|
Fantastic_Mr_Fox posted:lol as soon as Bernie has an ambassador killed to cover up an affair, you can talk. Did Vince Foster get a promotion we didn't know about?
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 21:38 |
|
|
Gravel Gravy posted:Did Vince Foster get a promotion we didn't know about? Maybe there's more to Benghazi than we know? Could it be we haven't found the one email that breaks it all open?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
Gravel Gravy posted:Did Vince Foster get a promotion we didn't know about? I'm glad I'm not the only one that went the Vince route.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
So did Hillary have an affair with Chris Stevens?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
Vilerat scammed Hillary out of money in Eve Online and that's why she did Benghazi.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
No she had an affair with vilerat try to keep up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
greatn posted:No she had an affair with vilerat try to keep up. This conspiracy hinges on the idea that a person that played Eve Online slept with someone.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
Vilerat and Chris Stevens were in a love triangle with Hillary. Bill got jealous and used his Al-Qaeda contacts to end the cucking.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Vilerat and Chris Stevens were in a love triangle with Hillary. Bill got jealous and used his Al-Qaeda contacts to end the cucking. That would be a love square though. At the very least a love rhombus. Love parallelogram.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
 stole the Titan fund
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
Gravel Gravy posted:That would be a love square though. Bill and Hillary were never in love tho???
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
Gravel Gravy posted:That would be a love square though. Love trapezoid actually.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
So uh, the gunship crew was concerned that bombing the MSF might be a war crime, but did so anyways.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
No joke I bet she'd be super good at that game.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:So uh, the gunship crew was concerned that bombing the MSF might be a war crime, but did so anyways. What the gently caress
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:So uh, the gunship crew was concerned that bombing the MSF might be a war crime, but did so anyways. We shouldn't rush to judgement though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfkYfPNckIM I'll never forget that horrible disaster that uh.... happened sometime, you know, with the thing? That uh... you know the thing? (also jesus christ the man looks beaten down) pathetic little tramp fucked around with this message at 19:25 on Oct 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Take a nap, Jeb! Yikes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
Jeb inspiring Americans to continue gaining weight and stay smart.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:So uh, the gunship crew was concerned that bombing the MSF might be a war crime, but did so anyways. What? Israel does it all the time!
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:So uh, the gunship crew was concerned that bombing the MSF might be a war crime, but did so anyways. I wonder how much more info needs to come out for somebody to be arrested for a paltry amount of time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
MariusLecter posted:What? Israel does it all the time! Not exactly... I'm not sure if they often get concerned over it. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
zoux posted:It's Friday, you're blowing off work, so let's spend the day freaking out over this Ipsos model that says the GOP is going to win the presidency. Oh wow, their going back to the old "Two term voter fatigue" bullshit? Also Reagans was about where Obama was at this time in 87. And Reagan didn't have the Dems in near full on civil war as Obama has the GOP now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
pathetic little tramp posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfkYfPNckIM  Jesus, Jeb! is so pathetic it's laughable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
pathetic little tramp posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfkYfPNckIM It's been said a thousand times but how is he so loving bad at this Plus he gets super pissy when anyone corrects him and sucks at hiding it. He probably spends every waking hour being yelled at and pulled in different directions by his donors via endless conference calls when he's not in front of some hastily gathered audience. He looks like he's running on a half-hour of sleep and if that's the case his performance here is almost understandable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
I never thought Jeb Bush would make me feel pathos, but here we are.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
MC Nietzche posted:If the email defense and handshake at he debate did not convince you that the long-term game Bernie Sanders is playing is to force Clinton to the left and motivate the base to vote for her then, I'm sorry, but you've left reality behind. Bernie Sanders is playing at being a kingmaker, not the king. I've never really understood the point of "force politician to the left/right", because all you are accomplishing is getting them to say certain things during their campaign, it doesn't actually change anything they believe or care about, so I don't really see Bernie "forcing Hillary to the left" as accomplishing jack or poo poo when she can(and probably will) just ignore the left once she is in office, no matter how much Bernie "forces her to the left" while campaigning. I mean, hell, Hillary becoming president will even more defang the actual liberals in this country, because it will prove that an actual liberal candidate cannot win the nomination against an establishment candidate and also prove that despite that fact we will be willing to vote for the establishment neo-liberal in the general. Not to say that liberals shouldn't vote for Hillary in the general in the very likely scenario she gets the nomination. I don't really know the solution. I just feel that this election is going to more or less prove the death of the American liberal as any kind of political force(admittedly its not like we've been a political force for the last 3 decades at the minimum anyways).
