|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Nice that hes not even pretending to be about government transparency anymore. I no longer think he's even an accelerationist anymore since that would involve some bit of misguided idealism, I think he's just a total loving sellout. I hope the fucker rots in that consulate. Assange was never about government transparency, just about targeting certain countries. 
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 04:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 15:52 |
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:How is she a Nixon. How. Like seriously you're full of poo poo how. She's a technocrat that clearly has a pathological need to be loved despite being a charismatic black hole. She's willing to use obscure procedure and personal connections to get her way in a way that is deeply unusual for politicians (this is normally listed as a positive trait for Hillary, as it was for Nixon). She got crushed by a more charismatic outsider and hasn't forgotten that burn. She spent some time in the wilderness and spent a lot of energy shoring up her base. She's deeply and fundamentally queer in the same way Nixon was. I don't see how the parallels aren't obvious. She's a mirror image, left where he was right. But don't be surprised when she "creates the EPA" as a compromise with her "friends" on the right.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 04:57
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Assange was never about government transparency, just about targeting certain countries. That's pretty unfair. He doesn't want to end up in a US torture cell. That means seeking safety with the of the US (who are also actively creepy fucks). Nothing wrong with knowing which side butters your bread.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:00
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:Yeah, the ostensible radical revolutionary Maoist would know a lot about nuance. FTFY
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:00
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:She's a technocrat that clearly has a pathological need to be loved despite being a charismatic black hole. She's willing to use obscure procedure and personal connections to get her way in a way that is deeply unusual for politicians (this is normally listed as a positive trait for Hillary, as it was for Nixon). She got crushed by a more charismatic outsider and hasn't forgotten that burn. She spent some time in the wilderness and spent a lot of energy shoring up her base. lol she won the popular vote in her primary with Obama, probably the most popular candidate for president in recent history. Throughout the primary, Clinton supporters were more enthusiastic about her than Sanders voters about him.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:00
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:FTFY 
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:02
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:in a way that is deeply unusual for politicians Uh oh you're going off-message
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:05
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:lol she won the popular vote in her primary with Obama, probably the most popular candidate for president in recent history. Throughout the primary, Clinton supporters were more enthusiastic about her than Sanders voters about him. So now we're going all revanchist and saying that Hillary should have won in '08?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:05
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:So now we're going all revanchist and saying that Hillary should have won in '08? She won the popular vote because Obama killed it in caucuses while Hillary won California, Texas, New York, and Florida. Also Obama wasn't even on the Michigan ballot. Nobody is saying Hillary was the real winner.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:10
|
|
|
Petr posted:Uh oh you're going off-message Not really. The whole "Cheerleader Hillary was the only one who went to loser Newt's Birthday Party" narrative just like how Senator Nixon was known to create a successful compromise. Part of why he was chosen for the VP slot. But we do agree that Hillary will win Texas 
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:11
|
|
|
I don't know why some of you are complaining about actual discussion of politics, even if it's rehashed. Would you rather argue some more about self-driving cars?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:11
|
|
|
big boi posted:I don't know why some of you are complaining about actual discussion of politics, even if it's rehashed. Would you rather argue some more about self-driving cars? Talking about politics is great, but these are some dumb loving posts from a self-described radical Maoist, so
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:13
|
|
|
Petr posted:Talking about politics is great, but these are some dumb loving posts from a self-described radical Maoist, so Better Red than
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:17
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Better Red than You're literally the dumbest person in this thread
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:21
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:She's a technocrat that clearly has a pathological need to be loved despite being a charismatic black hole. She's willing to use obscure procedure and personal connections to get her way in a way that is deeply unusual for politicians (this is normally listed as a positive trait for Hillary, as it was for Nixon). She got crushed by a more charismatic outsider and hasn't forgotten that burn. She spent some time in the wilderness and spent a lot of energy shoring up her base. Your evidence of her swing right can be found here: The rest of your points can be summed up as a bag of flaming dog poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:22
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Assange was never about government transparency, just about targeting certain countries. This. He was never any kind of idealist who lost his way. He was always this spiteful bastard who ruined a potential tool for increasing accountability for his own petty grudges.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:22
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:Your evidence of her swing right can be found here: You clearly misunderstood my post. Unless you are the sort of Colbert liberal who thinks that President Nixon was, in fact, well to the left of President Obama.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:24
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Unless you are the sort of Colbert liberal who thinks that President Nixon was, in fact, well to the left of President Obama. I don't even know where to begin with this sentence. EDIT: You seem to be pretending to be dumb to rile up the thread but are also actually dumb. You're inconsistent and can never back up any of the accusations you make. Please, just try to at least prove something. Yinlock fucked around with this message at 05:29 on Sep 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:You clearly misunderstood my post. Stop your making my head hurt trying to understand your poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:She's deeply and fundamentally queer in the same way Nixon was. ah, a nixon/kissinger shipper
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:28
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:ah, a nixon/kissinger shipper You clearly haven't read your Thomson.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
Clearly Shbobdb never read their James David Barber.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:You clearly haven't read your Thomson. It's spelled Thompson you god dang revisionist rightist.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Clearly Shbobdb never read their James David Barber. Hillary is like *the* active-negative type.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:31
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Colbert liberal Never stop posting
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:32
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:It's spelled Thompson you god dang revisionist rightist. I'm an anti-revisionist who is phone posting.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:32
|
|
|
I still manage to phone post somewhat coherently.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:34
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:I'm an anti-revisionist who is phone posting. You're as anti-revisionist as Khruschev and you've got the brain of Brezhnev with the class analysis of Deng.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:34
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:You're as anti-revisionist as Khruschev and you've got the brain of Brezhnev with the class analysis of Deng. Please quantify that. You aren't making a real argument unless you can back it up with clear examples including a quantifiable metric.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:35
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Hillary is like *the* active-negative type. lol
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:36
|
|
|
Where would you place it on the Barber "political compass"?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:38
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:I still manage to phone post somewhat coherently. Strong post/avatar character combo here.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:38
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Where would you place it on the Barber "political compass"? Quadrant IV, in so much as I think Barber isn't terrible useful.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:39
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Quadrant IV, in so much as I think Barber isn't terrible useful. I like how you never actually say anything.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:I like how you never actually say anything. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:I like how you never actually say anything. I answered your question? You didn't ask why I think you're wrong; you only asked where I'd put her.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
Think what you will, but I actually say things. Bi Now just shitposts and says nothing. What coherent position has he placed? How has he advanced the discussion beyond mere cheerleading?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:42
|
|
|
Hey instead of taking obvious bait could you people just put them on ignore for a change so that tomorrow morning this thread doesn't have a few hundred posts of goons falling over themselves to play with the same hand grenade?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:42
|
|
|
This shitposting competition sure is exciting.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 15:52 |
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Please quantify that. You aren't making a real argument unless you can back it up with clear examples including a quantifiable metric. Here you go. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:43
|
|