http://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2016/08/05/newt-gingrich-exemplifies-just-how-unscientific-america-is/#3f9f650e2832
This is a perfect example of my point. If you asked hillbots if gun violence was off the chain, they'd say yes at a 90% clip. You could probably dip into the gun thread and find chicat quotes to that effect. Yet the statistics don't bear that out. But you defend those statements because you want to believe them because you are delusional.
The fact that you're attempting to make a case that trump supporters are more divorced from reality than hillbot supporters is not only a sad reflection of the state of our society, but also demonstrates how far afoul of logic you, sb, lib7, etc. are willing to go to convince yourself of your own pretexts. You do that because you are Delusional.
You can post a thousand transcripts of unscripted speeches to make yourself feel good. It's a stupid exercise that could be used to undermine every person in the world. But your delusion prevent you from recognizing the obvious. Now go dig up video of hillary spacing out with dinkmentia and respond by accusing the website of some misdeed.
Oh man..the #HillarysHealth thing. Visit /r/TheDonald often?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 09, 2016, 06:25:32 PM
Do you know how many hillbot libtards actually believe donald trump said "all mexicans are rapists and murderers"? A large majority.
Just like in 08 when most libtarfs actually thought palin said she "could see russia from my backyard" or whatever tina fey said on snl.
I think most of the libtarfs know he said that he assumes some of them are good people.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 09, 2016, 06:46:15 PM
Post by: renocat on August 09, 2016, 08:42:49 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 09, 2016, 09:27:07 PM
Sad!
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 09, 2016, 09:53:39 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 09, 2016, 10:23:31 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on August 09, 2016, 10:31:22 PM
Let's get back to this: FSD, which party do you believe holds the majority of college-educated voters in this election?
stupid talking point. A college education doesn't imply you're intelligent.
Post by: wetwillie on August 09, 2016, 10:31:47 PM
Post by: renocat on August 09, 2016, 10:53:49 PM
Let's get back to this: FSD, which party do you believe holds the majority of college-educated voters in this election?Liberals are always staying in their smug herd butt sniffing each other and proclaiming how great they smell. Colleges have wacko professors who ram nonsensical down the minds of youth who perpetuate this wackiness. Like a bunch of inbred squirrels.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 09, 2016, 11:04:26 PM
SB is presumably a college graduate, and by all accounts, a moron. :lol:
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 09, 2016, 11:05:53 PM
Post by: catastrophe on August 09, 2016, 11:29:15 PM
Let's get back to this: FSD, which party do you believe holds the majority of college-educated voters in this election?
stupid talking point. A college education doesn't imply you're intelligent.
It means something, though. Why do you think insurers always ask for your education level?
Post by: steve dave on August 10, 2016, 07:38:42 AM
Quote
Monday: Titties ?
Tuesday: Assassinations ?
Wednesday: Global Thermonuclear War
Thursday: Strategic Interplanetary Atmospheric Annihilation
Friday: Universal Quantum Timescale Collapse
Post by: steve dave on August 10, 2016, 07:44:24 AM
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 8, 2016
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 10, 2016, 07:52:02 AM
Many people are saying that the Iranians killed the scientist who helped the U.S. because of Hillary Clinton's hacked emails.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 8, 2016
Uh, yeah there's quite a bit of evidence to indicate that Hillary's hacked emails didn't help and may in fact have sealed the guys fate.
But hey, who cares? Right?
Post by: ChiComCat on August 10, 2016, 08:32:24 AM
(https://mlpforums.com/uploads/post_images/sig-4566136.straw-man.png)
Post by: Yard Dog on August 10, 2016, 08:38:36 AM
Let's get back to this: FSD, which party do you believe holds the majority of college-educated voters in this election?
stupid talking point. A college education doesn't imply you're intelligent.
It means something, though. Why do you think insurers always ask for your education level?
I'm pretty sure the libtard talking point on this is because of racism. The minorities that systematically are bereft of the ability to achieve higher education are less likely able to get insurance. This also causes them to be less likely to get great career jobs. . .making them rely on welfare. . .thus making them Democrats for life.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 10, 2016, 08:51:29 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 10, 2016, 09:53:48 AM
Post by: DQ12 on August 10, 2016, 10:28:19 AM
That said, I think having a dumber base leaves the GOP vulnerable to blowhards like trump.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 10, 2016, 10:36:27 AM
Post by: CNS on August 10, 2016, 10:49:22 AM
Post by: steve dave on August 10, 2016, 10:54:27 AM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on August 10, 2016, 11:03:48 AM
Post by: CNS on August 10, 2016, 11:05:18 AM
Post by: steve dave on August 10, 2016, 11:05:46 AM
i know people who went to college and even have graduate degrees and believe that vaccines cause autism. there's dumb dumbs everywhere
their vote cancels out yours
Post by: SdK on August 10, 2016, 11:44:00 AM
I'll agree wholeheartedly.Let's get back to this: FSD, which party do you believe holds the majority of college-educated voters in this election?
stupid talking point. A college education doesn't imply you're intelligent.
Post by: Panjandrum on August 10, 2016, 12:05:17 PM
i know people who went to college and even have graduate degrees and believe that vaccines cause autism. there are dumb dumbs everywhere
Jenny McCarthy is very persuasive.
Post by: Cartierfor3 on August 10, 2016, 12:29:55 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 10, 2016, 12:35:19 PM
I will say though, the "Democrats are just smarter" is one of the more insulting arguments. Its just a cop out against actually discussing and evaluating ideas and political differences.
Democrats are poor and unemployed and want the government to pay for their RADICAL ISLAMIC TERRORISM themed gay wedding
Post by: SdK on August 10, 2016, 12:37:35 PM
I will say though, the "Democrats are just smarter" is one of the more insulting arguments. Its just a cop out against actually discussing and evaluating ideas and political differences.I agree. But we all like to pat ourselves on the backs and feel superior. Painting with broad strokes is never a good look.
Post by: DQ12 on August 10, 2016, 12:44:12 PM
That said, I think the large, uneducated segment of the GOP base is a problem that has become very apparent in this election cycle.
Post by: catastrophe on August 10, 2016, 12:50:44 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on August 10, 2016, 12:53:06 PM
I will say though, the "Democrats are just smarter" is one of the more insulting arguments. Its just a cop out against actually discussing and evaluating ideas and political differences.
Democrats are poor and unemployed and want the government to pay for their RADICAL ISLAMIC TERRORISM themed gay wedding
also mexican
Post by: chuckjames on August 10, 2016, 01:54:28 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on August 10, 2016, 02:03:56 PM
Stein voters!
Oh hai
Not an anti-vaxxer though. I don't think vaccines should be required, any self-respecting conservative and libertarian should feel the same but alas the limited government thing is a complete scam.
Post by: wetwillie on August 10, 2016, 02:05:47 PM
I will say though, the "Democrats are just smarter" is one of the more insulting arguments. Its just a cop out against actually discussing and evaluating ideas and political differences.
Where did you go to grad school?
Post by: Cartierfor3 on August 10, 2016, 02:10:20 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on August 10, 2016, 02:13:52 PM
Don't worry, once they overturn all those voter ID laws we'll get to see the large, uneducated segment of the Democratic Party as well.
Indeed, they weren't even smart enough to go get their free IDs. . .probably not smart enough to understand the complex nature of foreign policy.
Post by: 8manpick on August 10, 2016, 02:17:48 PM
You are delusional.Pfft... Not true of Chicago even for this century.
Trump said something along the lines of violent crime is at highs for certain cities (chicago may have been one), which is true.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 10, 2016, 02:17:57 PM
the GOP base, on average, is dumber/less educated than the democrat base. that's not going very far out on a limb. I don't think that there's necessarily anything wrong with being less educated, nor does it make the GOP policies any less valid.
That said, I think having a dumber base leaves the GOP vulnerable to blowhards like trump.
Tens of thousands of Hilbots and ultra indoctrinated and monolithic thinking Dem sellouts to power over ideals.
Post by: wetwillie on August 10, 2016, 02:18:08 PM
I only have a BA wetwillie :frown:
Yea me too, it was a poorly executed Dlew joke
Post by: CNS on August 10, 2016, 03:05:53 PM
Stein voters!
Oh hai
Not an anti-vaxxer though. I don't think vaccines should be required, any self-respecting conservative and libertarian should feel the same but alas the limited government thing is a complete scam.
I am a complex guy, I guess.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 10, 2016, 04:39:20 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on August 10, 2016, 04:59:13 PM
If you want to attendthe elite privateschoolmy kids do,you will be vaxxed.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 10, 2016, 07:27:31 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on August 10, 2016, 08:16:29 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 10, 2016, 09:34:46 PM
Post by: steve dave on August 11, 2016, 08:37:04 AM
Quote
Trump also said that ISIS "honors" Obama -- who the GOP nominee referred to as "Barack Hussein Obama."
"Normally you want to clean up; he made a bigger mess out of it. He made such a mess. And then you had Hillary with Libya, so sad," Trump said.
"In fact, in many respects, you know they honor president Obama. ISIS is honoring President Obama. He is the founder of ISIS. He's the founder of ISIS, OK? He's the founder. He founded ISIS."
:lol:
Post by: steve dave on August 11, 2016, 08:38:57 AM
http://varianceexplained.org/r/trump-tweets/
Post by: Cartierfor3 on August 11, 2016, 08:40:03 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 11, 2016, 08:41:03 AM
QuoteTrump also said that ISIS "honors" Obama -- who the GOP nominee referred to as "Barack Hussein Obama."
"Normally you want to clean up; he made a bigger mess out of it. He made such a mess. And then you had Hillary with Libya, so sad," Trump said.
"In fact, in many respects, you know they honor president Obama. ISIS is honoring President Obama. He is the founder of ISIS. He's the founder of ISIS, OK? He's the founder. He founded ISIS."
:lol:
He went on to say Hillary was the co-founder right after that.
Post by: ChiComCat on August 11, 2016, 08:44:05 AM
Quote
"you want to clean up; he made a bigger mess out of it. He made such a mess.
Post by: chum1 on August 11, 2016, 08:46:50 AM
Quote
“I got 14 million votes and won most of the states,” he boasts. “I’m liking the way I ran in the primaries better.”
http://time.com/4447985/inside-donald-trump-meltdown/
Post by: chum1 on August 11, 2016, 08:54:22 AM
Trump writes all the crazy tweets, a staffer writes the non-crazy ones
http://varianceexplained.org/r/trump-tweets/
I check in on his feed from time to time. It's SUPER obvious which ones are his. The difference is like: "Thank you for a great evening, West Virginia! xoxo" vs. "I TOLD YOU ABOUT EVIL CROOKED HILLARY WHEN I DEFEATED LYIN' TED, CNN! YOUR RATINGS ARE SO, SO AWFUL! SAD!"
Post by: CNS on August 11, 2016, 08:54:56 AM
Trump quote or 5 year old upset at his little brother?Quote"you want to clean up; he made a bigger mess out of it. He made such a mess.
I saw an article last week that was "who said it? Trump or Jenna Maroney from 30 Rock". :lol:
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: chum1 on August 11, 2016, 09:04:43 AM
A sign of good things to come.Quote“I got 14 million votes and won most of the states,” he boasts. “I’m liking the way I ran in the primaries better.”
http://time.com/4447985/inside-donald-trump-meltdown/
Quote
TIME: You talk about the strategists and the wise people counseling you. Are you still having fun? You seem to want to return to the way things used to be during the primary.
Trump: I am having a good time. Again, you see the difference. Let’s say between yesterday and go back into the rallies. I would say that I like the previous better. I can always revert to that if I want. It was more of an attacking style, which perhaps is a more natural style for me. There’s always a chance that I will do that and can go back to that.
http://time.com/4447611/donald-trump-time-cover-interview-transcript/
Post by: Phil Titola on August 11, 2016, 09:11:11 AM
A sign of good things to come.Quote“I got 14 million votes and won most of the states,” he boasts. “I’m liking the way I ran in the primaries better.”
http://time.com/4447985/inside-donald-trump-meltdown/
This should be heavily encouraged however we can.
Post by: CNS on August 11, 2016, 09:26:18 AM
Post by: DQ12 on August 11, 2016, 10:08:26 AM
Post by: steve dave on August 11, 2016, 10:47:31 AM
Post by: catastrophe on August 11, 2016, 10:49:36 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 11, 2016, 11:08:33 AM
A sign of good things to come.Quote“I got 14 million votes and won most of the states,” he boasts. “I’m liking the way I ran in the primaries better.”
http://time.com/4447985/inside-donald-trump-meltdown/QuoteTIME: You talk about the strategists and the wise people counseling you. Are you still having fun? You seem to want to return to the way things used to be during the primary.
Trump: I am having a good time. Again, you see the difference. Let’s say between yesterday and go back into the rallies. I would say that I like the previous better. I can always revert to that if I want. It was more of an attacking style, which perhaps is a more natural style for me. There’s always a chance that I will do that and can go back to that.
http://time.com/4447611/donald-trump-time-cover-interview-transcript/
oh yes please, a more attacking style.
Post by: MakeItRain on August 11, 2016, 11:10:28 AM
I think under even the most liberal libertarian pov, your personal liberty can get checked when you start endangering others lives. For example, it would still be illegal to burn your own house down.
I guess I'm confused as to how not making vaccines mandatory endangers the lives of others, no one is advocating making vaccines illegal.
Post by: CNS on August 11, 2016, 11:26:29 AM
I think under even the most liberal libertarian pov, your personal liberty can get checked when you start endangering others lives. For example, it would still be illegal to burn your own house down.
I guess I'm confused as to how not making vaccines mandatory endangers the lives of others, no one is advocating making vaccines illegal.
I don't have the link handy, but I heard a podcast explain it as there being a certain percentage of any group that is a tipping point as far as being able to control outbreak or not. The doc on the podcast said it's 15% for commonly vaccinated diseases in humans. So, if more than 15% of the herd gets it, it is much more likely to spread without control.
Post by: 8manpick on August 11, 2016, 11:32:15 AM
Herd immunity and protection of the part of the population who can't be vaccinated for medical immunodeficiency reasons or ageI think under even the most liberal libertarian pov, your personal liberty can get checked when you start endangering others lives. For example, it would still be illegal to burn your own house down.
I guess I'm confused as to how not making vaccines mandatory endangers the lives of others, no one is advocating making vaccines illegal.
Post by: steve dave on August 11, 2016, 12:19:08 PM
Post by: Kat Kid on August 11, 2016, 12:33:48 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 11, 2016, 01:22:59 PM
Yeah, if your anti-science/religious liberties start endangering kids on chemotherapy or with immune deficiencies who can't get vaccinated your civil liberties are no longer valid.
Their valid, just so long as you withdraw from society. That's the libertarian wrinkle.
Post by: Skipper44 on August 11, 2016, 01:42:35 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 11, 2016, 04:53:55 PM
Quote
“You meant that [Obama] created the vacuum, he lost the peace,” said Hewitt.
“No, I meant he’s the founder of ISIS, I do,” responded Trump.
Post by: steve dave on August 11, 2016, 05:01:03 PM
Post by: Cire on August 11, 2016, 06:14:21 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Phil Titola on August 11, 2016, 06:15:15 PM
Post by: wetwillie on August 11, 2016, 06:16:20 PM
Post by: catastrophe on August 11, 2016, 07:28:31 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on August 11, 2016, 09:37:46 PM
Is it treason to call the President a terrorist?
In America you can call the president anything you want.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 11, 2016, 09:43:19 PM
Post by: catastrophe on August 11, 2016, 09:54:40 PM
Is it treason to call the President a terrorist?
In America you can call the president anything you want.
Well, yea. You can call him names, but at some point it starts to sound like subversion.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 11, 2016, 09:56:08 PM
Is it treason to call the President a terrorist?
In America you can call the president anything you want.
Well, yea. You can call him names, but at some point it starts to sound like subversion.
gE is known for that
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 11, 2016, 11:18:49 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on August 11, 2016, 11:50:52 PM
Is it treason to call the President a terrorist?
In America you can call the president anything you want.
Well, yea. You can call him names, but at some point it starts to sound like subversion.
Oh yeah, the Bush years were great for there subversion. good times.
Post by: MakeItRain on August 11, 2016, 11:58:30 PM
Herd immunity and protection of the part of the population who can't be vaccinated for medical immunodeficiency reasons or ageI think under even the most liberal libertarian pov, your personal liberty can get checked when you start endangering others lives. For example, it would still be illegal to burn your own house down.
I guess I'm confused as to how not making vaccines mandatory endangers the lives of others, no one is advocating making vaccines illegal.
Again, no one is advocating for the elimination or even the lessening of access to vaccines. Herd immunity was achieved before the relatively new phenomenon of non-medical entities requiring scores of vaccinations. I'm also guessing some of you speaking about vaccinations don't have any practical knowledge of the current state of vaccines. Giving newborns Hep B vaccines don't help anyone but pharmaceuticals and the doctors getting a cut of advocating such an unnecessary practice.
Post by: sys on August 12, 2016, 12:05:08 AM
Post by: kim carnes on August 12, 2016, 12:07:29 AM
Post by: Cire on August 12, 2016, 04:33:04 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 12, 2016, 06:14:52 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 12, 2016, 07:45:34 AM
Is it treason to call the President a terrorist?
In America you can call the president anything you want.
Well, yea. You can call him names, but at some point it starts to sound like subversion.
gE is known for that
lol
Post by: 8manpick on August 12, 2016, 07:49:47 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 12, 2016, 10:10:01 AM
I think under even the most liberal libertarian pov, your personal liberty can get checked when you start endangering others lives. For example, it would still be illegal to burn your own house down.
I guess I'm confused as to how not making vaccines mandatory endangers the lives of others, no one is advocating making vaccines illegal.
for real?
Post by: MakeItRain on August 12, 2016, 10:14:16 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 12, 2016, 10:16:29 AM
Why are you guys reading this as I don't think children should be vaccinated? Are we having different conversations? You people are just as bad as vaxxers, is nuance impossible?
I am reading it as it should be optional so some knobs can choose not to and send their little dork to get people sick.
Post by: CNS on August 12, 2016, 10:33:18 AM
I mean, its as bad as allowing any mouthbreather to just run around, anywhere they want, with a loaded gun on their hip....wait....
Post by: MakeItRain on August 12, 2016, 10:37:06 AM
Why are you guys reading this as I don't think children should be vaccinated? Are we having different conversations? You people are just as bad as vaxxers, is nuance impossible?
I am reading it as it should be optional so some knobs can choose not to and send their little dork to get people sick.
Since is obvious that I have to spell out the context of this before I post it. I'm posting this article to show that the history of mandatory vaccinations have not been definitive outside of smallpox. I'm not linking this to show that children shouldn't be vaccinated. It also shows that state mandated vaccinations is still relatively burgeoning.
http://time.com/3751083/mandatory-vaccination-history/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+time%2Ftopstories+(TIME%3A+Top+Stories)
I don't think that walking back some of these required vaccines will lead to death and chaos. I think most people, well inside of 85%, would not stop vaccinating their children because a non-medical entity no longer tells them they have to.
Post by: MakeItRain on August 12, 2016, 10:40:01 AM
I am fine with someone not getting their kids vacc'ed. That kid just shouldn't be allowed in public places.
I mean, its as bad as allowing any mouthbreather to just run around, anywhere they want, with a loaded gun on their hip....wait....
Do you really not know that you're likely encountering someone everyday that isn't vaccinated? You should let other people raise their children, yours are protected, be happy.
Post by: steve dave on August 12, 2016, 10:44:56 AM
Post by: CNS on August 12, 2016, 10:51:29 AM
I am fine with someone not getting their kids vacc'ed. That kid just shouldn't be allowed in public places.
I mean, its as bad as allowing any mouthbreather to just run around, anywhere they want, with a loaded gun on their hip....wait....
Do you really not know that you're likely encountering someone everyday that isn't vaccinated? You should let other people raise their children, yours are protected, be happy.
I get that. However, there are plenty of ppl that are also encountering unvacc'ed kids that are unable to be vacc'ed themselves. This is the exact scenario that the herd immunization posts above are concerned with. Too many unvacc'ed could make that interaction a huge cluster eff as far as spreading diseases we currently have a handle on.
Post by: chum1 on August 12, 2016, 11:15:33 AM
Post by: catastrophe on August 12, 2016, 11:23:05 AM
Post by: steve dave on August 12, 2016, 11:24:19 AM
Yea, I think there are plenty of ways to reach a critical mass of vaccination without the state having to get involved. Wouldn't be opposed to schools dealing with vaccines like they do hearing, eyesight, and lice checks though.
I think they do, don't they?
Post by: kim carnes on August 12, 2016, 11:31:31 AM
Yea, I think there are plenty of ways to reach a critical mass of vaccination without the state having to get involved. Wouldn't be opposed to schools dealing with vaccines like they do hearing, eyesight, and lice checks though.
I think they do, don't they?
Let's hope so
Post by: CNS on August 12, 2016, 11:35:14 AM
Yea, I think there are plenty of ways to reach a critical mass of vaccination without the state having to get involved. Wouldn't be opposed to schools dealing with vaccines like they do hearing, eyesight, and lice checks though.
I think they do, don't they?
Not in my area. They didn't when I was little and they don't now that my kids are there. They do require you to get shots at the doc before enrolling, but don't take care of it at school. I would think it an insurance/liability issue. :dunno:
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on August 12, 2016, 11:39:14 AM
Speaking of things they check at school, do they still do those creepy scoliosis checks where the kids have to take their shirts off so some creepy adults can look at their spine?
Post by: star seed 7 on August 12, 2016, 11:52:54 AM
Post by: steve dave on August 12, 2016, 12:44:50 PM
Says his companies provide on site child care because he wants to take care of his employees and make them happy. Media contacts multiple hotels and resorts and they verify they have on site child care but it's for guests only and not available to employees :lol:
haha
Post by: ChiComCat on August 12, 2016, 12:47:46 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 12, 2016, 12:50:57 PM
Says his companies provide on site child care because he wants to take care of his employees and make them happy. Media contacts multiple hotels and resorts and they verify they have on site child care but it's for guests only and not available to employees :lol:
The media just keeps busting Donald's balls.
Post by: catastrophe on August 12, 2016, 01:32:22 PM
It's ok, guys. He was jk.
Post by: steve dave on August 12, 2016, 01:34:58 PM
Post by: catastrophe on August 12, 2016, 01:46:08 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on August 12, 2016, 01:49:49 PM
Post by: steve dave on August 12, 2016, 01:51:41 PM
I'm not taking MIR's side or anything, but when you go into public you assume the risk of going into public. Sick people go into public all the time. People with anti-immune disorders could get sick by things that both could and could not be vaccinated for.
the difference is there is a 100% safe and effective (both results and cost) solution to diseases we have vaccines for
Post by: star seed 7 on August 12, 2016, 01:58:26 PM
If we let people abuse their kids by instilling stupid religious attitudes, then letting them die from preventable diseases isn't much of a stretch.
Though the parents of kids that kill themselves from religious guilt or non-vaxxin' should be prosecuted for murder.
Post by: chum1 on August 12, 2016, 02:00:04 PM
Post by: wetwillie on August 12, 2016, 02:00:29 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on August 12, 2016, 02:03:30 PM
I don't really have a strong opinion but lean more to mir too.
If we let people abuse their kids by instilling stupid religious attitudes, then letting them die from preventable diseases isn't much of a stretch.
Though the parents of kids that kill themselves from religious guilt or non-vaxxin' should be prosecuted for murder.
what would be an example of this that is on par with not vaccinating for polio
Post by: CNS on August 12, 2016, 02:05:03 PM
I don't really have a strong opinion but lean more to mir too.
If we let people abuse their kids by instilling stupid religious attitudes, then letting them die from preventable diseases isn't much of a stretch.
Though the parents of kids that kill themselves from religious guilt or non-vaxxin' should be prosecuted for murder.
what would be an example of this that is on par with not vaccinating for polio
you hear of one or two ppl in the midwest(International House of Prayer folks, usually) that end up with kid that dies every year or so because they don't believe in doctors and their treatment plan was to pray it away.
Post by: Emo EMAW on August 12, 2016, 02:05:38 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on August 12, 2016, 02:06:56 PM
I don't really have a strong opinion but lean more to mir too.
If we let people abuse their kids by instilling stupid religious attitudes, then letting them die from preventable diseases isn't much of a stretch.
Though the parents of kids that kill themselves from religious guilt or non-vaxxin' should be prosecuted for murder.
what would be an example of this that is on par with not vaccinating for polio
you hear of one or two ppl in the midwest(International House of Prayer folks, usually) that end up with kid that dies every year or so because they don't believe in doctors and their treatment plan was to pray it away.
that's a good example. is that what you meant lib7?
Post by: star seed 7 on August 12, 2016, 02:07:21 PM
I don't really have a strong opinion but lean more to mir too.
If we let people abuse their kids by instilling stupid religious attitudes, then letting them die from preventable diseases isn't much of a stretch.
Though the parents of kids that kill themselves from religious guilt or non-vaxxin' should be prosecuted for murder.
what would be an example of this that is on par with not vaccinating for polio
Burning in hell for normal human behavior like masturbating, pre marital sex, and being gay.
Post by: ChiComCat on August 12, 2016, 02:08:37 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 12, 2016, 02:08:57 PM
I'm sure there are a bunch of reasons people don't vaxx their kids, but "they don't want to" is a good enough reason (not to imply one should need a reasons). This is still the US of A.
"They don't want to" isn't a good enough reason to starve your kids, though. There are limits to where you can apply that sort of thing to somebody else in the US of A, even if they are your children/property.
Post by: CNS on August 12, 2016, 02:10:11 PM
I'm sure there are a bunch of reasons people don't vaxx their kids, but "they don't want to" is a good enough reason (not to imply one should need a reasons). This is still the US of A.
"They don't want to" isn't a good enough reason to starve your kids, though. There are limits to where you can apply that sort of thing to somebody else in the US of A, even if they are your children/property.
the vax thing goes even further, imo. The starving example effects that one person's kid. The vax thing can effect all of our kids.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 12, 2016, 02:11:13 PM
I'm sure there are a bunch of reasons people don't vaxx their kids, but "they don't want to" is a good enough reason (not to imply one should need a reasons). This is still the US of A.
"They don't want to" isn't a good enough reason to starve your kids, though. There are limits to where you can apply that sort of thing to somebody else in the US of A, even if they are your children/property.
They are free to do that, but there will be consequences
Post by: Emo EMAW on August 12, 2016, 02:14:25 PM
I'm sure there are a bunch of reasons people don't vaxx their kids, but "they don't want to" is a good enough reason (not to imply one should need a reasons). This is still the US of A.
"They don't want to" isn't a good enough reason to starve your kids, though. There are limits to where you can apply that sort of thing to somebody else in the US of A, even if they are your children/property.
Sure there are limits. It's not like these people are breaking open doors to hospital rooms and schooing their non-vaxxed kids into private property to make others ill.
The fact remains, when you go into public, you assume the risk of going into public.
Post by: Kat Kid on August 12, 2016, 02:16:22 PM
I'm not taking MIR's side or anything, but when you go into public you assume the risk of going into public. Sick people go into public all the time. People with anti-immune disorders could get sick by things that both could and could not be vaccinated for.
Yep, survival of the fittest is my motto for public policy.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: star seed 7 on August 12, 2016, 02:17:55 PM
I'm sure there are a bunch of reasons people don't vaxx their kids, but "they don't want to" is a good enough reason (not to imply one should need a reasons). This is still the US of A.
"They don't want to" isn't a good enough reason to starve your kids, though. There are limits to where you can apply that sort of thing to somebody else in the US of A, even if they are your children/property.
Sure there are limits. It's not like these people are breaking open doors to hospital rooms and schooing their non-vaxxed kids into private property to make others ill.
The fact remains, when you go into public, you assume the risk of going into public.
Legalize open carry of vax needles to keep yourself safe
Post by: star seed 7 on August 12, 2016, 04:34:00 PM
Quote
But during an afternoon rally in Erie, Pennsylvania, Trump said his initial remark wasn’t “that sarcastic, to be honest with you.”
“So I said the founder of ISIS,” Trump recalled to the crowd, after accusing the president of being “so weak and so bad” that he allowed the Islamic State to grow. “Obviously I’m being sarcastic. Then — but not that sarcastic, to be honest with you.”
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-obama-islamic-state-sarcasm-226947#ixzz4H9fESmjn
Post by: catastrophe on August 12, 2016, 05:30:24 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 12, 2016, 06:09:01 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 12, 2016, 06:10:55 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 12, 2016, 06:12:31 PM
I don't really have a strong opinion but lean more to mir too.
If we let people abuse their kids by instilling stupid religious attitudes, then letting them die from preventable diseases isn't much of a stretch.
Though the parents of kids that kill themselves from religious guilt or non-vaxxin' should be prosecuted for murder.
Spoken like an abused and neglected child. Lib7, look at me, it's not your fault. It's not your fault. :cry:
Post by: star seed 7 on August 12, 2016, 09:42:33 PM
Media :curse:
Post by: sys on August 12, 2016, 10:01:58 PM
Post by: DQ12 on August 12, 2016, 10:05:05 PM
Post by: sys on August 12, 2016, 10:07:39 PM
that cant be a real quote
but it takes you a second, right?
Post by: star seed 7 on August 12, 2016, 10:08:52 PM
that cant be a real quote
it's not.
but it could be :surprised:
Post by: kim carnes on August 12, 2016, 10:11:08 PM
I'm sure there are a bunch of reasons people don't vaxx their kids, but "they don't want to" is a good enough reason (not to imply one should need a reasons). This is still the US of A.
"They don't want to" isn't a good enough reason to starve your kids, though. There are limits to where you can apply that sort of thing to somebody else in the US of A, even if they are your children/property.
Sure there are limits. It's not like these people are breaking open doors to hospital rooms and schooing their non-vaxxed kids into private property to make others ill.
The fact remains, when you go into public, you assume the risk of going into public.
Wtf is this post
Post by: chum1 on August 12, 2016, 10:12:25 PM
http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report
Post by: chum1 on August 12, 2016, 10:17:31 PM
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/08/12/trump_rally-goer_to_cnn_reporter_i_am_a_patriot_and_you_are_a_traitor.html
Post by: chum1 on August 13, 2016, 08:53:52 AM
Post by: steve dave on August 13, 2016, 10:46:06 AM
Post by: catastrophe on August 13, 2016, 12:17:40 PM
Post by: steve dave on August 13, 2016, 02:06:39 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urv4S-M-8cg&list=PLtD-NySxyH-VFn3jaJMMt100tSPQNc4On
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 13, 2016, 04:01:57 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 13, 2016, 04:04:36 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 13, 2016, 05:19:44 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 13, 2016, 08:31:09 PM
Which party has the voters preparing the cleverist memes?
Memes are dank, not clever, smdh
see
[youtube]https://youtu.be/aoXDe8HxHBA[/youtube]
Post by: Phil Titola on August 14, 2016, 12:13:38 AM
haha
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urv4S-M-8cg&list=PLtD-NySxyH-VFn3jaJMMt100tSPQNc4On
:love:
Post by: MakeItRain on August 14, 2016, 02:10:44 AM
haha
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urv4S-M-8cg&list=PLtD-NySxyH-VFn3jaJMMt100tSPQNc4On
This guys campaign is such a crap show we can't even keep up. We haven't even talked about Trump having a pedo directly over his left shoulder in this video, the day after he said Hillary invited the father of the Orlando shooting to her rally who sat in damn near the exact same spot.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 14, 2016, 08:14:29 AM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 14, 2016, 09:55:03 AM
Post by: renocat on August 14, 2016, 12:59:31 PM
Post by: The Big Train on August 14, 2016, 02:26:41 PM
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/764870785634799617
Post by: MakeItRain on August 14, 2016, 05:07:01 PM
Regular pedo, or soviet double agent pedo?
You're fully aware who Mark Foley is.
Post by: renocat on August 14, 2016, 06:02:08 PM
Wblhy do gutless.liberals sby away from defending crap worthless policies and defending wonder dog Obama? A perver in the crowd is the best line of attack that can be mustered.Regular pedo, or soviet double agent pedo?
You're fully aware who Mark Foley is.
Post by: chum1 on August 14, 2016, 10:37:01 PM
https://twitter.com/CLewandowski_/status/764989713149267968
Post by: catastrophe on August 14, 2016, 10:50:54 PM
Yeah! That's not right!
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/764870785634799617
Yea, WTF? It's not like freedom of the press means you can print things people in power disagree with.
Post by: Yard Dog on August 15, 2016, 08:17:34 AM
Yeah! That's not right!
https://twitter.com/realdonalddrumpf/status/764870785634799617
Pretty sure Libel is still illegal.
http://dictionary.law.com/default.aspx?selected=1153
Post by: Phil Titola on August 15, 2016, 08:56:29 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 15, 2016, 10:02:30 AM
Post by: sys on August 15, 2016, 10:26:13 AM
more on how money has little influence on campaigns and how super pacs convince dumbass billionaires to waste their money.
Post by: catastrophe on August 15, 2016, 10:29:59 AM
Yeah! That's not right!
https://twitter.com/realdonalddrumpf/status/764870785634799617
Pretty sure Libel is still illegal.
http://dictionary.law.com/default.aspx?selected=1153
Still freedom of the press though. Just like most civil causes of action, you can do whatever you want as long as you are willing to pay for the consequences of it.
Post by: sys on August 15, 2016, 10:37:36 AM
The non-scary daughter is on vacay in Croatia with putin gf :lol:
murdoch's ex wife is putin's girlfriend is ivanka's bff?
:sdeek: what is the group of global elites that conspiracy idiots think runs the world? bilderberg or something? i may need to believe in it.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 15, 2016, 10:45:25 AM
The non-scary daughter is on vacay in Croatia with putin gf :lol:
murdoch's ex wife is putin's girlfriend is ivanka's bff?
:sdeek: what is the group of global elites that conspiracy idiots think runs the world? bilderberg or something? i may need to believe in it.
Yup
Post by: Emo EMAW on August 15, 2016, 10:47:42 AM
Post by: Tobias on August 15, 2016, 10:48:12 AM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FsC4wFv7.png&hash=a19bef8fc1b306cf7c7c327931f1f1647d1047c5)
Post by: chum1 on August 15, 2016, 12:45:16 PM
Quote
Pennell estimates it takes her transcriptionists twice as long to transcribe a Trump speech as it does for Clinton — and additional safeguards have been in place for the GOP nominee.
"Basically, you can't do Trump in real time," said Pennell. "Trump is a team approach … with a secondary editor acting as secondary review point, and there is a lot that can be lost in the mix."
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/15/transcribers-agony-frustrated-not-by-what-trump-says-but-how-he-says-it.html
Post by: CNS on August 15, 2016, 12:51:50 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 15, 2016, 01:00:28 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 15, 2016, 01:10:43 PM
This thread is kind of fun to read what was going on a year ago
Like, does anyone even remember him refusing to release his birth certificate and saying it was "ridiculous" for the press to ask for him to release it?
That's major lols but totally lost in the avalanche of lols the past 14 months or whatever :lol:
Post by: CNS on August 15, 2016, 01:33:59 PM
This thread is kind of fun to read what was going on a year ago
The first 20 pages are so great. No way we are actually here, where we are, now. I mean, this universe is def a hologram.
Post by: chum1 on August 15, 2016, 02:27:25 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/15/donald-trumps-top-spokeswoman-katrina-pierson-is-saying-some-very-strange-things-this-month/
Post by: chum1 on August 15, 2016, 02:29:04 PM
Post by: CNS on August 15, 2016, 02:33:55 PM
Post by: CNS on August 15, 2016, 02:36:00 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 15, 2016, 03:06:53 PM
Quote
During his speech, Trump said he will put an end to nation-building if elected president.
“It is now time for a new approach. Our current strategy of nation-building and regime change is a proven absolute failure,” Trump said, citing the unpopular Iraq war. “What was the purpose of this whole thing?
“It’s time to put the mistakes of the past behind us and chart a new course.”
Trump said he will work with U.S. allies, including in the Middle East, to defeat radical Islamic terrorism.
“As president, I will call for an international conference focused on this goal. We will work side-by-side in our friends in the Middle East, including our greatest ally Israel,” Trump said, adding that his administration would work closely with NATO on this new mission.
Post by: CNS on August 15, 2016, 03:25:37 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 15, 2016, 03:57:58 PM
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/tIydyyAchLI/maxresdefault.jpg)
Wiki says she's from "kansas" (no specific location) :ksu:
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 15, 2016, 04:02:07 PM
The exact opposite of Hillary "Huge War Monger" Clinton. Not even close to getting there yet, but if this keeps up, I may need to re-think:QuoteDuring his speech, Trump said he will put an end to nation-building if elected president.
“It is now time for a new approach. Our current strategy of nation-building and regime change is a proven absolute failure,” Trump said, citing the unpopular Iraq war. “What was the purpose of this whole thing?
“It’s time to put the mistakes of the past behind us and chart a new course.”
Trump said he will work with U.S. allies, including in the Middle East, to defeat radical Islamic terrorism.
“As president, I will call for an international conference focused on this goal. We will work side-by-side in our friends in the Middle East, including our greatest ally Israel,” Trump said, adding that his administration would work closely with NATO on this new mission.
That's a super catchy nickname, dax. :thumbs:
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 15, 2016, 04:03:12 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 15, 2016, 04:04:14 PM
SB, as a huge Hilbot, why are you always so butthurt?
That's just a part of life as a Hilbot DemoLemming who loves corrupt war mongers, I guess. :dunno:
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 15, 2016, 04:05:25 PM
SB, as a huge Hilbot, why are you always so butthurt?
That's just a part of life as a Hilbot DemoLemming who loves corrupt war mongers, I guess. :dunno:
I thought you had resolved your inner guilt and angst, I guess not. Looking forward to your "I held my nose" screed in the future.
Post by: sys on August 15, 2016, 04:10:45 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 15, 2016, 04:13:13 PM
congratulations, liblib. you finally got him to admit it.
Admit what? That at this juncture I'm still voting for Johnson?
Weird, if anything else.
Post by: treysolid on August 15, 2016, 04:17:43 PM
The exact opposite of Hillary "Huge War Monger" Clinton. Not even close to getting there yet, but if this keeps up, I may need to re-think:QuoteDuring his speech, Trump said he will put an end to nation-building if elected president.
“It is now time for a new approach. Our current strategy of nation-building and regime change is a proven absolute failure,” Trump said, citing the unpopular Iraq war. “What was the purpose of this whole thing?
“It’s time to put the mistakes of the past behind us and chart a new course.”
Trump said he will work with U.S. allies, including in the Middle East, to defeat radical Islamic terrorism.
“As president, I will call for an international conference focused on this goal. We will work side-by-side in our friends in the Middle East, including our greatest ally Israel,” Trump said, adding that his administration would work closely with NATO on this new mission.
bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 15, 2016, 04:22:38 PM
The exact opposite of Hillary "Huge War Monger" Clinton. Not even close to getting there yet, but if this keeps up, I may need to re-think:QuoteDuring his speech, Trump said he will put an end to nation-building if elected president.
“It is now time for a new approach. Our current strategy of nation-building and regime change is a proven absolute failure,” Trump said, citing the unpopular Iraq war. “What was the purpose of this whole thing?
“It’s time to put the mistakes of the past behind us and chart a new course.”
Trump said he will work with U.S. allies, including in the Middle East, to defeat radical Islamic terrorism.
“As president, I will call for an international conference focused on this goal. We will work side-by-side in our friends in the Middle East, including our greatest ally Israel,” Trump said, adding that his administration would work closely with NATO on this new mission.
bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Yeah a couple of concerns with that. Particularly knowing that Turkey will likely be firmly under the control of hardcore Muslims by this time next year.
Post by: chum1 on August 15, 2016, 04:22:58 PM
Wiki says she's from "kansas" (no specific location) :ksu:
I read about it. At first, it's disappointing because you learn that she was only born in Kansas and her and her parents actually always lived in Texas. Then, the story becomes awesome when she explains that her mom took her to Kansas because her town did not have any adoption agencies specializing in bi-racial babies.
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_57617e9be4b0df4d586eccc1
Post by: star seed 7 on August 15, 2016, 04:25:33 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 15, 2016, 04:31:35 PM
Post by: catastrophe on August 15, 2016, 04:33:02 PM
Post by: treysolid on August 15, 2016, 04:34:07 PM
I think he was laughing because trump said he's going to withdraw from nato
trump is like that psycho boyfriend who cheats on his girlfriend and physically abuses her, but then says that he'll kill himself if she ever leaves him.
Post by: treysolid on August 15, 2016, 04:36:44 PM
Or he could have been talking about NATO countries who don't meet the requisite minimum requirement per the NATO Charter on defense spending relative to their GDP.
sooo.....all 5 of them?
bwahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Post by: chum1 on August 15, 2016, 04:41:09 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 15, 2016, 04:41:59 PM
In 2015 the UK spent 1.9% of GDP on defense, yet the U.S. spends tens of millions of dollars on air bases in the U.K. with U.S. Air Force F-15's flying air defense missions (intercepting Russian Bombers) on behalf of the U.K. (and NATO). Germany spent 1.2% of their GDP on defense in 2015.
Wow, you guys just don't know what you want.
Sad
Post by: star seed 7 on August 15, 2016, 04:43:17 PM
I would marry Katrina Pierson in a heartbeat. Oh, man. What an exciting life that would be.
9/11 truthers like her and dax are too mentally exhausting for me
Post by: treysolid on August 15, 2016, 04:54:43 PM
Fascinating, so ProgLibs want to see the U.S. continue to spend billions providing a military shield to countries who don't even meet the basic requirements of the pledge/charter they signed their names on?
In 2015 the UK spent 1.9% of GDP on defense, yet the U.S. spends tens of millions of dollars on air bases in the U.K. with U.S. Air Force F-15's flying air defense missions (intercepting Russian Bombers) on behalf of the U.K. (and NATO). Germany spent 1.2% of their GDP on defense in 2015.
Wow, you guys just don't know what you want.
Sad
:confused: :confused: Trump is the one who wants it both ways (KATDADDY NO!) in this scenario
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 15, 2016, 04:56:49 PM
Fascinating, so ProgLibs want to see the U.S. continue to spend billions providing a military shield to countries who don't even meet the basic requirements of the pledge/charter they signed their names on?
In 2015 the UK spent 1.9% of GDP on defense, yet the U.S. spends tens of millions of dollars on air bases in the U.K. with U.S. Air Force F-15's flying air defense missions (intercepting Russian Bombers) on behalf of the U.K. (and NATO). Germany spent 1.2% of their GDP on defense in 2015.
Wow, you guys just don't know what you want.
Sad
:confused: :confused: Trump is the one who wants it both ways (KATDADDY NO!) in this scenario
So you can't work with NATO allies on two things at once, only one thing at once? You can't get them to meet their obligations and work with them on establishing peace? Weird.
Look, I realize you're used to Hillary calling for NATO to bomb everything, but try to give peace a chance.
Post by: treysolid on August 15, 2016, 05:05:27 PM
Fascinating, so ProgLibs want to see the U.S. continue to spend billions providing a military shield to countries who don't even meet the basic requirements of the pledge/charter they signed their names on?
In 2015 the UK spent 1.9% of GDP on defense, yet the U.S. spends tens of millions of dollars on air bases in the U.K. with U.S. Air Force F-15's flying air defense missions (intercepting Russian Bombers) on behalf of the U.K. (and NATO). Germany spent 1.2% of their GDP on defense in 2015.
Wow, you guys just don't know what you want.
Sad
:confused: :confused: Trump is the one who wants it both ways (KATDADDY NO!) in this scenario
So you can't work with NATO allies on two things at once, only one thing at once? You can't get them to meet their obligations and work with them on establishing peace? Weird.
Look, I realize you're used to Hillary calling for NATO to bomb everything, but try to give peace a chance.
You're not even close. Threatening to walk away from NATO one month if they don't pay up and then requesting that they work with us on the middle east the next is psycho behavior.
Post by: treysolid on August 15, 2016, 05:07:52 PM
c'mon dax - give peace a chance.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 15, 2016, 05:09:26 PM
Now, being a catalyst that gets thousands of people killed, countries left in shambles and creating the biggest refugee crisis since WWII, that's psychotic behavior
You can't get anymore psychotic then a wild eyed Hillary proudly proclaiming she destroyed a country, and yet it's right there on video.
Post by: catastrophe on August 15, 2016, 05:10:08 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 15, 2016, 05:11:34 PM
^ major Gary Johnson supporter
When have I ever said "major".
Post by: catastrophe on August 15, 2016, 05:17:36 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 15, 2016, 05:21:22 PM
I just don't understand why you are willing to publicly defend the ridiculous things Trump continues to do and say but are still too ashamed to admit you are voting Trump.
I guess you don't understand that this a perfect time to point out the factual history of Hillary. Now easily one of the biggest killers of human beings in world history. The fact that you can't discern between political rhetoric and actual action is telling. Not only that, Hillary Clinton is a painfully well documented flip-flopper on nearly everything who has been caught repeatedly contradicting herself over the course of her entire political career. She has some of the lowest if not the lowest trustworthiness ratings of any presidential candidate/nominee, possibly ever.
Post by: catastrophe on August 15, 2016, 05:33:51 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 15, 2016, 05:39:20 PM
This thread is for Trump bashing / apologetics. Not for deflecting onto Hillary.
:lol:
Post by: MakeItRain on August 15, 2016, 05:42:58 PM
I just don't understand why you are willing to publicly defend the ridiculous things Trump continues to do and say but are still too ashamed to admit you are voting Trump.
I guess you don't understand that this a perfect time to point out the factual history of Hillary. Now easily one of the biggest killers of human beings in world history. The fact that you can't discern between political rhetoric and actual action is telling. Not only that, Hillary Clinton is a painfully well documented flip-flopper on nearly everything who has been caught repeatedly contradicting herself over the course of her entire political career. She has some of the lowest if not the lowest trustworthiness ratings of any presidential candidate/nominee, possibly ever.
Has anyone else in this thread mention Hillrod other than Dax, gE's #1 trumper?
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 15, 2016, 06:12:40 PM
Post by: treysolid on August 15, 2016, 06:15:26 PM
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWejiXvd-P8[/youtube]
c'mon dax - give peace a chance.
war monger dax definitely wants no part of Trumps policy to establish middle eastern peace and definitely-not-nation-building in this video.
Post by: Asteriskhead on August 15, 2016, 06:28:07 PM
Post by: chum1 on August 15, 2016, 06:32:02 PM
Quote
The video expected to be released in the Washington suit contains exchanges in which Trump is questioned about his sharp attacks on Curiel, including Trump's claim that the U.S.-born Latino judge was biased against him due to the judge's ethnicity.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-deposition-video-227021
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 15, 2016, 07:40:50 PM
Sad
Post by: Phil Titola on August 15, 2016, 08:28:11 PM
Post by: Kat Kid on August 15, 2016, 09:47:03 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 15, 2016, 09:49:13 PM
Post by: SdK on August 16, 2016, 08:33:03 AM
His alpha tone just makes betas feel like pussies and they really hate it.You know nothing about being an alpha.
Post by: CNS on August 16, 2016, 09:04:53 AM
Scared men looking for a powerful leader....
Post by: chum1 on August 16, 2016, 09:22:25 AM
Post by: SdK on August 16, 2016, 09:24:16 AM
It seems that by very definition trumps primary supporters have to be betas. :dunno:They just love the taste of a leather boot.
Scared men looking for a powerful leader....
Post by: CNS on August 16, 2016, 09:27:56 AM
It seems that by very definition trumps primary supporters have to be betas. :dunno:They just love the taste of a leather boot.
Scared men looking for a powerful leader....
They seem much more like a ball gag crowd to me :dunno:
Post by: SdK on August 16, 2016, 10:17:12 AM
I think you're right. My folly.It seems that by very definition trumps primary supporters have to be betas. :dunno:They just love the taste of a leather boot.
Scared men looking for a powerful leader....
They seem much more like a ball gag crowd to me :dunno:
Post by: chum1 on August 16, 2016, 11:54:55 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/17/us/politics/donald-trump-roger-ailes.html
Post by: mocat on August 16, 2016, 11:56:03 AM
Post by: chum1 on August 16, 2016, 12:28:06 PM
Post by: chum1 on August 16, 2016, 01:10:19 PM
9 point Clinton lead in Florida per Monmouth University survey
http://www.politico.com/blogs/swing-states-2016-election/2016/08/poll-clinton-leads-trump-by-9-in-florida-227057
Post by: chum1 on August 16, 2016, 04:37:26 PM
Quote
“I don’t wanna change. Everybody talks about, ‘Oh well, you’re gonna pivot, you’re gonna’ — I don’t wanna pivot. I mean, you have to be you. If you start pivoting, you’re not being honest with people.”
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/is-trump-changing-his-strategy-227075
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 16, 2016, 06:12:44 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 16, 2016, 06:18:01 PM
His alpha tone just makes betas feel like pussies and they really hate it.You know nothing about being an alpha.
Lemme guess, you and CNS don't like his tone......
Post by: CNS on August 16, 2016, 06:21:13 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 16, 2016, 06:23:08 PM
Post by: CNS on August 16, 2016, 06:25:58 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 16, 2016, 06:27:28 PM
Now show us the list.
