|
Montasque posted:Those same Bushies wrote a #NeverTrump manifesto in a Neo-Con publication back in the primaries. You're lookin too hard into it imo, it just adds to the narrative. These people are just gonna be branded as GOP defects and most won't want to read deeper than that.
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 07:03 |
|
|
but why not Johnson. If they truly despised Clinton and had character, they'd just piss it away on Johnson right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
Lastgirl posted:but why not Johnson. If they truly despised Clinton and had character, they'd just piss it away on Johnson right? Johnson is a peacenik - NeoCons need their forever war.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:22
|
|
|
Johnsons reserves all his thoughts of violence for the irrational actors who will die as a result of his whackjob ideology
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
Libertarians dont like wars of adventure because it cuts down on Jet Pack time.You ever Jet Pack during a war? Forget about it!
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
maybe if your parents exercised a modicum of self-interest, you wouldnt have to drink cholera water, Timmy
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
Hey, Olympics are cool right!? Lets spot the difference in the candidates' messaging! https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/762747771246051328 https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/762675570937298944 https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/762361057394458624 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/761773576101953536
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:maybe if your parents exercised a modicum of self-interest, you wouldnt have to drink cholera water, Timmy just give him some cough syrup, he'll be fine 
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
no gently caress you donald its "Bigly" you useless rear end
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
bigly good luck to our olympic athletes
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
thethreeman posted:Good post. I think the speculation is that it'll happen post election, though, during Obama's lame duck term. As long as he doesn't rescind the nomination, that is
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:bigly good luck to our olympic athletes
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
donald should get his hands digitally enlarged for all his print media
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
Xenophon posted:Also, re: those fav/unfav numbers in the CNN story, Cruz is unpopular now. But he wasn't refusing to endorse Trump so that he would be popular in the summer of 2016. He refused to endorse so that he could come back in 2019 and say "I told you so" and "I'm the real principled conservative" and "I am the only one who stood up to the liberal who threatened to destroy us from within." To be honest I'm not sure how well this is going to work. No matter how badly Trump gets beaten come November 8th, the primaries have already proven that there are too many people in the GOP base who buy into Trump's brand of nativist populism for the party to simply write them off. Look at what happened after 2012. The party leaders were keenly aware that their deficits among minority voters, especially young minority voters, had put them on an unsustainable path. Yet the moment they made a move to moderate on an issue that was hurting them, immigration, their base revolted, and three years later nominated a guy who wants to turn the US-Mexico border into the new Iron Curtain. Saying that Trump isn't a "true conservative" doesn't help because it's clear now that the Republican base doesn't give a drat about conservatism, they just want all the scary brown people to go away. Really I don't see how the GOP ever manages to solve the problem of these Donald Trump/George Wallace types in their party. When the Democrats started to piss these people off back in 1948, they simply became Republicans, but where are they supposed to go now? It's not like they can go back to the Democrats, as dependent as they are now on the Obama coalition to deliver them the White House, and America's FPTP voting system means that a third party would only give complete control of the federal government to the Democrats for the foreseeable future. IWW Online Branch fucked around with this message at 22:42 on Aug 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
Pro thread title change
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
GobiasIndustries posted:Hey, Olympics are cool right!? Lets spot the difference in the candidates' messaging! bigly
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
Love the new thread title.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
shiksa posted:So it's some sort of suicide skewed Trust in my self righteous skewicide
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
we have great, great thread titles. simply the best.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:35
|
|
|
TrilliontonNixon posted:Really I don't see how the GOP ever manages to solve the problem of these Donald Trump/George Wallace types in their party. When the Democrats started to piss these people off back in 1948, they simply became Republicans, but where are they supposed to go now? It's not like they can go back to the Democrats, as dependent as they are now on the Obama coalition to deliver them the the White House, and America's FPTP voting system means that a third party would only give complete control of the federal government to the Democrats for the foreseeable future. The Republicans can still continue to run up their advantage in state and local governments where their message is popular thanks to gerrymandering and our wonderfully arcane districting system, and then every four years the Other Republican Party can run a candidate for president. They might lose the presidency every year, but hey, when you hold a majority in every other branch of government, it doesn't matter so much!