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
pathetic little tramp posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfkYfPNckIM "9/11? It was sometime in the 2000-something-or-other, quit asking me, sheesh" - Jeb Bush, probably, soon This loving election 
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
Khisanth Magus posted:I've never really understood the point of "force politician to the left/right", because all you are accomplishing is getting them to say certain things during their campaign, it doesn't actually change anything they believe or care about What is your evidence of this?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
Khisanth Magus posted:I've never really understood the point of "force politician to the left/right", because all you are accomplishing is getting them to say certain things during their campaign, it doesn't actually change anything they believe or care about, so I don't really see Bernie "forcing Hillary to the left" as accomplishing jack or poo poo when she can(and probably will) just ignore the left once she is in office, no matter how much Bernie "forces her to the left" while campaigning. I mean, hell, Hillary becoming president will even more defang the actual liberals in this country, because it will prove that an actual liberal candidate cannot win the nomination against an establishment candidate and also prove that despite that fact we will be willing to vote for the establishment neo-liberal in the general. If more people that vote for you (or more people that you want to vote for you) are in favor of something that is more progressive than what you like you'll typically adopt a more progressive stance on the issue. Take OWS for example. It shifted the narrative away from "lazy bums on welfare" to "wealth inequality is bad yo" at a national level and into something the majority of democrats now openly talk about where before hand they were all about "welfare reform" and the like. So yeah, Bernie is absolutely trying to shift things towards a more progressive narrative but with his defense of Hillary in the debate and his strict adherence to not going negative knows that even a 1/10 of those progressive things he wants to get accomplished has a better chance of success with Hillary as president than himself as president.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
Clinton will be more liberal than Sanders supports think she will be and less liberal than Clinton supports hope she'll be able to be.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:50
|
|
|
Khisanth Magus posted:I've never really understood the point of "force politician to the left/right", because all you are accomplishing is getting them to say certain things during their campaign, it doesn't actually change anything they believe or care about, so I don't really see Bernie "forcing Hillary to the left" as accomplishing jack or poo poo when she can(and probably will) just ignore the left once she is in office, no matter how much Bernie "forces her to the left" while campaigning. You're wrong and dumb.. Politicians generally try to do what they said they'd try to do, so getting them to say they'll try to do something in and of itself is valuable in changing their behavior.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
^^ Insurgent candidates can also affect the party platform and the valued issues by individual congresspersons. It's incredibly valuable for shifting the narrative.greatn posted:No she had an affair with vilerat try to keep up. there's DNA on the blue tatt!!
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
A Winner is Jew posted:Take OWS for example. It shifted the narrative away from "lazy bums on welfare" to "wealth inequality is bad yo" at a national level and into something the majority of democrats now openly talk about where before hand they were all about "welfare reform" and the like. Wrong. Obama did that in the 08 campaign, which was several years before OWS.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:56
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:So uh, the gunship crew was concerned that bombing the MSF might be a war crime, but did so anyways. What a tragedy. And really looking like a war crime.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:57
|
|
|
Khisanth Magus posted:I've never really understood the point of "force politician to the left/right", because all you are accomplishing is getting them to say certain things during their campaign, it doesn't actually change anything they believe or care about, so I don't really see Bernie "forcing Hillary to the left" as accomplishing jack or poo poo when she can(and probably will) just ignore the left once she is in office, no matter how much Bernie "forces her to the left" while campaigning. I mean, hell, Hillary becoming president will even more defang the actual liberals in this country, because it will prove that an actual liberal candidate cannot win the nomination against an establishment candidate and also prove that despite that fact we will be willing to vote for the establishment neo-liberal in the general. Not mine, but: Well, Edwards himself was an empty suit with a nice head of hair, but some of the words they put in his mouth were good. He was pretty good about actually talking about economic issues and rarely succumbed to the hyperbolic "we must be vigilant" hawktalk that plagues American foreign policy. His aides probably thought they were doing a good thing by shifting the debate a little to the left, whether or not he actually won. Rhetoric influences policy. If people see a Democrat talking like a liberal and getting votes, it changes what is considered politically possible. For decades, people were saying that Kennedy-style liberalism was dead, but Edwards proved that, despite all his real shortcomings as a candidate, the message he laid out still resonated with a lot of people. That's a lesson we can apply to Obama as well. Set aside for a moment all the things he has (or hasn't) actually accomplished as president and consider all the things he's said over the years. How many politicians could have given a speech like we saw [at Clementa Pinckney's funeral]? Effortlessly yet full-throatedly tying together numerous policy issues into a single narrative based on American tradition, liberal values, and Christian compassion? Some credit surely goes to his speechwriters, but in many ways this is a speech he's been giving for years, and it's hard to imagine it coming from anyone else. People in political circles tend to get lost in the talking points and wedge issues of the Washington news cycle and forget that, for most people, that's all just background noise. Even here in DnD, I'm regularly (and naively) surprised by how many people are utterly ignorant of current events and pressing political issues, and we're supposed to be the people who care about this stuff. If even we can't be relied upon to know, say, why people are opposing the Keystone pipeline, what "net neutrality" means, who the hell ISIL are, or what the Affordable Care Act actually does; if half of us are still parroting talking points from three (or thirty) years ago as if nothing has changed, then imagine how confused and disengaged the truly uninformed are. Anyone who can cut through the poisonous cloud of cynicism and disaffection that keeps so many people from meaningfully engaging in political life and actually gets them to think and care about their neighbors, their country, and their world, even for a moment, is a goddamn hero. If the message is timely, inspirational, and progressive, so much the better. And that's why our goddamn socialist, muslim, warmonger, terrorist-loving, sellout, lame duck, feckless, fascist president is a national treasure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
Hillary Clinton's SuperPAC is probably funding Star Citizen on the side, yeesh.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
pathetic little tramp posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfkYfPNckIM Whatever ... it was horrible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Wrong. Obama did that in the 08 campaign, which was several years before OWS. If you go back and look at the news immediately before and after OWS, it went from Democrats, including Obama, talking about Debt and Deficit as primary narrative, Grand Bargain etc., to wealth inequality and social injustice as the primary issue. It absolutely shifted the focus of elected politicians.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 21:38 |
|
|
Khisanth Magus posted:I've never really understood the point of "force politician to the left/right", because all you are accomplishing is getting them to say certain things during their campaign, it doesn't actually change anything they believe or care about, Studies show that arguing in favor of a position you don't agree with increases your support for that position even if you're just doing it as an exercise.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 20:08
|
|