Post by: CNS on August 16, 2016, 06:27:46 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: CNS on August 16, 2016, 06:28:40 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 16, 2016, 06:29:29 PM
Post by: CNS on August 16, 2016, 06:31:49 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 16, 2016, 06:35:04 PM
Post by: CNS on August 16, 2016, 06:41:40 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 16, 2016, 06:45:45 PM
Let's see it, I'm sure it has a lot of well thought out reasons.
Post by: bucket on August 16, 2016, 07:04:27 PM
A good read on Trump's campaign manager. Now I see why that money he earned in Ukraine was such a big deal.
Post by: Kat Kid on August 16, 2016, 07:49:24 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 16, 2016, 07:53:25 PM
It is a little weird that a bunch of "alphas" call Trump "daddy."
Enraged at tone :curse: :weirdrobert:
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 16, 2016, 07:54:27 PM
https://m.youtube.com/watch?ebc=ANyPxKr-ztX4BO20FsyRMEYKPzuRV0hfUSwiPQ9vRRjGuyovoqcxanTOBPFiP7_0I6qXvecdlTbe&v=4IrE6FMpai8&time_continue=2
Post by: The Big Train on August 16, 2016, 07:55:54 PM
Post by: sys on August 16, 2016, 08:20:30 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/16/donald-trump-campaign-paul-manafort-ukraine-yanukovich?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Tweet
A good read on Trump's campaign manager. Now I see why that money he earned in Ukraine was such a big deal.
in interviews he comes across as repulsive.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 16, 2016, 09:05:36 PM
This goes out to my betas
Post by: Phil Titola on August 16, 2016, 09:15:29 PM
Post by: SdK on August 17, 2016, 12:36:23 AM
I just know alpha when I see it.His alpha tone just makes betas feel like pussies and they really hate it.You know nothing about being an alpha.
Lemme guess, you and CNS don't like his tone......
Post by: SdK on August 17, 2016, 12:37:45 AM
High level beta-flecting up in hereI posted before I saw this. Hahhahaha you are so cute
Post by: chum1 on August 17, 2016, 06:36:50 AM
Quote
Donald Trump, following weeks of gnawing agitation over his advisers’ attempts to temper his style, moved late Tuesday to overhaul his struggling campaign by rebuffing those efforts and elevating two longtime associates who have encouraged his combative populism.
...
While Trump respects Manafort, the aides said, he has grown to feel “boxed in” and "controlled" by people who barely know him. Moving forward, he plans to focus intensely on rousing his voters at rallies and through media appearances.
...
“Buckle up,” wrote a Trump strategist in a text message Wednesday to The Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/post-politics/wp/2016/08/17/trump-reshuffles-staff-in-his-own-image/
Post by: Tobias on August 17, 2016, 06:47:29 AM
Post by: steve dave on August 17, 2016, 06:56:33 AM
Post by: wetwillie on August 17, 2016, 07:00:57 AM
Post by: steve dave on August 17, 2016, 07:06:34 AM
Post by: Asteriskhead on August 17, 2016, 07:24:50 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 17, 2016, 07:59:30 AM
Post by: Phil Titola on August 17, 2016, 08:19:11 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 17, 2016, 10:08:51 AM
Post by: CNS on August 17, 2016, 10:09:01 AM
So him asking why we don't use nukes preemptively and shaming war heroes parents was him boxed in and controlled? I'm not sure the world is ready for his unbridled message.
He is about to use the nukes on his own campaign.
Post by: CNS on August 17, 2016, 10:09:22 AM
Hammered racist pandering Hillary last night.
Please summarize here. TIA.
Post by: DQ12 on August 17, 2016, 10:12:34 AM
Post by: sys on August 17, 2016, 10:12:50 AM
Please summarize here. TIA.
gave a speech about black on black crime to a bunch of white people in milwaukee.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 17, 2016, 10:13:29 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 17, 2016, 10:16:03 AM
Post by: ChiComCat on August 17, 2016, 10:16:46 AM
Seems a bit beholden to special interests
Post by: DQ12 on August 17, 2016, 10:20:55 AM
hopefully he shows up to the debates because boy howdy, if he's off the leash at those things, watch out.
Post by: chum1 on August 17, 2016, 10:26:37 AM
Post by: 8manpick on August 17, 2016, 10:42:22 AM
Post by: SdK on August 17, 2016, 10:44:00 AM
Post by: 8manpick on August 17, 2016, 10:45:25 AM
Post by: DQ12 on August 17, 2016, 10:45:37 AM
Post by: chum1 on August 17, 2016, 10:50:43 AM
Quote
Bannon has never run a political campaign. But he has made conservative documentaries, raised money for Breitbart News and hosted a Breitbart-branded radio show.
His harnessing of media megaphones led Bloomberg to call him "the most dangerous political operative in America" in a profile last year.
That description was quoted approvingly in a Trump press release about Wednesday's campaign shakeup.
The profile also described Breitbart as a "crusading right-wing populist website that's a lineal descendant of the Drudge Report (its late founder, Andrew Breitbart, spent years apprenticing with Matt Drudge) and a haven for people who think Fox News is too polite and restrained."
http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/17/media/steve-bannon-breitbart-donald-trump/
Post by: star seed 7 on August 17, 2016, 10:53:03 AM
who would've thought Hillary would have a tougher go in the primary than she would in the general?
I saw earlier that his lead in KS is down to 5points and only 6points in texas :sdeek:
Post by: chum1 on August 17, 2016, 10:54:04 AM
Post by: Tobias on August 17, 2016, 10:58:26 AM
Post by: sys on August 17, 2016, 11:07:05 AM
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2015-steve-bannon/
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 17, 2016, 11:12:04 AM
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Post by: SdK on August 17, 2016, 11:13:00 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 17, 2016, 11:16:03 AM
I thought you were voting for GJ?
But the idiocy on this thread is still to amazing to pass up.
Post by: SdK on August 17, 2016, 11:19:56 AM
Fair enough. I'd focus on bashing Hillary and less on trying to make trump seem palatable. But you do you. Just makes it hard to follow your position to the casual observer.I thought you were voting for GJ?
But the idiocy on this thread is still to amazing to pass up.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 17, 2016, 11:21:06 AM
I thought you were voting for GJ?
But the idiocy on this thread is still to amazing to pass up.
Well duh, it's the trump thread
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 17, 2016, 11:22:50 AM
Fair enough. I'd focus on bashing Hillary and less on trying to make trump seem palatable. But you do you. Just makes it hard to follow your position to the casual observer.I thought you were voting for GJ?
But the idiocy on this thread is still to amazing to pass up.
I'm still trying to figure out how any thinking person would think Hilary was "palatable" on any conceivable level. She's easily one of the most despicable human beings/politicians of our time. The only thing she has going for her is a well oil political machine that's cleared every obstacle out of the way for her via the most unethical of means.
Post by: Tobias on August 17, 2016, 11:26:13 AM
via the most unethical of means.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160817%2F40c876e9e8652d2354b21b08ef836cfb.jpg&hash=16a52cf7593ff8d26bfc575cf1def8af47cabdfb)
Post by: ChiComCat on August 17, 2016, 11:26:36 AM
Yep, getting advice from people in business is EXACTLY the same as owing political debts to a massive list of contributors to certain foundations and entities that pumped millions into personal banking accounts.
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Great summary. He is getting advice from business people and no need to mention the political contributions he was given. Meanwhile, be sure to mention the correlation on Hillary's side.
Post by: DQ12 on August 17, 2016, 11:27:04 AM
right. and it would be nice if the GOP put forth any semblance of a decent candidate against her.Fair enough. I'd focus on bashing Hillary and less on trying to make trump seem palatable. But you do you. Just makes it hard to follow your position to the casual observer.I thought you were voting for GJ?
But the idiocy on this thread is still to amazing to pass up.
I'm still trying to figure out how any thinking person would think Hilary was "palatable" on any conceivable level. She's easily one of the most despicable human beings/politicians of our time. The only thing she has going for her is a well oil political machine that's cleared every obstacle out of the way for her via the most unethical of means.
instead we have the most absurd legitimate political candidate I can think of who is running an absolute trainwreck of a campaign. which is the point of this thread.
Post by: SdK on August 17, 2016, 11:28:06 AM
Oh I agree. She just scares me less than Trump. Would you prefer Trump to Hillary?Fair enough. I'd focus on bashing Hillary and less on trying to make trump seem palatable. But you do you. Just makes it hard to follow your position to the casual observer.I thought you were voting for GJ?
But the idiocy on this thread is still to amazing to pass up.
I'm still trying to figure out how any thinking person would think Hilary was "palatable" on any conceivable level. She's easily one of the most despicable human beings/politicians of our time. The only thing she has going for her is a well oil political machine that's cleared every obstacle out of the way for her via the most unethical of means.
Post by: ChiComCat on August 17, 2016, 11:29:14 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 17, 2016, 11:33:19 AM
right. and it would be nice if the GOP put forth any semblance of a decent candidate against her.Fair enough. I'd focus on bashing Hillary and less on trying to make trump seem palatable. But you do you. Just makes it hard to follow your position to the casual observer.I thought you were voting for GJ?
But the idiocy on this thread is still to amazing to pass up.
I'm still trying to figure out how any thinking person would think Hilary was "palatable" on any conceivable level. She's easily one of the most despicable human beings/politicians of our time. The only thing she has going for her is a well oil political machine that's cleared every obstacle out of the way for her via the most unethical of means.
instead we have the most absurd legitimate political candidate I can think of who is running an absolute trainwreck of a campaign. which is the point of this thread.
Actually the last few Trump speeches have been very on point, I see nothing of any real substance coming from Hillary besides canned media of Hillary being asked questions by her staff while being propped up by a pillow.
Post by: CNS on August 17, 2016, 11:34:59 AM
I don't even....
Post by: star seed 7 on August 17, 2016, 11:47:16 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 17, 2016, 11:53:42 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 17, 2016, 12:03:14 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 17, 2016, 12:17:43 PM
So weird.
Post by: renocat on August 17, 2016, 12:50:27 PM
When it comes to trump, dax likes what he sees. :Carl:Come on admit you like him too.
Post by: Yard Dog on August 17, 2016, 04:14:21 PM
When it comes to trump, dax likes what he sees. :Carl:Come on admit you like him too.
I'm more than a little confident if you saw lib in public wearing a MAGA hat it wouldn't seem strange at all.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 17, 2016, 04:51:02 PM
Post by: sys on August 17, 2016, 05:21:37 PM
Quote
Over the last two weeks, concerned members of Trump's inner circle plotted an intervention to try and convince Trump that he needed to mount a more traditional campaign with a more disciplined approach to attacking Hillary Clinton and appealing to swing voters.
Trump heard them out and then staged a campaign intervention of his own in the opposite direction after concluding, as the campaign source recalled him saying, "the guys in New York don't know what they are doing."
"This is him finally embracing the fact that he knows better than they do," the source concluded.
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/after-campaign-shake-it-s-trump-versus-world-n633046
but later on it talks about how conway will travel with trump and try to make him act normal while bannon will just hang back, administrate and direct campaign strategy, presumably towards dax-level clinton bashing, so i dunno.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 17, 2016, 06:03:09 PM
I thought you were voting for GJ?
But the idiocy on this thread is still to amazing to pass up.
:D
Post by: star seed 7 on August 17, 2016, 07:40:36 PM
Post by: sys on August 17, 2016, 08:16:45 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 17, 2016, 10:48:44 PM
Post by: steve dave on August 17, 2016, 10:59:26 PM
Post by: sys on August 17, 2016, 11:20:02 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 18, 2016, 05:47:40 AM
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/291747-former-breitbart-editor-calls-trump-a-turd-tornado#
Post by: Tobias on August 18, 2016, 07:37:02 AM
Post by: Phil Titola on August 18, 2016, 08:05:09 AM
Post by: chum1 on August 18, 2016, 03:11:51 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jennifer-gunter/im-a-doctor-heres-concerning-trumps-medical-letter_b_11565838.html
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 18, 2016, 03:22:34 PM
Post by: catastrophe on August 18, 2016, 03:24:26 PM
Post by: sys on August 18, 2016, 03:25:23 PM
Hillary being on the verge of death would make her more appealing to me as a candidate. I really don't get the strategy of going after her health when both candidates are so unpopular.
no such luck with trump, his physical strength and stamina are extraordinary.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on August 18, 2016, 03:30:01 PM
Hillary being on the verge of death would make her more appealing to me as a candidate. I really don't get the strategy of going after her health when both candidates are so unpopular.
no such luck with trump, his physical strength and stamina are extraordinary.
Yeah, there really are no positives to voting for him.
Post by: bubbles4ksu on August 18, 2016, 03:55:58 PM
I didn't pay any attention to Trump's doctor letter before, but it is AMAZING.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jennifer-gunter/im-a-doctor-heres-concerning-trumps-medical-letter_b_11565838.html
"no history of alcohol or tobacco use" - Does Trump never drink? If Trump never drinks and the Dems aren't publicizing that they are very stupid. Also, can you imagine how rough ridin' obnoxious Donald J. Trump would be at a 5?
Post by: star seed 7 on August 18, 2016, 04:24:52 PM
Post by: catastrophe on August 18, 2016, 04:41:53 PM
Post by: SdK on August 18, 2016, 07:22:52 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on August 18, 2016, 08:02:22 PM
Post by: renocat on August 18, 2016, 09:00:47 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 18, 2016, 09:05:20 PM
Post by: mocat on August 19, 2016, 07:05:42 AM
Post by: The Big Train on August 19, 2016, 07:39:48 AM
Post by: Tobias on August 19, 2016, 07:41:01 AM
Post by: CNS on August 19, 2016, 09:13:24 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: CNS on August 19, 2016, 09:14:03 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: sys on August 19, 2016, 09:27:12 AM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160819%2F8873e9694f2ba9fc1315eddffb279f3e.jpg&hash=6d53b292aa3dc950627d8fc8e13e269e157feb1b)
extraordinary physical strength and stamina.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on August 19, 2016, 09:30:42 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on August 19, 2016, 09:31:20 AM
Post by: Tobias on August 19, 2016, 09:32:45 AM
Post by: Fedor on August 19, 2016, 09:37:34 AM
#science
Post by: Yard Dog on August 19, 2016, 09:40:18 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on August 19, 2016, 09:40:59 AM
Science shows that progressives hate their out groups more than anyone.And yet there's no naked statues of Hillary anywhere. :nono:
#science
Post by: CNS on August 19, 2016, 09:41:43 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 19, 2016, 09:43:53 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on August 19, 2016, 09:46:13 AM
Post by: renocat on August 19, 2016, 09:47:57 AM
Post by: sys on August 19, 2016, 09:48:20 AM
Post by: renocat on August 19, 2016, 09:59:25 AM
Post by: sys on August 19, 2016, 10:03:01 AM
Post by: Yard Dog on August 19, 2016, 10:05:43 AM
I demand equal time for viewing on Naked Hillary displays.
This might be the closest we get.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FlKTZ6H6.jpg&hash=44e531373193d548ab8a0fa2c625cd28faafafbc)
Post by: steve dave on August 19, 2016, 10:38:00 AM
Post by: Phil Titola on August 19, 2016, 10:47:19 AM
I demand equal time for viewing on Naked Hillary displays.
Freak
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 19, 2016, 11:11:14 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJxWgtUO8N4&list=PLtD-NySxyH-VFn3jaJMMt100tSPQNc4On
Alpha Trump will get 51% of the vote, but beta Trump in this video would get 68%
Post by: star seed 7 on August 20, 2016, 01:29:54 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJxWgtUO8N4&list=PLtD-NySxyH-VFn3jaJMMt100tSPQNc4On
Haha
Post by: chum1 on August 20, 2016, 12:07:45 PM
Quote
Mr. Trump also agreed to use teleprompters at his rallies, where he had made many of his most controversial remarks during unscripted appearances. He had refused to use teleprompters when Mr. Manafort had suggested that weeks earlier.http://www.wsj.com/articles/dawn-call-caps-donald-trumps-campaign-shake-up-1471650917
Then this week, Mr. Trump agreed to soften his approach—slightly.
:curse:
Post by: bucket on August 20, 2016, 12:33:27 PM
Quote
Federal Judge G. Murray Snow has asked the US Attorney's Office to file criminal contempt charges against Arpaio and some of his subordinates over failure to follow the court's instructions in a racial profiling case.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/20/us/arpaio-criminal-contempt-charges-referral/index.html
Post by: steve dave on August 20, 2016, 03:12:10 PM
nothing really shocking in here but interesting read
Post by: chum1 on August 21, 2016, 07:11:03 AM
Post by: Institutional Control on August 21, 2016, 07:23:48 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: CNS on August 21, 2016, 07:37:24 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: chum1 on August 22, 2016, 08:00:21 AM
Outstanding job by Conway to keep him off for 4-5 days. The most anyone else ever managed was 1-2 days.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/767528750749810688
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/767520065608613888
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/767683204039974912
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/767685048703279104
Post by: mocat on August 22, 2016, 08:19:34 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 22, 2016, 08:37:50 AM
Post by: steve dave on August 22, 2016, 08:48:16 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on August 22, 2016, 08:54:44 AM
he uses exclamation points like wackycat08Great minds!
Post by: star seed 7 on August 22, 2016, 08:56:52 AM
he uses exclamation points like wackycat08
The similarities don't end there
Post by: CNS on August 22, 2016, 09:45:23 AM
They are the ones in the clip the Chum posted about Trump asking an international policy adviser 3 times in one hour why we can't just use nukes.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 22, 2016, 10:10:00 AM
Post by: Panjandrum on August 22, 2016, 10:57:32 AM
Joe Scarborough(SP). Ex state rep for Florida and current political talk show host on MSNBC. I would imagine the "girlfriend" mentioned is his cohost.
They are the ones in the clip the Chum posted about Trump asking an international policy adviser 3 times in one hour why we can't just use nukes.
Joe and Mika kind of have a "are they/aren't they" romantic relationship saga going on now that both are divorced.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 22, 2016, 11:51:28 AM
Post by: chum1 on August 22, 2016, 12:31:36 PM
Its biggest news story right now is whether he's flip-flopping on immigration deportation or this:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/22/donald-trump-just-went-page-six-on-joe-scarborough-and-mika-brzezinski/
Post by: Panjandrum on August 22, 2016, 12:34:25 PM
The next three months is their way to try and make that vision a reality.
Post by: Woogy on August 22, 2016, 01:44:33 PM
https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/08/21/Business/Graphics/2300-trumpvalue-golf-chart-0819.jpg?uuid=WTLR7mf1EeaRy-y1QYgw6Q
So, like any homeowner who appeals their tax assessment one week and then the next :billdance: when their HELOC valuation comes back 25% higher?
:jerk:
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 22, 2016, 02:05:36 PM
Post by: bucket on August 22, 2016, 06:28:47 PM
Quote
“In Hillary Clinton’s America, the system stays rigged against Americans,” the ad declares. “Illegal immigrants convicted of committing crimes get to stay, collecting Social Security benefits, skipping the line.”
:lol:
No? Welp, back to the drawing boards guys.
Post by: bucket on August 22, 2016, 06:31:07 PM
On Melania
Quote
The Daily Mail, a UK publication, published a report citing a story in a Slovenian magazine that claimed a New York modeling agency that once represented Trump "also operated as an escort agency for wealthy clients." That report was then picked up or referenced by other news outlets.
How Christian
Post by: chum1 on August 23, 2016, 09:31:31 AM
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/768083669550366720
This?
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/22/politics/donald-trump-activist-investor/
Post by: steve dave on August 23, 2016, 09:37:03 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 23, 2016, 09:44:40 AM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on August 23, 2016, 09:47:53 AM
Post by: chum1 on August 23, 2016, 10:21:12 AM
Whenever you see one of his many tweets about the terribly run NYT which is failing and will be out of business soon, you can count on being able to find a recently posted negative NYT article about him.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 23, 2016, 10:47:33 AM
Post by: ChiComCat on August 23, 2016, 11:27:59 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 23, 2016, 11:57:04 AM
He tripled the rent his campaign HQ was paying to a building he owns
Like out of the blue? Or was there some coinciding event?
Post by: star seed 7 on August 23, 2016, 12:03:46 PM
Post by: ChiComCat on August 23, 2016, 12:20:46 PM
He tripled the rent his campaign HQ was paying to a building he owns
Like out of the blue? Or was there some coinciding event?
The event was that he was no longer bankrolling the campaign. Now that outside money is coming in, he wants some.
Post by: CNS on August 23, 2016, 12:27:39 PM
Post by: chum1 on August 23, 2016, 12:39:20 PM
Quote
Trump nearly quintupled the monthly rent his presidential campaign pays for its headquarters at Trump Tower to $169,758 in July, when he was raising funds from donors, compared with March, when he was self-funding his campaign, according to a Huffington Post review of Federal Election Commission filings. The rent jumped even though he was paying fewer staff in July than he did in March.
The Trump campaign paid Trump Tower Commercial LLC $35,458 in March ? the same amount it had been paying since last summer ? and had 197 paid employees and consultants. In July, it paid 172 employees and consultants.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-campaign-rent_us_57bba424e4b03d51368a82b9
Post by: chum1 on August 23, 2016, 12:50:38 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.huffingtonpost.com%2Fasset%2Fscalefit_630_noupscale%2F57bba7051800002100bcc6cb.jpeg&hash=f82b795959543af6b4d6c030e739dfe80cde9c5f)
Post by: Tobias on August 23, 2016, 12:52:10 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 23, 2016, 12:52:58 PM
Post by: CNS on August 23, 2016, 12:55:19 PM
Post by: chum1 on August 23, 2016, 01:00:02 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.dailymail.co.uk%2Fi%2Fpix%2F2015%2F08%2F27%2F22%2F2BB6C47100000578-3213296-Under_construction_Daniel_Gelbinovich_a_campaign_worker_for_Trum-a-2_1440710276937.jpg&hash=7de593d2bdbca0dad96e6f74b902ba1db69d2052)
Post by: steve dave on August 23, 2016, 01:02:33 PM
Post by: chum1 on August 23, 2016, 01:03:45 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcache1.asset-cache.net%2Fgc%2F485287260-michael-glassner-national-political-director-gettyimages.jpg%3Fv%3D1%26amp%3Bc%3DIWSAsset%26amp%3Bk%3D2%26amp%3Bd%3DX7WJLa88Cweo9HktRLaNXjvJlfip%252BG6EVzZzqr1ieQILGiHN4EO09Je4F8s2VNcfw032%252BRo6617dQBFM5OYlbQ%253D%253D&hash=30ff4ff04ad44e85b747a8b7fc3302e0e4a14c95)
Post by: chum1 on August 23, 2016, 01:07:51 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.dailymail.co.uk%2Fi%2Fpix%2F2015%2F08%2F27%2F22%2F2BB6C49000000578-3213296-Sean_O_Farrell_a_volunteer_for_Trump_Organization_Inc_Chief_Exec-a-17_1440710277844.jpg&hash=728eaa0d3497f1caabdefcafce28f499901c2e05)
Post by: chum1 on August 23, 2016, 01:08:53 PM
(https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/R1ZUSqje2OLWhZJzjCOr3A--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjtzbT0xO3c9ODAwO2lsPXBsYW5l/http://40.media.tumblr.com/97cc659a3026a89c60d19a51171e4997/tumblr_inline_ny6hwa4pQ91tedrp5_1280.jpg)
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on August 23, 2016, 01:10:06 PM
Post by: chum1 on August 23, 2016, 01:10:53 PM
(https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/ML2_PoRLDvs0qyvLHHzs_w--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjtzbT0xO3c9ODAwO2lsPXBsYW5l/http://41.media.tumblr.com/8848a00253cf0835aaffbf9db3f79e1e/tumblr_inline_ny6hwtOz8Y1tedrp5_1280.jpg)
Post by: steve dave on August 23, 2016, 01:11:38 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on August 23, 2016, 01:12:43 PM
FMP! :love:168169 pages vs 90. #Obsession :love:
Post by: chum1 on August 23, 2016, 01:25:07 PM
Quote
Hi, Zach. You're doing a fantastic job. I just came down to check on the MAGA hat operation. Are you able to keep up with the orders yourself? Or do we maybe need to get some more people in here?
(https://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/BN-KG555_TRUMP__P_20150911174425.jpg)
Post by: steve dave on August 23, 2016, 01:26:35 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 23, 2016, 02:48:12 PM
The @WashingtonPost quickly put together a hit job book on me- comprised of copies of some of their inaccurate stories. Don't buy, boring!
It's based on 20 hours of interviews with him :lol:
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 23, 2016, 09:47:29 PM
Post by: treysolid on August 23, 2016, 09:59:04 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 23, 2016, 10:09:36 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/RaySteeleRTV6/status/768199104031850496
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 24, 2016, 12:02:42 AM
Post by: chum1 on August 24, 2016, 08:41:10 AM
Quote
If you take a reasonable estimate of the value of his holdings, and put a likely multiple around 15 on his recurring royalty profits, you don’t get too far over $4 billion. Subtract $1.11 billion in debt, and you’re somewhere in the $3 billion range. as Fortune previously estimated.
http://fortune.com/2016/08/24/5-things-you-need-to-know-about-donald-trumps-debt/
Post by: star seed 7 on August 24, 2016, 01:36:43 PM
Post by: sys on August 24, 2016, 08:57:12 PM
Post by: treysolid on August 24, 2016, 09:25:24 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7aG-VQYGhA#
:sdeek:
Post by: MakeItRain on August 24, 2016, 09:58:32 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7aG-VQYGhA#
That's good crap
Post by: Panjandrum on August 24, 2016, 11:40:57 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 25, 2016, 10:22:10 AM
1. Sax solo guy's Hawaiian shirt blending in with the blue screen behind him
2. Pronouncing millennial all weird ("MILL-in-EE-ull")
3. Pronouncing diversity all weird ("DI-ver-SIDE-y")
Post by: TCUHornedFrog on August 25, 2016, 11:52:53 AM
Post by: chum1 on August 25, 2016, 11:59:28 AM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 25, 2016, 12:10:45 PM
Post by: Spracne on August 25, 2016, 12:19:32 PM
Post by: sys on August 25, 2016, 03:57:37 PM
basically the exact same thing as goEMAW did with octagon of doom.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 25, 2016, 04:24:27 PM
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/05/26/how-pepe-the-frog-became-a-nazi-trump-supporter-and-alt-right-symbol.html
basically the exact same thing as goEMAW did with octagon of doom.
@bubbles4ksu
Post by: Yard Dog on August 25, 2016, 04:32:42 PM
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/05/26/how-pepe-the-frog-became-a-nazi-trump-supporter-and-alt-right-symbol.html
basically the exact same thing as goEMAW did with octagon of doom.
normies :curse:
Post by: sys on August 25, 2016, 04:40:58 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 25, 2016, 04:53:20 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsi.wsj.net%2Fpublic%2Fresources%2Fimages%2FBN-PO333_ECONOM_J_20160825093415.jpg&hash=17a041daafacf492871b0c1b9e3ed1e48857adc9)
Sys, did you know that Trump isn't part of our nations political establishment, it's really great.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 25, 2016, 04:58:54 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 25, 2016, 09:12:11 PM
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/768904362211086336
Post by: chum1 on August 25, 2016, 09:20:23 PM
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/08/donald-trump-appeals-to-center-by-humiliating-ann-coulter.html
Post by: steve dave on August 26, 2016, 07:29:32 AM
The Ann Coulter thing was pretty remarkable.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/08/donald-trump-appeals-to-center-by-humiliating-ann-coulter.html
donald trump steering the far right towards the center. that's an actual thing that's actually happening in real life.
Post by: treysolid on August 26, 2016, 08:40:15 AM
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/26/steve-bannon-florida-registered-vote-donald-trump (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/26/steve-bannon-florida-registered-vote-donald-trump)
and the right wants Voter ID :lol:
Post by: chum1 on August 26, 2016, 09:24:42 AM
Trump: Okay to all of that except the last part. SHE'S STILL CROOKED HILLARY, DAMMIT!
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/769170204941164544
Post by: steve dave on August 26, 2016, 10:42:25 AM
Ruh Roh Steve Bannon
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/26/steve-bannon-florida-registered-vote-donald-trump (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/26/steve-bannon-florida-registered-vote-donald-trump)
and the right wants Voter ID :lol:
he's kind of a piece of crap
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/steve-bannon-domestic-violence-case-police-report-227432
Post by: Panjandrum on August 26, 2016, 12:27:12 PM
Ruh Roh Steve Bannon
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/26/steve-bannon-florida-registered-vote-donald-trump (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/26/steve-bannon-florida-registered-vote-donald-trump)
and the right wants Voter ID :lol:
he's kind of a piece of crap
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/steve-bannon-domestic-violence-case-police-report-227432
He doesn't look very healthy. Allegedly, he's very ill.
Post by: star seed 7 on August 26, 2016, 12:51:58 PM
Post by: mocat on August 26, 2016, 01:09:49 PM
Would have been a great role for Phillip Seymour Hoffman
Ides of March is already a movie bruh
Post by: star seed 7 on August 26, 2016, 01:24:36 PM
Post by: chum1 on August 26, 2016, 03:00:00 PM
Post by: steve dave on August 26, 2016, 10:16:01 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcrooksandliars.com%2Ffiles%2Fimagecache%2Fnode_primary%2Fprimary_image%2F16%2F08%2F160826-trump-doctor-mbe_522p_4682d6e21de28872bf7e79a0041ee9f1.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.jpg&hash=97744ae2b5b2709dbab283935b54cfa23fd23e2e)
Post by: mocat on August 26, 2016, 10:18:01 PM
Post by: The Big Train on August 26, 2016, 10:19:14 PM
Post by: The Big Train on August 26, 2016, 10:19:46 PM
Post by: sys on August 26, 2016, 11:42:01 PM
the MD who wrote Trumps amazing medical report looks exactly like you imagine he does
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcrooksandliars.com%2Ffiles%2Fimagecache%2Fnode_primary%2Fprimary_image%2F16%2F08%2F160826-trump-doctor-mbe_522p_4682d6e21de28872bf7e79a0041ee9f1.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.jpg&hash=97744ae2b5b2709dbab283935b54cfa23fd23e2e)
:lol:
Post by: Tobias on August 27, 2016, 01:01:54 AM
Post by: bones129 on August 27, 2016, 01:09:47 AM
the MD who wrote Trumps amazing medical report looks exactly like you imagine he does
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcrooksandliars.com%2Ffiles%2Fimagecache%2Fnode_primary%2Fprimary_image%2F16%2F08%2F160826-trump-doctor-mbe_522p_4682d6e21de28872bf7e79a0041ee9f1.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.jpg&hash=97744ae2b5b2709dbab283935b54cfa23fd23e2e)
And he works so fast, with concrete medical analysis based in part on the inspiration of Trump's own way of speaking.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-doctor-wrote-health-letter-just-5-minutes-limo-waited-n638526
:ROFL:
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 27, 2016, 06:53:13 AM
the MD who wrote Trumps amazing medical report looks exactly like you imagine he does
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcrooksandliars.com%2Ffiles%2Fimagecache%2Fnode_primary%2Fprimary_image%2F16%2F08%2F160826-trump-doctor-mbe_522p_4682d6e21de28872bf7e79a0041ee9f1.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.jpg&hash=97744ae2b5b2709dbab283935b54cfa23fd23e2e)
I think what stevedave is trying to say here is that this guy is a huge stud and probably has a hot wife half his age just like his studbud Trump.
Post by: bubbles4ksu on August 27, 2016, 08:43:01 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 27, 2016, 08:50:47 AM
Post by: bubbles4ksu on August 27, 2016, 09:32:02 AM
Post by: CNS on August 27, 2016, 09:42:40 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 27, 2016, 10:49:22 AM
Donny lit himself on fire again this morning. Is he stupid? Are his supporters stupid people?
What'd he do?
Post by: star seed 7 on August 27, 2016, 10:54:16 AM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 27, 2016, 11:36:19 AM
Quote
it's real
Donald J. Trump ?@realDonaldTrump 31m31 minutes ago
Dwayne Wade's cousin was just shot and killed walking her baby in Chicago. Just what I have been saying. African-Americans will VOTE TRUMP!
Post by: bubbles4ksu on August 27, 2016, 11:56:26 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 27, 2016, 12:27:09 PM
Post by: chum1 on August 27, 2016, 12:35:28 PM
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/769571710924263424
Post by: steve dave on August 27, 2016, 12:45:09 PM
Post by: chum1 on August 27, 2016, 12:49:37 PM
Post by: chum1 on August 27, 2016, 12:50:20 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 27, 2016, 12:56:45 PM
https://twitter.com/JoshSchwerin/status/769572883144245248
:D
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on August 27, 2016, 10:21:14 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160827%2F1cd61746e53eb2c668eabfd37f2abd73.jpg&hash=4f4b4bab1355246a314e0bff0785c0e8cad0e8ad)
Obama is a skinny smoker. Not healthy.
Post by: steve dave on August 27, 2016, 10:31:36 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on August 27, 2016, 11:07:01 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 27, 2016, 11:46:40 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on August 28, 2016, 03:10:01 AM
he's not black he's gray(https://bossip.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/barack-mom-dad.jpg)
Post by: chum1 on August 28, 2016, 04:20:04 PM
Post by: michigancat on August 28, 2016, 05:43:32 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 28, 2016, 05:48:14 PM
Estrogen is the only thing that could cause a man's hips to look like that.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 29, 2016, 05:55:27 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 29, 2016, 06:06:49 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 29, 2016, 06:23:12 AM
Howard Dean now predicting the demise of Trump campaign over the Wade tweet.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 29, 2016, 06:29:32 AM
Psychopath
Sociopath
Misspeller
Amnesty Don trending on Twitter
Flip flopper
Racist
Dean "campaign over"
Alt-right!!!!!!
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 29, 2016, 06:34:06 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 29, 2016, 09:02:04 AM
Post by: steve dave on August 29, 2016, 09:15:57 AM
Post by: catastrophe on August 29, 2016, 09:37:07 AM
(https://s1.2mdn.net/5808907/Gen_EnterNow_300x350_Dinner-with-Trump-yellow.gif)
Your choice of KFC or Trump Tower taco bowl!
Post by: steve dave on August 29, 2016, 09:39:40 AM
(https://s1.2mdn.net/5808907/Gen_EnterNow_300x350_Dinner-with-Trump-yellow.gif)
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/donald-trump-fundraiser-hawes-227486
Post by: catastrophe on August 29, 2016, 11:05:17 AM
Post by: sys on August 29, 2016, 01:37:03 PM
Post by: CNS on August 29, 2016, 01:56:56 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 30, 2016, 06:11:50 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on August 31, 2016, 09:21:15 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-considers-last-minute-meeting-in-mexico-with-the-countrys-president/2016/08/30/5a694790-6f12-11e6-9705-23e51a2f424d_story.html
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 31, 2016, 10:04:44 AM
Post by: chum1 on August 31, 2016, 05:51:43 PM
Post by: chum1 on August 31, 2016, 05:58:55 PM
https://twitter.com/EPN/status/771118159654891520
https://twitter.com/gdebenedetti/status/771118843846623233
Post by: chum1 on August 31, 2016, 06:00:11 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on August 31, 2016, 06:17:21 PM
OMG
https://twitter.com/EPN/status/771118159654891520
https://twitter.com/gdebenedetti/status/771118843846623233
Maybe not directly.
Post by: Tobias on August 31, 2016, 06:42:16 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on August 31, 2016, 06:50:54 PM
Post by: Tobias on August 31, 2016, 06:53:42 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 31, 2016, 07:03:45 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on August 31, 2016, 08:45:50 PM
he was in line for a cabinet seat
What do you mean "was"?
Post by: puniraptor on August 31, 2016, 09:03:51 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on August 31, 2016, 09:25:12 PM
Post by: sys on August 31, 2016, 09:36:51 PM
Has anyone thought about annexing mexico.
i've thought about it a lot.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on August 31, 2016, 09:57:31 PM
He tried to dabble in foreign policy and got wrecked
Betastone makes a good point here.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on September 01, 2016, 07:14:42 AM
Post by: steve dave on September 01, 2016, 07:53:52 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on September 01, 2016, 07:57:17 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on September 01, 2016, 08:07:25 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on September 01, 2016, 08:37:47 AM
Mexico, libs, and the media all hate that, together as one pathetic unit.
Post by: CNS on September 01, 2016, 08:39:20 AM
Has anyone thought about annexing mexico.
i've thought about it a lot.
Sure, let's do that.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Emo EMAW on September 01, 2016, 08:56:08 AM
Post by: Tobias on September 01, 2016, 09:07:47 AM
Post by: CNS on September 01, 2016, 09:12:28 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 01, 2016, 09:13:35 AM
Post by: CNS on September 01, 2016, 09:15:41 AM
Also, we should take the entire west cost of Canada from the ocean to the east side of the mountains.
Post by: Skipper44 on September 01, 2016, 09:18:13 AM
Post by: catastrophe on September 01, 2016, 09:32:25 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on September 01, 2016, 09:52:55 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 01, 2016, 10:08:48 AM
Post by: CNS on September 01, 2016, 10:51:58 AM
#Beta.
Completely dominated after no more than a couple hours in MX.
Post by: catastrophe on September 01, 2016, 11:05:12 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 01, 2016, 01:36:52 PM
Evidently Trump is now putting out Make Mexico Great Again Also hats.
#Beta.
Completely dominated after no more than a couple hours in MX.
Totally got silverbacked :frown:
https://twitter.com/marcfox10/status/771154633628803073
Post by: star seed 7 on September 01, 2016, 02:09:36 PM
Post by: SdK on September 01, 2016, 02:48:11 PM
https://twitter.com/JoshuaGreen/status/771159856137003009I'm considering voting for him now. A true world leader. Focusing on NA then abroad. I can get behind that.
Post by: steve dave on September 01, 2016, 03:03:04 PM
https://twitter.com/JoshuaGreen/status/771159856137003009
amazing
Post by: CNS on September 01, 2016, 03:06:37 PM
Post by: CNS on September 01, 2016, 03:07:25 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 01, 2016, 03:09:39 PM
Post by: steve dave on September 01, 2016, 03:14:38 PM
Making Mexico Great Again Also is actually probably the best immigration policy there is. Being %100 serious
oh also absolutely
Post by: CNS on September 01, 2016, 03:17:48 PM
Post by: chum1 on September 01, 2016, 03:42:26 PM
Post by: CNS on September 01, 2016, 03:46:53 PM
Would have exploded heads.
Post by: bubbles4ksu on September 01, 2016, 03:47:08 PM
#MMGAA
Post by: bucket on September 01, 2016, 09:07:27 PM
The horror
Post by: sys on September 01, 2016, 11:11:54 PM
unscripted, nonpolitician.
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on September 02, 2016, 08:37:01 AM
https://twitter.com/Mediaite/status/771516997343535104
The horror
Yeah, that would be a good thing. He should have said 'a bullet proof check cashing business' on every corner.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on September 02, 2016, 10:47:22 AM
https://twitter.com/Mediaite/status/771516997343535104
The horror
Yeah, that would be a good thing. He should have said 'a bullet proof check cashing business' on every corner.
haha because they are all criminals
Post by: treysolid on September 02, 2016, 11:23:24 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 02, 2016, 11:41:19 AM
:)
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.huffingtonpost.com%2Fasset%2Fscalefit_630_noupscale%2F57bba7051800002100bcc6cb.jpeg&hash=f82b795959543af6b4d6c030e739dfe80cde9c5f)
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/771688054344089601
Post by: Emo EMAW on September 02, 2016, 12:02:23 PM
https://twitter.com/Mediaite/status/771516997343535104
The horror
Yeah, that would be a good thing. He should have said 'a bullet proof check cashing business' on every corner.
haha because they are all criminals
I don't think you caught what he was layin down there amigo.
Post by: mocat on September 02, 2016, 12:06:25 PM
:)
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.huffingtonpost.com%2Fasset%2Fscalefit_630_noupscale%2F57bba7051800002100bcc6cb.jpeg&hash=f82b795959543af6b4d6c030e739dfe80cde9c5f)
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/771688054344089601
I honestly think wacky ghostwrites trump's tweets
Post by: star seed 7 on September 02, 2016, 12:12:21 PM
:)
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.huffingtonpost.com%2Fasset%2Fscalefit_630_noupscale%2F57bba7051800002100bcc6cb.jpeg&hash=f82b795959543af6b4d6c030e739dfe80cde9c5f)
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/771688054344089601
I honestly think wacky ghostwrites trump's tweets
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/771686352438042624
Post by: Dugout DickStone on September 02, 2016, 01:53:59 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on September 02, 2016, 04:08:22 PM
https://twitter.com/Mediaite/status/771516997343535104
The horror
Yeah, that would be a good thing. He should have said 'a bullet proof check cashing business' on every corner.
haha because they are all criminals
no. if you haven't figured it out yet, most illegals don't have bank accounts, and these places are opening up everywhere.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fworldonline.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com%2Fimg%2Fphotos%2F2005%2F09%2F25%2Fsbz_Hurricane_4k_color__t640.jpg%3Fa6ea3ebd4438a44b86d2e9c39ecf7613005fe067&hash=ba74198b5e4eef51ef3f441c56067df3ec4e6fb7)
Post by: renocat on September 03, 2016, 11:02:39 PM
Post by: treysolid on September 04, 2016, 09:52:47 AM
Black Church. Good move. People for God will like. Hedonist Hillary would not walk into her enemy's lair.
Two Corinthians. That's the whole ballgame.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on September 04, 2016, 10:08:52 AM
https://twitter.com/Mediaite/status/771516997343535104
The horror
Yeah, that would be a good thing. He should have said 'a bullet proof check cashing business' on every corner.
haha because they are all criminals
no. if you haven't figured it out yet, most illegals don't have bank accounts, and these places are opening up everywhere.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fworldonline.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com%2Fimg%2Fphotos%2F2005%2F09%2F25%2Fsbz_Hurricane_4k_color__t640.jpg%3Fa6ea3ebd4438a44b86d2e9c39ecf7613005fe067&hash=ba74198b5e4eef51ef3f441c56067df3ec4e6fb7)
hates the free market
Post by: SkinnyBenny on September 04, 2016, 03:39:52 PM
Black Church. Good move. People for God will like. Hedonist Hillary would not walk into her enemy's lair.
Two Corinthians. That's the whole ballgame.
:lol: Forgot all about that one. Of all of his rambling, incoherant speeches, that one may have been the most rambling and incoherant. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8EIgHsGZAmk
Post by: renocat on September 04, 2016, 03:55:28 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on September 05, 2016, 12:22:20 PM
Black Church. Good move. People for God will like. Hedonist Hillary would not walk into her enemy's lair.
But racists will hate
Post by: star seed 7 on September 05, 2016, 01:30:23 PM
Black Church. Good move. People for God will like. Hedonist Hillary would not walk into her enemy's lair.
But racists will hate
Also apparently religious black people are trumps enemy
Post by: star seed 7 on September 06, 2016, 10:50:09 PM
Post by: mocat on September 06, 2016, 11:24:43 PM
Post by: sys on September 07, 2016, 12:23:06 AM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on September 07, 2016, 06:28:36 AM
Post by: steve dave on September 07, 2016, 07:08:44 AM
i have a lot more respect for the xenophobes and the racists than the people that legitimately can't tell how stupid he is.
yeah, same
Post by: Phil Titola on September 07, 2016, 09:22:54 PM
Post by: bucket on September 07, 2016, 10:06:00 PM
Quote
Trump crowed about the virtues of Russian President Vladimir Putin — “He does have an 82 percent approval rating, according to the different pollsters,”
:lol:
Post by: chum1 on September 08, 2016, 12:15:18 PM
https://twitter.com/GoogleTrends/status/773924939577655297
Post by: chum1 on September 08, 2016, 04:01:28 PM
Quote
Editor's note: The following story was published in the August 2004 issue of Esquire. During the 2016 presidential election, Donald Trump has repeatedly claimed to have been against the Iraq War from the beginning, and he has cited this story as proof. The Iraq War began in March 2003, more than a year before this story ran, thus nullifying Trump's timeline.
https://twitter.com/JohnGHendy/status/773959535304114176
Post by: chum1 on September 08, 2016, 07:50:21 PM
Quote
Six current and former senior officials said they were aware of friction between retired Gen. Michael Flynn, one of the advisers Trump brought to the briefing, and the officials who conducted the briefing. Four sources with knowledge of the briefing — including two intelligence officials who spoke to people in the room — said Flynn repeatedly interrupted the briefers until New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie intervened.
https://www.google.com/amp/www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/amp/u-s-official-donald-trump-s-body-language-claim-doesn-n644856
Post by: SkinnyBenny on September 08, 2016, 11:03:26 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 09, 2016, 08:17:35 AM
I think many days there still are, we're just really lazy about updating this thread. I didn't get to watch the town hall thingy last night, or I'd include some LOLs in here from it--anybody else see it and wanna chime in with what you found to be the biggest LOLs? I mean besides Trump saying he and Putin are BFFs.
Mostly just talk about how our military is depleted and how our generals are reduced to rubble and embarrassing our country. Also how he had a plan to beat ISIS, but he wanted to listen to the generals before going through with his plan just in case they had a better plan.
Post by: ChiComCat on September 09, 2016, 08:27:53 AM
I think many days there still are, we're just really lazy about updating this thread. I didn't get to watch the town hall thingy last night, or I'd include some LOLs in here from it--anybody else see it and wanna chime in with what you found to be the biggest LOLs? I mean besides Trump saying he and Putin are BFFs.
Mostly just talk about how our military is depleted and how our generals are reduced to rubble and embarrassing our country. Also how he had a plan to beat ISIS, but he wanted to listen to the generals before going through with his plan just in case they had a better plan.
Also, he won't say what the plan is because then the enemy would know.
Post by: Panjandrum on September 09, 2016, 09:22:38 AM
I miss the times when there were like six nutso Trump stories each day.QuoteSix current and former senior officials said they were aware of friction between retired Gen. Michael Flynn, one of the advisers Trump brought to the briefing, and the officials who conducted the briefing. Four sources with knowledge of the briefing — including two intelligence officials who spoke to people in the room — said Flynn repeatedly interrupted the briefers until New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie intervened.
https://www.google.com/amp/www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/amp/u-s-official-donald-trump-s-body-language-claim-doesn-n644856
Every time I see or hear Flynn, I think of Niedermeyer.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F_3fSPdLyXVG4%2FSX3jEXdYgHI%2FAAAAAAAAAtc%2FIXOVDUNJ0ZM%2Fs1600%2Fniedermayer.jpg&hash=508e4d746134fc14febe8e4f0d9c11561544bc70)
Post by: chum1 on September 09, 2016, 11:39:41 AM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic2.politico.com%2Fdims4%2Fdefault%2Fca6acf8%2F2147483647%2Fresize%2F1160x%253E%2Fquality%2F90%2F%3Furl%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fstatic.politico.com%252F10%252F1d%252F8a7a26d5410891619aad844958b4%252F20160909-donald-trump-bill-clinton-7-high-rez.jpg&hash=fd801fbe6ddd41dc505fff8a1a76d368d99cdad2)
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/new-photos-bill-clinton-trump-melania-227945
Post by: MakeItRain on September 09, 2016, 04:58:56 PM
Post by: bucket on September 09, 2016, 05:11:40 PM
Post by: catastrophe on September 09, 2016, 05:17:13 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on September 09, 2016, 05:22:05 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on September 10, 2016, 10:15:48 AM
Post by: steve dave on September 10, 2016, 11:22:00 AM
LOL Bill smashed MT
100% chance
Post by: sys on September 10, 2016, 01:25:38 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on September 10, 2016, 06:09:10 PM
Post by: steve dave on September 10, 2016, 06:11:17 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on September 10, 2016, 06:15:42 PM
Post by: bones129 on September 10, 2016, 06:38:10 PM
Post by: sys on September 10, 2016, 09:48:19 PM
Post by: bones129 on September 11, 2016, 01:39:39 AM
Post by: treysolid on September 11, 2016, 10:10:24 PM
http://digg.com/video/trump-911-40-wall-street (http://digg.com/video/trump-911-40-wall-street)
:sdeek:
Post by: sys on September 12, 2016, 12:07:52 AM
the ego of this man knows no bounds
http://digg.com/video/trump-911-40-wall-street (http://digg.com/video/trump-911-40-wall-street)
9-11 has been a good date for donald trump.
Post by: stunted on September 12, 2016, 12:10:31 AM
the ego of this man knows no bounds
http://digg.com/video/trump-911-40-wall-street (http://digg.com/video/trump-911-40-wall-street)
9-11 has been a good date for donald trump.
more than good
https://twitter.com/kevcirilli/status/774982404293427200
Post by: gatoveintisiete on September 12, 2016, 07:38:27 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 13, 2016, 10:17:58 AM
Quote
Then [Clinton] gave up 20 percent of U.S. Uranium to Russia,” Trump said. “You know what that means, right? In other word, nuclear, right? While those who benefited from the deal gave massive amounts of money to the Clintons. They get a 20 percent of the Uranium! Uranium is big, big stuff because it means the ultimate. The ultimate is called nuclear. Not global warming. It’s called nuclear warming. OK?