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:35
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:Yeah, the only way he gets his nomination rescinded is if he asks for it himself after deciding to retire from the judiciary to live the quiet life of a professor, which seems...unlikely. oh interesting, didn't realize that. A bunch of articles have talked about how Obama can withdraw him, but I know nothing abt SC law: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/03/17/how-obama-could-get-last-laugh-in-supreme-court-fight/ quote:That scenario goes like this: If Republicans don’t give Garland any hearing, and a Democrat (most likely Hillary Clinton) wins the presidential election, Republicans could then move to consider him in the lame duck session, to prevent Clinton from picking a more liberal nominee. But at that point, Obama could withdraw his nominee, to allow his successor to pick the next justice, instead.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
I don't understand the big deal about toxxing vs. not. Isn't it just like  ?Boosted is fun and should be encouraged to post more, not less.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
Spent some time hanging out on the Trump boards today. They're all pretty much totally committed to the idea that Hillary is literally on death's door and that when she finally keels over in public everyone will run to the Donald. So even those knuckleheads realize that they can't unskew every poll and are straight-up hoping for a miracle now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
Since Trump is adopting Xander Crews platform with the big titties thing he might want to consider the pedestrian overpass to Canada over the wall, probably more economically feasible
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:37
|
|
|
Zeroisanumber posted:Spent some time hanging out on the Trump boards today. They're all pretty much totally committed to the idea that Hillary is literally on death's door and that when she finally keels over in public everyone will run to the Donald. Where does this theory even come from? Just because she tripped going up some stairs? I don't get it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:38
|
|
|
That DICK! posted:Since Trump is adopting Xander Crews platform with the big titties thing he might want to consider the pedestrian overpass to Canada over the wall, probably more economically feasible I was gonna call it "The Spic-Span!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
anotherone posted:Where does this theory even come from? Just because she tripped going up some stairs? I don't get it. Coordinated message from the Trump campaign and Super PACs blasting through right-wing media. Didn't work too well because even CNN was calling bullshit on it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
THA TITTY THRILLER posted:I was gonna call it "The Spic-Span!" 
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:41
|
|
|
GobiasIndustries posted:Hey, Olympics are cool right!? Lets spot the difference in the candidates' messaging! The only difference I see is that one of the photos in these tweets has below average hand size.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:41
|
|
|
That DICK! posted:Since Trump is adopting Xander Crews platform with the big titties thing he might want to consider the pedestrian overpass to Canada over the wall, probably more economically feasible as long as fred dryer is the VP
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
TRUMP ANNOUNCES LOVES BIGLY TITTIES FROM THE D
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
Dolash posted:It's a bit of a tricky needle to thread, Hillary picking up endorsements (or tacit endorsements in the form of condemning Trump / "vote your conscience") from Republicans and other right-wing or even "centrist" figures. It can definitely feed into the narrative of Hillary being the candidate of the establishment and doesn't help her with progressive voters who already see her as a compromise, but if she racks up enough support like that the narrative can instead be "everyone even remotely sane or civil vs. insane raving Trumpists". There's a core of Republicans who are obliged to support him through gritted teeth but the media seems like it's warming up to the idea of dropping the "both sides / horse race" nonsense and in that case it might help. True, the hardcore Trumpists will just double-down again but any remaining moderates or middle-ground types might give up on him. Glad Ted took a stand for that loose affiliation of area 52 body snatcher surrogates he calls his kin but he will never hold real power.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
anotherone posted:Where does this theory even come from? Just because she tripped going up some stairs? I don't get it. She fell and hit her head a year or two ago. Reportedly mild concussion, nothing beyond that. RW media has of course  over her supposed mental problems ever since.Welcome to anti-Hillary meme world. The last 25 years have been a lot of fun.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
Donald Trump supports Russia and their doping fucks of athletes in the Olympics such as Yuliya Efimova. #BeWithBaloogan
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
It probably is true that Hillary's health isn't tip-top right now. Blood clot in the brain is no small matter even with a full recovery. Seriously doubt it is bad enough for her to become incapacitated or withdraw though. I do think it's possible that she won't run for reelection in 2020 because of health reasons. She's really old now. Look at how much the presidency ages people.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
She had a blood clot in 2012 I think and has been pretty hoarse a few times when speaking (because it's hard going on a tour and giving a speech every day for months) but I think that's literally it, everything else is hilarious reaching for baby Jesus to strike that (w)itch dead
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
and yeah she's super old but so is trump and he at least has clear mental issues and seems increasingly psychotic as his campaign rolls on
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:50
|
|
|
Karl Sharks posted:just give him some cough syrup, he'll be fine  Yeah, that'd... that'd do something to you at the very least. All it needs is a little cocaine sprinkled in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
thethreeman posted:oh interesting, didn't realize that. A bunch of articles have talked about how Obama can withdraw him, but I know nothing abt SC law: The spiteful dick in me wants him to withdraw Garland if Hillary wins, but at the same time, it seems like far too much of a dick move.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 07:03 |
|
|
Azathoth posted:Yeah, the only way he gets his nomination rescinded is if he asks for it himself after deciding to retire from the judiciary to live the quiet life of a professor, which seems...unlikely. To be fair, while Obama might not be the type to rescind a nomination for purely partisan posturing, after the election he actually could make a principled argument that it's now the next President's job to pick a nominee. I don't see why the President has to pretend like they're suddenly acting in good faith by hearing the nomination when backed into a corner, he can take them at their previous word and at a time when it would be most applicable. I suppose this assumes that Obama would pick someone else than Merrick if given the choice, or that he agrees with letting Hillary pick once elected.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2016 22:55
|
|