Post by: steve dave on September 13, 2016, 10:51:32 AM
Post by: IPA4Me on September 13, 2016, 11:05:46 AM
Post by: Emo EMAW on September 13, 2016, 01:51:34 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on September 13, 2016, 01:58:39 PM
Post by: treysolid on September 13, 2016, 02:03:04 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 13, 2016, 02:03:43 PM
oh my god - trump is a genius. to combat global warming, we need to create a nuclear winter.
It's called nuclear warming, ok?
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 13, 2016, 02:04:23 PM
Post by: treysolid on September 13, 2016, 02:06:23 PM
oh my god - trump is a genius. to combat global warming, we need to create a nuclear winter.
It's called nuclear warming, ok?
i mean, maybe right before we're all wall shadows
Post by: treysolid on September 13, 2016, 02:14:25 PM
Man what Trump said is a huge story compared to Hillary pay for playing control of 20% of the US's uranium.
pfft.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jun/30/donald-trump/donald-trump-inaccurately-suggests-clinton-got-pai/ (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jun/30/donald-trump/donald-trump-inaccurately-suggests-clinton-got-pai/)
Post by: mocat on September 13, 2016, 02:16:38 PM
QuoteThen [Clinton] gave up 20 percent of U.S. Uranium to Russia,” Trump said. “You know what that means, right? In other word, nuclear, right? While those who benefited from the deal gave massive amounts of money to the Clintons. They get a 20 percent of the Uranium! Uranium is big, big stuff because it means the ultimate. The ultimate is called nuclear. Not global warming. It’s called nuclear warming. OK?
please link me here so i can read the rest
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 13, 2016, 02:18:46 PM
Man what Trump said is a huge story compared to Hillary pay for playing control of 20% of the US's uranium.
pfft.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jun/30/donald-trump/donald-trump-inaccurately-suggests-clinton-got-pai/ (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jun/30/donald-trump/donald-trump-inaccurately-suggests-clinton-got-pai/)
His claim was a lot more true than I expected it to be, anyway.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 13, 2016, 02:20:47 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 13, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
Maybe someone can copy the other quotes because this thing is chock full
Post by: treysolid on September 13, 2016, 02:23:21 PM
Post by: treysolid on September 13, 2016, 02:24:45 PM
Man what Trump said is a huge story compared to Hillary pay for playing control of 20% of the US's uranium.
pfft.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jun/30/donald-trump/donald-trump-inaccurately-suggests-clinton-got-pai/ (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jun/30/donald-trump/donald-trump-inaccurately-suggests-clinton-got-pai/)
His claim was a lot more true than I expected it to be, anyway.
i was expecting a pants-on-fire too
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 13, 2016, 02:27:11 PM
Yes, please continue to roll with that theme Trey, it's fantastic!
Post by: treysolid on September 13, 2016, 02:31:39 PM
LOL, she was a U.S. Senator.
Yes, please continue to roll with that theme Trey, it's fantastic!
I must have missed the part where a single senator from NY was one of the 11 gov't bodies required to approve the deal. but no, please, continue to roll with THIS theme because it's equally fantastic.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 13, 2016, 02:33:52 PM
LOL, she was a U.S. Senator.
Yes, please continue to roll with that theme Trey, it's fantastic!
I must have missed the part where a single senator from NY was one of the 11 gov't bodies required to approve the deal. but no, please, continue to roll with THIS theme because it's equally fantastic.
What's it like living in a world where everything fits into, (dare I say) nice little baskets, and no one with clout and the inside track picks up the phone and makes some calls, or calls in some favors, or promises some favors?? I bet the puppy dogs and kitty cats are mega cute there, send pictures.
Post by: treysolid on September 13, 2016, 02:35:34 PM
20% of our uranium to the Russians!
the company in question doesn't even have a license to export. all that sweet, sweet uranium (which is actually an ant-crap amount) is staying in the US of A.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on September 13, 2016, 02:38:11 PM
Post by: treysolid on September 13, 2016, 02:38:29 PM
LOL, she was a U.S. Senator.
Yes, please continue to roll with that theme Trey, it's fantastic!
I must have missed the part where a single senator from NY was one of the 11 gov't bodies required to approve the deal. but no, please, continue to roll with THIS theme because it's equally fantastic.
What's it like living in a world where everything fits into, (dare I say) nice little baskets, and no one with clout and the inside track picks up the phone and makes some calls, or calls in some favors, or promises some favors?? I bet the puppy dogs and kitty cats are mega cute there, send pictures.
a junior senator bribing 11 entirely different government agencies? get outside dax, the fresh air will do you some good.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 13, 2016, 02:42:03 PM
this is only news because it sounds good to Trump low-info-voter base
20% of our uranium to the Russians!
the company in question doesn't even have a license to export. all that sweet, sweet uranium (which is actually an ant-crap amount) is staying in the US of A.
Oh that's good news, because ya know, with our borders, shipping methods and various conduits (in and) out of the country being on North Korean style lock down. We all know, that stuff ain't going anywhere.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 13, 2016, 02:42:46 PM
LOL, she was a U.S. Senator.
Yes, please continue to roll with that theme Trey, it's fantastic!
I must have missed the part where a single senator from NY was one of the 11 gov't bodies required to approve the deal. but no, please, continue to roll with THIS theme because it's equally fantastic.
What's it like living in a world where everything fits into, (dare I say) nice little baskets, and no one with clout and the inside track picks up the phone and makes some calls, or calls in some favors, or promises some favors?? I bet the puppy dogs and kitty cats are mega cute there, send pictures.
a junior senator bribing 11 entirely different government agencies? get outside dax, the fresh air will do you some good.
Who the eff said anything about bribing? Go back to your cubicle. Damn
Post by: star seed 7 on September 13, 2016, 02:44:59 PM
LOL, she was a U.S. Senator.
Yes, please continue to roll with that theme Trey, it's fantastic!
I must have missed the part where a single senator from NY was one of the 11 gov't bodies required to approve the deal. but no, please, continue to roll with THIS theme because it's equally fantastic.
What's it like living in a world where everything fits into, (dare I say) nice little baskets, and no one with clout and the inside track picks up the phone and makes some calls, or calls in some favors, or promises some favors?? I bet the puppy dogs and kitty cats are mega cute there, send pictures.
a junior senator bribing 11 entirely different government agencies? get outside dax, the fresh air will do you some good.
Infowars people like dax absolutely think that happens
Post by: steve dave on September 13, 2016, 02:46:12 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 13, 2016, 02:49:43 PM
What impact might this have on what they call the "American Assured Fuel Supply"?
Thanks, and I'll listen on the air.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 13, 2016, 02:51:34 PM
LOL, she was a U.S. Senator.
Yes, please continue to roll with that theme Trey, it's fantastic!
I must have missed the part where a single senator from NY was one of the 11 gov't bodies required to approve the deal. but no, please, continue to roll with THIS theme because it's equally fantastic.
What's it like living in a world where everything fits into, (dare I say) nice little baskets, and no one with clout and the inside track picks up the phone and makes some calls, or calls in some favors, or promises some favors?? I bet the puppy dogs and kitty cats are mega cute there, send pictures.
a junior senator bribing 11 entirely different government agencies? get outside dax, the fresh air will do you some good.
Infowars people like dax absolutely think that happens
Bribes InfoWARS!! :curse: :curse: :curse:
Post by: chum1 on September 13, 2016, 02:52:39 PM
Post by: treysolid on September 13, 2016, 03:04:06 PM
Hey Trey, I left my Nuclear Scientist hat at home. But according to the World Nuclear Association, the U.S. has about 207K metric tons of Uranium. Now I'm not sure what of that is usable to do bad things with, nor do I fully understand the amount of processing U-235 (or is it 234?) needs to get to the stuff you can do bad (or good) things with . . . but is it really a good idea that theoretically, a Russian company controls roughly 40K tons of U.S. Uranium? Is it a good idea that a Russian company controls 20% of our supply, when we only have 4% of the worlds supply??
What impact might this have on what they call the "American Assured Fuel Supply"?
Thanks, and I'll listen on the air.
well dax, first lets get enrichment for nuclear weapons off the table because it's a moot point. both america and russia have enough nukes to destroy the world multiple times over
and the second half of your inquiry is a moot point as well because the company in question doesn't have an export license. their only source of income is american nuclear plants. I suppose they could refuse to sell, but that's not how companies make money.
you see where this is going? its a non-factor. if we were so worried about russia choking off our nuclear fuel supply (which we aren't), we could always switch over to thorium reactor technology, of which we have massive deposits.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 13, 2016, 03:07:20 PM
Hey Trey, I left my Nuclear Scientist hat at home. But according to the World Nuclear Association, the U.S. has about 207K metric tons of Uranium. Now I'm not sure what of that is usable to do bad things with, nor do I fully understand the amount of processing U-235 (or is it 234?) needs to get to the stuff you can do bad (or good) things with . . . but is it really a good idea that theoretically, a Russian company controls roughly 40K tons of U.S. Uranium? Is it a good idea that a Russian company controls 20% of our supply, when we only have 4% of the worlds supply??
What impact might this have on what they call the "American Assured Fuel Supply"?
Thanks, and I'll listen on the air.
well dax, first lets get enrichment for nuclear weapons off the table because it's a moot point. both america and russia have enough nukes to destroy the world multiple times over
and the second half of your inquiry is a moot point as well because the company in question doesn't have an export license. their only source of income is american nuclear plants. I suppose they could refuse to sell, but that's not how companies make money.
you see where this is going? its a non-factor. if we were so worried about russia choking off our nuclear fuel supply (which we aren't), we could always switch over to thorium reactor technology, of which we have massive deposits.
Nah, I'm not really "worried" about any of those things, but the Clinton's are historically extremely partial to selling off what most would consider to be vital geo-strategic national (and natural) resources to foreign entities. Now, if you're cool with that, that's fine, you're an extreme dumbass for thinking like that, but again, that's fine, and dumbasses make the world a more interesting place.
Post by: treysolid on September 13, 2016, 03:14:54 PM
Hey Trey, I left my Nuclear Scientist hat at home. But according to the World Nuclear Association, the U.S. has about 207K metric tons of Uranium. Now I'm not sure what of that is usable to do bad things with, nor do I fully understand the amount of processing U-235 (or is it 234?) needs to get to the stuff you can do bad (or good) things with . . . but is it really a good idea that theoretically, a Russian company controls roughly 40K tons of U.S. Uranium? Is it a good idea that a Russian company controls 20% of our supply, when we only have 4% of the worlds supply??
What impact might this have on what they call the "American Assured Fuel Supply"?
Thanks, and I'll listen on the air.
well dax, first lets get enrichment for nuclear weapons off the table because it's a moot point. both america and russia have enough nukes to destroy the world multiple times over
and the second half of your inquiry is a moot point as well because the company in question doesn't have an export license. their only source of income is american nuclear plants. I suppose they could refuse to sell, but that's not how companies make money.
you see where this is going? its a non-factor. if we were so worried about russia choking off our nuclear fuel supply (which we aren't), we could always switch over to thorium reactor technology, of which we have massive deposits.
Nah, I'm not really "worried" about any of those things, but the Clinton's are historically extremely partial to selling off what most would consider to be vital geo-strategic national (and natural) resources to foreign entities. Now, if you're cool with that, that's fine, you're an extreme dumbass for thinking like that, but again, that's fine, and dumbasses make the world a more interesting place.
belief in the overwhelming face of reason. but you do you, dax.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on September 13, 2016, 03:57:49 PM
Who is making something out of nothing here?
Post by: gatoveintisiete on September 13, 2016, 04:04:25 PM
Post by: puniraptor on September 13, 2016, 04:06:47 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 13, 2016, 04:11:33 PM
Hey Trey, I left my Nuclear Scientist hat at home. But according to the World Nuclear Association, the U.S. has about 207K metric tons of Uranium. Now I'm not sure what of that is usable to do bad things with, nor do I fully understand the amount of processing U-235 (or is it 234?) needs to get to the stuff you can do bad (or good) things with . . . but is it really a good idea that theoretically, a Russian company controls roughly 40K tons of U.S. Uranium? Is it a good idea that a Russian company controls 20% of our supply, when we only have 4% of the worlds supply??
What impact might this have on what they call the "American Assured Fuel Supply"?
Thanks, and I'll listen on the air.
well dax, first lets get enrichment for nuclear weapons off the table because it's a moot point. both america and russia have enough nukes to destroy the world multiple times over
and the second half of your inquiry is a moot point as well because the company in question doesn't have an export license. their only source of income is american nuclear plants. I suppose they could refuse to sell, but that's not how companies make money.
you see where this is going? its a non-factor. if we were so worried about russia choking off our nuclear fuel supply (which we aren't), we could always switch over to thorium reactor technology, of which we have massive deposits.
Nah, I'm not really "worried" about any of those things, but the Clinton's are historically extremely partial to selling off what most would consider to be vital geo-strategic national (and natural) resources to foreign entities. Now, if you're cool with that, that's fine, you're an extreme dumbass for thinking like that, but again, that's fine, and dumbasses make the world a more interesting place.
belief in the overwhelming face of reason. but you do you, dax.
Wait a second here. Expressing concern about foreign control of potentially fissionable natural resources (the idea that technically they can't export the material is, well, immaterial) lacks . . . reason. That, I must say, is, fascinating.
Only the staunchest Hillbot would attempt that take.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 13, 2016, 04:12:15 PM
How much cyber could we have built with that nuclear I think is the real question.
"The big one" is the answer to that question.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on September 13, 2016, 07:27:58 PM
Post by: chum1 on September 13, 2016, 07:33:56 PM
Post by: puniraptor on September 13, 2016, 07:41:27 PM
So dax is, like, a bonafide crazy person, yeah?I think all great DJs are at least more than a little crazy
Post by: treysolid on September 13, 2016, 08:01:32 PM
Hey Trey, I left my Nuclear Scientist hat at home. But according to the World Nuclear Association, the U.S. has about 207K metric tons of Uranium. Now I'm not sure what of that is usable to do bad things with, nor do I fully understand the amount of processing U-235 (or is it 234?) needs to get to the stuff you can do bad (or good) things with . . . but is it really a good idea that theoretically, a Russian company controls roughly 40K tons of U.S. Uranium? Is it a good idea that a Russian company controls 20% of our supply, when we only have 4% of the worlds supply??
What impact might this have on what they call the "American Assured Fuel Supply"?
Thanks, and I'll listen on the air.
well dax, first lets get enrichment for nuclear weapons off the table because it's a moot point. both america and russia have enough nukes to destroy the world multiple times over
and the second half of your inquiry is a moot point as well because the company in question doesn't have an export license. their only source of income is american nuclear plants. I suppose they could refuse to sell, but that's not how companies make money.
you see where this is going? its a non-factor. if we were so worried about russia choking off our nuclear fuel supply (which we aren't), we could always switch over to thorium reactor technology, of which we have massive deposits.
Nah, I'm not really "worried" about any of those things, but the Clinton's are historically extremely partial to selling off what most would consider to be vital geo-strategic national (and natural) resources to foreign entities. Now, if you're cool with that, that's fine, you're an extreme dumbass for thinking like that, but again, that's fine, and dumbasses make the world a more interesting place.
belief in the overwhelming face of reason. but you do you, dax.
Wait a second here. Expressing concern about foreign control of potentially fissionable natural resources (the idea that technically they can't export the material is, well, immaterial) lacks . . . reason. That, I must say, is, fascinating.
Only the staunchest Hillbot would attempt that take.
Quote
For another, Russia doesn’t have the licenses to export uranium outside the United States, Oilprice.org pointed out, "so it’s somewhat disingenuous to say this uranium is now Russia’s, to do with what it pleases." The Kremlin was likely more interested in Uranium One’s assets in Kazakhstan, the world’s largest producer.
You need to help me out and do the basic minimum for reading comprehension, here.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 13, 2016, 08:32:32 PM
Hey Trey, I left my Nuclear Scientist hat at home. But according to the World Nuclear Association, the U.S. has about 207K metric tons of Uranium. Now I'm not sure what of that is usable to do bad things with, nor do I fully understand the amount of processing U-235 (or is it 234?) needs to get to the stuff you can do bad (or good) things with . . . but is it really a good idea that theoretically, a Russian company controls roughly 40K tons of U.S. Uranium? Is it a good idea that a Russian company controls 20% of our supply, when we only have 4% of the worlds supply??
What impact might this have on what they call the "American Assured Fuel Supply"?
Thanks, and I'll listen on the air.
well dax, first lets get enrichment for nuclear weapons off the table because it's a moot point. both america and russia have enough nukes to destroy the world multiple times over
and the second half of your inquiry is a moot point as well because the company in question doesn't have an export license. their only source of income is american nuclear plants. I suppose they could refuse to sell, but that's not how companies make money.
you see where this is going? its a non-factor. if we were so worried about russia choking off our nuclear fuel supply (which we aren't), we could always switch over to thorium reactor technology, of which we have massive deposits.
Nah, I'm not really "worried" about any of those things, but the Clinton's are historically extremely partial to selling off what most would consider to be vital geo-strategic national (and natural) resources to foreign entities. Now, if you're cool with that, that's fine, you're an extreme dumbass for thinking like that, but again, that's fine, and dumbasses make the world a more interesting place.
belief in the overwhelming face of reason. but you do you, dax.
Wait a second here. Expressing concern about foreign control of potentially fissionable natural resources (the idea that technically they can't export the material is, well, immaterial) lacks . . . reason. That, I must say, is, fascinating.
Only the staunchest Hillbot would attempt that take.QuoteFor another, Russia doesn’t have the licenses to export uranium outside the United States, Oilprice.org pointed out, "so it’s somewhat disingenuous to say this uranium is now Russia’s, to do with what it pleases." The Kremlin was likely more interested in Uranium One’s assets in Kazakhstan, the world’s largest producer.
You need to help me out and do the basic minimum for reading comprehension, here.
First off it is interesting that you brought up reading comprehension considering you started off by saying that I said, or even implied that Clinton's bribed a multitude of government agencies. Son, bribed?? Pure comedy.
Again, you can try and redirect, and paint a picture that it's really not that bad and toss one straw man on the fire after another. But the simple baseline is foreign entities controlling fissionable US natural resources. Is that really a good idea? Probably not.
But as I said, the Clintons are known for selling off control of strategic natural resources to foreign entities in return for what? Only the FSM knows.
Post by: renocat on September 13, 2016, 08:40:25 PM
Post by: treysolid on September 13, 2016, 08:51:46 PM
Hey Trey, I left my Nuclear Scientist hat at home. But according to the World Nuclear Association, the U.S. has about 207K metric tons of Uranium. Now I'm not sure what of that is usable to do bad things with, nor do I fully understand the amount of processing U-235 (or is it 234?) needs to get to the stuff you can do bad (or good) things with . . . but is it really a good idea that theoretically, a Russian company controls roughly 40K tons of U.S. Uranium? Is it a good idea that a Russian company controls 20% of our supply, when we only have 4% of the worlds supply??
What impact might this have on what they call the "American Assured Fuel Supply"?
Thanks, and I'll listen on the air.
well dax, first lets get enrichment for nuclear weapons off the table because it's a moot point. both america and russia have enough nukes to destroy the world multiple times over
and the second half of your inquiry is a moot point as well because the company in question doesn't have an export license. their only source of income is american nuclear plants. I suppose they could refuse to sell, but that's not how companies make money.
you see where this is going? its a non-factor. if we were so worried about russia choking off our nuclear fuel supply (which we aren't), we could always switch over to thorium reactor technology, of which we have massive deposits.
Nah, I'm not really "worried" about any of those things, but the Clinton's are historically extremely partial to selling off what most would consider to be vital geo-strategic national (and natural) resources to foreign entities. Now, if you're cool with that, that's fine, you're an extreme dumbass for thinking like that, but again, that's fine, and dumbasses make the world a more interesting place.
belief in the overwhelming face of reason. but you do you, dax.
Wait a second here. Expressing concern about foreign control of potentially fissionable natural resources (the idea that technically they can't export the material is, well, immaterial) lacks . . . reason. That, I must say, is, fascinating.
Only the staunchest Hillbot would attempt that take.QuoteFor another, Russia doesn’t have the licenses to export uranium outside the United States, Oilprice.org pointed out, "so it’s somewhat disingenuous to say this uranium is now Russia’s, to do with what it pleases." The Kremlin was likely more interested in Uranium One’s assets in Kazakhstan, the world’s largest producer.
You need to help me out and do the basic minimum for reading comprehension, here.
First off it is interesting that you brought up reading comprehension considering you started off by saying that I said, or even implied that Clinton's bribed a multitude of government agencies. Son, bribed?? Pure comedy.
Again, you can try and redirect, and paint a picture that it's really not that bad and toss one straw man on the fire after another. But the simple baseline is foreign entities controlling fissionable US natural resources. Is that really a good idea? Probably not.
But as I said, the Clintons are known for selling off control of strategic natural resources to foreign entities in return for what? Only the FSM knows.
If transferring this company to russian owners was against the interests of the united states government and against the interests of national security, there is no way in hell that she could orchestrate its approval from 11 independent agencies without any kind of quid pro quo.
The only strawmen I'm tossing on the fire are yours.
Once again, Hillary Clinton did not sell off american uranium deposits. The former ownership of the company did. And the gov't approved it. Why? Because it's a routine business transaction involved in restructuring a multinational company that poses no threat to our national security. But because you don't understand our nuclear policy, you've bought into this "nefarious deeds" angle, hook, line and sinker, without doing any research on the topic. You didn't even read the politifact article.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 13, 2016, 09:11:01 PM
Hey Trey, I left my Nuclear Scientist hat at home. But according to the World Nuclear Association, the U.S. has about 207K metric tons of Uranium. Now I'm not sure what of that is usable to do bad things with, nor do I fully understand the amount of processing U-235 (or is it 234?) needs to get to the stuff you can do bad (or good) things with . . . but is it really a good idea that theoretically, a Russian company controls roughly 40K tons of U.S. Uranium? Is it a good idea that a Russian company controls 20% of our supply, when we only have 4% of the worlds supply??
What impact might this have on what they call the "American Assured Fuel Supply"?
Thanks, and I'll listen on the air.
well dax, first lets get enrichment for nuclear weapons off the table because it's a moot point. both america and russia have enough nukes to destroy the world multiple times over
and the second half of your inquiry is a moot point as well because the company in question doesn't have an export license. their only source of income is american nuclear plants. I suppose they could refuse to sell, but that's not how companies make money.
you see where this is going? its a non-factor. if we were so worried about russia choking off our nuclear fuel supply (which we aren't), we could always switch over to thorium reactor technology, of which we have massive deposits.
Nah, I'm not really "worried" about any of those things, but the Clinton's are historically extremely partial to selling off what most would consider to be vital geo-strategic national (and natural) resources to foreign entities. Now, if you're cool with that, that's fine, you're an extreme dumbass for thinking like that, but again, that's fine, and dumbasses make the world a more interesting place.
belief in the overwhelming face of reason. but you do you, dax.
Wait a second here. Expressing concern about foreign control of potentially fissionable natural resources (the idea that technically they can't export the material is, well, immaterial) lacks . . . reason. That, I must say, is, fascinating.
Only the staunchest Hillbot would attempt that take.QuoteFor another, Russia doesn’t have the licenses to export uranium outside the United States, Oilprice.org pointed out, "so it’s somewhat disingenuous to say this uranium is now Russia’s, to do with what it pleases." The Kremlin was likely more interested in Uranium One’s assets in Kazakhstan, the world’s largest producer.
You need to help me out and do the basic minimum for reading comprehension, here.
First off it is interesting that you brought up reading comprehension considering you started off by saying that I said, or even implied that Clinton's bribed a multitude of government agencies. Son, bribed?? Pure comedy.
Again, you can try and redirect, and paint a picture that it's really not that bad and toss one straw man on the fire after another. But the simple baseline is foreign entities controlling fissionable US natural resources. Is that really a good idea? Probably not.
But as I said, the Clintons are known for selling off control of strategic natural resources to foreign entities in return for what? Only the FSM knows.
If transferring this company to russian owners was against the interests of the united states government and against the interests of national security, there is no way in hell that she could orchestrate its approval from 11 independent agencies without any kind of quid pro quo.
The only strawmen I'm tossing on the fire are yours.
Once again, Hillary Clinton did not sell off american uranium deposits. The former ownership of the company did. And the gov't approved it. Why? Because it's a routine business transaction involved in restructuring a multinational company that poses no threat to our national security. But because you don't understand our nuclear policy, you've bought into this "nefarious deeds" angle, hook, line and sinker, without doing any research on the topic. You didn't even read the politifact article.
You keep trying to drown this in wonkish minutia. Do all experts agree on our "nuclear policy"?
I mean if want to to the really big picture we've got a president telling the world to get rid of nuclear weapons. While brokering a cryptic, utterly shrouded in darkness and possibly foolish nuclear deal with Iran. The US has spent billions on putting in the industry and mechanisms in place to modernize its nuclear arsenal, and now the Air Force is talking a new ICBM, and a new strategic bomber. Contradiction much?? That's just the tip of the iceberg.
Now if you don't want to think the most dubious and diabolical political couple in modern US history, who have gone on a world wide pay for pay spree while operating via proxy (sure) one of the most mysterious non profits in the world (that the FBI wanted to investigate 3 times). Didn't peddle their influence and extreme understanding of the system in return for contributions, that's cool. Stupid, but cool.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 13, 2016, 09:15:17 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 13, 2016, 09:18:27 PM
I've posted this before. Trey aka Another Hilbot didn't read it.
This was published before the NYT went all in on Clinton.
Post by: treysolid on September 13, 2016, 10:29:25 PM
Post by: treysolid on September 13, 2016, 10:30:01 PM
http://wlos.com/news/local/69-year-old-woman-punched-in-face-outside-rally-by-trump-supporter (http://wlos.com/news/local/69-year-old-woman-punched-in-face-outside-rally-by-trump-supporter)
Post by: treysolid on September 13, 2016, 10:33:59 PM
Post by: sys on September 13, 2016, 10:59:33 PM
Post by: Tobias on September 14, 2016, 01:41:18 AM
wonkish minutia :curse:
oompa loompas
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 14, 2016, 04:48:56 AM
TreyHilbot: With yet another Strawman. Face it, you just found out about how deep it all went so you needed to attach yourself to the least relevant fact to make yourself feel better. A true Hillbot.
Post by: chum1 on September 14, 2016, 09:53:10 AM
Quote
Donald J. Trump on Wednesday scrapped his previously announced plan to go over results from his most recent physical examination in a taped appearance with the television celebrity Dr. Mehmet Oz, aides to the Republican presidential nominee said.
Instead, Mr. Trump, 70, will appear on the “Dr. Oz Show,” but the two men will have a general discussion about health and wellness, not one anchored to the fitness of one of the two major candidates for president.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/15/us/politics/donald-trump-health-dr-oz.html
Post by: steve dave on September 14, 2016, 09:54:56 AM
Post by: CNS on September 14, 2016, 09:55:15 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on September 14, 2016, 02:01:43 PM
I wonder if he will then sit with Ms. Cleo afterward to discuss foreign policy?
lol
Post by: 8manpick on September 14, 2016, 02:45:06 PM
I wonder if he will then sit with Ms. Cleo afterward to discuss foreign policy?#RIP
Post by: ShellShock on September 14, 2016, 02:59:12 PM
I've downloaded and listened to all of them and they're not only very interesting, but chalked full of stuff that wasn't even disclosed on the news. Some of Hillary's answers are just shocking and really show how she gave zero F's and just flat out ignored all protocols. It made me :sdeek:
Post by: steve dave on September 14, 2016, 03:11:21 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on September 14, 2016, 03:33:26 PM
Nobody cares about any of that stuff, tho.
Not nearly as much as I care about who got pneumonia
Post by: treysolid on September 14, 2016, 05:18:26 PM
dax, you keep on neglecting the 1/11 aspect of this. if it is really true that hillary has the power and influence necessary to make 10 other government agencies approve a deal that they would all otherwise block, then she'd already be in her second term right now and we'd be looking forward to the Trump/Obama debates. if russian ownership of this company is such a bad thing (hint: it's not), then why do you lay the blame solely at the feet of Hillary and not at the feet of the secretary of the treasury, the secretary of defense, the secretary of justice, the secretary of energy, etc. etc.? i know why, it's because it's inconvenient for your talking points.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 14, 2016, 05:21:07 PM
Post by: cfbandyman on September 14, 2016, 06:07:01 PM
because infowars probably didn't mention that part
Probably
Post by: cfbandyman on September 14, 2016, 06:09:26 PM
wonkish minutia = don't let these facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
dax, you keep on neglecting the 1/11 aspect of this. if it is really true that hillary has the power and influence necessary to make 10 other government agencies approve a deal that they would all otherwise block, then she'd already be in her second term right now and we'd be looking forward to the Drumpf/Obama debates. if russian ownership of this company is such a bad thing (hint: it's not), then why do you lay the blame solely at the feet of Hillary and not at the feet of the secretary of the treasury, the secretary of defense, the secretary of justice, the secretary of energy, etc. etc.? i know why, it's because it's inconvenient for your talking points.
I wouldn't want to use facts get in the way of Dax and his hatred of Hillary.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on September 14, 2016, 07:02:20 PM
Post by: chum1 on September 14, 2016, 07:24:46 PM
http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/this-woman-actually-got-donald-trump-to-shut-the-eff-u-1786640463
Post by: gatoveintisiete on September 14, 2016, 07:28:31 PM
Post by: chum1 on September 14, 2016, 07:40:04 PM
Quote
“I invited you here to thank us for what we’ve done in Flint, not give a political speech.”
“OK. That’s good. Then I’m going back to Flint, OK?”
Cuck'd
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 14, 2016, 11:23:25 PM
wonkish minutia = don't let these facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
dax, you keep on neglecting the 1/11 aspect of this. if it is really true that hillary has the power and influence necessary to make 10 other government agencies approve a deal that they would all otherwise block, then she'd already be in her second term right now and we'd be looking forward to the Trump/Obama debates. if russian ownership of this company is such a bad thing (hint: it's not), then why do you lay the blame solely at the feet of Hillary and not at the feet of the secretary of the treasury, the secretary of defense, the secretary of justice, the secretary of energy, etc. etc.? i know why, it's because it's inconvenient for your talking points.
Where did I lay the blame solely at the feet of Hillary? Again, this is about peddling power and influence. When the NYT's pretty much says (while desperately trying not to say it) that the whole deal stinks, then there's clearly something there. Bureaucracies are vast, yet compact, talk to the right people, and you get things done. As the one person interviewed in the NYT's article said, those people aren't handing over the big checks to the Clinton Foundation et. al. for nothing no matter how much spin they put on it. When real experts (not treyHilbot apologist) are saying it's not a good idea, we need to listen to them.
You're whole "she'd already be president" take is hilarious. This was a business deal, and things of this construct happen all the time in Washington.
Post by: treysolid on September 15, 2016, 09:41:07 AM
but i don't remember seeing a single post about it. huh. funny.
Post by: chum1 on September 15, 2016, 09:42:30 AM
Quote
Donald Trump has made it clear he will nominate Peter Thiel to the Supreme Court if he wins the presidency, Thiel has told friends, according to a source close to the PayPal co-founder.
Trump “deeply loves Peter Thiel,” and people in the real estate mogul’s inner circle are talking about Thiel as a Supreme Court nominee, a separate source close to Trump told The Huffington Post.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-peter-thiel-supreme-court_us_57d80d57e4b09d7a687f9b03
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 15, 2016, 09:45:01 AM
given the amount of mental gymnastics necessary to make the "Hillary sold our uranium to the Russians!" case, i hope you were able to manufacture some REAL outrage when Trump gave a hefty and illegal donation to Pam Bondi so she wouldn't start a probe into Trump University.
but i don't remember seeing a single post about it. huh. funny.
LOL, you equated a pay-for-play business deal that happens in Washington all the time (good or bad) as being on the same level as making a few phone calls and peddling a little influence to win the Presidency of the United States.
I'll raise you a Pam Bondi, with a little airport meet and greet between Bill and the AG.
Post by: Tobias on September 15, 2016, 09:45:22 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 15, 2016, 09:45:52 AM
lol
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 15, 2016, 09:47:11 AM
Quote
I got nothing, as usual
Post by: chum1 on September 15, 2016, 11:21:02 AM
Quote
Donald Trump released Thursday a letter from his doctor detailing some of his medical information, showing him to be in good health and including a statement that says he had "stamina."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/15/politics/donald-trump-medical-details-stamina/
Post by: stunted on September 15, 2016, 11:21:57 AM
Post by: treysolid on September 15, 2016, 11:38:23 AM
given the amount of mental gymnastics necessary to make the "Hillary sold our uranium to the Russians!" case, i hope you were able to manufacture some REAL outrage when Trump gave a hefty and illegal donation to Pam Bondi so she wouldn't start a probe into Trump University.
but i don't remember seeing a single post about it. huh. funny.
LOL, you equated a pay-for-play business deal that happens in Washington all the time (good or bad) as being on the same level as making a few phone calls and peddling a little influence to win the Presidency of the United States.
I'll raise you a Pam Bondi, with a little airport meet and greet between Bill and the AG.
wait, are you now down-playing the ownership transfer approval so that you won't look like a hypocrite when it comes to your complete lack of concern re: Trump's corruption?
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 15, 2016, 11:52:27 AM
given the amount of mental gymnastics necessary to make the "Hillary sold our uranium to the Russians!" case, i hope you were able to manufacture some REAL outrage when Trump gave a hefty and illegal donation to Pam Bondi so she wouldn't start a probe into Trump University.
but i don't remember seeing a single post about it. huh. funny.
LOL, you equated a pay-for-play business deal that happens in Washington all the time (good or bad) as being on the same level as making a few phone calls and peddling a little influence to win the Presidency of the United States.
I'll raise you a Pam Bondi, with a little airport meet and greet between Bill and the AG.
wait, are you now down-playing the ownership transfer approval so that you won't look like a hypocrite when it comes to your complete lack of concern re: Trump's corruption?
Where did I say I had a complete lack of concern? I need to outline Treysolid logic:
1. It takes the same amount of effort to get some key people in some government agencies to approve a business deal as it does to somehow corrupt and sway the presidential election.
2. When that idiot logic is made fun of, you then re-direct to a completely unrelated matter.
If Trump is corrupt then prosecute and if his so called school was fraudulent in some form or fashion, then prosecute, or fine.
Unfortunately for Trump, he doesn't have the same political power and insider navigational system that the Clinton's have to continuously avoid prosecution.
The Clinton's have their own education problem, but as one would expect, that's not being talked about that much.
Post by: steve dave on September 15, 2016, 03:01:04 PM
Quote
Donald Trump Jr. says his father can't release his tax returns "because he's got a 12,000-page tax return that would create ... financial auditors out of every person in the country asking questions that would detract from (his father's) main message."
has hillary released any either?
Post by: star seed 7 on September 15, 2016, 03:22:31 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 15, 2016, 03:40:47 PM
Post by: catastrophe on September 15, 2016, 03:51:33 PM
1. Trump's hair on fleek.
2. Comparison of Trump's hands looking nearly the same size as little girl's.
3. Trump making black, young, beauty pageant contestant uncomfortable.
4. Security or Trump supporter in background looking very suspicious at said little girl.
Post by: steve dave on September 15, 2016, 03:59:21 PM
Post by: mocat on September 15, 2016, 04:04:06 PM
Post by: CNS on September 15, 2016, 04:28:04 PM
Post by: Tobias on September 15, 2016, 04:35:37 PM
that photo should attract the remaining Cruz supporters who were on the fence
:lol:
Post by: chum1 on September 15, 2016, 06:02:58 PM
Quote
when Ivanka came on to the show during Wednesday’s taping her father greeted her with a kiss, to which Dr. Oz said something along the lines of, “It’s nice to see a dad kiss his daughter.”
That was all it took for The Donald to give everyone nightmares, telling the audience he kisses her every chance he gets.
http://www.thewrap.com/dr-oz-show-edits-out-creepy-donald-trump-comment-about-kissing-daughter-ivanka/
Post by: steve dave on September 15, 2016, 06:51:18 PM
that photo should attract the remaining Cruz supporters who were on the fence
:lol:
Post by: mhkpasa on September 15, 2016, 08:58:14 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 15, 2016, 09:06:34 PM
Post by: treysolid on September 15, 2016, 09:49:24 PM
https://www.buzzfeed.com/mbvd/trump-refuses-to-say-obama-was-born-in-the-us?utm_term=.vfOnADM6o#.dpoW8eNv3 (https://www.buzzfeed.com/mbvd/trump-refuses-to-say-obama-was-born-in-the-us?utm_term=.vfOnADM6o#.dpoW8eNv3)
literally hours after trump said, "i won't answer that right now. I'll wait for the right time" Conway comes out and make a fool out of him.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on September 15, 2016, 09:51:03 PM
wikileaks posting hacked DNC emails exposing DNC bullshit, followed by DNC congressman threatening cold war era sanctions against russia = a-ok with the resident libtards
U.S. selling 20% of its uranium to a Russian company = absurd, impossible conjecture per the resident libtards.
Post by: bucket on September 15, 2016, 10:35:15 PM
Just to be clear:
wikileaks posting hacked DNC emails exposing DNC bullshit, followed by DNC congressman threatening cold war era sanctions against russia = a-ok with the resident libtards
U.S. selling 20% of its uranium to a Russian company = absurd, impossible conjecture per the resident libtards.
Share the damning e-mails that are so bothersome to you
Post by: puniraptor on September 16, 2016, 01:16:31 AM
Post by: bones129 on September 16, 2016, 01:38:19 AM
QuoteDonald Trump Jr. says his father can't release his tax returns "because he's got a 12,000-page tax return that would create ... financial auditors out of every person in the country asking questions that would detract from (his father's) main message."
has hillary released any either?
Yes, going back many years.
Post by: slackcat on September 16, 2016, 05:44:31 AM
that photo should attract the remaining Cruz supporters who were on the fence
:lol:
Post by: stunted on September 16, 2016, 07:26:49 AM
well this is going to fracture trump's base
https://www.buzzfeed.com/mbvd/trump-refuses-to-say-obama-was-born-in-the-us?utm_term=.vfOnADM6o#.dpoW8eNv3 (https://www.buzzfeed.com/mbvd/trump-refuses-to-say-obama-was-born-in-the-us?utm_term=.vfOnADM6o#.dpoW8eNv3)
literally hours after trump said, "i won't answer that right now. I'll wait for the right time" Conway comes out and make a fool out of him.
donald admits obama born in us. turns out the original birther was hillary :lol: :lol: :lol:
https://youtu.be/gLEy_hJaNEI
Post by: IPA4Me on September 16, 2016, 08:22:51 AM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on September 16, 2016, 08:41:44 AM
Post by: steve dave on September 16, 2016, 09:14:45 AM
Post by: IPA4Me on September 16, 2016, 10:13:06 AM
Post by: renocat on September 16, 2016, 12:51:58 PM
Hillary - you are the rip who said half of America are deplorable. Trump apologize for what? Trump never accused Obama for not being black. If disrespecting a president is a crime, you should be imprisoned for your comments about GBush. If a conservative criticizes Obama, he or she is a racist.
Post by: Panjandrum on September 16, 2016, 01:11:38 PM
CNN and other Clinton News, Opinion, and Propaganda outlets are peaved that they had to listen to veterans about how they support trump. How dare he waste our important time they are bemoaning disussing trivial stuff like care for our veterans.
Hillary - you are the rip who said half of America are deplorable. Trump apologize for what? Trump never accused Obama for not being black. If disrespecting a president is a crime, you should be imprisoned for your comments about GBush. If a conservative criticizes Obama, he or she is a racist.
That was a dumb thing to say, but not completely inaccurate.
Also, it's not half of America. It's really half of the 40% of people who will vote for him. And considering a lot of folks don't even vote, it's probably more like 10-15% of America.
So, if you pick ten random Americans out of a lineup, at least one or two of them probably will be racist, misogynist, homophobic, etc. And those people are probably 90+% voting for Trump. So, really, mathematically speaking, she wasn't wrong.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on September 16, 2016, 01:24:18 PM
So Hillary and her MSM surrogates decided they needed to turn the page and win a few news cycles, and they pulled out... the birther card? Seems like a weird choice, but that's what they went with. Trump announced a press conference to address the issue, and the all the cable outfits showed up. Instead of what they were hoping for, they broadcast free of charge about 45 minutes of one veteran after another striding to the podium and endorsing Trump. After all that, Trump came to the podium for about 60 seconds, said "Clinton started the birther conspiracies - I ended it" (that second part is dubious at best, but let's not get bogged down in truth issues) and dropped the mic and walked off without answering a single question.
The media is not happy. :lol: Here are some of the more hilarious reactions from Twitter. http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/16/media-outraged-after-trump-tricks-them-to-cover-endorsements-from-military-heroes/ (http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/16/media-outraged-after-trump-tricks-them-to-cover-endorsements-from-military-heroes/)
Post by: star seed 7 on September 16, 2016, 01:37:00 PM
Tiger can't change his stripes tho
Post by: chum1 on September 16, 2016, 01:55:54 PM
http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/09/trump-tv-pools-erase-video-hotel-tour-228284
Post by: bones129 on September 18, 2016, 11:21:35 PM
This whole part is funny and weird, too. Like, he wanted publicity for his new hotel that they were in and to give a cameras only tour, but then the press refused to go along.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/09/trump-tv-pools-erase-video-hotel-tour-228284
Maybe the media finally drew a line? :dunno:
Post by: chum1 on September 19, 2016, 08:58:55 AM
Quote
For many years, Trump has expressed curiosity about nuclear weapons. In 1984, still in his thirties, he told the Washington Post that he wanted to negotiate nuclear treaties with the Soviets. “It would take an hour and a half to learn everything there is to learn about missiles,” he said. “I think I know most of it anyway.” According to oscar G. Blair, a research scholar at the Program on Science and Global Security, at Princeton, Trump encountered a U.S. nuclear-arms negotiator at a reception in 1990 and offered advice on how to cut a “terrific” deal with a Soviet counterpart. Trump told him to arrive late, stand over the Soviet negotiator, stick his finger in his chest, and say, “eff you!”
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/09/26/president-trumps-first-term
Post by: star seed 7 on September 19, 2016, 09:03:55 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 19, 2016, 09:04:45 AM
Post by: CNS on September 19, 2016, 11:27:25 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: CNS on September 19, 2016, 11:27:50 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: star seed 7 on September 19, 2016, 11:29:49 AM
Post by: Tobias on September 19, 2016, 11:39:00 AM
Post by: chum1 on September 19, 2016, 03:21:58 PM
https://twitter.com/brianefallon/status/777191114201759749
Post by: CNS on September 19, 2016, 04:07:21 PM
Buster would army so good your head would spin
Well, he has been enlisted for like 12 yrs now, or something.
Post by: bucket on September 19, 2016, 05:18:29 PM
“The bad part: now we will give him amazing hospitalization, he will be taken care of by some of the best doctors in the world, he will be given a fully modern and updated hospital room, and he’ll probably even have room service, knowing the way our country is,” Trump said. “And on top of all of that, he will be represented by an outstanding lawyer."
:curse: Room service?!?
Post by: chum1 on September 20, 2016, 11:17:04 AM
(https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_742w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/09/19/Others/Images/2016-09-19/havitrump1474316891.jpg)
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on September 20, 2016, 12:54:40 PM
:)
https://twitter.com/brianefallon/status/777191114201759749
This comment seems incongruent with the military press conference of several days ago described above.
Post by: chum1 on September 20, 2016, 03:06:28 PM
Quote
The country club legal calamity arose in August 2010, after Martin Greenberg hit a hole-in-one on the 13th hole while playing in a for-charity tournament at the Trump National Golf Club, Westchester, in Briarcliff Manor, N.Y.
Under the rules of the competition, Greenberg was entitled to a $1 million prize.
But the rules also stipulated that Greenberg’s shot had to travel at least 150 yards, a distance that Trump’s golf club, allegedly, made the hole short of, on purpose.
Quote
an 80-foot flagpole at the oceanfront property that violated the town’s rules that such poles could not be taller than 42 feet.
When the town began fining Trump $1,250 a day for the pole, Trump sued in federal court, according to documents obtained by The Post, which stated that a flagpole shorter than the one Trump had erected “would fail to appropriately express the magnitude of Donald J. Trump’s ... patriotism.”
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/trump-258k-charity-settle-suits-businesses-article-1.2799475
Post by: steve dave on September 20, 2016, 03:19:03 PM
Post by: sys on September 20, 2016, 03:22:48 PM
Post by: sys on September 20, 2016, 03:24:32 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-election/trump-charity-donations/
Post by: sys on September 20, 2016, 03:31:39 PM
Quote
Chicago Police Memorial Foundation - In 2007, Trump told the IRS he'd given this group $5,000. In 2009, he told the IRS he'd taken it back. The Chicago charity says it never received a check in the first place.
Quote
Citizens United for Research in Epilepsy - In 2012, Trump called in to MSNBC's "Morning Joe" to pledge $100,000 as part of a fundraiser led by David Axelrod, President Obama's longtime adviser. Axelrod had promised to shave his moustache if he could raise $1 million for the cause. Trump gave the money from his foundation, and gave $0 of his own.
Quote
ALS Association - In 2014, Trump made an Ice Bucket Challenge video in which two Miss Universe contestants drenched him with Trump-branded water. These videos were made as part of a fundraiser for the ALS Association. Trump's foundation gave $0 to the ALS Association that year. Did Trump give his own money? The association said it could not release that information without Trump's permission.
Quote
Eric Trump Foundation - This charity is run by one of Trump's sons. Eric Trump first told The Post that his father had given "hundreds of thousands" to his charity. Then, he said he couldn't recall one specific instance where his father gave anything.
Quote
Friends of the Israel Defense Forces - his group provides welfare programs for Israeli military personnel. At a fundraiser in 2007, Trump promised to give $250,000 to the group. But he never paid. Another — unnamed — person paid in his stead.
there's so many (more).
Post by: CNS on September 20, 2016, 03:34:42 PM
:DQuoteThe country club legal calamity arose in August 2010, after Martin Greenberg hit a hole-in-one on the 13th hole while playing in a for-charity tournament at the Trump National Golf Club, Westchester, in Briarcliff Manor, N.Y.
Under the rules of the competition, Greenberg was entitled to a $1 million prize.
But the rules also stipulated that Greenberg’s shot had to travel at least 150 yards, a distance that Trump’s golf club, allegedly, made the hole short of, on purpose.Quotean 80-foot flagpole at the oceanfront property that violated the town’s rules that such poles could not be taller than 42 feet.
When the town began fining Trump $1,250 a day for the pole, Trump sued in federal court, according to documents obtained by The Post, which stated that a flagpole shorter than the one Trump had erected “would fail to appropriately express the magnitude of Donald J. Trump’s ... patriotism.”
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/trump-258k-charity-settle-suits-businesses-article-1.2799475
Needs a 'shop of a super small hand waving a flag.
Post by: CNS on September 20, 2016, 03:37:09 PM
Post by: sys on September 20, 2016, 03:40:33 PM
Quote
KIND Fund, UNICEF - Earlier this year, Trump sent a check from his foundation to MSNBC host Lawrence O'Donnell, made out to a charity that O'Donnell supports. The charity helps provide desks to schoolchildren in Malawi. O'Donnell said the check had been made out incorrectly, so he couldn't accept it. Trump never sent another check, made out the right way.
Quote
Louisana Flood Relief Fund - Before Trump visited Louisiana to tour flooded areas, the state's governor suggested that Trump make a "sizable donation" to this fund, run by the Baton Rouge Area Foundation. Trump gave nothing, a spokeswoman said.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on September 20, 2016, 04:49:55 PM
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37421886?ocid=socialflow_twitter
Post by: catastrophe on September 20, 2016, 04:52:46 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 20, 2016, 05:35:49 PM
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on September 21, 2016, 10:30:45 AM
QuoteALS Association - In 2014, Trump made an Ice Bucket Challenge video in which two Miss Universe contestants drenched him with Trump-branded water. These videos were made as part of a fundraiser for the ALS Association. Trump's foundation gave $0 to the ALS Association that year. Did Trump give his own money? The association said it could not release that information without Trump's permission.
Well in Trump's defense, the Ice Bucket Challenge was either get ice water dumped on you OR donate $100.
Post by: chum1 on September 21, 2016, 10:56:03 AM
Quote
Trump is spending a significant portion of his money making his ubiquitous Make America Great Again hats. Merchandise is one of his biggest expenses overall, at $2 million
http://theweek.com/speedreads/650118/hats-are-trumps-campaign-expenses
Post by: steve dave on September 21, 2016, 03:24:45 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 22, 2016, 04:12:49 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 22, 2016, 04:14:29 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 22, 2016, 04:20:09 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 22, 2016, 04:25:17 PM
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on September 22, 2016, 04:27:19 PM
“Basically, they will, if they see poss… — you know, they’re proactive, and if they see a person possibly with a gun or they think may have a gun, they will see the person, and they’ll look and they’ll take the gun away,” Trump said. “They’ll stop, they’ll frisk, and they’ll take the gun away, and they won’t have anything to shoot with. I mean, how it’s not being used in Chicago is, to be honest with you, it’s quite unbelievable. And, you know, the police, the local police, they know who has a gun, who shouldn’t be having a gun. They understand that.”
Cops everywhere know who has a gun and if they are a bad person they just take their gun away so they can't shoot people? Except in Chicago the cops just don't do that for some reason.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 22, 2016, 04:34:03 PM
“Basically, they will, if they see poss… — you know, they’re proactive, and if they see a person possibly with a gun or they think may have a gun, they will see the person, and they’ll look and they’ll take the gun away,” Trump said. “They’ll stop, they’ll frisk, and they’ll take the gun away, and they won’t have anything to shoot with. I mean, how it’s not being used in Chicago is, to be honest with you, it’s quite unbelievable. And, you know, the police, the local police, they know who has a gun, who shouldn’t be having a gun. They understand that.”
:opcat:
Post by: chum1 on September 22, 2016, 05:46:14 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/09/22/watch-the-dalai-lama-mock-the-shape-of-donald-trumps-mouth/
Post by: star seed 7 on September 22, 2016, 07:05:06 PM
Quote
Less than a day after protests over the police killing of an African-American man turned violent in North Carolina, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump placed much of the blame for the turmoil on the impact of drugs.
"If you're not aware, drugs are a very, very big factor in what you're watching on television at night," said Trump in a speech to the Shale Insight 2016 Conference in Pittsburgh today.
Post by: renocat on September 22, 2016, 07:49:23 PM
Blasting people who don't have a.gun is wrong. However I am surel the drug mafia operating in most cities have operatives who would like to shoot a cop and regularly do. So minimum wage cop with colorbook training assumes the worst in people, and if someone does not cooperate or makes spazjerky moves these ill trained cops fear for their lives - kill or be killed. Jungle law.QuoteLess than a day after protests over the police killing of an African-American man turned violent in North Carolina, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump placed much of the blame for the turmoil on the impact of drugs.
"If you're not aware, drugs are a very, very big factor in what you're watching on television at night," said Trump in a speech to the Shale Insight 2016 Conference in Pittsburgh today.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 22, 2016, 09:40:38 PM
QuoteLess than a day after protests over the police killing of an African-American man turned violent in North Carolina, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump placed much of the blame for the turmoil on the impact of drugs.
"If you're not aware, drugs are a very, very big factor in what you're watching on television at night," said Trump in a speech to the Shale Insight 2016 Conference in Pittsburgh today.
This rough ridin' guy :lol:
https://twitter.com/srl/status/779050448938557442
Post by: gatoveintisiete on September 22, 2016, 09:50:53 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 22, 2016, 09:56:31 PM
Post by: renocat on September 23, 2016, 10:01:29 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on September 23, 2016, 11:47:24 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on September 23, 2016, 12:17:15 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 23, 2016, 12:18:39 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 23, 2016, 12:21:44 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on September 23, 2016, 12:22:11 PM
But it worked very well in NYC!
His dumbass actually said that :ROFL:
Post by: Panjandrum on September 23, 2016, 12:48:14 PM
The odd thing about stop and frisk supporters is there seems to be a big overlap with the white people who support stockpiling guns to protect against tyranny crowd.
fyp
Post by: renocat on September 23, 2016, 01:16:10 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on September 23, 2016, 01:31:54 PM
Did we discuss Trump's answer to stop tensions between cops and minorities is to institute nationwide stop and frisk? He is legitimately stupid.
tons of racists think that is a great idea,btw
Post by: steve dave on September 23, 2016, 01:34:16 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 23, 2016, 02:14:24 PM
Lyin' Ted, son of the JFK killer conspirator, to support Trump! :excited:
Also has an ugly/crazy wife
Post by: sys on September 23, 2016, 02:35:16 PM
Post by: Brock Landers on September 23, 2016, 02:39:15 PM
Post by: catastrophe on September 23, 2016, 02:39:27 PM
Post by: Tobias on September 23, 2016, 02:40:00 PM
Post by: stunted on September 24, 2016, 04:27:32 PM
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/779729180334387200
Post by: stunted on September 24, 2016, 04:39:26 PM
Post by: steve dave on September 24, 2016, 04:45:28 PM
Post by: steve dave on September 24, 2016, 04:46:05 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 24, 2016, 04:49:37 PM
Post by: catastrophe on September 24, 2016, 04:55:00 PM
Post by: 8manpick on September 24, 2016, 05:02:40 PM
And holy crap gennifer flowers is actually going to be at the debate. This is real life reality tv.I truly had never heard of her
Post by: Dugout DickStone on September 24, 2016, 06:03:40 PM
And holy crap gennifer flowers is actually going to be at the debate. This is real life reality tv.
I don't believe you
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on September 24, 2016, 06:27:53 PM
And holy crap gennifer flowers is actually going to be at the debate. This is real life reality tv.I truly had never heard of her
This is what HRC is banking on. Enough people you are either too young or disengaged to remember that she enabled a serial rapist.
Post by: stunted on September 24, 2016, 06:36:03 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 24, 2016, 06:38:35 PM
And holy crap gennifer flowers is actually going to be at the debate. This is real life reality tv.I truly had never heard of her
This is what HRC is banking on. Enough people you are either too young or disengaged to remember that she enabled a serial rapist.
trump raped a 13 yr old girl and you're voting for him, happily i might add.
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on September 24, 2016, 06:45:28 PM
And holy crap gennifer flowers is actually going to be at the debate. This is real life reality tv.I truly had never heard of her
This is what HRC is banking on. Enough people you are either too young or disengaged to remember that she enabled a serial rapist.
trump raped a 13 yr old girl and you're voting for him, happily i might add.
1. Not happily. At all.
2. Have not heard about Trump raping a 13yo. Will have to research.
:lol: yes this sounds legitimate and not at all politically motivated... http://www.snopes.com/2016/06/23/donald-trump-rape-lawsuit/ (http://www.snopes.com/2016/06/23/donald-trump-rape-lawsuit/)
Post by: star seed 7 on September 26, 2016, 08:22:07 AM
On the eve of the first presidential debate, Donald Trump’s campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, described her candidate Sunday as “the Babe Ruth of debating,” a glowing assessment that’s unusual at a time when both camps typically work to rein in expectations.
“He's a brilliant debater,” Conway said on ABC’s “This Week.” “Newt Gingrich put it best. The former speaker recently said Donald Trump is the best debater he's ever seen. He's like the Babe Ruth of debating. He really shows up and swings and does a great job.”
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on September 26, 2016, 08:58:04 AM
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/trump-debate-babe-ruth-conway-228636
On the eve of the first presidential debate, Donald Trump’s campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, described her candidate Sunday as “the Babe Ruth of debating,” a glowing assessment that’s unusual at a time when both camps typically work to rein in expectations.
“He's a brilliant debater,” Conway said on ABC’s “This Week.” “Newt Gingrich put it best. The former speaker recently said Donald Trump is the best debater he's ever seen. He's like the Babe Ruth of debating. He really shows up and swings and does a great job.”
What a huge mistake. Now, if Donald Trump has a good debate but doesn't debate as well as Babe Ruth, it will be considered a failure.
Now the Clinton camp, they know what they're doing. "We are confident that Secretary Clinton will not fall on her ascension to, or at, the podium tonight." But see how they don't mention what might happen descending from the podium? Set the bar low!
Post by: star seed 7 on September 26, 2016, 09:01:24 AM
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on September 26, 2016, 09:15:33 AM
My quote was real tho
What you don't understand is that Babe Ruth was a shitty debater. Routinely got his ass kicked. So Kellyanne was actually setting the bar quite low and trolling the LBBIQ community.
Now if she had said Ty Cobb, I think we can all agree that would be much more concerning.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 26, 2016, 09:19:12 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 26, 2016, 09:21:18 AM
Post by: CNS on September 26, 2016, 09:27:01 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on September 26, 2016, 09:46:05 AM
As far as cultural view point seems to go, Trump and Cobb have a lot more in common, it seems.
this
Post by: MakeItRain on September 26, 2016, 10:52:25 AM
Post by: sys on September 26, 2016, 11:23:01 AM
The media has been very kind to Kellyanne Conway, she says stupid crap on the reg. I realize this is a function of who she is selling/defending, but my god has she skated. Also wtf is Kellyanne? Does she have a brother named Jimparker?
i don't understand why news shows invite these people on when their only role on the program is to respond to questions by lying or refusing to answer.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 26, 2016, 11:27:04 AM
Post by: bucket on September 26, 2016, 11:31:24 AM
The media has been very kind to Kellyanne Conway, she says stupid crap on the reg. I realize this is a function of who she is selling/defending, but my god has she skated. Also wtf is Kellyanne? Does she have a brother named Jimparker?
i don't understand why news shows invite these people on when their only role on the program is to respond to questions by lying or refusing to answer.
24 hour news cycle
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on September 26, 2016, 12:26:31 PM
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/trump-debate-babe-ruth-conway-228636
On the eve of the first presidential debate, Donald Trump’s campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, described her candidate Sunday as “the Babe Ruth of debating,” a glowing assessment that’s unusual at a time when both camps typically work to rein in expectations.
“He's a brilliant debater,” Conway said on ABC’s “This Week.” “Newt Gingrich put it best. The former speaker recently said Donald Trump is the best debater he's ever seen. He's like the Babe Ruth of debating. He really shows up and swings and does a great job.”
Does that hillary is the Lou Gherig of debates-dying of a degenerative disease?
Post by: sys on September 26, 2016, 12:28:19 PM
24 hour news cycle
if they don't wish to report news, and instead prefer to interview people on political topics (i admit, i'm far more likely to tune into the latter), there are tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of political scientists, political commentators and reporters who would have something more interesting to say than - " i don't know, you'd have to ask mr. trump."
Post by: michigancat on September 26, 2016, 01:17:05 PM
24 hour news cycle
if they don't wish to report news, and instead prefer to interview people on political topics (i admit, i'm far more likely to tune into the latter), there are tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of political scientists, political commentators and reporters who would have something more interesting to say than - " i don't know, you'd have to ask mr. trump."
to me that answer is pretty interesting
Post by: chum1 on September 26, 2016, 01:44:19 PM
Post by: stunted on September 26, 2016, 03:17:57 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2FgoEMAW.com%2Fforum%2FSmileys%2FgoEMAW%2FLove.gif&hash=6c7aa3394b1a0751c9b06f770c85d7267881ee5e)
Post by: CNS on September 26, 2016, 03:22:38 PM
24 hour news cycle
if they don't wish to report news, and instead prefer to interview people on political topics (i admit, i'm far more likely to tune into the latter), there are tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of political scientists, political commentators and reporters who would have something more interesting to say than - " i don't know, you'd have to ask mr. trump."
Yeah, but they would prob sound super smarty like they are better than the working man.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on September 26, 2016, 03:38:15 PM
Also wtf is Kellyanne? Does she have a brother named Jimparker?
:sdeek: Your racist is showing, MIR....
Post by: stunted on September 26, 2016, 03:51:32 PM
Post by: chum1 on September 26, 2016, 04:30:56 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-directed-23-million-owed-to-him-to-his-charity-instead/2016/09/26/7a9e9fac-8352-11e6-ac72-a29979381495_story.html
Post by: stunted on September 26, 2016, 04:59:10 PM
I should use infowars for my zingers
Post by: sys on September 27, 2016, 02:21:36 PM
Quote
In 2000, during a family dispute about the details of his father’s will, Trump, who was by then fabulously wealthy in his own right, cut off benefits from the family health plan that were paying for the medical care of his nephew’s seriously ill young son.
Quote
Trump, for his part, was unapologetic about his actions. “Why should we give him medical coverage?” he told Evans. When she asked him if he thought he might come across as cold-hearted, given the baby’s medical condition, he said, “I can’t help that."
http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/what-sort-of-man-is-donald-trump
Post by: chum1 on September 27, 2016, 03:31:16 PM
Quote
In the immediate aftermath of Monday's presidential debate, Donald Trump had nothing but praise for moderator Lester Holt.
"I thought Lester did a great job," the Republican nominee told CNN, adding that he thought the evening's questions were fair.
By the time he appeared on "Fox & Friends" Tuesday morning, however, Trump had changed his mind: "I'd give him a C, C+. I thought he was fine. Nothing outstanding. I thought he gave me very unfair questions at the end — the last three, four questions."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/27/donald-trump-has-already-flip-flopped-on-lester-holts-debate-performance/
Post by: massofcatfan on September 27, 2016, 03:40:22 PM
The media has been very kind to Kellyanne Conway, she says stupid crap on the reg. I realize this is a function of who she is selling/defending, but my god has she skated. Also wtf is Kellyanne? Does she have a brother named Jimparker?
i don't understand why news shows invite these people on when their only role on the program is to respond to questions by lying or refusing to answer.
:curse: I was listening to a radio interview with Clinton campaign manager.
Q: Name one thing Donald Trump did right last night
A: He was terrible, I was surprised at his lack of preparation, etc.
Now at this point the reporter should have either said "are you deaf" or "are you incapable of comprehending a simple question" or hung up on him. Of course this goes for how reporters should respond to all parties who have been trained to ignore the question and say whatever they want to say.
Post by: sys on September 27, 2016, 03:48:40 PM
Post by: catastrophe on September 27, 2016, 03:50:19 PM
Post by: catastrophe on September 27, 2016, 03:52:16 PM
Post by: CNS on September 27, 2016, 03:52:51 PM
Post by: chum1 on September 27, 2016, 04:00:44 PM
Someone like Kellyanne Conway, on the other hand, is like a Jedi Master who I watch in amazement.
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on September 27, 2016, 04:13:40 PM
The media has been very kind to Kellyanne Conway, she says stupid crap on the reg. I realize this is a function of who she is selling/defending, but my god has she skated. Also wtf is Kellyanne? Does she have a brother named Jimparker?
i don't understand why news shows invite these people on when their only role on the program is to respond to questions by lying or refusing to answer.
:curse: I was listening to a radio interview with Clinton campaign manager.
Q: Name one thing Donald Trump did right last night
A: He was terrible, I was surprised at his lack of preparation, etc.
Now at this point the reporter should have either said "are you deaf" or "are you incapable of comprehending a simple question" or hung up on him. Of course this goes for how reporters should respond to all parties who have been trained to ignore the question and say whatever they want to say.
I'm sure the reporter was very happy with that answer.
Post by: star seed 7 on September 27, 2016, 04:16:54 PM
Post by: ChiComCat on September 28, 2016, 08:41:12 AM
Post by: chum1 on September 28, 2016, 11:12:02 AM
1) Trump claims that he received $18M in donations within 24 hours of the debate and
2) while the only two scientific polls show that Clinton handily won the debate, every online poll shows that Trump won the debate.
Is there any way that these things actually happened naturally, without some sort effort to bring them about? I say no way. This has gotta be some 4D chess in action!
Post by: chum1 on September 28, 2016, 11:18:12 AM
Quote
Here are more than a dozen times Trump has tweeted about his debate win
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/09/28/trump-says-he-won-debate/91212500/
Post by: steve dave on September 28, 2016, 03:34:48 PM
Post by: chum1 on September 28, 2016, 07:10:08 PM
https://twitter.com/JohnJHarwood/status/781215486692524032
Post by: star seed 7 on September 28, 2016, 07:13:50 PM
Post by: renocat on September 28, 2016, 08:48:50 PM
Business will be great if he wins tho
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on September 28, 2016, 08:55:37 PM
Business will be great if he wins tho
I think they mean Trump business, like when the dixie chicks went political.
Post by: sys on September 28, 2016, 09:21:35 PM
Post by: renocat on September 28, 2016, 10:03:37 PM
Post by: michigancat on September 28, 2016, 10:05:48 PM
Post by: sys on September 28, 2016, 10:56:25 PM
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/09/28/books/hitler-ascent-volker-ullrich.html?_r=0
Post by: bucket on September 28, 2016, 11:16:45 PM
Post by: stunted on September 28, 2016, 11:26:04 PM
Post by: Tobias on September 28, 2016, 11:39:15 PM
apropos of everything.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/09/28/books/hitler-ascent-volker-ullrich.html?_r=0
eerie
Post by: bones129 on September 29, 2016, 01:56:38 AM
I don't think so.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/27/politics/donald-trump-women-problems/
Post by: michigancat on September 29, 2016, 07:50:54 AM
So Donald says he respects women and will do more for them than Hillary?jeez, Donald
I don't think so.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/27/politics/donald-trump-women-problems/
Post by: Cire on September 29, 2016, 08:30:21 AM
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 29, 2016, 08:52:05 AM
yesss
https://twitter.com/JohnJHarwood/status/781215486692524032
https://twitter.com/KatyTurNBC/status/781230950424408065
Post by: Cartierfor3 on September 29, 2016, 09:39:31 AM
Post by: chum1 on September 29, 2016, 11:12:27 AM
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/09/trump-camp-has-sexist-plan-to-fight-allegations-of-sexism.html
Post by: michigancat on September 29, 2016, 11:14:04 AM
yesss
https://twitter.com/JohnJHarwood/status/781215486692524032
https://twitter.com/KatyTurNBC/status/781230950424408065
Is this real life? :lol:
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 29, 2016, 11:19:37 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 29, 2016, 12:28:37 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 29, 2016, 01:38:48 PM
Post by: stunted on September 29, 2016, 05:30:35 PM
Post by: renocat on September 29, 2016, 05:51:50 PM
Post by: chum1 on September 29, 2016, 07:18:02 PM
Post by: steve dave on September 29, 2016, 07:46:22 PM
Post by: bucket on September 29, 2016, 08:43:01 PM
Quote
"Raise your hand, Christian conservatives everybody," Trump said, drawing a smattering of cheers and raised arms.
And then, he added: "Raise your hand if you're not a Christian conservative, I want to see this, right. That's -- oh, there's a couple, but that's all right. I think we'll keep them right? Should we keep them in the room, yes? I think so."
He let them stay in the room :D
Post by: steve dave on September 29, 2016, 08:48:24 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/28/politics/donald-trump-evangelicals/index.htmlQuote"Raise your hand, Christian conservatives everybody," Trump said, drawing a smattering of cheers and raised arms.
And then, he added: "Raise your hand if you're not a Christian conservative, I want to see this, right. That's -- oh, there's a couple, but that's all right. I think we'll keep them right? Should we keep them in the room, yes? I think so."
He let them stay in the room :D
holy crap :lol:
Post by: chum1 on September 29, 2016, 09:05:00 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-foundation-lacks-the-certification-required-for-charities-that-solicit-money/2016/09/29/7dac6a68-8658-11e6-ac72-a29979381495_story.html
Post by: catastrophe on September 29, 2016, 10:37:19 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/28/politics/donald-trump-evangelicals/index.htmlQuote"Raise your hand, Christian conservatives everybody," Trump said, drawing a smattering of cheers and raised arms.
And then, he added: "Raise your hand if you're not a Christian conservative, I want to see this, right. That's -- oh, there's a couple, but that's all right. I think we'll keep them right? Should we keep them in the room, yes? I think so."
He let them stay in the room :D
Anyone who raised their hand in that scenario has absolutely zero survival instincts.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on September 29, 2016, 10:40:00 PM
The Trump Foundation could easily have its own thread. Amazing.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-foundation-lacks-the-certification-required-for-charities-that-solicit-money/2016/09/29/7dac6a68-8658-11e6-ac72-a29979381495_story.html
Oh man! Not licensed to raise charitable dollars in new york!?!? Burn!
:lol:
Post by: stunted on September 29, 2016, 10:41:56 PM
Post by: chum1 on September 29, 2016, 11:37:44 PM
Post by: sys on September 30, 2016, 05:43:30 AM
this is well written and quite interesting (longish).
Post by: chum1 on September 30, 2016, 06:31:11 AM
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/781755469488615424
Post by: Tobias on September 30, 2016, 07:15:53 AM
Post by: 8manpick on September 30, 2016, 08:16:08 AM
3:20 a.m.!3:20 AM in the middle of the Atlantic?
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/781755469488615424
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160930%2Fa5d633b4ebf52005d42cc660f6285816.png&hash=6b4382769dc420cb3dedc6964c8cf0810449b28c)
Post by: treysolid on September 30, 2016, 08:20:22 AM
3:20 a.m.!
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/781755469488615424
interesting. totally different from when Donald says "people tell me..." "many people say..." of course. those could never be lies.
Post by: CNS on September 30, 2016, 10:13:23 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: chum1 on September 30, 2016, 12:00:14 PM
Quote
Donald Trump supporters artificially manipulated the results of online polls to create a false narrative that the Republican nominee won the first presidential debate on Monday night.http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/trump-clinton-debate-online-polls-4chan-the-donald/
The efforts originated from users of the pro-Trump Reddit community r/The_Donald and 4chan messaged boards, which bombarded around 70 polls, including those launched by Time, Fortune, and CNBC.
:D
Say I have a program running. There's data on this program that I want to use. I want to take that data and have it put in some database program, and from there have it interact with other programs (not important now, crossing that bridge later). What do I need for a tool that scrapes that program (through images/continual screenshots of the program, or at least when I hit execute it takes a screenshot and scrapes), and what to use for some database? And would need to be instant. Low programming experience only used stuff like sikuli, ahk, nothing fancy like python
Post by: steve dave on September 30, 2016, 12:13:49 PM
Post by: chum1 on September 30, 2016, 12:20:10 PM
remember when ksufans single handidly made manhattan beat lawrence for that $100k green energy grant or something? haha
Oh, wow, no. I only remember stuff like "Who has the best fans?"
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 30, 2016, 12:25:10 PM
Post by: Tobias on September 30, 2016, 12:25:30 PM
Post by: 8manpick on September 30, 2016, 12:32:46 PM
remember when ksufans single handidly made manhattan beat lawrence for that $100k green energy grant or something? hahaWasn't that the gE lightbulb campaign?
Post by: steve dave on September 30, 2016, 12:36:12 PM
remember when ksufans single handidly made manhattan beat lawrence for that $100k green energy grant or something? hahaWasn't that the gE lightbulb campaign?
yes, that's the one. thought it went back to fans. I think I single handedly changed ~200k commercial light bulbs to more energy efficient types.
Post by: stunted on September 30, 2016, 01:35:36 PM
More confirmation than news.QuoteDonald Trump supporters artificially manipulated the results of online polls to create a false narrative that the Republican nominee won the first presidential debate on Monday night.http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/trump-clinton-debate-online-polls-4chan-the-donald/
The efforts originated from users of the pro-Trump Reddit community r/The_Donald and 4chan messaged boards, which bombarded around 70 polls, including those launched by Time, Fortune, and CNBC.
:DSay I have a program running. There's data on this program that I want to use. I want to take that data and have it put in some database program, and from there have it interact with other programs (not important now, crossing that bridge later). What do I need for a tool that scrapes that program (through images/continual screenshots of the program, or at least when I hit execute it takes a screenshot and scrapes), and what to use for some database? And would need to be instant. Low programming experience only used stuff like sikuli, ahk, nothing fancy like python
i'm so doing this for the next debate
Post by: chum1 on September 30, 2016, 03:38:11 PM
Quote
"Regarding the first debate, there were issues regarding Donald Trump's audio that affected the sound level in the debate hall," the commission said in a statement.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/30/politics/debate-commission-trump-had-audio-issues/
Post by: catastrophe on September 30, 2016, 03:54:53 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on September 30, 2016, 06:26:26 PM
3:20 a.m.!3:20 AM in the middle of the Atlantic?
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/781755469488615424
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160930%2Fa5d633b4ebf52005d42cc660f6285816.png&hash=6b4382769dc420cb3dedc6964c8cf0810449b28c)
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/781926033159249920
Post by: The Big Train on September 30, 2016, 06:29:23 PM
Post by: chum1 on September 30, 2016, 07:38:27 PM
https://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/donald-trump-appeared-in-a-2000-playboy-softcore-porn
Post by: The Big Train on September 30, 2016, 07:42:13 PM
Post by: stunted on September 30, 2016, 08:24:50 PM
Post by: steve dave on September 30, 2016, 08:31:07 PM
Disappointed that it's not a sex tape
:thumbsup:
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on September 30, 2016, 10:25:38 PM
Post by: bones129 on October 01, 2016, 01:04:50 AM
3:20 a.m.!3:20 AM in the middle of the Atlantic?
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/781755469488615424
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160930%2Fa5d633b4ebf52005d42cc660f6285816.png&hash=6b4382769dc420cb3dedc6964c8cf0810449b28c)
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/781926033159249920
"No sources" :lol:
Post by: bones129 on October 01, 2016, 01:58:12 AM
He doesn't talk about them. :lol: :lol:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/30/politics/donald-trump-bill-clinton-presidential-debate-hillary-clinton/index.html
Post by: bones129 on October 01, 2016, 02:07:59 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/01/us/politics/donald-trump-interview-bill-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0
Post by: gatoveintisiete on October 01, 2016, 02:47:20 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 01, 2016, 10:58:58 AM
Post by: chum1 on October 01, 2016, 08:29:40 PM
Quote
Donald J. Trump declared a $916 million loss on his 1995 income tax returns, a tax deduction so substantial it could have allowed him to legally avoid paying any federal income taxes for up to 18 years, records obtained by The New York Times show.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html
Post by: chum1 on October 01, 2016, 08:31:16 PM
Post by: The Big Train on October 02, 2016, 07:55:40 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/10/02/as-news-of-trumps-taxes-broke-he-goes-off-script-at-a-rally-in-pennsylvania/
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 02, 2016, 09:12:15 AM
Post by: bones129 on October 02, 2016, 01:24:32 PM
Post by: sys on October 02, 2016, 03:26:33 PM
Post by: catastrophe on October 02, 2016, 04:14:44 PM
Post by: chum1 on October 02, 2016, 05:25:59 PM
Quote
“Right now, you say to your wife: ‘Let’s go to a movie after Trump.’ But you won’t do that because you’ll be so high and so excited that no movie is going to satisfy you. Okay? No movie. You know why? Honestly? Because they don’t make movies like they used to — is that right?”
Post by: sys on October 02, 2016, 05:34:21 PM
I typically avoid WaPo articles because of that.
well that's Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) of you.
Post by: sys on October 02, 2016, 05:35:26 PM
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/10/donald-trump-anti-semitism-young-jews-214314
Post by: star seed 7 on October 02, 2016, 05:46:25 PM
This is my favorite part:Quote“Right now, you say to your wife: ‘Let’s go to a movie after Trump.’ But you won’t do that because you’ll be so high and so excited that no movie is going to satisfy you. Okay? No movie. You know why? Honestly? Because they don’t make movies like they used to — is that right?”
This was also my favorite part, chum1
Post by: sys on October 02, 2016, 06:01:45 PM
This is my favorite part:Quote“Right now, you say to your wife: ‘Let’s go to a movie after Trump.’ But you won’t do that because you’ll be so high and so excited that no movie is going to satisfy you. Okay? No movie. You know why? Honestly? Because they don’t make movies like they used to — is that right?”
This was also my favorite part, chum1
the substantive issues are very important to candidate trump.
Post by: catastrophe on October 02, 2016, 07:36:52 PM
I typically avoid WaPo articles because of that.
well that's Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) of you.
I can read just as insightful analysis on Facebook or even here. It's like getting news from a version of Dax who is #withher
Post by: sys on October 02, 2016, 08:12:45 PM
Post by: catastrophe on October 02, 2016, 08:19:37 PM
Post by: sys on October 02, 2016, 08:28:15 PM
Ok known Hillary supporter Sys.
:lol:
Post by: MakeItRain on October 02, 2016, 09:14:33 PM
I typically avoid WaPo articles because of that.
well that's Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) of you.
:dubious:
Post by: star seed 7 on October 03, 2016, 11:13:44 AM
:lol:
Post by: star seed 7 on October 03, 2016, 11:18:43 AM
Quote
The Associated Press interviewed more than 20 people — former crew members, editors and contestants — who described crass behavior by Drumpf behind the scenes of the long-running hit show, in which aspiring capitalists were given tasks to perform as they competed for jobs working for him.
The staffers and contestants agreed to recount their experiences as Drumpf's behavior toward women has become a core issue in the presidential campaign. Interviewed separately, they gave concurring accounts of inappropriate conduct on the set.
Eight former crew members recalled that he repeatedly made lewd comments about a camerawoman he said had a nice rear, comparing her beauty to that of his daughter, Ivanka.
Post by: chum1 on October 03, 2016, 02:30:29 PM
Quote
The New York attorney general has notified Donald Trump that his charitable foundation is violating state law — by soliciting donations without proper certification — and ordered Trump’s charity to stop its fundraising immediately, the attorney general’s office said Monday.
...
Sheehan ordered that Trump’s foundation provide all the financial audit reports it should have provided in prior years, when it raised money without legal permission. He said that if Trump’s foundation did not stop its fundraising and file the proper paperwork, that would be considered “a continuing fraud upon the people of New York.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-foundation-ordered-to-stop-fundraising-by-ny-attorney-generals-office/2016/10/03/1d4d295a-8987-11e6-bff0-d53f592f176e_story.html
Post by: MakeItRain on October 04, 2016, 09:30:23 AM
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/mom-dead-vet-ptsd-message-donald-trump-article-1.2816236
Trump had literally said scores of things much worse than things said by candidates in the past that has doomed their campaigns. We can't even keep up with the stupid crap this guy says. It is amazing that he has said so many ridiculous things that this barely registers. I can't believe the campaign hasn't felt the least bit of pressure to apologize for this.
Post by: star seed 7 on October 04, 2016, 09:35:00 AM
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/trump-suggests-vets-ptsd-aren-strong-article-1.2815752
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/mom-dead-vet-ptsd-message-donald-trump-article-1.2816236
Trump had literally said scores of things much worse than things said by candidates in the past that has doomed their campaigns. We can't even keep up with the stupid crap this guy says. It is amazing that he has said so many ridiculous things that this barely registers. I can't believe the campaign hasn't felt the least bit of pressure to apologize for this.
Someone post the Biden speech about this. He destroys trump
Post by: MakeItRain on October 04, 2016, 10:45:16 AM
Post by: SdK on October 04, 2016, 11:00:51 AM
Post by: SdK on October 04, 2016, 11:01:36 AM
Post by: 8manpick on October 04, 2016, 11:13:15 AM
Post by: michigancat on October 04, 2016, 02:52:23 PM
Post by: michigancat on October 04, 2016, 02:52:59 PM
Post by: stunted on October 04, 2016, 04:11:11 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 04, 2016, 04:19:51 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on October 04, 2016, 05:33:03 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 04, 2016, 07:08:49 PM
:)QuoteThe New York attorney general has notified Donald Trump that his charitable foundation is violating state law — by soliciting donations without proper certification — and ordered Trump’s charity to stop its fundraising immediately, the attorney general’s office said Monday.
...
Sheehan ordered that Trump’s foundation provide all the financial audit reports it should have provided in prior years, when it raised money without legal permission. He said that if Trump’s foundation did not stop its fundraising and file the proper paperwork, that would be considered “a continuing fraud upon the people of New York.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-foundation-ordered-to-stop-fundraising-by-ny-attorney-generals-office/2016/10/03/1d4d295a-8987-11e6-bff0-d53f592f176e_story.html
Clinton Foundation experiencing similar, albeit less partisan, problems. :lol:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-foundation-amends-its-filing-with-new-york-1475623675?mod=e2tw
Post by: chum1 on October 05, 2016, 06:39:31 AM
http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/many-people-are-saying-that-donald-trump-is-mad-about-m-1787428755
Post by: steve dave on October 05, 2016, 12:40:04 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on October 05, 2016, 01:16:50 PM
Sad
Post by: Yard Dog on October 05, 2016, 01:59:41 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on October 05, 2016, 02:05:51 PM
Post by: Yard Dog on October 05, 2016, 02:15:00 PM
Why did you post that and why did the person who uploaded it label it that way? Did you post this to show us that this kid has a mother that is a leather purse with arms and eyes?
The title is complete click bait, but I just found it interesting. He seems like an intelligent young man. So is this a sign of indoctrination?
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 05, 2016, 02:17:34 PM
Post by: The Big Train on October 05, 2016, 03:13:26 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20161005%2F932aa4fcb41e15e77f6dcd45c87a91db.png&hash=b4b35109e5e91ab21f07bb2b3ce8f928d29fd601)
Post by: The Big Train on October 05, 2016, 03:16:13 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 05, 2016, 03:40:39 PM
Post by: chum1 on October 05, 2016, 06:47:25 PM
Post by: CNS on October 05, 2016, 06:55:54 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 05, 2016, 07:13:38 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 05, 2016, 08:13:00 PM
Post by: Spracne on October 05, 2016, 08:45:09 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 05, 2016, 08:48:51 PM
Post by: Spracne on October 05, 2016, 08:51:08 PM
Post by: The Big Train on October 05, 2016, 09:27:57 PM
Post by: Kat Kid on October 05, 2016, 10:09:12 PM
Apparently he likes to hire young brown boys as staffers??? Perhaps someone can verify.
unlikely
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia4.s-nbcnews.com%2Fj%2Fnewscms%2F2016_29%2F1631891%2F160721-paul-ryan-interns-mn-1240_9b9257bc5295f070fd2ee0336e07472c.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.jpg&hash=7867231d2d7aa6285816b4de8a4acbbc7bc96613)
Post by: chum1 on October 06, 2016, 12:18:14 PM
Quote
“Heroin overdoses are surging and meth overdoses in Nevada. Neh-VAHH-da," Trump said Wednesday night, drawing out the middle syllable. "You know what I said? You know what I said? I said when I came out here, I said nobody says it the other way. It has to be Neh-VAHH-da. Right? If you don't say it correctly, and it didn't happen to me, but it happened to a friend of mine, he was killed.”
So, yeah, Trump got the pronunciation of 'Nevada' wrong. And, yeah, he talked specifically about how he was pronouncing it correctly. And, yeah, he did so in front of a crowd of Nevadans.
But the icing on the cake is really how all of it is a digression following some crazy sounding, ungrammatical sentence on heroin and meth.
Post by: star seed 7 on October 06, 2016, 12:41:53 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 06, 2016, 02:51:00 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on October 06, 2016, 02:58:47 PM
Apparently he likes to hire young brown boys as staffers??? Perhaps someone can verify.
unlikely
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia4.s-nbcnews.com%2Fj%2Fnewscms%2F2016_29%2F1631891%2F160721-paul-ryan-interns-mn-1240_9b9257bc5295f070fd2ee0336e07472c.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.jpg&hash=7867231d2d7aa6285816b4de8a4acbbc7bc96613)
Replace Ryan with Obama, and you'd have a typical dinner party group photo from an Obama vacation.
Post by: sys on October 06, 2016, 03:05:24 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 06, 2016, 03:23:03 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 06, 2016, 04:03:19 PM
Apparently he likes to hire young brown boys as staffers??? Perhaps someone can verify.
unlikely
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia4.s-nbcnews.com%2Fj%2Fnewscms%2F2016_29%2F1631891%2F160721-paul-ryan-interns-mn-1240_9b9257bc5295f070fd2ee0336e07472c.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.jpg&hash=7867231d2d7aa6285816b4de8a4acbbc7bc96613)
Replace Ryan with Obama, and you'd have a typical dinner party group photo from an Obama vacation.
vacation :curse:
Post by: sonofdaxjones on October 06, 2016, 04:06:34 PM
Apparently he likes to hire young brown boys as staffers??? Perhaps someone can verify.
unlikely
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia4.s-nbcnews.com%2Fj%2Fnewscms%2F2016_29%2F1631891%2F160721-paul-ryan-interns-mn-1240_9b9257bc5295f070fd2ee0336e07472c.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.jpg&hash=7867231d2d7aa6285816b4de8a4acbbc7bc96613)
Replace Ryan with Obama, and you'd have a typical dinner party group photo from an Obama vacation.
vacation :curse:
Not the point.
Sad
Post by: The Big Train on October 06, 2016, 04:07:09 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CuEKiXbW8AA037W.jpg:large)
Man he is just all over the place
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 06, 2016, 06:43:42 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 06, 2016, 07:48:14 PM
What is wrong with him?
I sound like that when I'm blackout I think. or people recount me sounding like that to me when I wake up anyway, they may be filty liberal liars though.
Post by: chum1 on October 07, 2016, 11:11:57 AM
Quote
At a roundtable with National Border Patrol Council members Friday morning inside Trump Tower, Art Del Cueto, national vice president of the union that represents Border Patrol agents, told the Republican presidential nominee that agents have been advised not to deport illegal immigrants with criminal records, according to a pool report.
...
“Why? Trump asked. “So they can go ahead and vote before the election,” Del Cueto responded.
“Big statement, fellas,” Trump said
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/trump-immigrants-pouring-over-border-to-vote-229274
Post by: star seed 7 on October 07, 2016, 11:38:18 AM
Quote
Donald Trump took a relatively loose approach to his debate warm-up Thursday night during a town hall-style event in New Hampshire, regularly blowing through his two-minute clock and taking only about a dozen questions. The Manhattan billionaire said he could afford to take it easy because Hillary Clinton was resting. “I said forget debate prep. I mean, give me a break,” Trump said Thursday night. “Do you really think that Hillary Clinton is debate-prepping for three or four days? Hillary Clinton is resting, okay?”
Trump was supposed to take 20 questions from the crowd, read by conservative radio host and moderator Howie Carr, but took about 12 before leaving. He also routinely went over the two minutes his team allotted him for answers, the same amount of time he’ll have for responses Sunday night.
Trump’s Thursday night event went just over a half hour, barely a third of the 90 minutes Sunday night’s debate will last.
“They were saying this is practice for Sunday,” he told the crowd in before he began taking their questions. “This isn’t practice. This has nothing to do with Sunday."
Stamina
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 07, 2016, 01:17:54 PM
What is wrong with him?
I sound like that when I'm blackout I think. or people recount me sounding like that to me when I wake up anyway, they may be filty liberal liars though.
I have been around you when blacked out and you don't just randomly say unrelated crap or maybe I am even more blacked out and don't realize you are doing it and think you are making great sense...that is definitely a possibility i guess
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 07, 2016, 01:19:22 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 07, 2016, 04:36:46 PM
"Trump: A blacked out steve dave with small hands"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-recorded-having-extremely-lewd-conversation-about-women-in-2005/2016/10/07/3b9ce776-8cb4-11e6-bf8a-3d26847eeed4_story.html?tid=sm_tw
Post by: steve dave on October 07, 2016, 04:37:34 PM
Post by: The Big Train on October 07, 2016, 04:38:09 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on October 07, 2016, 07:50:29 PM
Post by: The Big Train on October 07, 2016, 07:52:06 PM
So. Does Hillary bring this up during the debate Sunday?
This was my exact question that lead to the quote I posted.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 07, 2016, 07:53:08 PM
Post by: sys on October 07, 2016, 09:40:52 PM
Post by: The Big Train on October 07, 2016, 09:47:02 PM
You could say title IX but how directly does it impact it?
Post by: The Big Train on October 07, 2016, 09:48:37 PM
Post by: sys on October 07, 2016, 09:49:45 PM
Post by: The Big Train on October 07, 2016, 09:54:54 PM
Post by: The Big Train on October 07, 2016, 09:56:35 PM
As an educated voter you just have to see and absorb everything when you go to the polls.
Post by: sys on October 07, 2016, 10:01:44 PM
Post by: The Big Train on October 07, 2016, 10:05:49 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on October 07, 2016, 10:07:14 PM
Post by: The Big Train on October 07, 2016, 10:08:22 PM
I think both are unfit for character and policy reasons
But which policy perspective is the least damaging is what I am getting at
Post by: OK_Cat on October 07, 2016, 10:09:42 PM
Post by: The Big Train on October 07, 2016, 10:14:46 PM
A presidential candidate is on tape promoting sexual assault. Kind of a big deal.
"That was in 2005 with his bros!" - Trump Voter
That quote was about the same time as the other one I said earlier
Post by: The Big Train on October 07, 2016, 10:15:04 PM
Post by: The Big Train on October 07, 2016, 10:15:38 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 07, 2016, 10:16:51 PM
ordinarily i would at least partially agree. but policy really is pretty irrelevant to this election. i'd venture to guess that the majority of americans believe that one or both of the candidates are unfit to serve as president for reasons that have nothing to do with their policy positions. when you believe that about a candidate, their assorted policy proposals aren't that relevant.
sys, this is
ACCURATE
Post by: sys on October 07, 2016, 10:26:12 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 07, 2016, 10:41:58 PM
Post by: OK_Cat on October 07, 2016, 10:44:08 PM
the person who was previously going to vote for trump does not GAF about this. do you know what it would take to make that person not vote for Trump?
Confirmed. The one person that I work with that is openly pro-trump talks about 'bitches' pretty much every day.
Post by: The Big Train on October 07, 2016, 10:49:35 PM
the person who was previously going to vote for trump does not GAF about this. do you know what it would take to make that person not vote for Trump?
The media is in hilldogs pocket and they are all out to get trump. No matter what he says he gets attacked for it.
^^^^. Trump People(Dax)
Post by: renocat on October 07, 2016, 10:51:33 PM
A presidential candidate is on tape promoting sexual assault. Kind of a big deal.I agree. I am considering not voting for president. This is sad.
Post by: stunted on October 07, 2016, 10:53:33 PM
Post by: SdK on October 07, 2016, 11:12:11 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 07, 2016, 11:22:01 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 07, 2016, 11:25:15 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 07, 2016, 11:39:19 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 08, 2016, 12:08:22 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 12:11:48 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on October 08, 2016, 02:38:08 AM
I agree 100% with that. They are both unfit to be president. Which makes this crap show of an election even more important for the voters to know what they intend to do from a policy perspective.
My feelings on Hillz is well documented, but I don't think she is unfit to be president. I find it odd that anyone other than the most partisan of conservatives would think that. She has spent her entire adult life leading to this.
Post by: MakeItRain on October 08, 2016, 02:47:02 AM
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/donald-trump-says-central-park-five-are-guilty-despite-dna-n661941
Post by: MakeItRain on October 08, 2016, 03:40:22 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on October 08, 2016, 03:53:37 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on October 08, 2016, 08:10:45 AM
Post by: michigancat on October 08, 2016, 08:31:56 AM
He makes it hard to keep up. Hjs misogyny is overshadowing his racism.Not just racist, but also very stupid. Why was this even being discussed?
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/donald-trump-says-central-park-five-are-guilty-despite-dna-n661941
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 08:40:13 AM
Post by: michigancat on October 08, 2016, 08:42:03 AM
Because it makes trump look badYeah but Trump actually released a statement about it
Post by: MakeItRain on October 08, 2016, 08:48:32 AM
[youtube]https://youtu.be/djQApFzMbSM[/youtube]
Post by: The Big Train on October 08, 2016, 09:24:05 AM
http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/a-complete-ish-history-of-donald-trumps-obsession-with-1787304637/amp
Post by: steve dave on October 08, 2016, 09:28:45 AM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on October 08, 2016, 09:32:09 AM
Nothing even registers anymore.
It's like nobody even cares :frown:
Post by: steve dave on October 08, 2016, 09:36:36 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 09:43:00 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 09:56:02 AM
Post by: steve dave on October 08, 2016, 09:59:23 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 10:02:29 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 10:07:37 AM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on October 08, 2016, 10:14:57 AM
https://mobile.twitter.com/SethAbramovitch/status/784614001661644800?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
Post by: steve dave on October 08, 2016, 10:16:05 AM
Post by: wetwillie on October 08, 2016, 10:16:22 AM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on October 08, 2016, 10:39:00 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 10:47:59 AM
This candidate is bigot! That bigoted crap the other candidate is doing isn't actually bigoted because I'm a libtard! :zzz:
Post by: steve dave on October 08, 2016, 10:51:15 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 10:56:27 AM
It's lies!!! "Smart educated whites" get their news from gawker.
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 10:57:51 AM
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/714891184867508224
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 08, 2016, 11:04:35 AM
Post by: ksupamplemousse on October 08, 2016, 11:09:57 AM
everyone should go read through sean hannity's twitter meltdown. at one point he talks about all the martial arts black belts he has. it's good.
Yeah, it's a fun read. I haven't paid attention to TV media in years now, and it was really entertaining to see how unhinged Sean Hannity has become. Like, he's a crazy person. Hopefully he doesn't get fired from his TV job, because I can't imagine he's stable enough to get a job anywhere else.
Post by: steve dave on October 08, 2016, 11:11:03 AM
everyone should go read through sean hannity's twitter meltdown. at one point he talks about all the martial arts black belts he has. it's good.
Yeah, it's a fun read. I haven't paid attention to TV media in years now, and it was really entertaining to see how unhinged Sean Hannity has become. Like, he's a crazy person. Hopefully he doesn't get fired from his TV job, because I can't imagine he's stable enough to get a job anywhere else.
the entire AM radio industry is built on that type of crazy. he'll print money for as long as he wants.
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 11:11:39 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 11:13:50 AM
Post by: CNS on October 08, 2016, 11:15:37 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 08, 2016, 11:16:45 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 11:16:56 AM
So far the only person to be done in by crazy is Glenn Beck, and I think he was done in by overextention, rather than crazy.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
And he's still in the top ten and owns a very popular media company
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 08, 2016, 11:18:49 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 11:21:13 AM
It has now gone into Baylor/Penn State fan territory
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20161008%2F54d4e297f4e17c50fd6d893fc3b75020.png&hash=12c11dcf85a1a4b4a6208468f43cf57abe7dee8f)
Post by: ksupamplemousse on October 08, 2016, 11:21:43 AM
Post by: renocat on October 08, 2016, 12:14:33 PM
Hannity's audience is the basket, and like 80% of them wish they could go around grabbing pI like.Hannity, but I am bailing. Johnson I guess.
Post by: stunted on October 08, 2016, 12:23:51 PM
Post by: renocat on October 08, 2016, 12:41:38 PM
you guys need to stop slut-shaming my donaldHe lost the.Christian vote.
Post by: steve dave on October 08, 2016, 01:05:58 PM
you guys need to stop slut-shaming my donaldHe lost the.Christian vote.
I don't think so. They don't actually GAF about that stuff.
Post by: MakeItRain on October 08, 2016, 01:12:20 PM
I want somebody to add the Curb Your Enthusiasm music to that CNN video.
OMG :ROFL:
Post by: MakeItRain on October 08, 2016, 01:14:13 PM
This is a plus for the basket, they admire his rapey moxie
At this point we can safely say 100% of his supporters are in that basket
Post by: CNS on October 08, 2016, 01:15:14 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: ksupamplemousse on October 08, 2016, 01:15:31 PM
you guys need to stop slut-shaming my donaldHe lost the.Christian vote.
I don't think so. They don't actually GAF about that stuff.
Yeah, half my fb feed is the christian vote. and. they. do. not. give. a. eff. They want a president who will elect conservative justices so that they can "win" the culture wars. He could be a cannibal, they don't rough ridin' care. They'll never abandon him. Most of them are actually becoming more radicalized the more stupid crap he says, I'd say 10% of them have publicly declared on social media that they'd do violence on his behalf.
Post by: CNS on October 08, 2016, 01:17:01 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 08, 2016, 01:18:44 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 08, 2016, 01:20:30 PM
Post by: CNS on October 08, 2016, 01:26:12 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: ksupamplemousse on October 08, 2016, 01:26:36 PM
the christian right will turn on him once they know for certain they cannot win the election. then they will move with their "morals". there's still so much hope that wikileaks or someone can drop something meaningful on clinton that they aren't giving up yet.
They may have overplayed their hand this election though, hard for them not to come out looking like frauds after this regardless of what they do from here on out. Catholic church will survive ($$, tradition, global political power), but evangelicals may be done as a cohesive force. I mean, same group of people will eventually find their way back to each other again, but their may be a bit of a vacuum there after this election. I know several people who've become straight up atheists during this election, these people were dedicated religious folk as well. Some people are doubling down on Trump, but some are having an existential crisis because of the church's relationship to his candidacy. Like you said, they're keeping it together until the election, but there are some hard conversations to be had after he loses. There will be quite a bit of fallout.
Post by: steve dave on October 08, 2016, 01:28:11 PM
Gary should pray in public or something.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
reefer madness tho
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 08, 2016, 01:28:20 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 01:33:27 PM
you guys need to stop slut-shaming my donaldHe lost the.Christian vote.
I don't think so. They don't actually GAF about that stuff.
Yeah, half my fb feed is the christian vote. and. they. do. not. give. a. eff. They want a president who will elect conservative justices so that they can "win" the culture wars. He could be a cannibal, they don't rough ridin' care. They'll never abandon him. Most of them are actually becoming more radicalized the more stupid crap he says, I'd say 10% of them have publicly declared on social media that they'd do violence on his behalf.
Basically the left re war, big corp, the environment, poverty, well basically everything they allegedly stand for?
Post by: CNS on October 08, 2016, 01:35:01 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: wetwillie on October 08, 2016, 01:40:33 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 08, 2016, 01:43:17 PM
I can't remember where I saw it at but supposedly many evangelicals believe that trump is just a vessel to deliver Mike Pence to the White House. I think they believe that once in the White House Trump will be smited(smote?)
imagine how much crying ted cruz would do if that happened. WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME LORD!?
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 08, 2016, 01:44:15 PM
you guys need to stop slut-shaming my donald
It's actually perv shaming.
Post by: CNS on October 08, 2016, 01:44:27 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: ksupamplemousse on October 08, 2016, 01:51:56 PM
The evangelicals are doomed, but it has nothing to do with Trump. They are dying much faster than they are growing.
Yeah, many more important factors, but their strong support of Trump is eroding the moral high ground they've been using to ward off all the other threats to the future of their movement.
Post by: Brock Landers on October 08, 2016, 01:52:09 PM
Post by: stunted on October 08, 2016, 01:54:36 PM
you guys need to stop slut-shaming my donald
It's actually perv shaming.
i'd love to see the porn histories of everyone who perv shames. betas everywhere are secretly jealous a man can be so comfortable with being sexually aggressive. women love it (especially from a world class alpha like trump). ever read 50 shades of grey? i did.
Post by: CNS on October 08, 2016, 01:56:10 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 08, 2016, 01:56:40 PM
you guys need to stop slut-shaming my donald
It's actually perv shaming.
i'd love to see the porn histories of everyone who perv shames. betas everywhere are secretly jealous a man can be so comfortable with being sexually aggressive. women love it (especially from a world class alpha like trump). ever read 50 shades of grey? i did.
gross dude, take a break.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 08, 2016, 01:58:01 PM
Post by: stunted on October 08, 2016, 02:07:57 PM
why deny what women like? that is the true misogyny. lets take a dive into the female mind, and by female mind i mean two top 10 quotes according to the web's #1 50 shades of grey fan site.
Quote
"Every time you move tomorrow, I want you to be reminded that I've been here. Only me. You are mine."
Quote
i dont make love, i f*ck...hard
Post by: CNS on October 08, 2016, 02:09:56 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 02:14:44 PM
Post by: CNS on October 08, 2016, 02:21:19 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 02:34:55 PM
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/784529660625453057
Post by: steve dave on October 08, 2016, 02:40:25 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 02:40:48 PM
you guys need to stop slut-shaming my donald
It's actually perv shaming.
i'd love to see the porn histories of everyone who perv shames. betas everywhere are secretly jealous a man can be so comfortable with being sexually aggressive. women love it (especially from a world class alpha like trump). ever read 50 shades of grey? i did.
:lol:
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 08, 2016, 02:44:58 PM
man, I wish trump would take stunner's stance on this deal.
X100
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 02:50:38 PM
man, I wish trump would take stunner's stance on this deal.
Too beta to own it :frown:
Post by: michigancat on October 08, 2016, 02:52:10 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 08, 2016, 02:56:56 PM
I mean, it is kind of strange that this seems to be the straw that broke the camel's back with Trump. It was readily apparent he was a major piece of crap before this, right?
he said "grab them by the pussy"
Post by: michigancat on October 08, 2016, 02:58:13 PM
I mean, it is kind of strange that this seems to be the straw that broke the camel's back with Trump. It was readily apparent he was a major piece of crap before this, right?
he said "grab them by the pussy"
I guess I'm surprised that anyone was surprised to learn that Donald Trump said something like that.
Post by: steve dave on October 08, 2016, 02:59:27 PM
I guess I'm surprised that anyone learned that Donald Trump said that and were surprised.I mean, it is kind of strange that this seems to be the straw that broke the camel's back with Trump. It was readily apparent he was a major piece of crap before this, right?
he said "grab them by the pussy"
nobody was surprised. if they say they were they are lying. it's just such a ridiculous thing to say that it's worthy of laughing at it. also I posted this earlier saying the same thing.
and I mean, what swing voter is like, "oh wow, the 1,000th data point of trump being a misogynistic bigoted piece of crap. that's the last straw. now I'm not voting for him"
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 03:01:57 PM
I mean, it is kind of strange that this seems to be the straw that broke the camel's back with Trump. It was readily apparent he was a major piece of crap before this, right?
A lot of people have fooled themselves into thinking he's actually a good person and the librul media is out to get him. Pussy grabbing is probably a bit much for the ksuw's tho. I'd love to hear his take on this
Post by: CNS on October 08, 2016, 03:03:54 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 03:04:37 PM
I mean, it is kind of strange that this seems to be the straw that broke the camel's back with Trump. It was readily apparent he was a major piece of crap before this, right?
To non- retards it was.
Post by: The Big Train on October 08, 2016, 03:09:29 PM
Post by: ksupamplemousse on October 08, 2016, 03:20:34 PM
I mean, it is kind of strange that this seems to be the straw that broke the camel's back with Trump. It was readily apparent he was a major piece of crap before this, right?
he said "grab them by the pussy"
I guess I'm surprised that anyone was surprised to learn that Donald Trump said something like that.
I'm just staggered that Trump would run for president with all of the terrible crap he has done/said which apparently is not all that hard to bring to light. Like, if you knew that you had said and done a bunch of crap that was going to take an enormous toll on you and your business were it to come out, why the eff would you run for president?
Post by: steve dave on October 08, 2016, 03:25:21 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 03:29:30 PM
Quote
In an email from the RNC to a victory program mail vendor, with the subject line “Hold on all projects,” the committee asked the vendor to “put a hold” on mail production.
“Please put a hold/stop on all mail projects right now. If something is in production or print it needs to stop. Will update you when to proceed,” Lauren Toomey, a staffer in the RNC’s political department, wrote in an email that was obtained by POLITICO.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/rnc-halts-all-victory-project-work-for-trump-229363#ixzz4MWlgMRo0
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 03:33:50 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 03:34:47 PM
Post by: Tobias on October 08, 2016, 03:35:31 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 08, 2016, 03:37:47 PM
https://twitter.com/sbauerAP/status/784849279835840516
Amaze
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 08, 2016, 03:40:47 PM
This whole thing is getting really weird really fast
Oh yeah
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 03:47:11 PM
I mean, it is kind of strange that this seems to be the straw that broke the camel's back with Trump. It was readily apparent he was a major piece of crap before this, right?
he said "grab them by the pussy"
I guess I'm surprised that anyone was surprised to learn that Donald Trump said something like that.
I'm just staggered that Trump would run for president with all of the terrible crap he has done/said which apparently is not all that hard to bring to light. Like, if you knew that you had said and done a bunch of crap that was going to take an enormous toll on you and your business were it to come out, why the eff would you run for president?
Hillary is running, and she's worse
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 03:48:45 PM
I mean, it is kind of strange that this seems to be the straw that broke the camel's back with Trump. It was readily apparent he was a major piece of crap before this, right?
he said "grab them by the pussy"
I guess I'm surprised that anyone was surprised to learn that Donald Trump said something like that.
I'm just staggered that Trump would run for president with all of the terrible crap he has done/said which apparently is not all that hard to bring to light. Like, if you knew that you had said and done a bunch of crap that was going to take an enormous toll on you and your business were it to come out, why the eff would you run for president?
Hillary is running, and she's worse
:lol:
Post by: ksupamplemousse on October 08, 2016, 04:02:28 PM
I mean, it is kind of strange that this seems to be the straw that broke the camel's back with Trump. It was readily apparent he was a major piece of crap before this, right?
he said "grab them by the pussy"
I guess I'm surprised that anyone was surprised to learn that Donald Trump said something like that.
I'm just staggered that Trump would run for president with all of the terrible crap he has done/said which apparently is not all that hard to bring to light. Like, if you knew that you had said and done a bunch of crap that was going to take an enormous toll on you and your business were it to come out, why the eff would you run for president?
Hillary is running, and she's worse
Hillary has been running for president for 40 rough ridin' years, and she's had every little thing that a conservative thought could tanish her name brought up and escalated into a full blown investigation by groups of people who rough ridin' hate her and would love nothing more than for her to be indicted on federal charges. In none of these instances has there been sufficient evidence to even put her on trial for anything. Let alone convict her for anything. Hillary Clinton is a boring person that conservatives are obsessed with for reasons I'll never understand.
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 04:05:33 PM
#pussyblocking?
Post by: OK_Cat on October 08, 2016, 04:05:47 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 04:27:08 PM
So the Howard Stern stuff just released talking about his daughters boobs and saying she's a "piece of ass" are probably the equal thing. I hope the "worse" doesn't end up wikileak boring
Post by: steve dave on October 08, 2016, 04:31:00 PM
this is an actual appropriate moment for that whole "what a time to be alive" thing
Yes
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 08, 2016, 04:39:50 PM
Post by: michigancat on October 08, 2016, 04:40:45 PM
^make sure you play with sound
Post by: renocat on October 08, 2016, 04:47:25 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 08, 2016, 04:52:50 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 05:15:29 PM
he never actually did it, just liked to talk big in front of other guys.
Well he's been sued by a woman that claimed he walked up to her, kissed her and then grabbed her crotch
Post by: Tobias on October 08, 2016, 05:16:51 PM
Post by: treysolid on October 08, 2016, 05:25:43 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 05:52:13 PM
I mean, it is kind of strange that this seems to be the straw that broke the camel's back with Trump. It was readily apparent he was a major piece of crap before this, right?
he said "grab them by the pussy"
I guess I'm surprised that anyone was surprised to learn that Donald Trump said something like that.
I'm just staggered that Trump would run for president with all of the terrible crap he has done/said which apparently is not all that hard to bring to light. Like, if you knew that you had said and done a bunch of crap that was going to take an enormous toll on you and your business were it to come out, why the eff would you run for president?
Hillary is running, and she's worse
Hillary has been running for president for 40 rough ridin' years, and she's had every little thing that a conservative thought could tanish her name brought up and escalated into a full blown investigation by groups of people who rough ridin' hate her and would love nothing more than for her to be indicted on federal charges. In none of these instances has there been sufficient evidence to even put her on trial for anything. Let alone convict her for anything. Hillary Clinton is a boring person that conservatives are obsessed with for reasons I'll never understand.
She's barely beating trump, you dipshit
Post by: sys on October 08, 2016, 05:53:08 PM
and I mean, what swing voter is like, "oh wow, the 1,000th data point of trump being a misogynistic bigoted piece of crap. that's the last straw. now I'm not voting for him"
it's video instead of words on page. humans aren't rational animals, seeing and hearing it makes all the difference in the world.
Post by: sys on October 08, 2016, 05:54:20 PM
She's barely beating trump, you dipshit
she was barely beating him two weeks ago. it's a landslide right now (but there's still five weeks to go).
Post by: Cartierfor3 on October 08, 2016, 05:54:48 PM
and I mean, what swing voter is like, "oh wow, the 1,000th data point of trump being a misogynistic bigoted piece of crap. that's the last straw. now I'm not voting for him"
it's video instead of words on page. humans aren't rational animals, seeing and hearing it makes all the difference in the world.
that is kinda true. remember how much video changed the Ray Rice stuff?
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 05:58:58 PM
and I mean, what swing voter is like, "oh wow, the 1,000th data point of trump being a misogynistic bigoted piece of crap. that's the last straw. now I'm not voting for him"
it's video instead of words on page. humans aren't rational animals, seeing and hearing it makes all the difference in the world.
As the DNC is fully aware, evidenced by "wikileaks is a russian front meant to insert trump as russian stalking horse us president"
They're rough ridin' all in on stupidity, and it has proven quite succesful
Post by: OK_Cat on October 08, 2016, 05:59:49 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 06:07:17 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on October 08, 2016, 06:21:00 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 06:24:45 PM
:lol:
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 06:28:42 PM
:ROFL:
Post by: Tobias on October 08, 2016, 06:28:47 PM
Post by: treysolid on October 08, 2016, 06:37:35 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 06:57:52 PM
What kind of a weirdo reads that and thinks, hmm I'm gonna let everyone know I think this is worthwhile
Post by: IPA4Me on October 08, 2016, 07:12:49 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20161009%2F90aa234608dae66138b14032fcc36f90.jpg&hash=67a4aedf67f1762d963e9986c0e9708ca47bce81)
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 07:41:18 PM
Post by: IPA4Me on October 08, 2016, 07:53:20 PM
[youtube]http://youtu.be/4IrE6FMpai8[/youtube]
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 08:59:16 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 09:59:55 PM
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/784908158426869761
Post by: steve dave on October 08, 2016, 10:04:08 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on October 08, 2016, 10:05:17 PM
3d chess
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/784908158426869761
That's amazing. Right when I heard Trump was running I decided I fully hoped he got the 'pub nomination, because lit'rally any moron could see that this kind of disaster would happen and the democratic nominee would just completely moonwalk into the white house, even if it was Hillary Clinton. Sounds like the ol' DNC was thinking the same. :blush:
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 10:15:39 PM
#smartwhitepeople
:lol:
Post by: treysolid on October 08, 2016, 10:16:20 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on October 08, 2016, 10:19:21 PM
"Lit'rally"
#smartwhitepeople
:lol:
Ever heard of Rob Lowe and Parks and Rec, idiot?
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 10:20:28 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 10:21:13 PM
"Lit'rally"
#smartwhitepeople
:lol:
Ever heard of Rob Lowe and Parks and Rec, idiot?
Is rob your favorite child rapist, pedophile?
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 10:23:23 PM
It's like libtard larry the cable guy
Post by: OK_Cat on October 08, 2016, 10:25:44 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 08, 2016, 10:27:56 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 10:28:12 PM
Post by: OK_Cat on October 08, 2016, 10:30:27 PM
2) what does that have to do with Trump?
Post by: treysolid on October 08, 2016, 10:32:38 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 10:33:06 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 08, 2016, 10:37:26 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 08, 2016, 11:26:35 PM
Women standing in support of bill Clinton's wife is an irony of epic scale and proportion. The psychopathy is limitless. This phenomenon is far more fascinating than anything trumph could ever accomplish.
No, the trump support is still way more fascinating
Post by: SkinnyBenny on October 09, 2016, 12:01:58 AM
Women standing in support of bill Clinton's wife is an irony of epic scale and proportion. The psychopathy is limitless. This phenomenon is far more fascinating than anything trumph could ever accomplish.
lol your party thought it would be a great idea to nominate donald trump as the presidential candidate :lol:
Post by: renocat on October 09, 2016, 12:51:13 AM
I am a staunch prolife conservative. I don't know how we nominated this human possum. We know what possum eat, and he is what he eats. And our dumbassas are yelling Bill Clinton is a groper. Well he isn't running. I DISLIKE.HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON TOO.Women standing in support of bill Clinton's wife is an irony of epic scale and proportion. The psychopathy is limitless. This phenomenon is far more fascinating than anything trumph could ever accomplish.
lol your party thought it would be a great idea to nominate donald trump as the presidential candidate :lol:
Post by: steve dave on October 09, 2016, 06:36:07 AM
Post by: The Big Train on October 09, 2016, 08:13:01 AM
Post by: renocat on October 09, 2016, 08:36:41 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 09, 2016, 08:59:50 AM
My brother takes the fun out of being angry. He reminded me Christ said let him free of sin cast the first stone. Man I have said some vile crap in my time at KSU. A lot of our past presidents could not pass the standard being applied to trump. It is going to FSD, Dax and others to drag me back.to the Never Hillary.
You shouldn't talk so filthy reno. Jesus would be mad
Post by: puniraptor on October 09, 2016, 09:05:30 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 09, 2016, 09:42:46 AM
President Lyndon Johnson used to whip his dick out and hit people with it.
poor Donald couldn't do that
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 09, 2016, 10:24:03 AM
Quote
show a “pattern of assaultive behavior” by the Republican nominee.
“It’s not just words,” the Virginia senator said on CNN’s “State of the Union,” referring to a 2005 video of Mr. Trump’s comments released on Friday. “It’s really talking about a pattern of sexual assault.”
No Tim, they are in fact just words. It's not an assault. An assault is the crap your pal Bill did over and over again over the course of his career.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/tim-kaine-labels-donald-trumps-behavior-sexual-assault-1476022517?mod=e2tw
Post by: treysolid on October 09, 2016, 10:49:26 AM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Femojipedia-us.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fcache%2Fe4%2F9e%2Fe49e33767a64cf63310af3764fc60126.png&hash=df22beecaec807f0fae6164a2958909c62e964b1)
Post by: treysolid on October 09, 2016, 11:23:16 AM
its just a thing of beauty, right at 3:45.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 09, 2016, 11:35:41 AM
how would donald know that you can "do anything" to women when you're a rich and powerful man if he hasn't tried it and done it?
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Femojipedia-us.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fcache%2Fe4%2F9e%2Fe49e33767a64cf63310af3764fc60126.png&hash=df22beecaec807f0fae6164a2958909c62e964b1)
YouTube video
Post by: chum1 on October 09, 2016, 12:23:23 PM
Post by: treysolid on October 09, 2016, 01:09:27 PM
Quote
“Come on, that’s how real men talk!” said a very frustrated man who wouldn’t give his name. “That’s how men talk!” A 17-year-old who has been volunteering for the Trump campaign, and who also didn’t want his name used, was explaining to a bystander that Trump’s comments weren’t predatory because they let him do it because he’s a star, and that is a form of consent.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/10/donald-trump-supporters-trump-tower-214335#ixzz4Mc2kWyhM
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 09, 2016, 01:12:50 PM
Post by: treysolid on October 09, 2016, 02:19:34 PM
also not surprising in the least.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 09, 2016, 02:23:45 PM
Post by: Karlen on October 09, 2016, 04:15:46 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on October 09, 2016, 05:23:46 PM
how would donald know that you can "do anything" to women when you're a rich and powerful man if he hasn't tried it and done it?
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Femojipedia-us.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fcache%2Fe4%2F9e%2Fe49e33767a64cf63310af3764fc60126.png&hash=df22beecaec807f0fae6164a2958909c62e964b1)
Talked to Bill & Hillary Clinton?
Post by: The Big Train on October 09, 2016, 06:57:05 PM
https://twitter.com/regated/status/785264884267290625
Post by: OK_Cat on October 09, 2016, 06:59:57 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 09, 2016, 07:06:42 PM
Post by: treysolid on October 09, 2016, 07:14:55 PM
how would donald know that you can "do anything" to women when you're a rich and powerful man if he hasn't tried it and done it?
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Femojipedia-us.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fcache%2Fe4%2F9e%2Fe49e33767a64cf63310af3764fc60126.png&hash=df22beecaec807f0fae6164a2958909c62e964b1)
Talked to Bill & Hillary Clinton?
no, you're right. I'm sure that donald never figured out how to use his status and position for sexual exploit until he was a 50-year old man.
Post by: MakeItRain on October 09, 2016, 08:05:39 PM
The gloves have come off
https://twitter.com/regated/status/785264884267290625
The real reason he didn't do this until now
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/flashback-donald-trump-called-bill-clintons-accusers-terrible/story?id=42686582
Post by: CNS on October 09, 2016, 08:20:30 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: bubbles4ksu on October 09, 2016, 08:57:31 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 09, 2016, 09:53:57 PM
Post by: pvegs on October 09, 2016, 10:07:50 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 09, 2016, 11:27:55 PM
https://twitter.com/ziwe/status/785321278169374721
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 09, 2016, 11:33:51 PM
Post by: bones129 on October 10, 2016, 12:00:08 AM
I'm pretty sure Donald was actually rejecting Tiffany there.
Yes. So sad. He wouldn't have treated Ivanka that way.
Post by: star seed 7 on October 10, 2016, 12:13:17 AM
I'm pretty sure Donald was actually rejecting Tiffany there.
Yes. So sad. He wouldn't have treated Ivanka that way.
Well she is a piece of ass
Post by: chum1 on October 10, 2016, 01:05:43 AM
Quote
The four women — three of whom have alleged Bill Clinton sexually assaulted or harassed them years ago — were to walk in the debate hall at the same time as the 42nd president and confront him in front of a national television audience.
“We were going to put the four women in the VIP box,” said former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani, who represents Trump in debate negotiations. “We had it all set. We wanted to have them shake hands with Bill, to see if Bill would shake hands with them.”
...
Giuliani said Bannon kept pushing to have the women come out until three minutes before the debate began.
“But we pulled it because we were going to have a big incident on national TV,” Giuliani said.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/10/10/trumps-debate-plan-to-seat-bill-clintons-accusers-in-family-box-was-thwarted/
Post by: stunted on October 10, 2016, 01:13:06 AM
Quote
I talked to a Swiss local yesterday about American politics. He says everyone in Switzerland is following the race closely. He favors Trump because he thinks Trump would be better for the global economy. I asked if anyone he knows in Switzerland is worried about Trump’s “temperament” and having his finger on the nukes. The Swiss man literally laughed. I had trouble explaining why that was even a topic in the United States. Apparently their news sources filter out some of that stuff. He wasn’t worried and didn’t know anyone who is. (But this is a data point of one. Don’t assume to much.)
I also asked the Swiss man what kind of problems they have in Switzerland. He laughed again. The answer is “none.” Literally.
Good economy.
Plenty of jobs.
No racial strife.
Low crime rate.
Highest standard of living.
No real pollution.
No litter.
No homeless that I could see.
He also told me that it is illegal to build a mosque in Switzerland because they don’t want to change their national character, which is 95% Christian he estimated. He said (and I did not fact-check) that the Swiss allow no immigration at all unless the person has special skills or marries a citizen.
And the gun ownership in Switzerland is 100% for adult males. That’s their militia. Yet crime is low.
Make of that what you will. It’s simplistic to think that a total ban on immigration plus universal male gun-ownership helps Switzerland have no real problems. But you can’t rule it out, either.
Trump is trying to make America a bit more like Switzerland. Clinton is trying to make America less like Switzerland. Spend a day in Switzerland and tell me who has the better plan. This country is amazing.
Post by: catastrophe on October 10, 2016, 09:37:22 AM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on October 10, 2016, 10:55:12 AM
Post by: catastrophe on October 10, 2016, 11:21:48 AM
Post by: chum1 on October 10, 2016, 11:23:03 AM
Quote
In a call with the Republican conference, Mr. Ryan urged his members to focus on their own re-election campaigns and to make individual decisions about how to handle Mr. Trump, according to two people who were on the call, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
All but conceding defeat in the presidential race, Mr. Ryan said he would dedicate himself full time to keeping control of the House and said flatly that he “won’t defend” Mr. Trump
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/11/us/politics/donald-trump-gop-hillary-clinton.html
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 10, 2016, 01:33:53 PM
:lol:
NBC should be ashamed of this.
Post by: stunted on October 10, 2016, 01:41:20 PM
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-accused-underage-rape-lawsuit-a7352976.html
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/07/donald-trump-sexual-assault-lawsuits-norm-lubow
they go low, we go high
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on October 10, 2016, 04:05:07 PM
https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/785299709342654465
:lol:
NBC should be ashamed of this.
You can tell Trump won the debate when they say things like this.
Post by: SdK on October 10, 2016, 04:26:33 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 10, 2016, 05:15:18 PM
Warren tells Donald to keep his name out of his mouth
Post by: treysolid on October 10, 2016, 10:15:13 PM
:eek:
hold on, folks
Post by: chum1 on October 10, 2016, 11:00:00 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 10, 2016, 11:07:16 PM
Trump now citing Russian propaganda that no American news outlet is reporting on...
:eek:
hold on, folks
I don't think you can call photocopies of podestas emails Russian propoganda, unless you think hillary is the russian czar of propoganda.
Post by: stunted on October 10, 2016, 11:52:02 PM
Post by: Phil Titola on October 11, 2016, 08:35:34 AM
Trump now citing Russian propaganda that no American news outlet is reporting on...
:eek:
hold on, folks
I don't think you can call photocopies of podestas emails Russian propoganda, unless you think hillary is the russian czar of propoganda.
Given it showed up only on a Russian propaganda site and they even took it down for being so ridiculous....
Post by: treysolid on October 11, 2016, 08:42:16 AM
Trump now citing Russian propaganda that no American news outlet is reporting on...
:eek:
hold on, folks
I don't think you can call photocopies of podestas emails Russian propoganda, unless you think hillary is the russian czar of propoganda.
bwahahaha
the text was written by an american writer in an article that was published in newsweek showing what it would take for hillary to really be up against the wall with her emails. it was a fictional email that he wrote posing as sidney blumenthal. sputnik (russian propaganda outlet) takes the text, puts it out as a legit podesta email. sputnik later takes it down because the original author caught them.
bwahahaha
Post by: treysolid on October 11, 2016, 08:43:36 AM
:lol:
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 11, 2016, 11:33:57 AM
Post by: Emo EMAW on October 11, 2016, 11:44:59 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 11, 2016, 11:56:54 AM
Post by: chum1 on October 11, 2016, 12:00:14 PM
Post by: CNS on October 11, 2016, 12:00:51 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: everyone shut up on October 11, 2016, 12:44:42 PM
Debate three may include actual assault.i sure hope so
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on October 11, 2016, 01:01:13 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 11, 2016, 05:07:21 PM
meanwhile, trump reads the sputnik text at his PA rally like it's breaking news...
:lol:
What is wrong with him?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 11, 2016, 11:32:43 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/11/trump-on-ryan-dont-want-his-support-dont-care-about-his-support.html
Post by: bones129 on October 12, 2016, 02:10:07 AM
Pretty good interview. He's completely off the rails.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/11/trump-on-ryan-dont-want-his-support-dont-care-about-his-support.html
Donald Derailed.
Post by: bones129 on October 12, 2016, 02:23:25 AM
http://www.kansascity.com/latest-news/article107580512.html
Some people... :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:
Post by: treysolid on October 12, 2016, 08:36:00 AM
It's all Beyoncé's fault!
http://www.kansascity.com/latest-news/article107580512.html
Some people... :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:
the BeyHive went HAM on her twitter.
Post by: Cartierfor3 on October 12, 2016, 01:31:56 PM
how is this even still a thing
man. lasted a lot longer than i thought
Post by: cfbandyman on October 12, 2016, 01:54:39 PM
It's all Beyoncé's fault!
http://www.kansascity.com/latest-news/article107580512.html
Some people... :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:
Someone get that campaign the most greatest, best, finest, most beautiful tailor to fit the most greatest, best, finest, most beautiful clownsuit onto it, and then throw it into greatest, best, finest, most beautiful bodybag and bury 6 feet under the most greatest, best, finest, most beautiful dirt in America.
Post by: chum1 on October 12, 2016, 08:05:48 PM
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/us/politics/donald-trump-women.html
Post by: star seed 7 on October 12, 2016, 08:18:26 PM
Quote
In a phone interview on Tuesday night, a highly agitated Mr. Trump denied every one of the women’s claims.
“None of this ever took place,” said Mr. Trump, who began shouting at the Times reporter who was questioning him. He said that The Times was making up the allegations to hurt him and that he would sue the news organization if it reported them.
“You are a disgusting human being,” he told the reporter as she questioned him about the women’s claims.
Asked whether he had ever done any of the kissing or groping that he had described on the recording, Mr. Trump was once again insistent: “I don’t do it. I don’t do it. It was locker room talk.”
Post by: CNS on October 12, 2016, 08:20:58 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: gatoveintisiete on October 12, 2016, 08:34:01 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 12, 2016, 08:39:44 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 12, 2016, 08:45:19 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 12, 2016, 08:45:33 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 12, 2016, 08:59:08 PM
That will go over well
Post by: chum1 on October 12, 2016, 09:20:40 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on October 12, 2016, 09:30:05 PM
Post by: sys on October 12, 2016, 09:33:16 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on October 12, 2016, 09:35:10 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 12, 2016, 09:38:47 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 12, 2016, 09:40:49 PM
Post by: stunted on October 12, 2016, 09:45:40 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on October 12, 2016, 09:47:33 PM
Post by: chum1 on October 12, 2016, 09:47:55 PM
http://people.com/politics/donald-trump-attacked-people-writer/
Post by: star seed 7 on October 12, 2016, 09:48:48 PM
something doesn't add up, she was 38 at an age when trump would have been dicking hot 17-22 year olds.
10yr olds according to the video today
Post by: star seed 7 on October 12, 2016, 09:50:00 PM
smart people are overlooking Trumps flaws, appreciating his strengths, and joining him in the fight against establishment politicians and their minipalative media cohorts. Wiki leaks is making it clear to anyone who wasn't sure, that hrc will sell any constituency out in a heartbeat, including lgbt, blacks, Jews, women, Catholics, poors, donors etc.
Take this to the moment you realized the don is going to lose thread
Post by: stunted on October 12, 2016, 09:54:31 PM
(https://i.gyazo.com/c60d337d2e3c8ba2e1fece1ce69c6ce7.png)
at an age when trump was dicking this:
(https://i.gyazo.com/cfc73df4666350c3768a2aeb40da2ef0.png)
Post by: stunted on October 12, 2016, 09:58:16 PM
something doesn't add up, she was 38 at an age when trump would have been dicking hot 17-22 year olds.
10yr olds according to the video today
pic of 10 year old?
Post by: treysolid on October 12, 2016, 10:04:15 PM
smart people are overlooking Trumps flaws, appreciating his strengths, and joining him in the fight against establishment politicians and their minipalative media cohorts. Wiki leaks is making it clear to anyone who wasn't sure, that hrc will sell any constituency out in a heartbeat, including lgbt, blacks, Jews, women, Catholics, poors, donors etc.
since when has ignoring the weaknesses of people you would entrust with great responsibility ever been considered "smart"?
Post by: sys on October 12, 2016, 10:09:16 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/12/politics/hillary-clinton-utah-poll/
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on October 12, 2016, 10:14:19 PM
Why was he so mad at Bill?
Probably jealous that bill is actually a serial rapist and his wife protects him. True alpha.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on October 12, 2016, 10:14:59 PM
smart people are overlooking Trumps flaws, appreciating his strengths, and joining him in the fight against establishment politicians and their minipalative media cohorts. Wiki leaks is making it clear to anyone who wasn't sure, that hrc will sell any constituency out in a heartbeat, including lgbt, blacks, Jews, women, Catholics, poors, donors etc.
since when has ignoring the weaknesses of people you would entrust with great responsibility ever been considered "smart"?
I'm not surprised that this truth confounds many on this site.
Post by: star seed 7 on October 12, 2016, 10:26:26 PM
evan mcmullin fulfilling his white horse destiny would be the most enjoyable thing that might possibly happen on election day.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/12/politics/hillary-clinton-utah-poll/
Yes, good luck to the guy
Post by: sys on October 12, 2016, 10:26:53 PM
fun read.
Post by: star seed 7 on October 12, 2016, 10:58:39 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/12/bill-oreillys-trump-interviews-are-the-best-trump-interviews/
fun read.
It's an all-time pile on in history
Post by: Tobias on October 12, 2016, 11:10:30 PM
Post by: chum1 on October 12, 2016, 11:13:10 PM
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/palm-beach-post-exclusive-local-woman-says-trump-groped-her/w5ii48gwdJY9htsLl88GcP/
Post by: star seed 7 on October 12, 2016, 11:44:12 PM
http://people.com/politics/donald-trump-attacked-people-writer/
Post by: star seed 7 on October 13, 2016, 12:03:39 AM
Post by: puniraptor on October 13, 2016, 01:22:09 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/12/bill-oreillys-trump-interviews-are-the-best-trump-interviews/
fun read.
It's an all-time pile on in history
I really love how desparately BO was trying to get him to put together a coherent or intelligible thought. It was futile and beautiful.
Post by: bones129 on October 13, 2016, 02:06:15 AM
https://twitter.com/greghoward88/status/786424476594499584
Futile posturing by the Trump "forces." NYT will never retract. Sue, Donnie, sue. ROFL.
Post by: stunted on October 13, 2016, 02:11:27 AM
all this will help given the combination of shy tory / 50 shades of grey effect. women aren't going to come out and show support for trump, but when it comes down to it, nothing gets them wetter than a powerful go-getter like trump
this will hurt with all the neutered men though, as they're the ones jealous of alphas that actually grab life by the balls/pussy.
Post by: cfbandyman on October 13, 2016, 08:52:42 AM
hillary must not like her internal polling.
all this will help given the combination of shy tory / 50 shades of grey effect. women aren't going to come out and show support for trump, but when it comes down to it, nothing gets them wetter than a powerful go-getter like trump
this will hurt with all the neutered men though, as they're the ones jealous of alphas that actually grab life by the balls/pussy.
:blah: :ROFL: :sdeek: :buh-bye:
Post by: MakeItRain on October 13, 2016, 08:55:21 AM
https://twitter.com/greghoward88/status/786424476594499584
My God. These attorneys look like such rough ridin' stooges, they know full well this isn't at all libel. They clearly don't care about damaging their practice and looking like idiots.
Post by: Kat Kid on October 13, 2016, 09:09:22 AM
hillary must not like her internal polling.
all this will help given the combination of shy tory / 50 shades of grey effect. women aren't going to come out and show support for trump, but when it comes down to it, nothing gets them wetter than a powerful go-getter like trump
this will hurt with all the neutered men though, as they're the ones jealous of alphas that actually grab life by the balls/pussy.
You don't really believe Trump will win the election, do you?
Post by: ChiComCat on October 13, 2016, 09:12:13 AM
Post by: cfbandyman on October 13, 2016, 09:28:38 AM
Women don't know what they want. Good thing stunted is here to tell them.
Truest of the alphas, just grab em by the pussy and tell them what to do.
Post by: cfbandyman on October 13, 2016, 09:32:20 AM
hillary must not like her internal polling.
all this will help given the combination of shy tory / 50 shades of grey effect. women aren't going to come out and show support for trump, but when it comes down to it, nothing gets them wetter than a powerful go-getter like trump
this will hurt with all the neutered men though, as they're the ones jealous of alphas that actually grab life by the balls/pussy.
You don't really believe Drumpf will win the election, do you?
True alphas dont listen to facts, reason, and polls created by sissy liberals, they go with their gut, reach down, grab them honchos and hump life into submission.
Post by: Panjandrum on October 13, 2016, 09:45:04 AM
Post by: cfbandyman on October 13, 2016, 09:48:55 AM
I'm surprised stunted doesn't have a Pepe avatar.
:lol:
Post by: ben ji on October 13, 2016, 10:21:35 AM
http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/
Post by: stunted on October 13, 2016, 11:12:04 AM
hillary must not like her internal polling.
all this will help given the combination of shy tory / 50 shades of grey effect. women aren't going to come out and show support for trump, but when it comes down to it, nothing gets them wetter than a powerful go-getter like trump
this will hurt with all the neutered men though, as they're the ones jealous of alphas that actually grab life by the balls/pussy.
You don't really believe Trump will win the election, do you?
i believe things aren't what they seem and it's close. wikileaks has shown a lot of COLUSION involving polls and the media. the rush from big media sites to publish hearsay hits on trump. same sites lying about her rallies having 18k when pictures show 3k in the crowd (unscientific counting, but clearly under 4k). though i understand the want to completely nuke him, this all reeks of desperation.
Women don't know what they want. Good thing stunted is here to tell them.
they know what they want. they just won't tell you. (https://www.amazon.com/My-Secret-Garden-Womens-Fantasies/dp/0704332949)
Post by: star seed 7 on October 13, 2016, 11:22:51 AM
Post by: Brock Landers on October 13, 2016, 11:24:05 AM
Post by: treysolid on October 13, 2016, 11:24:26 AM
in the words of big daddy kane, "put a quarter in your ass 'cause you played yourself"
Post by: CNS on October 13, 2016, 11:25:13 AM
His show is gone.
This guy took a huge KITN for something that seemed ridiculous since day 1.
Has there been a bigger fall due to ego?
Post by: stunted on October 13, 2016, 11:26:31 AM
Dude absolutely nobody cares if a candidate exaggerates the crowd size at their rallies. Exactly 0 votes will be changed because of it. Trump mentioned in the second debate he has crowds of 20 to 30000 showing up to his events and that's obviously bullshit too.
why lie then? :dunno:
Post by: treysolid on October 13, 2016, 11:30:24 AM
What does Don do after all this? I mean, his brand will take a hit since it is represented as something that never loses, yet he is going to lose. Also, once he no longer represents anyone's political team bullshit, he isn't going to have women crawling over themselves to defend their vote for jesus, pubs, and whoever they put up for election. He is now associated with racism, white nationalism, sexual assault, etc.
His show is gone.
This guy took a huge KITN for something that seemed ridiculous since day 1.
Has there been a bigger fall due to ego?
trump, bannon and ailes start a media group and his base will eat it up. it'll be bigger than fox news. let's face it - his base can't afford to stay/live in his properties (which are going to take a hit), so this is the most likely path forward.
Post by: cfbandyman on October 13, 2016, 11:50:01 AM
hillary must not like her internal polling.
all this will help given the combination of shy tory / 50 shades of grey effect. women aren't going to come out and show support for trump, but when it comes down to it, nothing gets them wetter than a powerful go-getter like trump
this will hurt with all the neutered men though, as they're the ones jealous of alphas that actually grab life by the balls/pussy.
You don't really believe Drumpf will win the election, do you?
i believe things aren't what they seem and it's close. wikileaks has shown a lot of COLUSION involving polls and the media. the rush from big media sites to publish hearsay hits on trump. same sites lying about her rallies having 18k when pictures show 3k in the crowd (unscientific counting, but clearly under 4k). though i understand the want to completely nuke him, this all reeks of desperation.
And this is why Drumpf is even a thing. Belief in something over reality and facts. But I guess it's all just rigged anyways any nothing I can do can show you the run into an iceberg while falling over a cliff into a flaming Hindenburg his campaign has become. May I suggest unplugging from Alex Jones and info wars for like a week, walk around, and actually get a real pulse on things?
Dude absolutely nobody cares if a candidate exaggerates the crowd size at their rallies. Exactly 0 votes will be changed because of it. Trump mentioned in the second debate he has crowds of 20 to 30000 showing up to his events and that's obviously bullshit too.
why lie then? :dunno:
Why indulge yourself in fairy tales adults tell themselves to make them feel better? As if you can actually handle getting your ass handed to you.
Post by: stunted on October 13, 2016, 11:56:09 AM
Post by: chum1 on October 13, 2016, 12:03:07 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 13, 2016, 12:09:05 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on October 13, 2016, 12:10:30 PM
What does Don do after all this? I mean, his brand will take a hit since it is represented as something that never loses, yet he is going to lose. Also, once he no longer represents anyone's political team bullshit, he isn't going to have women crawling over themselves to defend their vote for jesus, pubs, and whoever they put up for election. He is now associated with racism, white nationalism, sexual assault, etc.
His show is gone.
This guy took a huge KITN for something that seemed ridiculous since day 1.
Has there been a bigger fall due to ego?
trump, bannon and ailes start a media group and his base will eat it up. it'll be bigger than fox news. let's face it - his base can't afford to stay/live in his properties (which are going to take a hit), so this is the most likely path forward.
Yeah, I keep telling my wife that when she says, "He's done. He's ruined."
The pragmatist in my believes Bannon has to know that this thing is completely in the trash, so the whole purpose of the final 30 days is to harden the base and further the alt-right movement.
I absolutely think that there will be some form of Breitbart empire coming out of this with Trump backing it, financially.
Post by: stunted on October 13, 2016, 12:10:38 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on October 13, 2016, 12:19:59 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 13, 2016, 12:23:04 PM
He should start his own TV network. It would be very popular.
You should email or twitter this to him
Post by: Phil Titola on October 13, 2016, 12:56:16 PM
yup. good thing wikileaks is removing the tinfoil and putting it on the other side.
The wiki leaks stuff seems pretty Meh... Basically a campaign being a campaign. Can you imagine if trumps campaign emails were
Post by: cfbandyman on October 13, 2016, 12:56:56 PM
He should start his own TV network. It would be very popular.
Absolutely, it'll be like watching Toddlers in Tiaras but with full grown ass men behaving that way
Post by: star seed 7 on October 13, 2016, 12:58:47 PM
yup. good thing wikileaks is removing the tinfoil and putting it on the other side.
The wiki leaks stuff seems pretty Meh... Basically a campaign being a campaign. Can you imagine if trumps campaign emails werehackedleaked given how he speaks pubic ally?
I don't think the campaign coordinates at all so probably not much emails except ones with a subject like "Fwd:Fwd:Fwd:Fwd:Fwd"
Post by: Phil Titola on October 13, 2016, 12:59:49 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on October 13, 2016, 01:07:38 PM
He should start his own TV network. It would be very popular.
You should email or twitter this to him
Great idea! It will be tremendous!! Beat those looser networks like CNN(Clinton News Network)!!! #MAGA
Post by: wetwillie on October 13, 2016, 01:27:53 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on October 13, 2016, 01:29:36 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on October 13, 2016, 01:38:20 PM
Sarah Palin has a show, Hannity, maybe Ben Carson. its pretty easy to see. O'Reilly stays at Fox and goes head to head.
Fox morphs and becomes the establishment republican station. TNN takes people like that blonde haired girl on the Blaze and all of the people you mention.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 13, 2016, 01:53:12 PM
Post by: chum1 on October 13, 2016, 01:55:12 PM
Quote
A lawyer for the New York Times just issued a letter back to a lawyer for Donald Trump.
It started nice enough. But you'll want to read to the end.
Hell, life is short. Here's the money quote:
We published newsworthy information about a subject of deep public concern. If Mr. Trump disagrees, if he believes that American citizens had no right to hear what these women had to say and that the law of this country forces us and those who would dare to criticize him to stand silent or be punished, we welcome the opportunity to have a court set him straight.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 13, 2016, 02:17:11 PM
He doesn't have enough money
Probably not, but it really shouldn't be that hard to find investors for a MAGA Network. That would make money hand over fist as long as Trump doesn't actually have anything to do with its operation and is a figurehead only.
Post by: CNS on October 13, 2016, 02:44:21 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Panjandrum on October 13, 2016, 02:54:15 PM
Anyone given the oppy to invest in the MAGA Channel and doesn't is a rough ridin' idiot. It would be like printing money right now and for the entire time Clinton would be in office.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I mean, think about it...
Info Wars, Tomi from the Blaze, Sarah Palin, Breitbart News, Sean Hannity, Lou Dobbs, etc.
I mean you may as well call it Red Meat TV.
Post by: Emo EMAW on October 13, 2016, 02:56:21 PM
Post by: cfbandyman on October 13, 2016, 02:59:41 PM
Anyone given the oppy to invest in the MAGA Channel and doesn't is a rough ridin' idiot. It would be like printing money right now and for the entire time Clinton would be in office.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I mean, think about it...
Info Wars, Tomi from the Blaze, Sarah Palin, Breitbart News, Sean Hannity, Lou Dobbs, etc.
I mean you may as well call it Red Meat TV.
I'd invest just to make money of those losers, and I hate all of them. But I do like money.
Post by: cfbandyman on October 13, 2016, 03:02:12 PM
Don't forget Ted Nugent covering sports.
And with Kid Rock :love:
Curt Schilling can come too :D
Post by: Phil Titola on October 13, 2016, 03:03:58 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on October 13, 2016, 03:18:50 PM
"Next hour, Ted Nugent's Wild America, where he scares people on the street by trying to shoot them with bows and arrows. Then, in the 11:00 hour, Rudy Guilianni screams at light poles while Chris Christy apologizes to passers by."
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 13, 2016, 03:21:52 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on October 13, 2016, 03:34:15 PM
The network has to take itself more seriously than that. It will be a news network, just like Fox News.
Really? Can we really say the words "serious" and "Trump surrogate" at the same time?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 13, 2016, 03:37:12 PM
The network has to take itself more seriously than that. It will be a news network, just like Fox News.
Really? Can we really say the words "serious" and "Trump surrogate" at the same time?
Trump surrogates do take themselves seriously. That's why they are entertaining. If they were in on the joke, they wouldn't be worth watching.
Post by: star seed 7 on October 13, 2016, 03:46:47 PM
Post by: chum1 on October 13, 2016, 03:48:24 PM
I change the channel for certain people. Boris Epshteyn, for one, is really awful.
Not surprising at all. Lewandowski and Giuliani are also terrible people.
Quote
Others have found his manner, which can quickly accelerate from reasonable to aggressive to dismissive, off-putting. He also has let his emotions get the better of him.
Two years ago, Mr. Epshteyn was charged with misdemeanor assault in Scottsdale, Ariz., following a bar fight. The charge was dropped after he agreed to undergo anger management counseling and perform community service.
“Boris takes a certain amount of delight in trying to bully the interviewer,” said Joy Reid, the host of a show on MSNBC, who has clashed with Mr. Epshteyn. “He sees every night as combat and he goes in as very combative.”
Three political commentators said in separate interviews that he often acted in a rude, condescending manner toward show staffers, makeup artists and others. The three, all of whom are opposed to Mr. Trump’s election, spoke on condition of anonymity because they sometimes appear on air with Mr. Ephsteyn.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/14/us/politics/boris-epshteyn-trump.html
Post by: CNS on October 13, 2016, 04:01:27 PM
Pfft.
I mean, if someone is ganging up on you on sexual assault, and you're like, "uggo, pass". :lol:
Post by: cfbandyman on October 13, 2016, 04:04:33 PM
The network has to take itself more seriously than that. It will be a news network, just like Fox News.
You're using the term "news" pretty liberally (hur hur), they think it's news, it's really more "infotainment" slipping towards "entertainment"
Post by: cfbandyman on October 13, 2016, 04:09:15 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 13, 2016, 04:24:51 PM
The network has to take itself more seriously than that. It will be a news network, just like Fox News.
You're using the term "news" pretty liberally (hur hur), they think it's news, it's really more "infotainment" slipping towards "entertainment"
Well, yeah. It absolutely has to have the format of a cable news channel to work, though. It needs the hayseeds to tune in nightly to get the day's news. That way they gain more control over the republican party, anger up the libs, etc. Hannity's show would stay exactly like it already is, but follow him up with shows hosted by Ann Coulter and Laura Ingrahm.
Post by: CNS on October 13, 2016, 04:26:31 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on October 13, 2016, 07:36:33 PM
The network has to take itself more seriously than that. It will be a news network, just like Fox News.
You're using the term "news" pretty liberally (hur hur), they think it's news, it's really more "infotainment" slipping towards "entertainment"
Well, yeah. It absolutely has to have the format of a cable news channel to work, though. It needs the hayseeds to tune in nightly to get the day's news. That way they gain more control over the republican party, anger up the libs, etc. Hannity's show would stay exactly like it already is, but follow him up with shows hosted by Ann Coulter and Laura Ingrahm.
You are giving these people too much credit. They think people are literally demons. They are imbeciles.
Post by: Phil Titola on October 13, 2016, 07:50:52 PM
Part of Don's denial of trying to make out with that reporter was "...take a look at her...I don't think so".
Pfft.
I mean, if someone is ganging up on you on sexual assault, and you're like, "uggo, pass". :lol:
"I have standards"
Post by: bucket on October 13, 2016, 08:31:31 PM
The network has to take itself more seriously than that. It will be a news network, just like Fox News.
You're using the term "news" pretty liberally (hur hur), they think it's news, it's really more "infotainment" slipping towards "entertainment"
Well, yeah. It absolutely has to have the format of a cable news channel to work, though. It needs the hayseeds to tune in nightly to get the day's news. That way they gain more control over the republican party, anger up the libs, etc. Hannity's show would stay exactly like it already is, but follow him up with shows hosted by Ann Coulter and Laura Ingrahm.
You are giving these people too much credit. They think people are literally demons. They are imbeciles.
“Trump sniffing may have been a sign of the Holy Spirit coming out of him,” said Robertson on “The 700 Club.” “The Holy Spirit affects people in strange ways. Some people go into a frenzy, some people start laughing uncontrollably, some people bark like dogs. Apparently, Trump sniffs.”
:lol:
Post by: catastrophe on October 13, 2016, 09:50:40 PM
Post by: sys on October 13, 2016, 11:58:50 PM
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/donald-trump-lied-donating-9-11-charities-article-1.2829908
Post by: stunted on October 14, 2016, 12:00:15 AM
Dude absolutely nobody cares if a candidate exaggerates the crowd size at their rallies. Exactly 0 votes will be changed because of it. Trump mentioned in the second debate he has crowds of 20 to 30000 showing up to his events and that's obviously bullshit too.
today's ohio rally - 110k on facebook stream, 50k on youtube stream, 28k at the rally. 3x smaller city than hillarys
Post by: star seed 7 on October 14, 2016, 12:41:41 AM
Post by: bones129 on October 14, 2016, 12:46:24 AM
No thanks.
Post by: catastrophe on October 14, 2016, 07:35:03 AM
Post by: steve dave on October 14, 2016, 08:19:32 AM
Post by: ChiComCat on October 14, 2016, 08:26:33 AM
I would legit be a regular watcher of the Breitbart Infowars MAGA Network
I get frustrated too easily
Post by: cfbandyman on October 14, 2016, 08:52:59 AM
I would legit be a regular watcher of the Breitbart Infowars MAGA Network
I get frustrated too easily
Same, I'd let everyone else tell me what the dregs of America's society is doing on MAGA Meltdown for me. Though if/when it decides to become full fascist (correctly used term for once) Hiel Drumpf - going to take over the government via a coup, we might have a problem.
Post by: Panjandrum on October 14, 2016, 09:25:13 AM
I would legit be a regular watcher of the Breitbart Infowars MAGA Network
I get frustrated too easily
Same, I'd let everyone else tell me what the dregs of America's society is doing on MAGA Meltdown for me. Though if/when it decides to become full fascist (correctly used term for once) Hiel Drumpf - going to take over the government via a coup, we might have a problem.
Their videos would be all over Facebook and Twitter. It would become the de facto news link from all of your family/friends that send you links to something with "America", "Patriot", or "Angry" in the URL.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 14, 2016, 09:35:32 AM
I would legit be a regular watcher of the Breitbart Infowars MAGA Network
If Robertson is going to get on there and discuss who is a demon and who is having the holy spirit sniff out of their nose, I would slap it on the dvr at least.
Post by: chum1 on October 14, 2016, 11:03:28 AM
Quote
“Because of the revelation of the public video, and everything that came out on Access Hollywood, you know, he was really all wrought up, and you could just sense how much anger he had,” Clinton said, ABC reports. “And so, he was really trying to dominate and then literally stalk me around the stage.”
:love: KILLER INSTINCT
Quote
Trump has denied that he meant to intimidate Clinton onstage. “They said he invaded her space,” he said at a Florida rally after the debate, ABC reports. “Believe me. The last space that I want to invade is her space. Believe me.”
:lol:
http://time.com/4531129/hillary-clinton-ellen-degeneres-donald-trump-debate/
Post by: renocat on October 14, 2016, 11:09:41 AM
You are running for President to lead our nation, not to destroy Hillary Clinton. I and many others want to know how your policies will affect our lives. Frankly, we would not vote for you on the basis of your looks, subhuman skewered personality, or vanity. We want policy meat and not Hollywood Horsecrap drama. I do not care a rip about Bill Clinton and his sexual shenanigans. Quit parading out old victimized grandmas, and talk about issues.
Respectfully,
Renocat American.
Post by: cfbandyman on October 14, 2016, 11:19:59 AM
I would legit be a regular watcher of the Breitbart Infowars MAGA Network
I get frustrated too easily
Same, I'd let everyone else tell me what the dregs of America's society is doing on MAGA Meltdown for me. Though if/when it decides to become full fascist (correctly used term for once) Hiel Drumpf - going to take over the government via a coup, we might have a problem.
Their videos would be all over Facebook and Twitter. It would become the de facto news link from all of your family/friends that send you links to something with "America", "Patriot", or "Angry" in the URL.
We might as well change the political facebook/tweets thread to be MAGA Meltdown Thread, since it's that group of people that pretty much generated like 90% of all the posts in that thread. MODS!
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 14, 2016, 11:43:58 AM
Post by: sys on October 14, 2016, 12:26:03 PM
Post by: chum1 on October 14, 2016, 12:38:52 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 14, 2016, 12:48:49 PM
Quote
But those who take pleasure in watching Trump destroy the Republican Party are missing the bigger picture. He’s trying to destroy the country, as well. Civility, always a tenuous thing, cannot be quickly restored in a society that has learned to hate in public, at full throttle.
Post by: cfbandyman on October 14, 2016, 12:58:12 PM
I wonder to what degree the Drumpf campaign actually sees advancing Clinton conspiaracy theory as a winning strategy. Are they like, "We just need to get this info out there, people will see the TRUTH about the Clintons, and Hillary will never be elected! HAHAHA!"
I'm sure they think it matters, but overall all? No, not really. I mean you'd think you keep repeating the same message over and over and over again that eventually it'll be so, but really, all it ends up doing is reinforcing those who believe in the conspiracy theory, pissing off those who hate that it's being perpetuating, and render all those in the middle catatonic having to keep hearing all the bullshit. Net outcome is the needle not really moving in one direction or the other, other than more MAGAs are fairly old and white, and over time that share of the pie will dwindle either as they die out or becoming less of a % as we become more diverse over time. Either way unless they can gain some serious traction somehow on the middle, they will be this forever, not necessarily small, but perpetually off to the side but clamoring for the perpetual limelight antagonistic group of assholes. But they could adapt, depends on how willing they might be.
Post by: stunted on October 14, 2016, 01:57:43 PM
http://www.smartmatic.com/about/our-team/detail/lord-mark-malloch-brown/
https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/people/mark-malloch-brown
Post by: steve dave on October 14, 2016, 02:00:28 PM
so a hardcore globalist is in charge of voting machines in a lot of the swing states. that's nice. osf's vision of the world is going well in europe (it's not). luckily there's an ocean to protect the us from turning into paris
http://www.smartmatic.com/about/our-team/detail/lord-mark-malloch-brown/
https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/people/mark-malloch-brown
you insinuating this thing is going to be rigged stunz?
Post by: DQ12 on October 14, 2016, 02:18:56 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 14, 2016, 02:41:15 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 14, 2016, 02:44:03 PM
Trump asking why no one accuses Obama of sexual assault :lol:
lol wut
Post by: Phil Titola on October 14, 2016, 02:45:35 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 14, 2016, 02:46:04 PM
Post by: 8manpick on October 14, 2016, 02:50:07 PM
actually, that brings up another point. tons of whackos have tried to nail down Barry Hussein for the last 7.5 years and he has been spotless.Rigged! Also, stud!
Post by: 8manpick on October 14, 2016, 03:52:49 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/14/politics/obama-cleveland-trump-come-on-man/
Post by: chuckjames on October 14, 2016, 04:11:40 PM
so a hardcore globalist is in charge of voting machines in a lot of the swing states. that's nice. osf's vision of the world is going well in europe (it's not). luckily there's an ocean to protect the us from turning into paris
http://www.smartmatic.com/about/our-team/detail/lord-mark-malloch-brown/
https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/people/mark-malloch-brown
Post by: star seed 7 on October 14, 2016, 06:02:28 PM
Trump asking why no one accuses Obama of sexual assault :lol:
lol wut
[youtube]https://youtu.be/k0kOIYUL8lw[/youtube]
:lol:
Post by: stunted on October 14, 2016, 09:48:55 PM
so a hardcore globalist is in charge of voting machines in a lot of the swing states. that's nice. osf's vision of the world is going well in europe (it's not). luckily there's an ocean to protect the us from turning into paris
http://www.smartmatic.com/about/our-team/detail/lord-mark-malloch-brown/
https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/people/mark-malloch-brown
you insinuating this thing is going to be rigged stunz?
if only alex jones or putin was the chairman of the voting machine company :frown:
Post by: steve dave on October 15, 2016, 07:41:01 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 15, 2016, 08:17:29 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/14/opinion/burning-down-the-house.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0QuoteBut those who take pleasure in watching Trump destroy the Republican Party are missing the bigger picture. He’s trying to destroy the country, as well. Civility, always a tenuous thing, cannot be quickly restored in a society that has learned to hate in public, at full throttle.
If there's one thing that's certain, its that hate and uncivility were brought on by trump.
#obamafascists
Post by: star seed 7 on October 15, 2016, 01:41:40 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 15, 2016, 01:55:00 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 15, 2016, 02:11:04 PM
Quote
Trump has recently started encouraging his mostly white supporters to sign up online to be “election observers” to stop “Crooked Hillary from rigging this election.” He’s urging them to act as posses of poll watchers in “other” communities to ensure that things are “on the up and up.”
“Watch your polling booths,” he warned.
His supporters are heeding the call.
“Trump said to watch your precincts. I’m going to go, for sure,” said Steve Webb, a 61-year-old carpenter from Fairfield, Ohio.
“I’ll look for . . . well, it’s called racial profiling. Mexicans. Syrians. People who can’t speak American,” he said. “I’m going to go right up behind them. I’ll do everything legally. I want to see if they are accountable. I’m not going to do anything illegal. I’m going to make them a little bit nervous.”
Post by: bucket on October 15, 2016, 02:51:28 PM
Post by: sys on October 15, 2016, 02:58:44 PM
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2016/10/15/donald-trump-warnings-conspiracy-rig-election-are-stoking-anger-among-his-followers/LcCY6e0QOcfH8VdeK9UdsM/story.html
perfectly normal, perfectly healthy.
Post by: chum1 on October 15, 2016, 03:25:59 PM
Post by: treysolid on October 15, 2016, 05:21:56 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on October 15, 2016, 08:31:54 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 15, 2016, 09:14:52 PM
Post by: catastrophe on October 15, 2016, 09:20:04 PM
Post by: Canary on October 15, 2016, 10:46:21 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 16, 2016, 09:24:36 AM
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2016/10/15/donald-trump-warnings-conspiracy-rig-election-are-stoking-anger-among-his-followers/LcCY6e0QOcfH8VdeK9UdsM/story.htmlQuoteTrump has recently started encouraging his mostly white supporters to sign up online to be “election observers” to stop “Crooked Hillary from rigging this election.” He’s urging them to act as posses of poll watchers in “other” communities to ensure that things are “on the up and up.”
“Watch your polling booths,” he warned.
His supporters are heeding the call.
“Trump said to watch your precincts. I’m going to go, for sure,” said Steve Webb, a 61-year-old carpenter from Fairfield, Ohio.
“I’ll look for . . . well, it’s called racial profiling. Mexicans. Syrians. People who can’t speak American,” he said. “I’m going to go right up behind them. I’ll do everything legally. I want to see if they are accountable. I’m not going to do anything illegal. I’m going to make them a little bit nervous.”
Every candidates voters are "mostly white" :facepalm:
Post by: star seed 7 on October 16, 2016, 09:53:36 AM
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/787618207444131840
Post by: chum1 on October 16, 2016, 10:04:09 AM
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/787612552654155776
Haha
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/787618207444131840
:blank:
Post by: steve dave on October 16, 2016, 10:07:00 AM
Post by: CNS on October 16, 2016, 10:25:20 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: michigancat on October 16, 2016, 11:43:37 AM
Post by: Tobias on October 16, 2016, 11:48:15 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 16, 2016, 11:52:39 AM
Post by: PowercatPat on October 16, 2016, 12:09:24 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 16, 2016, 12:19:48 PM
I think it's funny that he complains about the media spreading "false" stories about him, but has brought up several conspiracy theories against his opponents that haven't been true at all.
Quid pro quo?
Post by: MakeItRain on October 16, 2016, 03:13:54 PM
Post by: sys on October 16, 2016, 04:14:02 PM
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/trump-campaign-struggles-funding-woes-state-operatives-complain-n667136
Post by: sys on October 16, 2016, 04:32:07 PM
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2016/10/15/donald-trump-warnings-conspiracy-rig-election-are-stoking-anger-among-his-followers/LcCY6e0QOcfH8VdeK9UdsM/story.htmlQuoteTrump has recently started encouraging his mostly white supporters to sign up online to be “election observers” to stop “Crooked Hillary from rigging this election.” He’s urging them to act as posses of poll watchers in “other” communities to ensure that things are “on the up and up.”
“Watch your polling booths,” he warned.
His supporters are heeding the call.
“Trump said to watch your precincts. I’m going to go, for sure,” said Steve Webb, a 61-year-old carpenter from Fairfield, Ohio.
“I’ll look for . . . well, it’s called racial profiling. Mexicans. Syrians. People who can’t speak American,” he said. “I’m going to go right up behind them. I’ll do everything legally. I want to see if they are accountable. I’m not going to do anything illegal. I’m going to make them a little bit nervous.”
Every candidates voters are "mostly white" :facepalm:
shoddy journalism. should have read "completely". good catch, fsd.
Post by: sys on October 16, 2016, 05:28:40 PM
good article explaining the likely mechanism for much of trump's paper loss that let him avoid real taxes.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 16, 2016, 07:03:54 PM
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2016/10/15/donald-trump-warnings-conspiracy-rig-election-are-stoking-anger-among-his-followers/LcCY6e0QOcfH8VdeK9UdsM/story.htmlQuoteTrump has recently started encouraging his mostly white supporters to sign up online to be “election observers” to stop “Crooked Hillary from rigging this election.” He’s urging them to act as posses of poll watchers in “other” communities to ensure that things are “on the up and up.”
“Watch your polling booths,” he warned.
His supporters are heeding the call.
“Trump said to watch your precincts. I’m going to go, for sure,” said Steve Webb, a 61-year-old carpenter from Fairfield, Ohio.
“I’ll look for . . . well, it’s called racial profiling. Mexicans. Syrians. People who can’t speak American,” he said. “I’m going to go right up behind them. I’ll do everything legally. I want to see if they are accountable. I’m not going to do anything illegal. I’m going to make them a little bit nervous.”
Every candidates voters are "mostly white" :facepalm:
shoddy journalism. should have read "completely". good catch, fsd.
Fear whitey
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 17, 2016, 09:23:19 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 17, 2016, 09:25:17 AM
Post by: ben ji on October 17, 2016, 09:44:59 AM
Donald Trump has taken a step closer to starting his own cable TV network, the Financial Times reported Monday.
The Republican presidential nominee’s interest in harnessing his political gains and populist appeal for a slice of the cable TV market has long been rumored. His son-in-law, Jared Kushner, has been in contact with Aryeh Bourkoff, founder of investment bank LionTree, about starting a TV network if he's defeated in the presidential election in November, the FT reported.
Bourkoff couldn’t be reached for comment. The Trump campaign couldn’t immediately be reached for comment.
Kushner, who owns the New York Observer and is married to Trump's daughter, Ivanka Trump, held a "brief" conversation with Bourkoff in "the past couple of months" but it "has not progressed since," the report said, citing unnamed sources.
In June, Vanity Fair first reported about Trump's interest in expanding his media business beyond his current TV production business, Trump Productions, to launch a "mini-media conglomerate."
In September, Trump denied that he was interested in starting a new network. “I want to win the presidency," he told The Washington Post. "I have no interest in a media company. False rumor.”
Post by: CNS on October 17, 2016, 09:56:32 AM
He would make like 1000x more money that way.
Post by: SdK on October 17, 2016, 10:11:41 AM
Post by: ChiComCat on October 17, 2016, 11:09:56 AM
Post by: chum1 on October 17, 2016, 04:58:41 PM
Quote
Alaskans won’t find any information about Donald Trump in their voter’s guide this year, after the GOP presidential nominee's campaign failed to submit biographical data and a candidate statement
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/301323-trump-campaign-left-out-of-alaska-voter-guide
Post by: bones129 on October 17, 2016, 07:31:15 PM
Post by: catastrophe on October 17, 2016, 08:19:21 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 17, 2016, 08:47:52 PM
What kind of an idiot reads a voters guide?
Do we have these in Kansas?
:lol:
Post by: sys on October 18, 2016, 11:01:50 AM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/chris-christie-trump-distancing_us_58062677e4b0b994d4c157b7
Post by: CNS on October 18, 2016, 11:06:05 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 18, 2016, 11:13:34 AM
Post by: chum1 on October 18, 2016, 11:38:49 AM
http://qz.com/811993/peter-thiels-support-of-donald-trump-has-divided-silicon-valley-but-it-has-roots-in-his-long-held-libertarian-ideology/
Post by: steve dave on October 18, 2016, 12:09:54 PM
first rat (half) off?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/chris-christie-trump-distancing_us_58062677e4b0b994d4c157b7
we live in a world where chris christie has to distance himself from the republican nominee for president of the united states because he's embarrassed by their campaign. that's a real life thing that is happening right now.
Post by: Kat Kid on October 18, 2016, 12:11:05 PM
Some interesting thoughts on Thiel's motives following all of the tweets.
http://qz.com/811993/peter-thiels-support-of-donald-trump-has-divided-silicon-valley-but-it-has-roots-in-his-long-held-libertarian-ideology/
I don't which I find more LOL, the "persuasion" shtick scott adams is doing or the "chess master" narratives about Trump and Thiel. They are just self-evident bullshit.
Post by: stunted on October 18, 2016, 01:25:06 PM
the "persuasion" shtick scott adams is doing
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CuUsMeHW8AAScmG.jpg)
Post by: Kat Kid on October 18, 2016, 01:50:01 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on October 18, 2016, 01:53:40 PM
Post by: Kat Kid on October 18, 2016, 01:54:39 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on October 18, 2016, 02:11:18 PM
Post by: stunted on October 18, 2016, 02:27:21 PM
divorce court loser lol, dude is mid-life crisis mode to the max
he is a huge loser, but i thought we were talking about his persuasion? which given his age, loserness, and that hottie, confirms his persuasion shtick, no?
Post by: Kat Kid on October 18, 2016, 02:31:15 PM
divorce court loser lol, dude is mid-life crisis mode to the max
he is a huge loser, but i thought we were talking about his persuasion? which given his age, loserness, and that hottie, confirms his persuasion shtick, no?
it confirms his bank account and willingness to drain it.
Post by: Kat Kid on October 18, 2016, 02:33:26 PM
divorce court loser lol, dude is mid-life crisis mode to the max
he is a huge loser, but i thought we were talking about his persuasion? which given his age, loserness, and that hottie, confirms his persuasion shtick, no?
and to be clear, I'm not even addressing scott adams own skills, but rather his evaluation of Trump's
Post by: steve dave on October 18, 2016, 02:43:19 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on October 18, 2016, 03:13:46 PM
[youtube]https://youtu.be/vZnlz-b2NnY[/youtube]
Post by: MakeItRain on October 18, 2016, 04:01:40 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 18, 2016, 04:05:26 PM
I'll say this, the dilbert guy has more influence over people than I would have ever assumed he did.
Who would have thought a huge alpha stud like stunz would be under the persuasive charm of the dilbert guy? What an amazing world
Post by: steve dave on October 18, 2016, 06:23:56 PM
Post by: stunted on October 18, 2016, 06:28:23 PM
With each time stunted posts about women I am more and more convinced that he's either a virgin or has only paid for sex.
do ladyboys count?
Post by: chum1 on October 18, 2016, 07:04:45 PM
Quote
What you've got right there is a cartoonist with 80,000
followers suggesting that Twitter executives, having determined his pro-Trump tweets too dangerous for public consumption (presumably because they could sway the entire election), are actively hiding them.
https://dailydot.relaymedia.com/amp/unclick/dilbert-scott-adams-twitter-treason/
Post by: michigancat on October 18, 2016, 07:24:09 PM
Post by: michigancat on October 18, 2016, 07:26:48 PM
Quote from: dilbert
I won’t jump the gun and assume something nefarious is happening. But I will say that IF it is happening, I would regard it as treason. If one political party can use the machinery of social networks to reduce free speech, that is an attack on American values at the deepest level. As a patriot, I would feel obligated to help kill Twitter. (And you wouldn’t want to bet against me.)
Post by: steve dave on October 18, 2016, 07:37:29 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 18, 2016, 07:43:09 PM
Post by: chum1 on October 18, 2016, 07:51:46 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 18, 2016, 07:52:55 PM
Post by: stunted on October 18, 2016, 11:35:46 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on October 19, 2016, 01:51:16 AM
He melted down good and effing hard, didn't he?
Post by: tdaver on October 19, 2016, 08:17:21 AM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi68.tinypic.com%2Faz73b9.jpg&hash=2299890bb4cebfdd9c4221834240badf63a3af44)
Post by: steve dave on October 19, 2016, 08:35:14 AM
against hillary clinton
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 19, 2016, 08:43:49 AM
With each time stunted posts about women I am more and more convinced that he's either a virgin or has only paid for sex.
do ladyboys count?
Dilbert seems to think so
Post by: stunted on October 19, 2016, 08:52:08 AM
8%
against hillary clinton
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0
just another conspiracy waiting to be confirmed. been a good week for tinfoil hat wearers.
Post by: 8manpick on October 19, 2016, 08:54:17 AM
Post by: stunted on October 19, 2016, 08:58:53 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 19, 2016, 09:11:33 AM
Because they present themselves as unbiased.
Share before Facebook deletes this!!!!
Post by: catastrophe on October 19, 2016, 09:36:02 AM
Post by: stunted on October 19, 2016, 09:54:55 AM
https://www.periscope.tv/ScottAdamsSays/1OwxWrgAnbpJQ
Post by: 8manpick on October 19, 2016, 09:58:18 AM
Post by: stunted on October 19, 2016, 10:00:10 AM
i won't listen to people who answer my question, everything just goes straight over my head
Post by: 8manpick on October 19, 2016, 10:02:35 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 19, 2016, 10:04:07 AM
Censorship :curse:
Post by: stunted on October 19, 2016, 10:05:01 AM
:ohno:
Post by: stunted on October 19, 2016, 10:14:15 AM
I mean, I understand your answer, it just reflects stupidity and/or willful ignorance on the part of people who hold that viewpoint.
it's going down a dark path when this private company which happens to reach everyone in the states, claims to be unbiased, when it's actions speak otherwise.
if they want to go for clinton, that is fine, but then they wouldn't be as big as they are.
not saying they do, i'm sure a lot of it is groups of people reporting posts that end up deleted.
Post by: DQ12 on October 19, 2016, 10:30:12 AM
i don't have a problem with them promoting speech they prefer, but i don't think it's appropriate for them to censor political speech they disagree with that otherwise abides by whatever's in their TOS.
Post by: steve dave on October 19, 2016, 10:34:39 AM
Post by: Emo EMAW on October 19, 2016, 10:40:17 AM
Private companies curating content! Who knew?
Not private.
Post by: Emo EMAW on October 19, 2016, 10:41:59 AM
is there an example of twitter/facebook being biased or censoring in some way that i missed?
How can we know what you missed?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 19, 2016, 11:01:11 AM
https://twitter.com/ScottAdamsSays/status/788742941061689344
:ohno:
The existence of an actual Hitler who rose to power in the past sort of disproves his whole theory that if 40% of the country can't see Trump as some new Hitler, then you can be sure he isn't one.
I don't see Trump as Hitler, fwiw. Just a racist buffoon.
Post by: star seed 7 on October 19, 2016, 11:05:58 AM
is there an example of twitter/facebook being biased or censoring in some way that i missed?
i don't have a problem with them promoting speech they prefer, but i don't think it's appropriate for them to censor political speech they disagree with that otherwise abides by whatever's in their TOS.
They allegedly mess with the "trending stories" stuff.
I don't think there has ever been *credible* talk of censorship beyond the tos
Post by: steve dave on October 19, 2016, 11:11:37 AM
Post by: DQ12 on October 19, 2016, 11:17:59 AM
assume that I've missed every story about twitter/facebook censoring political speechis there an example of twitter/facebook being biased or censoring in some way that i missed?
How can we know what you missed?
Post by: Emo EMAW on October 19, 2016, 11:31:48 AM
assume that I've missed every story about twitter/facebook censoring political speechis there an example of twitter/facebook being biased or censoring in some way that i missed?
How can we know what you missed?
This was the big one. You'll have to do some clicking, links and such, to form a more complete understanding and opinion.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/10/technology/conservatives-accuse-facebook-of-political-bias.html
Post by: DQ12 on October 19, 2016, 11:34:50 AM
Post by: stunted on October 19, 2016, 11:44:34 AM
stunz, do you think twitter shadow banned dilbert like he's claiming?
no, it's probably people reporting his posts that triggered (heh) something automated.
i'm also not sure what he's after in that article. sometimes he's tricky, he writes a lot of stuff he doesn't think and throws in a ton of mind tricks. some also call it 3d chess.
Post by: EMAWican on October 19, 2016, 11:56:10 AM
that's not really censorship though. i have no problem with that.
Big example: http://money.cnn.com/2016/07/19/technology/twitter-suspends-milo-yiannopoulos/
Another one:
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi189.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fz81%2Fksurocks00%2Frando%2Fimage-147.jpeg&hash=5f3662883e4b98b9fb62e2e5d7e4c0217c54baf9)
Another:
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi189.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fz81%2Fksurocks00%2Frando%2Fimage-134.jpeg&hash=11cfc9e405e509e8d426f8455b6fd76d961fc070)
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi189.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fz81%2Fksurocks00%2Frando%2Fimage-135.jpeg&hash=6b5c768e94059b861672fb920663195a8722e7e9)
IIRC James O'Keefe's account was suspended as well.
Post by: Panjandrum on October 19, 2016, 11:59:26 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 19, 2016, 12:06:24 PM
stunz, do you think twitter shadow banned dilbert like he's claiming?
why wouldn't he persuade twitter to un-shadow ban him?
Post by: stunted on October 19, 2016, 12:10:00 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 19, 2016, 12:22:06 PM
Post by: stunted on October 19, 2016, 12:35:53 PM
:lol:
Post by: steve dave on October 19, 2016, 12:36:28 PM
was he actually banned or just in his head?
well, everyone could obviously read it to mock him about it so I'm guessing the head one.
Post by: treysolid on October 19, 2016, 12:45:15 PM
according to some hedge fund manager dude, essentially, fiduciaries = slaves. let my people go!
Post by: catastrophe on October 19, 2016, 01:12:42 PM
that's not really censorship though. i have no problem with that.
Why is it not censorship? Obviously it can't be in the legal (1st Amendment)sense because Facebook is not government run, but the accusation is that, within its own medium, Facebook is intentionally making it so certain political content does not appear in favor of other political content.
Another accusation was Google modifying its suggested searches to include only positive suggestions for Hillary-related searches (i.e., autocomplete would not fill in any scandal related terms even though they were far more searched) but include negative ones for other candidates.
I don't think anyone is claiming any of this is illegal, but if true it certainly should weigh on the credibility of the companies.
Post by: chum1 on October 19, 2016, 05:04:32 PM
http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/buzzfeed-ceo-ivanka-trump-told-me-she-wanted-to-see-mu-1787991802
Post by: MakeItRain on October 19, 2016, 05:28:49 PM
Post by: catastrophe on October 19, 2016, 05:35:27 PM
Post by: catastrophe on October 19, 2016, 05:36:20 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 19, 2016, 06:02:57 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 19, 2016, 06:05:48 PM
Post by: 8manpick on October 19, 2016, 07:10:24 PM
Mulatto is such an odd word to useBorderline racist (maybe? Don't really know, don't really care) but no surprise there
Post by: 8manpick on October 19, 2016, 07:12:52 PM
Also, eff off buzzfeed, no need to put that outIt's BuzzFeed so basically as expected. "Cocks Ivanka hasn't seen... You won't believe #6!"
Post by: SdK on October 20, 2016, 02:28:33 AM
I only think of Kurt when I hear the word.Mulatto is such an odd word to useBorderline racist (maybe? Don't really know, don't really care) but no surprise there
Post by: star seed 7 on October 20, 2016, 10:01:54 AM
Post by: cfbandyman on October 20, 2016, 10:20:33 AM
Mulatto is such an odd word to useBorderline racist (maybe? Don't really know, don't really care) but no surprise there
Pretty much agree on all counts. Who cares? Doesn't surprise me, and Mulatto is pretty antiquated, sort of racist but since this is the first time I've heard it be used, at all, in years it doesn't exactly pack any sort of significant punch. Kind of like calling Italians WOPs or telling the Irish NINA.
Post by: cfbandyman on October 20, 2016, 10:21:27 AM
Post by: DQ12 on October 20, 2016, 10:24:37 AM
Promoting some speech but not all speech is not censorship, it's bias.that's not really censorship though. i have no problem with that.
Why is it not censorship? Obviously it can't be in the legal (1st Amendment)sense because Facebook is not government run, but the accusation is that, within its own medium, Facebook is intentionally making it so certain political content does not appear in favor of other political content.
Another accusation was Google modifying its suggested searches to include only positive suggestions for Hillary-related searches (i.e., autocomplete would not fill in any scandal related terms even though they were far more searched) but include negative ones for other candidates.
I don't think anyone is claiming any of this is illegal, but if true it certainly should weigh on the credibility of the companies.
Post by: Emo EMAW on October 20, 2016, 10:59:58 AM
Post by: ChiComCat on October 20, 2016, 11:02:49 AM
Post by: chum1 on October 20, 2016, 11:25:00 AM
Post by: Emo EMAW on October 20, 2016, 11:36:53 AM
I don't know the details, but I don't think these companies made it so certain content couldn't be viewed, they just prioritized the content that people see when they search or look at a timeline or feed. If they didn't organize content like this, their services wouldn't be very useful at all.
Apparently you don't.
Post by: EMAWican on October 20, 2016, 11:51:57 AM
I don't know the details, but I don't think these companies made it so certain content couldn't be viewed, they just prioritized the content that people see when they search or look at a timeline or feed. If they didn't organize content like this, their services wouldn't be very useful at all.
Big example: http://money.cnn.com/2016/07/19/technology/twitter-suspends-milo-yiannopoulos/
Another one:
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi189.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fz81%2Fksurocks00%2Frando%2Fimage-147.jpeg&hash=5f3662883e4b98b9fb62e2e5d7e4c0217c54baf9)
Another:
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi189.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fz81%2Fksurocks00%2Frando%2Fimage-134.jpeg&hash=11cfc9e405e509e8d426f8455b6fd76d961fc070)
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi189.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fz81%2Fksurocks00%2Frando%2Fimage-135.jpeg&hash=6b5c768e94059b861672fb920663195a8722e7e9)
IIRC James O'Keefe's account was suspended as well.
Post by: SdK on October 20, 2016, 12:54:32 PM
Nirvana, Kurt from Nirvana, a popular music group from the early 90s. He said other words like mosquito and libido.I only think of Kurt when I hear the word.Mulatto is such an odd word to useBorderline racist (maybe? Don't really know, don't really care) but no surprise there
Post by: SdK on October 20, 2016, 12:54:50 PM
Post by: chum1 on October 20, 2016, 12:58:51 PM
I don't know the details, but I don't think these companies made it so certain content couldn't be viewed, they just prioritized the content that people see when they search or look at a timeline or feed. If they didn't organize content like this, their services wouldn't be very useful at all.
Apparently you don't.
I mean, outside of a couple of cases like that Milo guy. There are always a few people that are going to cross the line wherever it is. So, NBD.
And the biggest thing that a large number of people bitched about, by far, was actually facebook's news feed. Almost no one cares about a handful of cases like Milo.
Post by: Emo EMAW on October 20, 2016, 01:05:17 PM
I don't know the details, but I don't think these companies made it so certain content couldn't be viewed, they just prioritized the content that people see when they search or look at a timeline or feed. If they didn't organize content like this, their services wouldn't be very useful at all.
Apparently you don't.
I mean, outside of a couple of cases like that Milo guy. There are always a few people that are going to cross the line wherever it is. So, NBD.
And the biggest thing that a large number of people bitched about, by far, was actually facebook's news feed. Almost no one cares about a handful of cases like Milo.
So I guess censorship is okay in your eyes?
Post by: chum1 on October 20, 2016, 01:08:44 PM
I don't know the details, but I don't think these companies made it so certain content couldn't be viewed, they just prioritized the content that people see when they search or look at a timeline or feed. If they didn't organize content like this, their services wouldn't be very useful at all.
Apparently you don't.
I mean, outside of a couple of cases like that Milo guy. There are always a few people that are going to cross the line wherever it is. So, NBD.
And the biggest thing that a large number of people bitched about, by far, was actually facebook's news feed. Almost no one cares about a handful of cases like Milo.
So I guess censorship is okay in your eyes?
Like facebook's ban on nudity? Sure. It's fine.
Post by: mocat on October 20, 2016, 01:15:05 PM
Post by: DQ12 on October 20, 2016, 01:18:48 PM
disirregardlessly, yes, that is censorship.
Post by: catastrophe on October 20, 2016, 01:22:16 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on October 20, 2016, 01:23:44 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 20, 2016, 01:26:57 PM
I just don't want to live in a country where I can't get my pics of mulatto penises and unbiased political commentary in the same place.
You will be able to get all of that and more on the MAGA Network.
Post by: DQ12 on October 20, 2016, 01:31:08 PM
Again, I don't think anyone is claiming this stuff is illegal. However, it is problematic in the same way many people have issues with the Citizens' United opinion (or even the taking of campaign contributions from foreign governments). It unquestionably can have an impact on the political process.i agree with everything you said. ideally, social networks would not engage in bias or censorship.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on October 20, 2016, 01:32:10 PM
Post by: DQ12 on October 20, 2016, 01:36:57 PM
you guys are ruining this threadwrong
Post by: steve dave on October 20, 2016, 01:37:47 PM
Post by: Tobias on October 20, 2016, 01:40:51 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 20, 2016, 01:44:16 PM
Post by: SdK on October 20, 2016, 01:50:00 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 20, 2016, 01:50:20 PM
Post by: Tobias on October 20, 2016, 01:50:26 PM
Post by: chum1 on October 20, 2016, 01:58:38 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on October 20, 2016, 02:00:42 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on October 20, 2016, 02:02:12 PM
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/789117930801926148
Damn, Chris Wallace of FOX News is cheating too? Wow!
Post by: CNS on October 20, 2016, 02:03:03 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 20, 2016, 02:04:15 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 20, 2016, 02:04:53 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on October 20, 2016, 02:06:17 PM
Post by: chum1 on October 20, 2016, 02:28:55 PM
http://fortune.com/2016/10/17/trump-tv-fail/
Post by: stunted on October 20, 2016, 02:54:28 PM
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/789117930801926148
Damn, Chris Wallace of FOX News is cheating too? Wow!
It's a 3d chess move, people take the bait when he's technically not wrong, he could easily be referencing the debate with Bernie, bringing attention the cheating there and leaks. Hook line and sinker as the white people say.
Post by: chum1 on October 20, 2016, 03:38:59 PM
(https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2016/10/rippingpaper.gif)
Post by: chum1 on October 20, 2016, 03:39:24 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 20, 2016, 03:41:27 PM
Post by: puniraptor on October 20, 2016, 07:36:53 PM
1. Write in Evan McMullin, following my heart to the white horse. This is a meaningless vote and is inconsequential to Evan's path to victory.
2. Vote Gary the Idiot. I don't support Gary, but I do want my vote to increase the validity of a third party as an investment in the future.
3. Vote Hill. I don't want to vote for hill, BUT I DO want do to my part to ensure that Trump loses by the widest possible margin and is completely humiliated. This path is the only way to rationalize that my vote is counting in any way.
Post by: star seed 7 on October 20, 2016, 07:42:45 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on October 20, 2016, 08:29:39 PM
even though I have the refreshing freedom of voting in a state with a completely uncontested election, I am torn on how to vote:
1. Write in Evan McMullin, following my heart to the white horse. This is a meaningless vote and is inconsequential to Evan's path to victory.
Why not write in Pat Roberts, or Condi Rice, or Marco Rubio, or whatever other generic republican that actually represents the state you vote in?
Post by: puniraptor on October 20, 2016, 09:16:08 PM
even though I have the refreshing freedom of voting in a state with a completely uncontested election, I am torn on how to vote:
1. Write in Evan McMullin, following my heart to the white horse. This is a meaningless vote and is inconsequential to Evan's path to victory.
Why not write in Pat Roberts, or Condi Rice, or Marco Rubio, or whatever other generic republican that actually represents the state you vote in?
are any of those people Mormon CIA operatives with a TOP SECRET CLASSIFIED body count in their wake. I like condie, but she has no path to victory and none of the above are even asking for the chance to be president?
I don't understand why I would do what you said why not I do.
Post by: MakeItRain on October 21, 2016, 12:51:50 AM
even though I have the refreshing freedom of voting in a state with a completely uncontested election, I am torn on how to vote:
1. Write in Evan McMullin, following my heart to the white horse. This is a meaningless vote and is inconsequential to Evan's path to victory.
Why not write in Pat Roberts, or Condi Rice, or Marco Rubio, or whatever other generic republican that actually represents the state you vote in?
are any of those people Mormon CIA operatives with a TOP SECRET CLASSIFIED body count in their wake. I like condie, but she has no path to victory and none of the above are even asking for the chance to be president?
I don't understand why I would do what you said why not I do.
I didn't know you moved to Utah, sorry man, my bad.
Post by: bones129 on October 21, 2016, 01:53:47 AM
http://people.com/politics/donald-trump-walks-out-of-interview-after-question-about-being-labeled-racist-sexist/
Post by: puniraptor on October 21, 2016, 03:09:22 AM
I didn't know you moved to Utah, sorry man, my bad.
When the House is trying to select a president from the top 3 electoral vote getters, I want lame duck Huelskamp or whoever to see that one brave constituent wrote in Elder McMullin. I think it will matter.
Post by: MakeItRain on October 21, 2016, 05:24:32 AM
I didn't know you moved to Utah, sorry man, my bad.
When the House is trying to select a president from the top 3 electoral vote getters, I want lame duck Huelskamp or whoever to see that one brave constituent wrote in Elder McMullin. I think it will matter.
Matter in what way? HRC is going to end up with around 350 votes in the EC and will have over 50% of the popular vote. Then there's this:
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/utah/
You live in restricted ass Kansas anyway, voting for McMullin is no different than voting for Stalin, your vote literally will be thrown out. Meanwhile he's on the ballot here, I could be bought, I definitely have a price.
Post by: puniraptor on October 21, 2016, 06:52:09 AM
Post by: Institutional Control on October 21, 2016, 08:31:04 AM
I didn't know you moved to Utah, sorry man, my bad.
When the House is trying to select a president from the top 3 electoral vote getters, I want lame duck Huelskamp or whoever to see that one brave constituent wrote in Elder McMullin. I think it will matter.
Matter in what way? HRC is going to end up with around 350 votes in the EC and will have over 50% of the popular vote. Then there's this:
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/utah/
You live in restricted ass Kansas anyway, voting for McMullin is no different than voting for Stalin, your vote literally will be thrown out. Meanwhile he's on the ballot here, I could be bought, I definitely have a price.
Selling votes!! OMG, The Donald is right, the election is RIGGED!
Crooked Hillary.
Post by: puniraptor on October 21, 2016, 08:38:22 AM
Post by: Institutional Control on October 21, 2016, 08:52:00 AM
What's the polling in Iowa up to these days?
Iowa
Hillary 39.8%
Trump 44.6%
http://www.politico.com/2016-election/swing-states
Post by: puniraptor on October 21, 2016, 08:58:07 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on October 21, 2016, 02:20:58 PM
Post by: chum1 on October 21, 2016, 03:49:35 PM
Some interesting thoughts on Thiel's motives following all of the tweets.
http://qz.com/811993/peter-thiels-support-of-donald-trump-has-divided-silicon-valley-but-it-has-roots-in-his-long-held-libertarian-ideology/
I don't which I find more LOL, the "persuasion" shtick scott adams is doing or the "chess master" narratives about Trump and Thiel. They are just self-evident bullshit.
Both just assholes?
https://twitter.com/juliacarriew/status/789454395251445760
Post by: ChiComCat on October 21, 2016, 04:04:19 PM
Post by: Panjandrum on October 21, 2016, 04:09:08 PM
Just wait for Scott Adams "He didn't want to win, he just persuaded himself to a television network" article to which everyone answers "WE KNOW!"
To me, one of the greatest mysteries and legends of this inane spectacle was that the author of Dilbert became a vocal participant in this process.
That's not quite Scott Baio and Antonio Sabato Jr. on the RNC stage, but it's above a lot of other stuff.
Post by: bucket on October 21, 2016, 07:38:13 PM
David French on having to deal with the alt-right
Post by: michigancat on October 21, 2016, 07:56:58 PM
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441319/donald-trump-alt-right-internet-abuse-never-trump-movement?utm_content=bufferd07bc&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=bufferJeez
David French on having to deal with the alt-right
Post by: treysolid on October 22, 2016, 12:08:17 PM
Post by: chum1 on October 22, 2016, 08:53:41 PM
Post by: mocat on October 22, 2016, 08:58:45 PM
Post by: bones129 on October 22, 2016, 11:47:13 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on October 23, 2016, 11:32:12 PM
Post by: Tobias on October 23, 2016, 11:35:14 PM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on October 23, 2016, 11:36:18 PM
Post by: Tobias on October 24, 2016, 12:45:16 AM
Post by: chum1 on October 24, 2016, 07:12:52 AM
Quote
Trump traveled from a luxury hotel to this remote spot in his personal helicopter, passing over the “beautiful Florida Everglades” — which he has promised to “restore and protect” — and spotting gators and water moccasins.
“I told the pilot: ‘You sure that we’re okay? Those are big.’ Came in from Palm Beach to here. And I’m saying: ‘Let's get over those .?.?. because that’s a rough-looking sight down there,” Trump said. “You don't want to be down there. Right? I’ve heard for a long time: Go around the Everglades. It will take you longer but — not good. But we’re going to protect them.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/10/24/during-a-rare-sunday-rally-trump-asks-the-crowd-if-he-was-right-to-run-for-president/
Post by: mocat on October 24, 2016, 07:25:09 AM
Quote
“I'll tell you what: We’re doing well in the polls, but, you know, I really think those polls are very inaccurate when it comes to women,” he said. “I think we’re doing better with women than with men, frankly. So, we’re setting records with men, but I want to set records with women. … And I can’t tell the men this, but if I could swap, I would swap you out so fast. You have no idea how fast.”
Post by: steve dave on October 24, 2016, 08:36:43 AM
Post by: treysolid on October 24, 2016, 11:03:24 AM
Post by: michigancat on October 24, 2016, 11:18:31 AM
All the bullet points in this article are great. Outstanding reporting from the Washington Post.QuoteTrump traveled from a luxury hotel to this remote spot in his personal helicopter, passing over the “beautiful Florida Everglades” — which he has promised to “restore and protect” — and spotting gators and water moccasins.
“I told the pilot: ‘You sure that we’re okay? Those are big.’ Came in from Palm Beach to here. And I’m saying: ‘Let's get over those .?.?. because that’s a rough-looking sight down there,” Trump said. “You don't want to be down there. Right? I’ve heard for a long time: Go around the Everglades. It will take you longer but — not good. But we’re going to protect them.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/10/24/during-a-rare-sunday-rally-trump-asks-the-crowd-if-he-was-right-to-run-for-president/
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on October 24, 2016, 02:44:51 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 24, 2016, 03:04:26 PM
Quote
He plugged a recent poll from Investors Business Daily that shows him ahead nationally by two percentage points. Trump claimed that the publication had “the most accurate poll from the last election and the two elections before that,” an honor that the small Los Angeles-based publication seems to have bestowed upon itself. (RealClearPolitics reports that Clinton is beating Trump nationally by an average of 5.9 percentage points.)
haha, just like kansas state
Post by: catastrophe on October 24, 2016, 05:11:22 PM
https://twitter.com/cecicardelle/status/789588565604925441/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
The idea is funny, but it looks like she probably covered up the shirt with her hair whenever anyone was actually looking.
Post by: MakeItRain on October 24, 2016, 06:24:32 PM
https://twitter.com/cecicardelle/status/789588565604925441/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
The idea is funny, but it looks like she probably covered up the shirt with her hair whenever anyone was actually looking.
What? It says contra on the front of that shirt, is she a yeti?
Post by: puniraptor on October 24, 2016, 07:22:40 PM
maybe the coolest word in the whole language.
Post by: Phil Titola on October 24, 2016, 07:29:36 PM
contra is such a cool word
maybe the coolest word in the whole language.
Top 5 NES game too!
Post by: CNS on October 24, 2016, 07:41:19 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 24, 2016, 07:49:18 PM
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/790713289311387648
Post by: star seed 7 on October 24, 2016, 07:50:17 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 24, 2016, 08:06:01 PM
Watching Vice News. They have a story about election hacking using the old ass Diebold voting machines. 25% of the nation uses machines that their CIS professor guy says he could hack with only a few seconds access to the memory cord. Most of those don't provide hard copy of what votes were cast. Russia is gonna put Trump in, you guys.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I don't think most of our voting machines are connected to the internet. I could be wrong about that, though.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 24, 2016, 08:22:06 PM
Watching Vice News. They have a story about election hacking using the old ass Diebold voting machines. 25% of the nation uses machines that their CIS professor guy says he could hack with only a few seconds access to the memory cord. Most of those don't provide hard copy of what votes were cast. Russia is gonna put Trump in, you guys.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Cold War II
#thankshillary
Post by: star seed 7 on October 24, 2016, 08:32:06 PM
Watching Vice News. They have a story about election hacking using the old ass Diebold voting machines. 25% of the nation uses machines that their CIS professor guy says he could hack with only a few seconds access to the memory cord. Most of those don't provide hard copy of what votes were cast. Russia is gonna put Trump in, you guys.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I don't think most of our voting machines are connected to the internet. I could be wrong about that, though.
I can't think of any reason it should be
Post by: Phil Titola on October 24, 2016, 08:35:47 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 24, 2016, 08:41:36 PM
Bombs? Stunz?
Post by: wetwillie on October 24, 2016, 08:48:29 PM
Watching Vice News. They have a story about election hacking using the old ass Diebold voting machines. 25% of the nation uses machines that their CIS professor guy says he could hack with only a few seconds access to the memory cord. Most of those don't provide hard copy of what votes were cast. Russia is gonna put Trump in, you guys.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I don't think most of our voting machines are connected to the internet. I could be wrong about that, though.
I can't think of any reason it should be
They don't need the internet.
Post by: SkinnyBenny on October 24, 2016, 09:59:11 PM
https://twitter.com/cecicardelle/status/789588565604925441/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
The idea is funny, but it looks like she probably covered up the shirt with her hair whenever anyone was actually looking.
I bet you're a blast at parties.
Post by: michigancat on October 24, 2016, 10:01:39 PM
Lol
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/790713289311387648
lol when did wikileaks get so goddam dumb
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 24, 2016, 10:23:29 PM
#libtardparadox
Post by: chum1 on October 24, 2016, 10:37:02 PM
lol when did wikileaks get so goddam dumb
When their smart people left in 2011.
https://www.wired.com/2011/08/wikileaks-documents-destroyed/
Post by: sys on October 24, 2016, 11:16:38 PM
lol when did wikileaks get so goddam dumb
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-11/how-julian-assange-turned-wikileaks-into-trump-s-best-friend
Post by: MakeItRain on October 25, 2016, 12:56:26 AM
Lol
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/790713289311387648
lol when did wikileaks get so goddam dumb
Why in the holy eff did they feel this was relevant to release and why did fsd post it? Is John Podesta, whom I can't stand, not allowed to email regular people about regular crap?
Post by: Phil Titola on October 25, 2016, 08:00:05 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 25, 2016, 08:09:32 AM
Post by: michigancat on October 25, 2016, 08:55:15 AM
Wow, kind of sad.lol when did wikileaks get so goddam dumb
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-11/how-julian-assange-turned-wikileaks-into-trump-s-best-friend
Post by: catastrophe on October 25, 2016, 09:17:45 AM
https://twitter.com/cecicardelle/status/789588565604925441/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
The idea is funny, but it looks like she probably covered up the shirt with her hair whenever anyone was actually looking.
I bet you're a blast at parties.
Well, yea. That's a pretty safe bet.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 25, 2016, 10:19:37 AM
Post by: catastrophe on October 25, 2016, 10:38:12 AM
Let's just start with this: how many women go to an event and switch their hairstyle (ponytail to wearing it down) halfway though?
Post by: steve dave on October 25, 2016, 10:41:05 AM
Post by: catastrophe on October 25, 2016, 10:46:51 AM
if going from down to ponytail also counts then mrs. dave is about 100% of events she attends.
The reverse is definitely different because the ponytail is an acceptable hairstyle regardless of whether you got your hair did or not. You can always go into a ponytail, but a lot of women would be uncomfortable starting out in one and then letting it down.
Question 2: how many letters do you actually see on the picture where she's posing with Trump?
Post by: catastrophe on October 25, 2016, 10:47:55 AM
Post by: catastrophe on October 25, 2016, 10:52:40 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 25, 2016, 10:55:23 AM
if going from down to ponytail also counts then mrs. dave is about 100% of events she attends.
The reverse is definitely different because the ponytail is an acceptable hairstyle regardless of whether you got your hair did or not. You can always go into a ponytail, but a lot of women would be uncomfortable starting out in one and then letting it down.
Question 2: how many letters do you actually see on the picture where she's posing with Trump?
The ones that spell the word "contra"
Post by: catastrophe on October 25, 2016, 11:19:51 AM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on October 25, 2016, 11:26:45 AM
Post by: catastrophe on October 25, 2016, 11:29:25 AM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on October 25, 2016, 11:31:16 AM
Post by: steve dave on October 25, 2016, 11:32:13 AM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on October 25, 2016, 11:34:16 AM
Post by: Cartierfor3 on October 25, 2016, 11:34:41 AM
Post by: steve dave on October 25, 2016, 11:37:43 AM
i think he read it on drudge or something
well, he lied about not being a trump supporter
SOURCE: he reads drudge
Post by: Cartierfor3 on October 25, 2016, 11:38:38 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 25, 2016, 11:43:52 AM
lying about being a trump supporter was his whole premise re:polls so there you go.
his premise is that lots of people are embarrassed to be Trump supporters (like he is) but will vote for trump?
Post by: Cartierfor3 on October 25, 2016, 11:45:52 AM
lying about being a trump supporter was his whole premise re:polls so there you go.
his premise is that lots of people are embarrassed to be Trump supporters (like he is) but will vote for trump?
yeah. like in polls where you don't say your name I guess he's winning by like a million.
Post by: catastrophe on October 25, 2016, 11:51:38 AM
Post by: catastrophe on October 25, 2016, 11:52:59 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 25, 2016, 12:05:33 PM
Would be funny (in a tragic way) if exit polls on Election Day showed Hillary winning in a landslide but more votes actually counted for Trump.
would be funny way as there is no way that happened
Post by: treysolid on October 25, 2016, 01:04:16 PM
I had dinner last night with a person who is not only convinced Trump will win, but that it will be a landslide.
you had dinner with @mitchellvii ?
Post by: stunted on October 25, 2016, 01:18:20 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 25, 2016, 01:20:41 PM
Remember Brexit
yep, exactly. then the next morning everyone was like, "I voted for it but I didn't think it would actually pass!" this is a conceivable thing that could happen. though the brexit polling was showing a neck and neck when the vote happened v. the big gap we have now.
Post by: CNS on October 25, 2016, 01:32:34 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 25, 2016, 01:53:10 PM
I thought the brexit claim is that so many ppl thought it wouldn't pass that a bunch just didnt' bother to vote since it was going to be a landslide against anyway. :dunno:
both, and both could take place here
Post by: chum1 on October 25, 2016, 02:10:23 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 25, 2016, 02:16:14 PM
I thought the brexit claim is that so many ppl thought it wouldn't pass that a bunch just didnt' bother to vote since it was going to be a landslide against anyway. :dunno:
both, and both could take place here
So 2 days of panic followed by months of BFD that was silly to get worried about?
Post by: Panjandrum on October 25, 2016, 02:28:14 PM
I thought the brexit claim is that so many ppl thought it wouldn't pass that a bunch just didnt' bother to vote since it was going to be a landslide against anyway. :dunno:
both, and both could take place here
I would agree, but absentee and early voting numbers are up all over the place, so I'm guessing that it may go the other way with increased voter turnout.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 25, 2016, 02:58:53 PM
These are the questions that plague humanity.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 25, 2016, 03:04:48 PM
What continent(s) will stop trading with the u.s. upon Trumpident???? Will the dollar become worth less than the peso upon Trumptatorship?????
These are the questions that plague humanity.
Well, Trump has made restricting trade between Canada and Mexico part of his platform, so I'd start there.
Post by: CNS on October 25, 2016, 03:22:04 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 25, 2016, 04:14:33 PM
What continent(s) will stop trading with the u.s. upon Trumpident???? Will the dollar become worth less than the peso upon Trumptatorship?????
These are the questions that plague humanity.
Well, Trump has made restricting trade between Canada and Mexico part of his platform, so I'd start there.
That's what you got out of "way better deals"????
Nobody is going to stop trading with the u.s. We lead the world in consumption of cheap goods.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 25, 2016, 04:18:04 PM
What continent(s) will stop trading with the u.s. upon Trumpident???? Will the dollar become worth less than the peso upon Trumptatorship?????
These are the questions that plague humanity.
Well, Trump has made restricting trade between Canada and Mexico part of his platform, so I'd start there.
That's what you got out of "way better deals"????
Nobody is going to stop trading with the u.s. We lead the world in consumption of cheap goods.
I have no idea what Trump means by "better" or if he has any sort of ability to negotiate the deal he wants, but he is very anti-free trade, so I'm assuming that his idea of better is something far more restrictive than what we currently have with NAFTA.
Post by: CNS on October 25, 2016, 04:28:36 PM
Also, he had a good piece on NAFTA. He noted that a total of 700,000 jobs were lost over 15 yrs and that we are adding just under 200k/month this year alone. He also noted that Uni of Chicago polled a bunch of economists and 95% of them said that NAFTA has benefited the US and 5% said they weren't sure. None said it was negative.
Post by: sys on October 25, 2016, 05:34:50 PM
What continent(s) will stop trading with the u.s. upon Trumpident???? Will the dollar become worth less than the peso upon Trumptatorship?????
the pound has fallen by like 20% since brexit and none of the trade changes will kick in for another couple years.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 25, 2016, 05:47:25 PM
What continent(s) will stop trading with the u.s. upon Trumpident???? Will the dollar become worth less than the peso upon Trumptatorship?????
the pound has fallen by like 20% since brexit and none of the trade changes will kick in for another couple years.
You would hate our Fed
Post by: sys on October 25, 2016, 05:48:18 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 25, 2016, 05:50:49 PM
Also, he had a good piece on NAFTA. He noted that a total of 700,000 jobs were lost over 15 yrs and that we are adding just under 200k/month this year alone.
This point is asinine and inaccurate, so I will assume the rest was equally illogical and unfounded.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 25, 2016, 05:52:59 PM
i adore our fed.
The devalueing the currency part, too?
Post by: CNS on October 25, 2016, 06:29:34 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: CNS on October 25, 2016, 06:30:48 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: CNS on October 25, 2016, 06:37:21 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Kat Kid on October 25, 2016, 06:39:24 PM
i adore our fed.
The devalueing the currency part, too?
RUN AWAY INFLATION!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 25, 2016, 07:28:29 PM
Same guy I initially mentioned said that NAFTA adds about $15B annually to our economy. Said the TPP will add in the neighborhood of over 3x that, iirc.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
$15B to a $16,000B economy isn't even a rounding error, but I'm glad some guy you listened to thinks its great.
Globally there's no question free trade is great global economic policy. What trump, obama, sanders and other Democrats advocate for are anti-free trade measures to protect jobs and industry, while claiming free trade only helps the rich (obama v. Romney major debate point).
I was just pointing out an asinine talking point.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 25, 2016, 07:30:28 PM
i adore our fed.
The devalueing the currency part, too?
RUN AWAY stagINFLATION! and dismal economic growth and employment
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fify
Post by: steve dave on October 25, 2016, 07:30:32 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 25, 2016, 07:32:03 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 25, 2016, 07:34:19 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 25, 2016, 07:38:43 PM
Post by: CNS on October 25, 2016, 07:39:44 PM
My point ITT is that trump is saying NAFTA is basically aids. I don't give a crap about the rounding error, but it obviously isn't negative on the jobs side or money side.
Now, back to deflecting how enraged you are at SD.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: steve dave on October 25, 2016, 07:43:20 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 25, 2016, 07:44:03 PM
Post by: CNS on October 25, 2016, 07:49:10 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 25, 2016, 07:49:28 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 25, 2016, 07:51:39 PM
Glad to see that after your deflection, and through your rage at SD, you are able to agree with my point that started this in that trump doesn't know what he is talking about with trade.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
I can't agree with you, because everything you is either misguided or incoherent.
Post by: CNS on October 25, 2016, 07:52:41 PM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 25, 2016, 08:20:21 PM
You don't have the mental capacity to think, only regurgitate internet nonsense.
Post by: CNS on October 25, 2016, 08:35:08 PM
No crap the division doesn't equate to lights out numbers, however they are still not red.
As for job numbers, go find a source.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: chum1 on October 25, 2016, 08:44:28 PM
(https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2016/10/TrumpSpend_Hats.jpg)
Post by: sys on October 25, 2016, 09:16:46 PM
i adore our fed.
The devalueing the currency part, too?
the dollar is super strong and consensus is that it will continue to strengthen near/medium term.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 25, 2016, 09:23:17 PM
:Carl:
Post by: sys on October 25, 2016, 09:35:24 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on October 26, 2016, 01:16:16 AM
lying about being a trump supporter was his whole premise re:polls so there you go.
his premise is that lots of people are embarrassed to be Trump supporters (like he is) but will vote for trump?
yeah. like in polls where you don't say your name I guess he's winning by like a million.
I live in a purple state that has a weird imbalance of national political influence. I say this because I have been polled a lot, never asked to give my name.
Post by: MakeItRain on October 26, 2016, 01:21:42 AM
Remember Brexit
When/Where do I remember the UK having the electoral college?
Post by: stunted on October 26, 2016, 01:34:02 AM
(https://i.sli.mg/y0wz2G.jpg)
Post by: Cartierfor3 on October 26, 2016, 10:45:32 AM
http://deadspin.com/remember-when-donald-trump-got-booed-for-butchering-ta-1788216229 (http://deadspin.com/remember-when-donald-trump-got-booed-for-butchering-ta-1788216229)
Post by: chum1 on October 26, 2016, 11:27:18 AM
(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2016/10/26/us/27xp-trumpstar3/27xp-trumpstar3-master675.jpg)
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on October 26, 2016, 03:02:29 PM
Quote from: Donald J. Trump
My son Eric came up with a Big League idea, and it’s simple: If we can get every one of my supporters to contribute $20.17, just one time, Crooked Hillary’s big spending special interest cronies won’t be able to save her!
CONTRIBUTE $20.17 NOW
Money isn’t everything in an election. I’ve proven that in this race.
But for Hillary Clinton, believe me, money IS everything – she would have zero chance without her big dollar donors, nasty TV ads and the lying liberal media!
Eric’s plan is tremendous. Help us make it a huge success. I’d love to see your name on the list he provides me each morning.
Help me win in 14 days and Make America Great Again!
Best wishes,
Donald J. Trump
Post by: ChiComCat on October 26, 2016, 03:10:48 PM
Post by: CNS on October 26, 2016, 03:11:52 PM
Post by: Tobias on October 26, 2016, 03:12:35 PM
Post by: chum1 on October 26, 2016, 03:18:48 PM
Post by: sys on October 26, 2016, 03:22:45 PM
1. get $20.17 from everyone.
2. make list, show it to dad.
3. ???
4. first second son!
Post by: CNS on October 26, 2016, 03:25:32 PM
Post by: bucket on October 26, 2016, 03:59:31 PM
Where did Trump get my email address? :curse:Quote from: Donald J. TrumpMy son Eric came up with a Big League idea, and it’s simple: If we can get every one of my supporters to contribute $20.17, just one time, Crooked Hillary’s big spending special interest cronies won’t be able to save her!
CONTRIBUTE $20.17 NOW
Money isn’t everything in an election. I’ve proven that in this race.
But for Hillary Clinton, believe me, money IS everything – she would have zero chance without her big dollar donors, nasty TV ads and the lying liberal media!
Eric’s plan is tremendous. Help us make it a huge success. I’d love to see your name on the list he provides me each morning.
Help me win in 14 days and Make America Great Again!
Best wishes,
Donald J. Trump
You can add your address on his website. I do it to my friends and people who annoy me all of the time :lol:
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on October 26, 2016, 04:03:06 PM
Where did Trump get my email address? :curse:Quote from: Donald J. TrumpMy son Eric came up with a Big League idea, and it’s simple: If we can get every one of my supporters to contribute $20.17, just one time, Crooked Hillary’s big spending special interest cronies won’t be able to save her!
CONTRIBUTE $20.17 NOW
Money isn’t everything in an election. I’ve proven that in this race.
But for Hillary Clinton, believe me, money IS everything – she would have zero chance without her big dollar donors, nasty TV ads and the lying liberal media!
Eric’s plan is tremendous. Help us make it a huge success. I’d love to see your name on the list he provides me each morning.
Help me win in 14 days and Make America Great Again!
Best wishes,
Donald J. Trump
You can add your address on his website. I do it to my friends and people who annoy me all of the time :lol:
My mom probably did it.
Post by: steve dave on October 26, 2016, 08:14:11 PM
Trump also told Cain that solar and wind are “very, very expensive” and “not working on a large-scale.” And he criticized the way wind turbines look, calling the windmills in Palm Springs, California a “junkyard"
Post by: Phil Titola on October 26, 2016, 08:50:00 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on October 27, 2016, 12:41:22 AM
“[Wind power] kills all the birds,” Trump told 2012 Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain on the latter’s radio show Tuesday. “Thousands of birds are lying on the ground. And the eagle. You know, certain parts of California?—?they’ve killed so many eagles. You know, they put you in jail if you kill an eagle. And yet these windmills [kill] them by the hundreds.”
Trump also told Cain that solar and wind are “very, very expensive” and “not working on a large-scale.” And he criticized the way wind turbines look, calling the windmills in Palm Springs, California a “junkyard"
He's got to be the stupidest major candidate in modern political history. How in the eff did he graduate? Bad look for Wharton.
Post by: bones129 on October 27, 2016, 01:04:52 AM
“[Wind power] kills all the birds,” Trump told 2012 Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain on the latter’s radio show Tuesday. “Thousands of birds are lying on the ground. And the eagle. You know, certain parts of California?—?they’ve killed so many eagles. You know, they put you in jail if you kill an eagle. And yet these windmills [kill] them by the hundreds.”
Trump also told Cain that solar and wind are “very, very expensive” and “not working on a large-scale.” And he criticized the way wind turbines look, calling the windmills in Palm Springs, California a “junkyard"
He's got to be the stupidest major candidate in modern political history. How in the eff did he graduate? Bad look for Wharton.
MIR just nailed it.
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on October 27, 2016, 08:34:00 AM
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/uFMpyn9Jlwk/maxresdefault.jpg)
Post by: CNS on October 27, 2016, 08:39:51 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: CNS on October 27, 2016, 08:40:18 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: star seed 7 on October 27, 2016, 08:41:19 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 27, 2016, 08:43:07 AM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on October 27, 2016, 08:54:57 AM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 27, 2016, 09:11:26 AM
Nuclear is the best looking.
You must be out of your dam mind.
:D
Post by: XocolateThundarr on October 27, 2016, 09:13:42 AM
It is also interesting that most of the windfarms being constructed in Kansas are by out of state entities. I think the one we are currently working on is being funded by at least in part by Google (at least that is what I heard).
Post by: catastrophe on October 27, 2016, 09:22:13 AM
Post by: steve dave on October 27, 2016, 09:29:16 AM
Post by: Gooch on October 27, 2016, 09:29:20 AM
I do think he is right about them being very expensive...at least in the construction process. I have been involved in the construction of a few of these in Kansas. The cost of the projects are unbelievably high. I've heard that the only reason they are viable at this point is due to the government subsidies for clean power. Thus, if the subsidies weren't available you wouldn't see near as many facilities being constructed. To be fair, I haven't seen any numbers regarding the how long it takes for them to "pay for themselves" with the power they generate once operational. The construction cost just seems to be so high that it would take forever to pay off.This tells you they are profitable.
It is also interesting that most of the windfarms being constructed in Kansas are by out of state entities. I think the one we are currently working on is being funded by at least in part by Google (at least that is what I heard).
Post by: XocolateThundarr on October 27, 2016, 09:37:29 AM
I do think he is right about them being very expensive...at least in the construction process. I have been involved in the construction of a few of these in Kansas. The cost of the projects are unbelievably high. I've heard that the only reason they are viable at this point is due to the government subsidies for clean power. Thus, if the subsidies weren't available you wouldn't see near as many facilities being constructed. To be fair, I haven't seen any numbers regarding the how long it takes for them to "pay for themselves" with the power they generate once operational. The construction cost just seems to be so high that it would take forever to pay off.This tells you they are profitable.
It is also interesting that most of the windfarms being constructed in Kansas are by out of state entities. I think the one we are currently working on is being funded by at least in part by Google (at least that is what I heard).
Possibly....the farm down by Howard was constructed by an entity from Tennessee if I remember correctly. As I understood it, they were required to construct it to offset the amount of energy used/generated from "dirty energy". Also, are they profitable if the government subsidies aren't there? I mean, just the turbines for a farm out by Dodge cost $300 million. That doesn't include any other components, infrastructure improvements, or construction costs.
Post by: Phil Titola on October 27, 2016, 09:40:13 AM
Best-looking power? Probably hydro, right?
Hoover dam isn't sexy. Impressive but not sexy. How about natural gas with its sexy stacks?
Post by: star seed 7 on October 27, 2016, 09:42:56 AM
Post by: CNS on October 27, 2016, 09:43:43 AM
Post by: tdaver on October 27, 2016, 09:59:55 AM
Quote
“I will do anything that is basically covered by the law to reduce Berkshire’s tax rate,” Buffett told an audience in Omaha, Nebraska this weekend. “For example, on wind energy, we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That’s the only reason to build them. They don’t make sense without the tax credit.”
Post by: Gooch on October 27, 2016, 10:05:33 AM
what's the cost to build a new coal or gas fired plant?I do think he is right about them being very expensive...at least in the construction process. I have been involved in the construction of a few of these in Kansas. The cost of the projects are unbelievably high. I've heard that the only reason they are viable at this point is due to the government subsidies for clean power. Thus, if the subsidies weren't available you wouldn't see near as many facilities being constructed. To be fair, I haven't seen any numbers regarding the how long it takes for them to "pay for themselves" with the power they generate once operational. The construction cost just seems to be so high that it would take forever to pay off.This tells you they are profitable.
It is also interesting that most of the windfarms being constructed in Kansas are by out of state entities. I think the one we are currently working on is being funded by at least in part by Google (at least that is what I heard).
Possibly....the farm down by Howard was constructed by an entity from Tennessee if I remember correctly. As I understood it, they were required to construct it to offset the amount of energy used/generated from "dirty energy". Also, are they profitable if the government subsidies aren't there? I mean, just the turbines for a farm out by Dodge cost $300 million. That doesn't include any other components, infrastructure improvements, or construction costs.
Post by: wetwillie on October 27, 2016, 10:19:15 AM
Solar panels are fine. I mean, in small amts, they are basically shiny roofs.
Elon Musk and Solar City are going to introduce their new solar shingle product tomorrow. Supposed to be similar to a traditional roof shingle in look and function.
Post by: CNS on October 27, 2016, 10:22:08 AM
Solar panels are fine. I mean, in small amts, they are basically shiny roofs.
Elon Musk and Solar City are going to introduce their new solar shingle product tomorrow. Supposed to be similar to a traditional roof shingle in look and function.
There was another company trying to do this several years ago. Will be a game changer if it is reasonably affordable.
I have also heard of a company that was out of New Mex that is working with German power companies right now on printable solar panels. Evidently, they are something like 30% more efficient than current market panels and consist of a solar ink/paint substance that they print on foil. So it's super light weight too. Solar paint would be amaze.
Post by: wetwillie on October 27, 2016, 10:25:22 AM
Solar panels are fine. I mean, in small amts, they are basically shiny roofs.
Elon Musk and Solar City are going to introduce their new solar shingle product tomorrow. Supposed to be similar to a traditional roof shingle in look and function.
There was another company trying to do this several years ago. Will be a game changer if it is reasonably affordable.
I have also heard of a company that was out of New Mex that is working with German power companies right now on printable solar panels. Evidently, they are something like 30% more efficient than current market panels and consist of a solar ink/paint substance that they print on foil. So it's super light weight too. Solar paint would be amaze.
Luna I think is who you are talking about. Some dude in Detroit has been doing it for a decade but obviously can't scale.
Post by: EMAWican on October 27, 2016, 10:41:53 AM
Just an FYI that a lot of people don't realize. Like 98+% of the electricity generated via Kansas wind farms goes out of state.
Post by: XocolateThundarr on October 27, 2016, 10:41:56 AM
what's the cost to build a new coal or gas fired plant?I do think he is right about them being very expensive...at least in the construction process. I have been involved in the construction of a few of these in Kansas. The cost of the projects are unbelievably high. I've heard that the only reason they are viable at this point is due to the government subsidies for clean power. Thus, if the subsidies weren't available you wouldn't see near as many facilities being constructed. To be fair, I haven't seen any numbers regarding the how long it takes for them to "pay for themselves" with the power they generate once operational. The construction cost just seems to be so high that it would take forever to pay off.This tells you they are profitable.
It is also interesting that most of the windfarms being constructed in Kansas are by out of state entities. I think the one we are currently working on is being funded by at least in part by Google (at least that is what I heard).
Possibly....the farm down by Howard was constructed by an entity from Tennessee if I remember correctly. As I understood it, they were required to construct it to offset the amount of energy used/generated from "dirty energy". Also, are they profitable if the government subsidies aren't there? I mean, just the turbines for a farm out by Dodge cost $300 million. That doesn't include any other components, infrastructure improvements, or construction costs.
:dunno:
Post by: EMAWican on October 27, 2016, 10:48:47 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on October 27, 2016, 10:55:33 AM
what's the cost to build a new coal or gas fired plant?I do think he is right about them being very expensive...at least in the construction process. I have been involved in the construction of a few of these in Kansas. The cost of the projects are unbelievably high. I've heard that the only reason they are viable at this point is due to the government subsidies for clean power. Thus, if the subsidies weren't available you wouldn't see near as many facilities being constructed. To be fair, I haven't seen any numbers regarding the how long it takes for them to "pay for themselves" with the power they generate once operational. The construction cost just seems to be so high that it would take forever to pay off.This tells you they are profitable.
It is also interesting that most of the windfarms being constructed in Kansas are by out of state entities. I think the one we are currently working on is being funded by at least in part by Google (at least that is what I heard).
Possibly....the farm down by Howard was constructed by an entity from Tennessee if I remember correctly. As I understood it, they were required to construct it to offset the amount of energy used/generated from "dirty energy". Also, are they profitable if the government subsidies aren't there? I mean, just the turbines for a farm out by Dodge cost $300 million. That doesn't include any other components, infrastructure improvements, or construction costs.
:dunno:
It's a lot
Post by: Mrs. Gooch on October 27, 2016, 11:13:19 AM
Quote from: Some study from 2008
In fact, the estimated costs of building new coal plants
have reached $3,500 per kW, without financing costs, and are still expected to increase
further. This would mean a cost of well over $2 billion for a new 600 MW coal plant when
financing costs are included.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/91d3/bd08c6672492fda5e14484abecea86117ad6.pdf
Post by: Institutional Control on October 27, 2016, 11:13:28 AM
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/10/watch-chris-cuomo-battles-giuliani-for-living-in-fact-free-trumpland-during-tense-interview/
Post by: Emo EMAW on October 27, 2016, 02:36:03 PM
Quote from: Some study from 2008In fact, the estimated costs of building new coal plants
have reached $3,500 per kW, without financing costs, and are still expected to increase
further. This would mean a cost of well over $2 billion for a new 600 MW coal plant when
financing costs are included.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/91d3/bd08c6672492fda5e14484abecea86117ad6.pdf
I wonder why that is? :dunno:
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on October 27, 2016, 02:44:38 PM
Nuclear is the best looking.
You must be out of your dam mind.
:D
:fatty:
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FBNkWq2s.jpg&hash=67666a22df93876bcab40756d814c150ef8f1499)
Post by: star seed 7 on October 27, 2016, 02:46:25 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on October 27, 2016, 02:47:47 PM
Post by: sys on October 27, 2016, 02:49:55 PM
Best-looking power? Probably hydro, right?
hydro can be very sexy. i think a lot of the others can be attractive as well, a lot of it is a question of design.
Post by: cfbandyman on October 27, 2016, 03:09:45 PM
what's the cost to build a new coal or gas fired plant?I do think he is right about them being very expensive...at least in the construction process. I have been involved in the construction of a few of these in Kansas. The cost of the projects are unbelievably high. I've heard that the only reason they are viable at this point is due to the government subsidies for clean power. Thus, if the subsidies weren't available you wouldn't see near as many facilities being constructed. To be fair, I haven't seen any numbers regarding the how long it takes for them to "pay for themselves" with the power they generate once operational. The construction cost just seems to be so high that it would take forever to pay off.This tells you they are profitable.
It is also interesting that most of the windfarms being constructed in Kansas are by out of state entities. I think the one we are currently working on is being funded by at least in part by Google (at least that is what I heard).
Possibly....the farm down by Howard was constructed by an entity from Tennessee if I remember correctly. As I understood it, they were required to construct it to offset the amount of energy used/generated from "dirty energy". Also, are they profitable if the government subsidies aren't there? I mean, just the turbines for a farm out by Dodge cost $300 million. That doesn't include any other components, infrastructure improvements, or construction costs.
:dunno:
Natural gas is pretty cheap relative. The real way to compare across is $/MWh
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/df/Projected_LCOE_in_the_U.S._by_2020_%28as_of_2015%29.png/640px-Projected_LCOE_in_the_U.S._by_2020_%28as_of_2015%29.png)
The thing is, wind, and especially solar is continuing to go down in price over time. The biggest hindrances those have though is demand loading and energy storage (sun not shining, wind not blowing). That being said,d I've also thought solar was a great solution to reduce summer time load, after all, your greatest demand on the grid is in the summer time, and when does solar work the best? Oh yeah, when it's hot and sunny out. I've also never been bothered by wind turbines when i see them, always thing of their energy production when I see them turning and it makes me very :)
IMO though, I'd like to see a lot more investment in fusion power, it's still be "20 years off" for like 50 years, but its success basically solves every problem with energy production. Doesn't get much better than literally harnessing the power of the sun.
Post by: chum1 on October 27, 2016, 10:59:20 PM
D :dance:
CHESS :dance:
Quote
Issenberg, the author of The Victory Lab: The Secret Science of Winning Campaigns, is well versed in this sort of science, and “no scientific basis” is almost an understatement — if you know anything about the basics of political science or data analysis, or both, you know that the idea that a last-second burst of Facebook posts could flip any meaningful number of people from voters to nonvoters is fairly bonkers, and doubly bonkers when you’re targeting a group which has exhibited an historic amount of animus toward your candidate.
http://nymag.com/selectall/2016/10/is-the-trump-campaign-getting-scammed-by-data-hucksters.html
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on October 27, 2016, 11:20:51 PM
When the government claimed that they weren't going to extend the tax credits on wind farms the number of proposed wind farms went to zero. After they got pushback and extended them, wind farms started getting built. All you need to know if they're feasible or not.
Just an FYI that a lot of people don't realize. Like 98+% of the electricity generated via Kansas wind farms goes out of state.
People are extremely stupid about wind, that it's profitable without subsidies, that the technology is new or improving, that it's efficient.
Solar is all of those things except efficient, but is even a larger loss item.
Post by: Tobias on October 27, 2016, 11:30:46 PM
Post by: sys on October 28, 2016, 02:20:06 AM
some interesting stuff in there.
Post by: sys on October 28, 2016, 02:21:45 AM
http://nymag.com/selectall/2016/10/is-the-trump-campaign-getting-scammed-by-data-hucksters.html
heh. i've luked.
Post by: Panjandrum on October 28, 2016, 02:54:31 AM
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-27/inside-the-trump-bunker-with-12-days-to-go
some interesting stuff in there.
I remember Parscale. He was several years older, but he's a Shawnee Heights grad.
Fascinating stuff, but it's terrifying to know these people are going to stay in the public eye.
Post by: sys on October 28, 2016, 03:59:08 PM
Post by: chum1 on October 28, 2016, 07:22:43 PM
Post by: steve dave on October 28, 2016, 07:44:29 PM
https://twitter.com/Slate/status/792126818685952000
haha, just like my grandpa would do (RIP)
Post by: steve dave on October 28, 2016, 07:47:19 PM
Quote
Trump immediately dismissing as a “thug” a black supporter, who was specifically trying to get Trump to be more sensitive to African-Americans
amaze
Post by: bucket on October 28, 2016, 08:48:59 PM
Post by: Phil Titola on October 29, 2016, 09:13:50 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on October 29, 2016, 09:42:14 AM
Post by: CNS on October 29, 2016, 11:59:34 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: Phil Titola on October 29, 2016, 12:14:30 PM
What happens in Rocky 4 now?
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Obv they both kill Apollo and yell "Law and Order"
Post by: chum1 on October 30, 2016, 01:02:18 PM
Quote
After Trump tentatively decided on Christie, Manafort told Trump his plane had a mechanical problem, campaign sources said, forcing Trump to spend another night in the Hoosier State. Pence then made his case to be Trump’s No. 2 over dinner as Trump’s advisers argued that Christie’s Bridgegate troubles would sink the campaign.
http://nypost.com/2016/10/30/trump-offered-christie-his-vp-slot-then-rescinded-it/
Post by: stunted on October 30, 2016, 01:57:09 PM
Post by: SdK on October 30, 2016, 02:41:55 PM
Post by: stunted on October 30, 2016, 08:52:00 PM
we have the best obamas
Post by: star seed 7 on October 30, 2016, 09:34:58 PM
Post by: bones129 on October 31, 2016, 12:51:10 AM
https://twitter.com/ObamaMalik/status/792810368628207618
we have the best obamas
And Mexico will reimburse Malik? Not a chance.
Post by: chum1 on October 31, 2016, 11:40:19 AM
Post by: wetwillie on October 31, 2016, 11:57:17 AM
Trump is not the big election story right now. How long until he changes that?
I'm sure the liberal media will release something they have been sitting on a few days before Election Day. They are so very very unfair.
Post by: ChiComCat on October 31, 2016, 12:36:20 PM
Post by: steve dave on November 01, 2016, 07:39:44 AM
Post by: Panjandrum on November 01, 2016, 09:23:18 AM
His best bet is probably New Hampshire.
Well, maybe Colorado if everyone commits voter fraud like he's telling them to do.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 01, 2016, 09:33:57 AM
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_elections_electoral_college_map.html
The most recent poll in each state has him leading in all, except Colorado where he is down 1 point.
As all this news about hillary and the dnc's bullshit, cronyism, cheating, lying and fraud continues to break, it isn't beyond the realm of possibility that he wins all those states.
I don't think early voting is any indicator of how the independent undecided will vote, as they are usually too stupid to know that's an option.
Post by: steve dave on November 01, 2016, 09:36:58 AM
I don't think early voting is any indicator of how the independent undecided will vote, as they are usually too stupid to know that's an option.
:lol:
Post by: stunted on November 01, 2016, 09:43:43 AM
Anyways Trump is leading on Washington Post - ABC poll. :driving:
Post by: Panjandrum on November 01, 2016, 09:56:32 AM
According to this map there are 8 toss up states. I think each candidate has as good a chance as the other to win them. Trump basically needs to win all of them.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_elections_electoral_college_map.html
The most recent poll in each state has him leading in all, except Colorado where he is down 1 point.
As all this news about hillary and the dnc's bullshit, cronyism, cheating, lying and fraud continues to break, it isn't beyond the realm of possibility that he wins all those states.
I don't think early voting is any indicator of how the independent undecided will vote, as they are usually too stupid to know that's an option.
I don't like RCP. Unless I'm missing something, they don't weight the polls differently based on quality like FiveThirtyEight does.
Here's the thing about all of the polls that flummoxes me. I hear one side say that there are a lot of "hidden" Trump voters that will not admit to voting for Trump in a phone poll, but when I actually read some of the polling data in a lot of these individual states, Hillary is winning large demographic groups that are critical to winning the election.
Trump can't lean on white men and women without college degrees if she's winning women overall and obliterating him with minorities and those with college degrees.
Something has to give. I fully believe these polls are under-representing something, at least a tiny bit, but the overwhelming amount of data says that even in his best times, he's been an arm or hands length away from her, and in her best times, she's been two car lengths ahead.
Even with the Comey news, I wouldn't be at all surprised if she still wins this thing by 4-5 points, nationally, and gets close to 300 electoral college votes. I firmly believe he's walking away with Iowa and Ohio, but I think she still holds onto CO, PA, NH, NV and mayyyyyybe North Carolina.
I will not even venture a guess on Florida. That's always a coin flip.
Post by: Panjandrum on November 01, 2016, 09:58:17 AM
Who knew panjy was such a dumbass. Polls are swinging heavily to Trump. Early voting is whatever after a bomb like the FBI thing has dropped. Though I still think rigging can happen.
Anyways Trump is leading on Washington Post - ABC poll. :driving:
I don't care about national polls. I care about the sum total of state polls.
And I think the email thing will subside in a few days, and we'll stabilize again right before election day.
Post by: Panjandrum on November 01, 2016, 10:01:40 AM
A lot of old people vote early, and old people are voting for Trump. If Hillary continues to have a strong lead in early voting, that may be a dent on election day.
Post by: stunted on November 01, 2016, 10:09:09 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1BC9ueVwdM
trump announcing something?
Post by: CNS on November 01, 2016, 10:14:44 AM
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: stunted on November 01, 2016, 10:17:10 AM
The very premise that ppl are too ashamed to admit to anonymous polls that they are voting for trump seems completely ridiculous to me. I mean, can we all just admit that this is a talking point and not reality?
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
scott adams (persuasion/psychology genius) says it's a thing
Post by: Institutional Control on November 01, 2016, 10:26:11 AM
The very premise that ppl are too ashamed to admit to anonymous polls that they are voting for trump seems completely ridiculous to me. I mean, can we all just admit that this is a talking point and not reality?
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
scott adams (persuasion/psychology genius) says it's a thing
But what does Trey Parker and Matt Stone think? And has anyone talked to Bill Watterson lately?
Post by: Panjandrum on November 01, 2016, 10:31:35 AM
Are you on the God Emperor Trump subreddit?
Post by: wetwillie on November 01, 2016, 10:33:58 AM
Good God, stunz. You're linking 4chan?
Are you on the God Emperor Trump subreddit?
Do you even stunz bro?
Post by: stunted on November 01, 2016, 10:34:28 AM
Good God, stunz. You're linking 4chan?
Are you on the God Emperor Trump subreddit?
what's wrong with them? are they russian sources?
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 01, 2016, 10:34:44 AM
1. I don't believe early voting results are released. I don't know what you're relying on for this hidden hilltard advantage. Early exit polls? In any event, I would guess the demogogueocrats have had a decided advantage in this front since they started mass registerimg their indoctrinated constituency years ago.
2. I don't really care what anecdotal garbage you're relying upon for your "feelings" that hilltard will prevail. I just noted that the most recent poll (the one taken after more of her bullshit came out) shows Trump pulling ahead in the states he needs to win the election.
Honestly, I still think Hilltard will win in spite of her being the most demonstrably incapable and incompetent person ever to run for the white house. Trump is that wtf of a candidte.
Post by: stunted on November 01, 2016, 10:39:18 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on November 01, 2016, 10:54:22 AM
The very premise that ppl are too ashamed to admit to anonymous polls that they are voting for trump seems completely ridiculous to me. I mean, can we all just admit that this is a talking point and not reality?
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
scott adams (persuasion/psychology genius) says it's a thing
How bad are your persuasion powers if you won't even admit to supporting someone anonymously?
Post by: Panjandrum on November 01, 2016, 11:26:37 AM
Two points to Panflutetard and I'll listen off the air:
1. I don't believe early voting results are released. I don't know what you're relying on for this hidden hilltard advantage. Early exit polls? In any event, I would guess the demogogueocrats have had a decided advantage in this front since they started mass registerimg their indoctrinated constituency years ago.
2. I don't really care what anecdotal garbage you're relying upon for your "feelings" that hilltard will prevail. I just noted that the most recent poll (the one taken after more of her bullshit came out) shows Trump pulling ahead in the states he needs to win the election.
Honestly, I still think Hilltard will win in spite of her being the most demonstrably incapable and incompetent person ever to run for the white house. Trump is that wtf of a candidte.
There are groups that track early voting data. Most of it is based on how many Democrats or Republicans have voted. It's assuming registered Dems and Pubs are voting party lines, which is a safe assumption. http://www.electproject.org/early_2016 (http://www.electproject.org/early_2016)
Again, FiveThirtyEight has a better method of rating polls. A lot of the most recent ones are from the same polling firm (Remington). So, we won't know where the race really stands post Comey until later this week.
Post by: bucket on November 01, 2016, 12:10:53 PM
According to this map there are 8 toss up states. I think each candidate has as good a chance as the other to win them. Trump basically needs to win all of them.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_elections_electoral_college_map.html
The most recent poll in each state has him leading in all, except Colorado where he is down 1 point.
As all this news about hillary and the dnc's bullshit, cronyism, cheating, lying and fraud continues to break, it isn't beyond the realm of possibility that he wins all those states.
I don't think early voting is any indicator of how the independent undecided will vote, as they are usually too stupid to know that's an option.
Don't forget about the bomb James O'Keefe is going to drop this week!
Post by: steve dave on November 01, 2016, 12:21:34 PM
Quote from: liberal rag WSJ
Signatories include economists Angus Deaton of Princeton University, who won the economics Nobel last year, and Oliver Hart of Harvard University, who was one of the two Nobel winners this year.
The letter is notable because it is less partisan or ideological than such quadrennial exercises, and instead takes issue with Mr. Trump’s history of promoting debunked falsehoods.
Quote
We, the undersigned economists, represent a broad variety of areas of expertise and are united in
our opposition to Donald Trump. We recommend that voters choose a different candidate on the
following grounds:
? He degrades trust in vital public institutions that collect and disseminate information
about the economy, such as the Bureau of Labor Statistics, by spreading disinformation
about the integrity of their work.
? He has misled voters in states like Ohio and Michigan by asserting that the renegotiation
of NAFTA or the imposition of tariffs on China would substantially increase employment
in manufacturing. In fact, manufacturing’s share of employment has been declining since
the 1970s and is mostly related to automation, not trade.
? He claims to champion former manufacturing workers, but has no plan to assist their
transition to well-compensated service sector positions. Instead, he has diverted the
policy discussion to options that ignore both the reality of technological progress and the
benefits of international trade.
? He has misled the public by asserting that U.S. manufacturing has declined. The location
and product composition of manufacturing has changed, but the level of output has more
than doubled in the U.S. since the 1980s.
? He has falsely suggested that trade is zero-sum and that the “toughness” of negotiators
primarily drives trade deficits.
? He has misled the public with false statements about trade agreements eroding national
income and wealth. Although the gains have not been equally distributed—and this is an
important discussion in itself—both mean income and mean wealth
have risen substantially in the U.S. since the 1980s.
? He has lowered the seriousness of the national dialogue by suggesting that the
elimination of the Environmental Protection Agency or the Department of Education
would significantly reduce the fiscal deficit. A credible solution will require an increase
in tax revenue and/or a reduction in spending on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, or
Defense.
? He claims he will eliminate the fiscal deficit, but has proposed a plan that would decrease
tax revenue by $2.6 to $5.9 trillion over the next decade according to the non-partisan
Tax Foundation.
? He claims that he will reduce the trade deficit, but has proposed a reduction in public
saving that is likely to increase it.
? He uses immigration as a red herring to mislead voters about issues of economic
importance, such as the stagnation of wages for households with low levels of education.
Several forces are responsible for this, but immigration appears to play only a modest
role. Focusing the dialogue on this channel, rather than more substantive channels, such
as automation, diverts the public debate to unproductive policy options.
? He has misled the electorate by asserting that the U.S. is one of the most heavily taxed
countries. While the U.S. has a high top statutory corporate tax rate, the average effective
rate is much lower, and taxes on income and consumption are relatively low. Overall, the
U.S. has one of the lowest ratios of tax revenue to GDP in the OECD.
? His statements reveal a deep ignorance of economics and an inability to listen to credible
experts. He repeats fake and misleading economic statistics, and pushes fallacies about
the VAT and trade competitiveness.
? He promotes magical thinking and conspiracy theories over sober assessments of feasible
economic policy options.
Donald Trump is a dangerous, destructive choice for the country. He misinforms the electorate,
degrades trust in public institutions with conspiracy theories, and promotes willful delusion over
engagement with reality. If elected, he poses a unique danger to the functioning of democratic
and economic institutions, and to the prosperity of the country. For these reasons, we strongly
recommend that you do not vote for Donald Trump.
Signed,
Jason Abaluck, Yale University
Dilip J. Abreu, Princeton University
Daron Acemoglu, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Amir Ali Ahmadi, Princeton University
Mohammad Akbarpour, Stanford University
Stefania Albanesi, University of Pittsburgh
David Albouy, University of Illinois
S. Nageeb Ali, Pennsylvania State University
Hunt Allcott, New York University
Douglas Almond, Columbia University
Daniel Altman, New York University
Donald Andrews, Yale University
Isaiah Andrews, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Andres Aradillas-Lopez, Pennsylvania State University
Kenneth Ardon, Salem State University
Timothy Armstrong, Yale University
Nick Arnosti, Columbia University
Kenneth J. Arrow, Stanford University
Gaurab Aryal, University of Virginia
Arash Asadpour, New York University
Susan Athey, Stanford University
Andrew Atkeson, University of California, Los Angeles
Maximilian Auffhammer, University of California, Berkeley
Mariagiovanna Baccara, Washington University, St. Louis
Jonathan B. Baker, American University
Laurence Ball, Johns Hopkins University
Abhijit Banerjee, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
James Bang, St. Ambrose University
Chris Barrett, Cornell University
Jean-Noel Barrot, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
John C. Beghin, Iowa State University
Jess Benhabib, New York University
Lanier Benkard, Stanford University
Alan Benson, University of Minnesota
Ronald Berenbeim, New York University
Dirk Bergemann, Yale University
David Berger, Northwestern University
Daniel Beunza, London School of Economics
Joydeep Bhattacharya, Iowa State University
Alberto Bisin, New York University
Emily Blank, Howard University
Francine D. Blau, Cornell University
Nicholas Bloom, Stanford University
Simon Board, University of California, Los Angeles
Luigi Bocola, Northwestern University
Elizabeth Bogan, Princeton University
Michele Boldrin, Washington University, St. Louis
Patrick Bolton, Columbia University
Carl Bonham, University of Hawaii, Manoa
John P. Bonin, Wesleyan University
Severin Borenstein, University of California, Berkeley
Tilman Borgers, University of Michigan
William C. Brainard, Yale University
Timothy Bresnahan, Stanford University
Moshe Buchinsky, University of California, Los Angeles
Eric Budish, University of Chicago
Daniel D. Butler, Auburn University
Sebastien Buttet, City University of New York
Ricardo Caballero, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
John Y. Campbell, Harvard University
Christopher D. Carroll, Johns Hopkins University
Gabriel Carroll, Stanford University
Michael R. Carter, University of California, Davis
Elizabeth Caucutt, University of Western Ontario
Sewin Chan, New York University
Arun G. Chandrasekhar, Stanford University
David A. Chapman, University of Virginia
Kalyan Chatterjee, Pennsylvania State University
Victor Chernozhukov, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Bhagwan Chowdhry, University of California, Los Angeles
Lawrence Christiano, Northwestern University
Michael Chwe, University of California, Los Angeles
Tim Classen, Loyola University Chicago
Gian Luca Clementi, New York University
Victor Couture, University of California, Berkeley
Ian Coxhead, University of Wisconsin
Eric W. Crawford, Michigan State University
Sean Crockett, City University of New York, Baruch College
Barbara Crockett, City University of New York, Baruch College
Samuel Culbert, University of California, Los Angeles
J. David Cummins, Temple University
David Cutler, Harvard University
Jaksa Cvitanic, California Institute of Technology
Chetan Dave, New York University
Paul A. David, Stanford University
Donald R. Davis, Columbia University
Angus Deaton, Princeton University
Joyee Deb, Yale University
Rajeev Dehejia, New York University
Stefano DellaVigna, University of California, Berkeley
Tatyana Deryugina, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Ravi Dhar, Yale University
Marco Di Maggio, Harvard Business School
Dimitrios Diamantaras, Temple University
Peter Diamond, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Avinash K. Dixit, Princeton University
Rebecca Dizon-Ross, University of Chicago
Matthias Doepke, Northwestern University
Esther Duflo, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Steven Durlauf, University of Wisconsin
William Easterly, New York University
Federico Echenique, California Institute of Technology
Florian Ederer, Yale University
Aaron S. Edlin, University of California, Berkeley
Lena Edlund, Columbia University
Sebastian Edwards, University of California, Los Angeles
J.P. Eggers, New York University
Sara Fisher Ellison, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Jeffrey Ely, Northwestern University
Ryan Fang, University of Chicago
Langdana Farrokh, Rutgers University
Daniel Fetter, Wellesley College
David Figlio, Northwestern University
Diana Fletschner
Frederick Floss, State University of New York at Buffalo
Dana Foarta, Stanford University
Meredith Fowlie, University of California, Berkeley
Jeffrey Frankel, Harvard University
Guillaume Frechette, New York University
Victor R. Fuchs, Stanford University
Thomas Fujiwara, Princeton University
David W. Galenson, University of Chicago
Sebastián Gallegos, Princeton University
Michael Gallmeyer, University of Virginia
David Gamarnik, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Bernhard Ganglmair, University of Texas at Dallas
Pedro Gardete, Stanford University
Robert Garlick, Duke University
Peter Garrod, University of Hawaii, Manoa
Claudine Gartenberg, New York University
François Geerolf, University of California, Los Angeles
Christophre Georges, Hamilton College
George Georgiadis, Northwestern University
Andra Ghent, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Suman Ghosh, Florida Atlantic University
Stefano Giglio, University of Chicago
Chuan Goh, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee
Ben Golub, Harvard University
Daniel Gottlieb, Washington University, St Louis
Lawrence H. Goulder, Stanford University
William Greene, New York University
Dan Greenwald, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Matthew Grennan, University of Pennsylvania
Gene Grossman, Princeton University
Jean Grossman, Princeton University
Michael Grubb, Boston College
Jonathan Gruber, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Martin J. Gruber, New York University
Isabel Guerrero, Harvard University
Veronica Guerrieri, University of Chicago
Adam Guren, Boston University
Isa Hafalir, Carnegie Mellon University
Nima Haghpanah, Pennsylvania State University
Jens Hainmueller, Stanford University
Marina Halac, Columbia University
Jeffrey Hammer, Princeton University
Ben Handel, University of California, Berkeley
Oliver D. Hart, Harvard University
Tarek Alexander Hassan, University of Chicago
Andreas Hauskrecht, Indiana University
Brent Hickman, University of Chicago
Kate Ho, Columbia University
Saul D. Hoffman, University of Delaware
Stephen Holland, University of North Carolina, Greensboro
Thomas J. Holmes, University of Minnesota
Adam Honig, Amherst College
Roozbeh Hosseini, University of Georgia
Sabrina Howell, New York University
Peter Howitt, Brown University
Hilary Hoynes, University of California, Berkeley
Yasheng Huang, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Isaiah Hull, Sveriges Riksbank
Jennifer Hunt, Rutgers University
Barry W. Ickes, Pennsylvania State University
Nicolas Inostroza, Northwestern University
Oleg Itskhoki, Princeton University
Kelsey Jack, Tufts University
Sanford M. Jacoby, University of California, Los Angeles
Paul Jakus, Utah State University
Gerald Jaynes, Yale University
Ely Jeffrey, Northwestern University
Geoffrey Jehle, Vassar College
Elizabeth J. Jensen, Hamilton College
Barbara A.P. Jones, Alabama A&M University
Derek C. Jones, Hamilton College
Joseph P. Joyce, Wellesley College
John H. Kagel, Ohio State University
Lisa B. Kahn, Yale University
Navin Kartik, Columbia University
Barbara G. Katz, New York University
Michael Klein, Tufts University
Christopher R. Knittel, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Yilmaz Kocer, University of Southern California
Michal Kolesár, Princeton University
Charles Kolstad, Stanford University
Gerald F. Kominski, University of California, Los Angeles
Matthew Kotchen, Yale University
Kate Krause, University of New Mexico
Mordecai Kurz, Stanford University
David Laitin, Stanford University
Fabian Lange, McGill University
Joe Langsam, University of Maryland and Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Michel Lawrence, Economic Policy Institute
Jonathan Leonard, University of California, Berkeley
Jacob Leshno, Columbia University
Dan Levin, Ohio State University
David Levin, University of California, Berkeley
Shengwu Li, Harvard University
Annie Liang, University of Pennsylvania
Marc Lieberman, New York University
Benjamin Linkow, University of Chicago
Dennis B. Liotta, New York University
Elliot Lipnowski, University of Chicago
Zachary Liscow, Yale University
Adriana Lleras-Muney, University of California, Los Angeles
Benjamin Lockwood, University of Pennsylvania
Guido Lorenzoni, Northwestern University
Jay Lu, University of California, Los Angeles
Sydney C. Ludvigson, New York University
Catherine Maclean, Temple University
Mihai Manea, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Eric Maskin, Harvard University
Costas Meghir, Yale University
Marc Melitz, Harvard University
Konrad Menzel, New York University
Robert C. Merton, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Andrew Metrick, Yale University
Atif Mian, Princeton University
Ronald Miller, Columbia University
Alan Miller, University of Haifa
Kurt Mitman, Stockholm University
Benjamin Moll, Princeton University
Dilip Mookherjee, Boston University
Jonathan Morduch, New York University
Alan Moreira, Yale University
John Morgan, University of California, Berkeley
Stephen E. Morris, Princeton University
Taylor Muir, University of California, Los Angeles
Aldo Musacchio, Brandeis University
Roger Myerson, University of Chicago
John Nachbar, Washington University, St. Louis
Barry Nalebuff, Yale University
Paulo Natenzon, Washington University, St. Louis
Roz Naylor, Stanford University
Jack Needleman, University of California, Los Angeles
Christopher A. Neilson, Princeton University
David Neumark, University of California, Irvine
Marina Niessner, Yale University
Roger G. Noll, Stanford University
John O'Trakoun, Ford Motor Company
Ezra Oberfield, Princeton University
James Orlin, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
David L. Ortega, Michigan State University
Pietro Ortoleva, Columbia University
Sharon Oster, Yale University
Emily Oster, Brown University
Ann Owen, Hamilton College
Thomas Palfrey, California Institute of Technology
Giri Parameswaran, Haverford College
Sahar Parsa, Tufts University
David Pearce, New York University
Lynne Pepall, Tufts University
Michael Peters, Yale University
Monika Piazzesi, Stanford University
Robert S. Pindyck, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Laetitia Placido, City University of New York
Jeffrey Pliskin, Hamilton College
Steve Polasky, University of Minnesota
Eswar Prasad, Cornell University
Anita Prasad, Temple University
Thomas Pugel, New York University
Melissa Pumphrey
Richard E. Quandt, Princeton University
Hazhir Rahmandad, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Gautam Rao, Harvard University
David S. Rapson, University of California, Davis
Debraj Ray, New York University
Thomas Reardon, Michigan State University
Julian Reif, University of Illinois
David Reiley, Pandora Media, Inc., and University of California, Berkeley
Philip Reny, University of Chicago
John Riley, University of California, Los Angeles
Mario Rizzo, New York University
John Roberts, Stanford University
Yana Rodgers, Rutgers University
Paul M. Romer, New York University
Donald B. Rosenfield, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Esteban Rossi-Hansberg, Princeton University
Alvin E. Roth, Stanford University
Dan Sacks, Indiana University
Maryam Saeedi, Carnegie Mellon University
Maher Said, New York University
Sarada Sarada, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Christine Sauer, University of New Mexico
Anja Sautmann, Brown University
Laura Schechter, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Jose A. Scheinkman, Columbia University and Princeton University
Frank Schilbach, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Andrew Schotter, New York University
William Schulze, Cornell University
Stuart O. Schweitzer, University of California, Los Angeles
Julia Schwenkenberg, Rutgers University, Newark
Paul Scott, New York University
Fiona M. Scott Morton, Yale University
Douglas Shaw, Economist
Mark Shepard, Harvard University
Itai Sher, University of California
Gerald Shively, Purdue University
Ali Shourideh, Carnegie Mellon university
Nirvikar Singh, University of California, Santa Cruz
Marciano Siniscalchi, Northwestern University
Jack Stecher, Carnegie Mellon University
John Sterman, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Scott Stern, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Steven Stern, Stony Brook University
Adam Storeygard, Tufts University
Sandip Sukhtankar, University of Virginia
Scott Sumner, Bentley University
Ashley Swanson, University of Pennsylvania
Steve Tadelis, University of California, Berkeley
Joshua Tasoff, Claremont Graduate University
Dmitry Taubinsky, Dartmouth College
J. Edward Taylor, University of California, Davis
Richard Thaler, University of Chicago
Mallika Thomas, Cornell University
Felix Tintelnot, University of Chicago
Oana Tocoian, Claremont McKenna College
Dan Tortorice, Brandeis University
Nikos Trichakis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
David Tschirley, Michigan State University
Robert W. Turner, Colgate University
Stephen Turnovsky, University of Washington
Kosuke Uetake, Yale University
Utku Unver, Boston College
Robert Valdez, University of New Mexico
John Van Reenen, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Richard Van Weelden, University of Chicago
Kerry D. Vandell, University of California, Irvine
Laura Veldkamp, New York University
Venky Venkateswaran, New York University
Gianluca Violante, New York University
Tom Vogl, Princeton University
Paul Wachtel, New York University
Joel Waldfogel, University of Minnesota
Don Waldman, Colgate University
Xiao Yu Wang, Duke University
Leonard Wantchekon, Princeton University
Mark Watson, Princeton University
Jonathan Weinstein, Washington University, St. Louis
Birger Wernerfelt, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Ivan Werning, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Silvia Weyerbrock, Princeton University
E. Glen Weyl, Yale University
Roger White, Whittier College
Andrea Wilson, Georgetown University
Larry Wimmer, Brigham Young University
Justin Wolfers, University of Michigan
Catherine Wolfram, University of California, Berkeley
Richard Woodward, Texas A&M University
Jeffrey Wooldridge, Michigan State University
oscar Wydick, University of San Francisco
Dean Yang, University of Michigan
Muhamet Yildiz, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Pai-Ling Yin, University of Southern California
Gary Yohe, Wesleyan University
Thomas C. Youle, Dartmouth College
Albert Zevelev, Baruch College
Frederick Zimmerman, University of California, Los Angeles
Seth Zimmerman, University of Chicago
Eric Zivot, University of Washington
NOTE: Institutions are listed for identification purposes and should not be viewed as signatories
to the letter.
Post by: star seed 7 on November 01, 2016, 12:24:39 PM
Post by: michigancat on November 01, 2016, 12:30:16 PM
According to this map there are 8 toss up states. I think each candidate has as good a chance as the other to win them. Trump basically needs to win all of them.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_elections_electoral_college_map.html
The most recent poll in each state has him leading in all, except Colorado where he is down 1 point.
As all this news about hillary and the dnc's bullshit, cronyism, cheating, lying and fraud continues to break, it isn't beyond the realm of possibility that he wins all those states.
I don't think early voting is any indicator of how the independent undecided will vote, as they are usually too stupid to know that's an option.
Don't forget about the bomb James O'Keefe is going to drop this week!
wait, was the donald duck costume thing the kill switch for the kill switch video? Or is the next one the REALLY big one?
Post by: bucket on November 01, 2016, 12:31:12 PM
Post by: steve dave on November 01, 2016, 12:32:10 PM
Liberal economists! :curse:
yeah, if anything this will spur uneducated whites to vote for trump even harder
Post by: bucket on November 01, 2016, 12:32:41 PM
According to this map there are 8 toss up states. I think each candidate has as good a chance as the other to win them. Trump basically needs to win all of them.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_elections_electoral_college_map.html
The most recent poll in each state has him leading in all, except Colorado where he is down 1 point.
As all this news about hillary and the dnc's bullshit, cronyism, cheating, lying and fraud continues to break, it isn't beyond the realm of possibility that he wins all those states.
I don't think early voting is any indicator of how the independent undecided will vote, as they are usually too stupid to know that's an option.
Don't forget about the bomb James O'Keefe is going to drop this week!
wait, was the donald duck costume thing the kill switch for the kill switch video? Or is the next one the REALLY big one?
https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/792507399097708544
Post by: catastrophe on November 01, 2016, 12:32:50 PM
Quote from: liberal rag WSJ
Signatories include economists Angus Deaton of Princeton University, who won the economics Nobel last year, and Oliver Hart of Harvard University, who was one of the two Nobel winners this year.
The letter is notable because it is less partisan or ideological than such quadrennial exercises, and instead takes issue with Mr. Trump’s history of promoting debunked falsehoods.
What a rough ridin' pointless exercise.
Post by: stunted on November 01, 2016, 12:39:08 PM
personally i give it a c+ because i think you're a cool guy
Post by: stunted on November 01, 2016, 12:40:47 PM
(https://i.sli.mg/ziJrZu.jpg)
Post by: Panjandrum on November 01, 2016, 12:43:50 PM
Quote from: liberal rag WSJSignatories include economists Angus Deaton of Princeton University, who won the economics Nobel last year, and Oliver Hart of Harvard University, who was one of the two Nobel winners this year.
The letter is notable because it is less partisan or ideological than such quadrennial exercises, and instead takes issue with Mr. Trump’s history of promoting debunked falsehoods.
What a rough ridin' pointless exercise.
No Trump voter is going to believe something college professors and academics say. They discredited education ages ago.
Post by: star seed 7 on November 01, 2016, 12:48:03 PM
Post by: ChiComCat on November 01, 2016, 01:06:38 PM
Quote from: liberal rag WSJSignatories include economists Angus Deaton of Princeton University, who won the economics Nobel last year, and Oliver Hart of Harvard University, who was one of the two Nobel winners this year.
The letter is notable because it is less partisan or ideological than such quadrennial exercises, and instead takes issue with Mr. Trump’s history of promoting debunked falsehoods.
What a rough ridin' pointless exercise.
No Trump voter is going to believe something college professors and academics say. They discredited education ages ago.
Alphas stopped believing in education years ago as there are few hot chicks in it.
Post by: stunted on November 01, 2016, 01:12:12 PM
Post by: CNS on November 01, 2016, 01:41:35 PM
Well, they certainly aren't reading all that. I mean, tweet it or something. These economists don't know their audience.Liberal economists! :curse:
yeah, if anything this will spur uneducated whites to vote for trump even harder
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
Post by: stunted on November 01, 2016, 02:08:05 PM
Quote
We’ve written about this before, but I wanted to call your attention to it again because the possibility of an Electoral College-popular vote split keeps widening in our forecast. While there’s an outside chance that such a split could benefit Clinton if she wins the exact set of states that form her “firewall,” it’s far more likely to benefit Donald Trump, according to our forecast. Thus, as of early Monday evening, our polls-only model gave Hillary Clinton an 85 percent chance of winning the popular vote but just a 75 percent chance of winning the Electoral College. There’s roughly a 10 percent chance of Trump’s winning the White House while losing the popular vote, in other words.
Post by: MakeItRain on November 01, 2016, 02:37:36 PM
Good God, stunz. You're linking 4chan?
Are you on the God Emperor Trump subreddit?
:Take the Bait:
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on November 01, 2016, 03:51:49 PM
Post by: sys on November 01, 2016, 04:34:28 PM
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on November 01, 2016, 04:51:35 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on November 01, 2016, 05:16:46 PM
Post by: sys on November 01, 2016, 06:52:59 PM
(https://cdn.meme.am/instances/20548475.jpg)
done.
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 01, 2016, 08:08:40 PM
Nothing says highly educated like the Hilbot who can't accept or understand that Hil and Bill accepted millions from racist, gay hating, misogynistic thugs.
Meanwhile the MSM continues to fly cover for Huma and her Sharia loving, America is to blame family.
Sad
Post by: star seed 7 on November 01, 2016, 08:15:04 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 01, 2016, 08:17:43 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on November 01, 2016, 08:18:41 PM
Post by: Tobias on November 01, 2016, 08:20:13 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 01, 2016, 08:20:50 PM
Sad
Post by: star seed 7 on November 01, 2016, 08:23:26 PM
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 01, 2016, 08:27:40 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on November 01, 2016, 08:28:36 PM
Post by: Tobias on November 01, 2016, 08:30:00 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on November 01, 2016, 08:34:02 PM
Post by: stunted on November 01, 2016, 08:50:37 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on November 01, 2016, 09:03:14 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on November 01, 2016, 09:07:51 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on November 01, 2016, 09:11:19 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 01, 2016, 09:46:19 PM
Is a pretty great line.
Post by: stunted on November 01, 2016, 10:22:55 PM
Did you know Trump doesn't need narcotics or alcohol to perform daily activities? He doesn't drink. It will be nice to have a sober president in office for once.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEDQpWc_CyI
"There's about four minutes between the order being given and the people responsible for launching nuclear weapons to do so"
she's kind of adorb here though
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on November 02, 2016, 08:16:16 AM
Post by: Institutional Control on November 02, 2016, 08:16:55 AM
Did you know Trump doesn't need narcotics or alcohol to perform daily activities? He doesn't drink. It will be nice to have a sober president in office for once. (https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20161102%2F38b3b48274afc93c52405e13d650d39b.png&hash=d05978f7618da729d4332c58f1d984834675a7d7)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
For once? W. didn't drink.
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on November 02, 2016, 08:18:16 AM
Post by: steve dave on November 02, 2016, 08:25:42 AM
Who have to be pretty slammed to think about Obamacare.
good point here
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on November 02, 2016, 08:30:16 AM
Post by: stunted on November 02, 2016, 08:49:00 AM
More Nate tinfoil on popular vs electoral.
Post by: steve dave on November 02, 2016, 09:45:04 AM
Post by: steve dave on November 02, 2016, 09:45:52 AM
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-yes-donald-trump-has-a-path-to-victory/
More Nate tinfoil on popular vs electoral.
stunz, just curious, why do trump supporters not like nate silver? seems like he's a pretty straight shooter.
Post by: michigancat on November 02, 2016, 09:54:00 AM
Maybe because he way underestimated Trump in the primaries?http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-yes-donald-trump-has-a-path-to-victory/
More Nate tinfoil on popular vs electoral.
stunz, just curious, why do trump supporters not like nate silver? seems like he's a pretty straight shooter.
Post by: stunted on November 02, 2016, 09:54:59 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on November 02, 2016, 09:56:34 AM
Post by: stunted on November 02, 2016, 09:58:21 AM
Post by: Panjandrum on November 02, 2016, 10:27:10 AM
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/ (http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/)
Over the course of the election, Hillary has kind of topped out at 45-46%, and she's lived in that range since about the second debate (when she reached her apex). None of that has really subsided. What's changed in a lot of these polls in the past week is that Trump has moved from his typical range (39%-41%) to 41.8%. All of that rise is coinciding (not exactly proportionally) with Gary Johnson's decrease.
On 10/17, Clinton had a 6.9% lead over trump, and Gary Johnson had 6.3% of the vote. Now, she has a 3.3% lead, and Johnson's polling has gone down 1.6%. Some of this is obviously Republicans coming home to Trump, some independents shifting to Trump, but a decent chunk has to be Gary Johnson voters jumping ship and heading over to Donald.
Post by: CNS on November 02, 2016, 10:31:25 AM
Post by: chum1 on November 02, 2016, 11:14:22 AM
Post by: michigancat on November 02, 2016, 11:46:39 AM
Trump is very boring when he sticks to the script. I saw a montage of clips from recent speeches last night and he appears to be in DNGAF mode big league.
It's the best thing he can do right now.
Post by: Tobias on November 02, 2016, 11:50:14 AM
Post by: chum1 on November 02, 2016, 11:56:16 AM
Post by: chum1 on November 02, 2016, 11:58:14 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on November 02, 2016, 01:23:01 PM
Post by: steve dave on November 02, 2016, 01:23:59 PM
Post by: sys on November 02, 2016, 01:29:33 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on November 02, 2016, 05:16:41 PM
Trump voters smdh
Post by: stunted on November 02, 2016, 07:18:41 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 02, 2016, 09:55:54 PM
http://news.hamptonu.edu/release/Hampton-University's-CPP-Latest-Poll-Shows-VA-Voter-Shift-from-Clinton-to-Trump-Post-Email-Investigation
Post by: stunted on November 02, 2016, 10:01:38 PM
Post by: CNS on November 03, 2016, 09:23:59 AM
edit: found it.
Vice News
Quote
As Clinton's email woes continue, an ABC/Washington Post poll puts Trump ahead in the race. The controversial Republican nominee has successfully grabbed the electoral race by the pussy and clawed back a one-point lead: Trump is on 46 percent of the vote, to Clinton's 45 percent.
Post by: steve dave on November 03, 2016, 09:25:00 AM
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/
Post by: Panjandrum on November 03, 2016, 09:30:47 AM
Saw a post in my FB feed this morning from either Vice News or The Atlantic (I don't remember which) that noted a new poll out this morning showed Don take the lead by 2% nationally. I cant find it in my feed now, so I am not sure which poll.
Rasmussen and LA Times have been very Trump leaning all cycle. Most of the heavy hitters (ABC, CBS, CNN, etc.) are leaning her.
The weird outlier poll today was WBUR in New Hampshire. Showed a Trump lead of +1. Showed heavy Republican skew with Ayote and Sununu as well.
I guess a Suffolk poll is coming out there today which could provide some more clarity.
Post by: Tobias on November 03, 2016, 09:36:09 AM
Post by: stunted on November 03, 2016, 01:06:00 PM
Post by: michigancat on November 03, 2016, 01:09:27 PM
https://twitter.com/ScottAdamsSays/status/794197411144941568
whoa he's in the bay area! :excited:
Post by: stunted on November 03, 2016, 01:16:23 PM
Post by: bucket on November 03, 2016, 05:40:03 PM
Quote
Melania Trump says she wants to reduce online bullying
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Post by: stunted on November 03, 2016, 06:54:34 PM
lol she mad
Post by: Spracne on November 03, 2016, 06:57:23 PM
Post by: MakeItRain on November 03, 2016, 09:02:56 PM
He (she?) appears to be mumped in the head.
Did you watch it on mute or can we chalk this up to the always fresh androgyny humor?
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 03, 2016, 09:25:26 PM
Like cartoonish gangsters!
#tolerance #openminds
Post by: star seed 7 on November 03, 2016, 09:59:53 PM
i hope someone gives tur a show after this election ends. i'm going to miss her most of all.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/trump-katy-tur-single-out-rally-230679
Post by: bucket on November 03, 2016, 10:11:03 PM
Post by: sys on November 04, 2016, 12:09:04 AM
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/11/dont-gamble-on-trump/506207/
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 04, 2016, 08:46:25 AM
I like the rhetoricals, "should I care that one candidate has committed high crimes, when the other isn't releasing his tax returns because they probably show ties to putin?"
:lol:
"Should it matter that one trades political favors for large sums of cash, when the other had a business that wrnt bankrupt?"
:lol:
It doesn't get any more irrational and loony than that article.
Post by: Spracne on November 04, 2016, 08:52:30 AM
Post by: steve dave on November 04, 2016, 01:24:12 PM
https://electionbettingodds.com/
Post by: stunted on November 04, 2016, 01:51:40 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on November 04, 2016, 03:43:04 PM
betting odds took a clinton turn in the last 24 hours
https://electionbettingodds.com/
The headshots they use are interesting.
Post by: chum1 on November 04, 2016, 05:06:46 PM
Quote
Judge issues restraining order against Trump campaign over voter-harassment fears
http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-judge-to-trump-campaign-no-you-can-t-1478284503-htmlstory.html
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on November 04, 2016, 06:04:09 PM
QuoteJudge issues restraining order against Trump campaign over voter-harassment fears
http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-judge-to-trump-campaign-no-you-can-t-1478284503-htmlstory.html
:rolleyes:
Post by: bucket on November 04, 2016, 07:39:41 PM
Post by: steve dave on November 04, 2016, 09:21:11 PM
Post by: stunted on November 05, 2016, 12:08:28 AM
Post by: Tobias on November 05, 2016, 01:14:10 AM
did you guys see obama talk about that trump supporter at the rally? holy cow. this election really makes his presidency look dreamy.
I didn't see any of that and yes I agree
Post by: stunted on November 05, 2016, 09:11:45 AM
Post by: steve dave on November 05, 2016, 01:31:19 PM
Quote
We have really never seen anything like this. Former acting CIA director Michael Morell says that Putin has cleverly recruited Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.
I’d prefer another term drawn from the arcana of the Soviet era: polezni durak. That’s the useful fool, some naif, manipulated by Moscow, secretly held in contempt, but whose blind support is happily accepted and exploited.
That’s a pretty harsh term, and Trump supporters will no doubt be offended. But, frankly, it’s the most benign interpretation of all this that I can come up with right now.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/former-cia-chief-trump-is-russias-useful-fool/2016/11/03/cda42ffe-a1d5-11e6-8d63-3e0a660f1f04_story.html
Former Central Intelligence Agency and National Security Agency chief buying into the conspiracy tinfoil hat stuff, sad
Post by: sys on November 05, 2016, 02:30:23 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 05, 2016, 04:10:31 PM
QuoteWe have really never seen anything like this. Former acting CIA director Michael Morell says that Putin has cleverly recruited Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.
I’d prefer another term drawn from the arcana of the Soviet era: polezni durak. That’s the useful fool, some naif, manipulated by Moscow, secretly held in contempt, but whose blind support is happily accepted and exploited.
That’s a pretty harsh term, and Trump supporters will no doubt be offended. But, frankly, it’s the most benign interpretation of all this that I can come up with right now.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/former-cia-chief-trump-is-russias-useful-fool/2016/11/03/cda42ffe-a1d5-11e6-8d63-3e0a660f1f04_story.html
Former Central Intelligence Agency and National Security Agency chief buying into the conspiracy tinfoil hat stuff, sad
The left is getting extremely desperate. The most russian thing about this election is the coordinated propoganda and misinformation efoort from team hilltard and the old media. It's highly troubling.
Post by: sys on November 05, 2016, 05:31:05 PM
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/melania-trump-modeling-visa-jobs-230774
Post by: star seed 7 on November 05, 2016, 08:01:22 PM
WATCH THIS
Post by: bucket on November 05, 2016, 08:09:02 PM
QuoteWe have really never seen anything like this. Former acting CIA director Michael Morell says that Putin has cleverly recruited Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.
I’d prefer another term drawn from the arcana of the Soviet era: polezni durak. That’s the useful fool, some naif, manipulated by Moscow, secretly held in contempt, but whose blind support is happily accepted and exploited.
That’s a pretty harsh term, and Trump supporters will no doubt be offended. But, frankly, it’s the most benign interpretation of all this that I can come up with right now.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/former-cia-chief-trump-is-russias-useful-fool/2016/11/03/cda42ffe-a1d5-11e6-8d63-3e0a660f1f04_story.html
Former Central Intelligence Agency and National Security Agency chief buying into the conspiracy tinfoil hat stuff, sad
The left is getting extremely desperate. The most russian thing about this election is the coordinated propoganda and misinformation efoort from team hilltard and the old media. It's highly troubling.
And Trump referencing Russian news that's so off the wall that Russian news redacts it.
Post by: stunted on November 05, 2016, 11:26:56 PM
[youtube]https://youtu.be/pm8n9qVIK_8[/youtube]
WATCH THIS
i watched
Post by: stunted on November 05, 2016, 11:27:33 PM
holy alpha
Post by: slackcat on November 06, 2016, 05:18:12 AM
Post by: puniraptor on November 06, 2016, 07:33:48 AM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on November 06, 2016, 10:07:37 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on November 06, 2016, 10:09:30 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on November 06, 2016, 10:48:44 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on November 06, 2016, 10:51:26 AM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 06, 2016, 12:29:14 PM
He is polling absurdly well with non college educated white males
Obamas bread and butter. Such a weird election.
Post by: star seed 7 on November 06, 2016, 12:39:48 PM
He is polling absurdly well with non college educated white males
Obamas bread and butter. Such a weird election.
:Ugh:
Post by: Dugout DickStone on November 06, 2016, 12:50:20 PM
He is polling absurdly well with non college educated white males
Obamas bread and butter. Such a weird election.
did you read the part where literally every guy too stupid to go to college loves Trump?
Post by: gatoveintisiete on November 06, 2016, 01:24:31 PM
Post by: sys on November 06, 2016, 05:04:18 PM
heh.
Post by: sys on November 06, 2016, 05:06:47 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/07/us/politics/donald-trump-presidential-race.html?_r=0
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 06, 2016, 05:42:41 PM
He is polling absurdly well with non college educated white males
Obamas bread and butter. Such a weird election.
did you read the part where literally every guy too stupid to go to college loves Trump?
Yeah, they voted for obama last time. This isn't news
Post by: chum1 on November 06, 2016, 05:48:19 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 06, 2016, 06:02:04 PM
oh, the original nyt article is much better.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/07/us/politics/donald-trump-presidential-race.html?_r=0
So passive aggressive and back-handed. When did journalism become a 16-year old girl's fb page?
Quote
Aboard his gold-plated jumbo jet, the Republican nominee does not like to rest or be alone with his thoughts, insisting that aides stay up and keep talking to him. He prefers the soothing, whispery voice of his son-in-law.
He requires constant assurance that his candidacy is on track. “Look at that crowd!” he exclaimed a few days ago as he flew across Florida, turning to his young press secretary as a TV tuned to Fox News showed images of what he claimed were thousands of people waiting for him on the ground below.
And he is struggling to suppress his bottomless need for attention. As he stood next to the breakfast buffet at his golf club in Doral, Fla., eyeing a tray of pork sausages, he sought to convey restraint when approached by a reporter for The New York Times.
Gold plated jumbo jet?
Fox News image of what he CLAIM is thousands of people?
Bottomless need for attention
Golf club and sausages
Post by: star seed 7 on November 06, 2016, 06:34:24 PM
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 06, 2016, 06:41:33 PM
-bizarro nyt
Post by: bones129 on November 07, 2016, 12:35:15 AM
Ugly socially awkward person with part time barista job who lives in parents basement where she, who identifies as he, watches msnbc and prays undying allegiance to hilltard and his democrat masters, post.
-bizarro nyt
Curious post, FSD. Please provide more info so I can give some critical analysis to this post.
Post by: ChiComCat on November 07, 2016, 10:35:09 AM
He is polling absurdly well with non college educated white males
Obamas bread and butter. Such a weird election.
did you read the part where literally every guy too stupid to go to college loves Trump?
Yeah, they voted for obama last time. This isn't news
This isn't true
Post by: steve dave on November 07, 2016, 10:49:32 AM
He is polling absurdly well with non college educated white males
Obamas bread and butter. Such a weird election.
did you read the part where literally every guy too stupid to go to college loves Trump?
Yeah, they voted for obama last time. This isn't news
This isn't true
of course it's not true. I think he's just trolling though.
Post by: star seed 7 on November 07, 2016, 11:23:02 AM
Amaze. And lol @ christie
Post by: CNS on November 07, 2016, 11:52:53 AM
Quote
He fears too much planning before a victory might jinx the campaign.:lol:
Just figure it out later.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 07, 2016, 01:04:49 PM
He is polling absurdly well with non college educated white males
Obamas bread and butter. Such a weird election.
did you read the part where literally every guy too stupid to go to college loves Trump?
Yeah, they voted for obama last time. This isn't news
This isn't true
of course it's not true. I think he's just trolling though.
According to Nate Tinfoil it's true
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 07, 2016, 01:06:02 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on November 07, 2016, 01:08:59 PM
Also, per nate tinfoil, Romney smoked obama among people with college degrees (obviously, you'd have to be a respect to vote for obama2)
And now trump has the non educated vote.
Post by: ChiComCat on November 07, 2016, 01:10:46 PM
He is polling absurdly well with non college educated white males
Obamas bread and butter. Such a weird election.
did you read the part where literally every guy too stupid to go to college loves Trump?
Yeah, they voted for obama last time. This isn't news
This isn't true
of course it's not true. I think he's just trolling though.
According to Nate Tinfoil it's true
I would love to see that link
Post by: steve dave on November 07, 2016, 01:26:09 PM
He is polling absurdly well with non college educated white males
Obamas bread and butter. Such a weird election.
did you read the part where literally every guy too stupid to go to college loves Trump?
Yeah, they voted for obama last time. This isn't news
This isn't true
of course it's not true. I think he's just trolling though.
According to Nate Tinfoil it's true
on opposite day?
Quote from: 538
In both 2008 and 2012, Republicans’ best group by far — of the five we examined — was white voters without college degrees. The GOP carried that group by 14 percentage points in 2008 and a whopping 26 points in 2012.
Post by: steve dave on November 07, 2016, 01:50:48 PM
Also, per nate tinfoil, Romney smoked obama among people with college degrees (obviously, you'd have to be a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) to vote for obama2)
swing and another miss
College graduate (29% of voters)
Obama 47 - 51 Romney
Postgraduate study (18% of voters)
Obama 55 - 42 Romney
Weighted Total:
Obama 50 - 48 Romney
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 07, 2016, 02:14:27 PM
Also, per nate tinfoil, Romney smoked obama among people with college degrees (obviously, you'd have to be a respect to vote for obama2)
And now trump has the non educated vote.
Thanks for bringing this full circle.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 07, 2016, 02:16:04 PM
Also, per nate tinfoil, Romney smoked obama among people with college degrees (obviously, you'd have to be a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) to vote for obama2)
swing and another miss
College graduate (29% of voters)
Obama 47 - 51 Romney
Postgraduate study (18% of voters)
Obama 55 - 42 Romney
Weighted Total:
Obama 50 - 48 Romney
Weighted total :dubious:
Post by: Dugout DickStone on November 07, 2016, 02:16:26 PM
Also, per nate tinfoil, Romney smoked obama among people with college degrees (obviously, you'd have to be a respect to vote for obama2)
And now trump has the non educated vote.
Thanks for bringing this full circle.
well crap, you were wrong. If you cannot believe FSD on voting #'s, who can you believe?
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 07, 2016, 02:18:10 PM
He is polling absurdly well with non college educated white males
Obamas bread and butter. Such a weird election.
did you read the part where literally every guy too stupid to go to college loves Trump?
Yeah, they voted for obama last time. This isn't news
This isn't true
of course it's not true. I think he's just trolling though.
According to Nate Tinfoil it's true
on opposite day?Quote from: 538In both 2008 and 2012, Republicans’ best group by far — of the five we examined — was white voters without college degrees. The GOP carried that group by 14 percentage points in 2008 and a whopping 26 points in 2012.
Why have you reduced uneducated to whites? Obama won uneducated all food groups in 12 and 08.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on November 07, 2016, 02:18:47 PM
Post by: steve dave on November 07, 2016, 02:20:03 PM
He is polling absurdly well with non college educated white males
Obamas bread and butter. Such a weird election.
did you read the part where literally every guy too stupid to go to college loves Trump?
Yeah, they voted for obama last time. This isn't news
This isn't true
of course it's not true. I think he's just trolling though.
According to Nate Tinfoil it's true
on opposite day?Quote from: 538In both 2008 and 2012, Republicans’ best group by far — of the five we examined — was white voters without college degrees. The GOP carried that group by 14 percentage points in 2008 and a whopping 26 points in 2012.
Why have you reduced uneducated to whites? Obama won uneducated all food groups in 12 and 08.
you're doing really well ITT
He is polling absurdly well with non college educated white males
Obamas bread and butter. Such a weird election.
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 07, 2016, 02:20:35 PM
Also, just realized i read over "whites" like 25 posts ago. Are uneducated whites dumber than uneducated non-whites, or are they all equally stupid for purposes of this exercise in who are the dumbasses voting for?
Post by: MakeItRain on November 07, 2016, 02:44:36 PM
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/2016-election-day/gingrich-giuliani-priebus-eyed-top-jobs-trump-white-house-sources-n678881
Amaze. And lol @ christie
Rudy and his dog whistle as AG is absolutely the scariest proposition of a Trump presidency. This cannot happen.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 07, 2016, 02:47:35 PM
Also, per nate tinfoil, Romney smoked obama among people with college degrees (obviously, you'd have to be a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) to vote for obama2)
swing and another miss
College graduate (29% of voters)
Obama 47 - 51 Romney
Postgraduate study (18% of voters)
Obama 55 - 42 Romney
Weighted Total:
Obama 50 - 48 Romney
Isn't that double-counting people in postgraduate study?
Well, maybe not. Percentages seem low if the first number includes everyone with a college degree.
Post by: steve dave on November 07, 2016, 02:50:48 PM
Also, per nate tinfoil, Romney smoked obama among people with college degrees (obviously, you'd have to be a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) to vote for obama2)
swing and another miss
College graduate (29% of voters)
Obama 47 - 51 Romney
Postgraduate study (18% of voters)
Obama 55 - 42 Romney
Weighted Total:
Obama 50 - 48 Romney
Isn't that double-counting people in postgraduate study?
no. you don't check all the boxes up to the top one you qualify for. just the one you fall into.
Post by: Emo EMAW on November 07, 2016, 03:11:41 PM
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 07, 2016, 03:17:52 PM
That really seems like a lot of people running around with grad degrees.
Post-grads might just be more likely to vote than your typical college grad.
Post by: steve dave on November 07, 2016, 03:19:47 PM
That really seems like a lot of people running around with grad degrees.
I thought the opposite. especially as a percentage of voters.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 07, 2016, 03:25:01 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on November 07, 2016, 03:43:05 PM
11% of the US population has a postgraduate degree.
This is more where I was thinking.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 07, 2016, 03:44:14 PM
11% of the US population has a postgraduate degree.
This is more where I was thinking.
Only 60% of the population votes, though. 18% of voters being postgraduates is not unreasonable.
Post by: steve dave on November 07, 2016, 03:46:50 PM
11% of the US population has a postgraduate degree.
This is more where I was thinking.
Only 60% of the population votes, though. 18% of voters being postgraduates is not unreasonable.
a fairly large percentage of the 0-17 year old non-voter block don't even have college degrees, let alone graduate degrees.
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 07, 2016, 03:48:07 PM
11% of the US population has a postgraduate degree.
This is more where I was thinking.
Only 60% of the population votes, though. 18% of voters being postgraduates is not unreasonable.
a fairly large percentage of the 0-17 year old non-voter block don't even have college degrees, let alone graduate degrees.
60% of the voting-eligible population
Post by: steve dave on November 07, 2016, 03:50:09 PM
11% of the US population has a postgraduate degree.
This is more where I was thinking.
Only 60% of the population votes, though. 18% of voters being postgraduates is not unreasonable.
a fairly large percentage of the 0-17 year old non-voter block don't even have college degrees, let alone graduate degrees.
60% of the voting-eligible population
I know, I'm just being a jackass
Post by: Emo EMAW on November 07, 2016, 03:50:24 PM
11% of the US population has a postgraduate degree.
This is more where I was thinking.
Only 60% of the population votes, though. 18% of voters being postgraduates is not unreasonable.
Ya upon further inspection it seems fine. The feeling I had in my balls was off is all.
Post by: CNS on November 07, 2016, 04:49:02 PM
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/2016-election-day/gingrich-giuliani-priebus-eyed-top-jobs-trump-white-house-sources-n678881
Amaze. And lol @ christie
Rudy and his dog whistle as AG is absolutely the scariest proposition of a Trump presidency. This cannot happen.
Would rather one of the puppies that does superbowl pics on Fallon as AG.
Post by: CNS on November 07, 2016, 04:51:30 PM
:love:
Post by: bucket on November 07, 2016, 04:52:51 PM
Is there a way to find out when your local polls are the busiest? I want to go then. I live in LV county and feel like the ppl watching, and possible antics, could be absolutely Trumptastic at that time.
:love:
Stand your ground, bro
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 07, 2016, 09:41:01 PM
Unless you're a doctor, lawyer or accountant, you got scammed out of money.
Post by: Emo EMAW on November 07, 2016, 09:41:11 PM
Post by: SkinnyBenny on November 07, 2016, 10:08:51 PM
Of the 11% with post-grad degrees 90% are worthless stooge graduates of internet colleges with phony MBA's or education-type degrees.
Unless you're a doctor, lawyer or accountant, you got scammed out of money.
Correct. Chemists have never done anything worthwhile.
BTW, Ted Nugent is currently wearing camo and wailing the national anthem on guitar in front of a giant American flag. It's a fitting end to the Trump campaign at his last rally before getting his ass handed to him tomorrow.
Post by: renocat on November 07, 2016, 11:10:02 PM
Trump's ace in the hole. Will deliver Pennsylvania. Yoderites love him.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on November 08, 2016, 09:20:51 AM
Post by: renocat on November 08, 2016, 10:31:14 AM
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/10/amish-voters-rally-donald-trump-pennsylvania-video/Fox News realizes the Amish factor. Wouldn't it be a gutbusting belly laugh if this caused Hillary to lose.Pennsylvania.
Trump's ace in the hole. Will deliver Pennsylvania. Yoderites love him.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/07/super-pac-hoping-amish-voters-will-make-election-day-gop-barn-raiser.html
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 08, 2016, 10:35:06 AM
Post by: star seed 7 on November 08, 2016, 12:09:53 PM
:lol:
Post by: bubbles4ksu on November 08, 2016, 12:10:49 PM
Post by: Phil Titola on November 08, 2016, 12:12:22 PM
Post by: chum1 on November 08, 2016, 12:25:00 PM
Post by: mocat on November 08, 2016, 01:16:43 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on November 08, 2016, 01:18:24 PM
Post by: cfbandyman on November 08, 2016, 01:20:20 PM
Of the 11% with post-grad degrees 90% are worthless stooge graduates of internet colleges with phony MBA's or education-type degrees.
Unless you're a doctor, lawyer or accountant, you got scammed out of money.
Correct. Chemists have never done anything worthwhile.
BTW, Ted Nugent is currently wearing camo and wailing the national anthem on guitar in front of a giant American flag. It's a fitting end to the Trump campaign at his last rally before getting his ass handed to him tomorrow.
Engineers totally got scammed as well. Scientists as well didn't get scammed, but rather placed in the pocket of big gov't grants.
Post by: cfbandyman on November 08, 2016, 01:22:05 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on November 08, 2016, 01:43:20 PM
Post by: Phil Titola on November 08, 2016, 01:49:43 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on November 08, 2016, 01:57:47 PM
Post by: Cire on November 08, 2016, 03:03:01 PM
Post by: mocat on November 08, 2016, 03:08:59 PM
Post by: Emo EMAW on November 08, 2016, 03:14:02 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on November 08, 2016, 03:17:17 PM
Post by: Phil Titola on November 08, 2016, 03:17:29 PM
Post by: chum1 on November 08, 2016, 03:52:44 PM
Post by: wetwillie on November 08, 2016, 10:50:54 PM
If he can win Michigan, Pennsylviana, Ohio, Wisconsin he is going to win. I know that's still a long shot, but he seems to have major traction with his anti trade message.
Pretty rough when this state plus a bunch of swing states are all must wins:
http://www.270towin.com/states/Pennsylvania
:Chirp:
Post by: chum1 on November 09, 2016, 12:40:08 AM
If he can win Michigan, Pennsylviana, Ohio, Wisconsin he is going to win. I know that's still a long shot, but he seems to have major traction with his anti trade message.
Pretty rough when this state plus a bunch of swing states are all must wins:
http://www.270towin.com/states/Pennsylvania
:Chirp:
That was correct for ever other election I can remember. :frown:
Post by: chum1 on November 09, 2016, 12:40:55 AM
Post by: MakeItRain on November 09, 2016, 01:00:14 AM
Post by: CNS on November 09, 2016, 07:22:24 AM
Post by: everyone shut up on November 09, 2016, 07:40:49 AM
Post by: stunted on November 10, 2016, 11:45:25 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqBByn24qzg
Post by: michigancat on November 11, 2016, 12:02:32 AM
Post by: stunted on November 11, 2016, 12:05:10 AM
Post by: Tobias on November 11, 2016, 12:07:44 AM
Post by: michigancat on November 11, 2016, 12:09:59 AM
:frown:
Post by: stunted on November 11, 2016, 12:26:04 AM
diversity :love:
Post by: Tobias on November 11, 2016, 12:27:21 AM
Post by: mhkpasa on November 11, 2016, 08:06:24 AM
Praying is as beta as it gets
Post by: Dugout DickStone on November 11, 2016, 08:57:15 AM
Praying is as beta as it gets
Post by: chum1 on November 13, 2016, 12:11:57 PM
Post by: chum1 on February 18, 2017, 09:35:01 AM
https://medium.com/@DaleBeran/4chan-the-skeleton-key-to-the-rise-of-trump-624e7cb798cb#.r9uqepkqa
Post by: sys on February 18, 2017, 04:36:46 PM
Interesting thoughts on a segment of Trump enthusiasts.
https://medium.com/@DaleBeran/4chan-the-skeleton-key-to-the-rise-of-trump-624e7cb798cb#.r9uqepkqa
very interesting article.
Post by: sys on February 18, 2017, 05:02:11 PM
Quote
We know, by this point, that Trump is funny. Even to us leftists, horrified by his every move, he is hilarious. Someone who is all brash confidence and then outrageously incompetent at everything he does is?—?from an objective standpoint?—?comedy gold.
this hits pretty close to home.
Post by: chum1 on May 16, 2017, 08:20:05 AM
Quote
A joint statement signed by numerous Republican foreign-policy experts declared, “Mr. Trump’s own statements lead us to conclude that as president, he would use the authority of his office to act in ways that make America less safe, and which would diminish our standing in the world.” And so it has transpired: he used his authority to handle classified information as he sees fit in a way that made America less safe.
The conservative economist Thomas Sowell warned, “A shoot-from-the-hip, belligerent show-off is the last thing we need or can afford.” Now Trump’s shoot-from-the-hip style and desire to show off U.S. intelligence seems to have done harm.
Ross Douthat cautioned, “I think that reluctant Trump supporters are overestimating the systemic durability of the American-led order, and underestimating the extent to which a basic level of presidential competence and self-control is itself a matter of life and death—for Americans, and for human beings the world over.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/donald-trumps-loose-lips-vindicate-his-critics/526809/
Post by: LickNeckey on June 15, 2017, 11:00:02 PM
If Trump is corrupt then prosecute and if his so called school was fraudulent in some form or fashion, then prosecute, or fine.
oh the halcyon days of dax desiring the legal system to run it's course
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on June 15, 2017, 11:04:23 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: LickNeckey on June 15, 2017, 11:06:16 PM
Out of all the libs on this board, LickNeckey is the least respected idiot, right? I mean wolf! Dele your account already. Kinda sad. All he does is the pit too. :(
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
put the childbride to bed at a decent hour to allow for some message boarding i see
grats
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on June 15, 2017, 11:07:18 PM
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on June 15, 2017, 11:08:41 PM
Post by: LickNeckey on June 15, 2017, 11:14:03 PM
good for you
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on June 15, 2017, 11:15:45 PM
Post by: SdK on June 16, 2017, 05:16:20 AM
Wtf? Childbride?Out of all the libs on this board, LickNeckey is the least respected idiot, right? I mean wolf! Dele your account already. Kinda sad. All he does is the pit too. :(
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
put the childbride to bed at a decent hour to allow for some message boarding i see
grats
Post by: Dugout DickStone on June 17, 2017, 11:20:28 AM
Post by: SdK on June 17, 2017, 11:24:43 AM
LickNeckey should avoid these line of insults, he is bad at them.
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 07, 2019, 07:30:27 PM
I knew g27 would be a trumpeteer :D
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 07, 2019, 07:36:28 PM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3202153/Donald-Trump-AMAZING-bed-claims-former-Penthouse-Pet-presidential-hopeful-secretary-track-spotting-sexy-magazine-spread.html
:love:
Smashes her, then gives her his book :lol:
1st Trump post
Post by: star seed 7 on March 07, 2019, 07:37:44 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 07, 2019, 07:42:22 PM
If anybody but Trump got up there and said the same things he said, i'd be a 100% supporter. He gets it and will turn us around.
Unfortunately, he's Donald Trump and has a tower full of skeletons.
Did not believe it would happen
Post by: star seed 7 on March 07, 2019, 07:47:43 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 07, 2019, 08:00:40 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 07, 2019, 08:02:37 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 07, 2019, 08:28:07 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 08, 2019, 05:40:43 PM
Post by: steve dave on March 08, 2019, 07:33:25 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 08, 2019, 08:44:49 PM
Post by: steve dave on March 08, 2019, 09:10:50 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 08, 2019, 09:20:32 PM
Post by: stunted on March 08, 2019, 09:41:11 PM
my track record is better than cuck27 too. disavowed trump which ended up being the correct move. right about oscar while he's ??? about him. right about tiger woods being rough ridin' BACK. better golfer. more handsome, bigger penis most likely. so yea, evidence suggests i'm more likely the earlier trumper than cuck27.
Post by: Spracne on March 08, 2019, 09:47:41 PM
Post by: star seed 7 on March 08, 2019, 10:18:26 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 08, 2019, 10:31:09 PM
Post by: Katpappy on March 08, 2019, 10:48:54 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 08, 2019, 10:51:38 PM
Post by: stunted on March 08, 2019, 10:53:42 PM
lol this is a guy who said we should be watching :lol: :lol: :lol: adam scott over tiger woods :lol: :lol: :lol:
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 08, 2019, 10:58:26 PM
Post by: stunted on March 08, 2019, 10:59:49 PM
lol this is a guy who said we should be watching :lol: :lol: :lol: adam scott over tiger woods :lol: :lol: :lol:
i'm still lolling. this is what happens when you google adam scott:
(https://i.gyazo.com/85271fbfc9e73d060b8990982bbf8d96.png)
adam scott over tiger woods.
:lol:
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 08, 2019, 11:01:33 PM
Post by: Katpappy on March 08, 2019, 11:02:47 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 08, 2019, 11:05:34 PM
Post by: stunted on March 08, 2019, 11:08:52 PM
Post by: gatoveintisiete on March 08, 2019, 11:12:09 PM
Post by: sys on March 08, 2019, 11:54:25 PM
i've been messageboarding since early 2000's.
intellectually i know most of the posters on this board weren't around for the early years, but it still always surprises me when people are ignorant of basic messageboard and mhs/townie history.
Post by: Kat Kid on March 09, 2019, 07:50:07 AM
i've been messageboarding since early 2000's.
intellectually i know most of the posters on this board weren't around for the early years, but it still always surprises me when people are ignorant of basic messageboard and mhs/townie history.
it really makes me pretty upset too if I am being honest about it.
Post by: 8manpick on March 09, 2019, 08:27:38 AM
The day cat27 calls stunz a sock is truly a confusing onei've been messageboarding since early 2000's.
intellectually i know most of the posters on this board weren't around for the early years, but it still always surprises me when people are ignorant of basic messageboard and mhs/townie history.
it really makes me pretty upset too if I am being honest about it.
Post by: LickNeckey on November 24, 2019, 04:01:22 PM
i made a sig image for you dax :)
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FYWrBjRu.jpg&hash=7416f38058582106258df4a0a61d23231b17a150)
Post by: star seed 7 on November 24, 2019, 04:05:34 PM
sad when emotions get the best of us and we out our own socks :frown:
:shy:
Post by: star seed 7 on November 24, 2019, 04:15:38 PM
i'm hoping we soon start seeing some ringing accusations against the "deep state" in the wake of all these 'pub career politicians/public servants endorsing clinton on the basis of trump being unfit for office. i'd like to think it'll be within the next week.
:eye:
Post by: chum1 on November 03, 2022, 10:25:16 PM
https://twitter.com/rgoodlaw/status/1588308713987010561
Post by: Dugout DickStone on November 04, 2022, 09:40:18 AM
Post by: catastrophe on November 04, 2022, 11:31:33 AM
of course he will. He needs the moneyIt’s the Ken Paxton plan (TX attorney general). They can’t convict you if you control law enforcement.
Post by: Pete on November 04, 2022, 12:04:00 PM
Post by: Spracne on November 04, 2022, 12:06:13 PM
What's the purpose of Trump being coy about running at this point? It can't be just showmanship, can it?
The embarrassment of losing again? Maybe he's waiting to see whether the right people get elected to the right offices in the right states before announcing.
Post by: Pete on November 04, 2022, 12:07:19 PM
What's the purpose of Trump being coy about running at this point? It can't be just showmanship, can it?
The embarrassment of losing again? Maybe he's waiting to see whether the right people get elected to the right offices in the right states before announcing.
I suppose so. Probably even the certainty of not losing the primary, which some speculated about for a very short while before Trump silver backed Fat Ron.
Post by: Dugout DickStone on November 04, 2022, 12:10:00 PM
Post by: chum1 on November 04, 2022, 12:29:44 PM
Post by: Dugout DickStone on November 04, 2022, 12:37:25 PM
Post by: steve dave on November 04, 2022, 01:05:39 PM
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2022, 01:14:09 PM
2. I bet Fat Ron won't run if Trump does. He is way to cucked to uncuck enough in time to no longer look like Fat Ron Trump Cuck.
3. With the Saudis, Russians, North Koreans, etc positioning how they are globally right now, there is way too many opportunities via chaos out there, for a guy like Trump, to not run.
Post by: mocat on November 04, 2022, 01:28:26 PM
Post by: BIG APPLE CAT on November 04, 2022, 01:37:43 PM
1. Trump has to run. It's his best chance at beating the current cases against him.
2. I bet Fat Ron won't run if Trump does. He is way to cucked to uncuck enough in time to no longer look like Fat Ron Trump Cuck.
3. With the Saudis, Russians, North Koreans, etc positioning how they are globally right now, there is way too many opportunities via chaos out there, for a guy like Trump, to not run.
Whoa, we talkin kayos (sp?) in here?
Post by: Spracne on November 04, 2022, 01:55:27 PM
Post by: steve dave on November 05, 2022, 08:29:27 PM
https://twitter.com/OliviaRubinABC/status/1589050195073183744
Post by: CHONGS on November 05, 2022, 08:31:39 PM
Post by: Sandstone Outcropping on November 05, 2022, 09:50:27 PM
Post by: steve dave on November 05, 2022, 09:51:48 PM
It is so damn depressing to contemplate a trump v. Biden rematch. This is the dumbest thing imaginable.
I'm reasonably confident one of them will be dead before then. hopefully fat ron too. actually I have a long list of downgrades who I hope die before election day.
Post by: catastrophe on November 05, 2022, 10:05:42 PM
lameAwful
https://twitter.com/OliviaRubinABC/status/1589050195073183744
Post by: Brock Landers on November 05, 2022, 10:11:46 PM
Post by: CNS on November 05, 2022, 10:14:13 PM
It would be great for the county.
Even if Fat Ron lives.
Post by: Sandstone Outcropping on November 05, 2022, 10:19:42 PM
I think our chance passed when trump didn’t die from Covid. Both of these men will live into their 90’s, unfortunately.It is so damn depressing to contemplate a trump v. Biden rematch. This is the dumbest thing imaginable.
I'm reasonably confident one of them will be dead before then. hopefully fat ron too. actually I have a long list of downgrades who I hope die before election day.
Post by: MakeItRain on November 07, 2022, 09:11:39 AM
It is so damn depressing to contemplate a trump v. Biden rematch. This is the dumbest thing imaginable.
I'm reasonably confident one of them will be dead before then. hopefully fat ron too. actually I have a long list of downgrades who I hope die before election day.
Preach.
To quote the once great philosopher by the name of "Old Kanye"
Quote
We in the streets, playa, get your mail
It's only two places you end up, either dead or in jail
Still nowhere to go (nowhere to go)
Still nowhere to go (nowhere to go)
Now throw your hands up
Hustlers, busters, boosters, hoes
Everybody, eff that
Still nowhere to go (nowhere to go)
Still nowhere to go (nowhere to go)
Post by: Spracne on November 07, 2022, 10:01:09 AM
There's no chance Trump knows what sanctimonious means. Same with the average MAGA.
Yeah, he tripping. Why's he trynna use a big word like that? Is he trying to rebrand?
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 07, 2022, 10:04:44 AM
Post by: Institutional Control on November 07, 2022, 08:40:44 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk