|
FactsAreUseless posted:Hi Pablo, welcome to USPOL. Hi FAU 
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 15:42 |
|
|
mcmagic posted:So your argument is that Trump is a better general election candidate than John Kasich or Marco Rubio? I guess you could just be a moron.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
canepazzo posted:Jesus Christ HuffPo I mean, they're not wrong.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:51
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:And they wanted the wrong person if the goal was winning the white house and having coattails down ballot. That's just a fact. Please tell me which democrat would have done better downballot. Protip: Don't say Bernie because holy poo poo was he bad(and had an almost Trump level of pettiness) at it during the primary season.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:51
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Wait, I thought Trump was within the margin of error and a real threat because Hillary is so bad, which is it? Hillary is so bad at politics that she managed to steal the election from Bernie in spite of being hated by the majority of the country. There's no way she will be able to pull that off against Donald Trump who is also bad at politics and hated by the majority of the country.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:51
|
|
|
hint: if you're going to post about how unfavorable hillary is, post the crosstabs of her favorability showing how it breaks down across race and gender.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:51
|
|
|
"Takeru Kobayashi would have been up by 14 hot dogs" - mcmagic, 2012
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:51
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:Why can't you people deal with dissent in a nuanced, civil way? Because we've done "mcmagic, I disagree - I think you're overstating Clinton's unfavourabilities and underestimating her strengths. For example, ..." for almost a year now with this loving clown. Like seriously, go look at previous USPol threads and read mcmagic's posts; they're all some variant of "I don't like Clinton". There's a breaking point and mcmagic used up all of his good will about 4 or 5 months ago.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
Ein Sexmonster posted:No. My argument is that Clinton is not a worse candidate than Sanders or whoever you'd prefer. Then why did you respond to my post about Trump?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:We have dozens of times he just ignores it and posts the same stuff again, this has been going on for months. If you mean me, this is the second time I come to this thread.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
canepazzo posted:Jesus Christ HuffPo Yes, YESSSS 
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
Ein Sexmonster posted:No. My argument is that Clinton is not a worse candidate than Sanders or whoever you'd prefer. I think you'll find that your forgetting her unfavorables. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Sorry, it's been going on for months and we've finally hit our breaking point. I admit it seems insane if this is the first mcmagic derail you've seen, but there have been literally dozens. socialsecurity posted:We have dozens of times he just ignores it and posts the same stuff again, this has been going on for months. Ze Pollack posted:As far as 45-48% of Americans are concerned, Hillary Clinton is less deserving of the presidency of the united states than a failed businessman, serial sexual assaulter, and inveterate racist with an attention span no longer than five seconds. And this right wing hatred of her, in the extent it actually occurs, by the right is simply not justifiable by anything she did or is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:And this right here is why you're full of poo poo mcmagic. You consistently and constantly assume that literally none of Hillary Clinton's support is due to her. You begin from the viewpoint of "anyone could get what Hillary Clinton does." For what it's worth, this is an opinion shared by Hillary Clinton's staff. It's one of the less incendiary but more revealing leaks; the one where people are trying to workshop what reason they should give for Hillary Clinton running for president, and are coming up with nothing. It's an interesting slogan, I'm With Her. Because it very carefully eludes the question of -why- anyone should want Hillary Clinton to be president, in favor of presenting the laziest argument known to man: "other people have decided they support her, trust that their reasons are good."
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
"Ted Kennedy would have been up by 8 points." - mcmagic, 1980
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
Instant Sunrise posted:hint: if you're going to post about how unfavorable hillary is, post the crosstabs of her favorability showing how it breaks down across race and gender. So? Whining about white men doesn't make them not exist or be a large portion of the electorate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
canepazzo posted:Jesus Christ HuffPo At some point they decided that they want to be as objective and accurate as Breitbart, but from the left.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
Instant Sunrise posted:hint: if you're going to post about how unfavorable hillary is, post the crosstabs of her favorability showing how it breaks down across race and gender. The sad thing is that they've been posted multiple times, but it's still essentially the exact same conversation
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
Mcmagic has completely convinced me. Bernie would've been a better candidate. I'm voting Hillary anyway since she aligns with Bernie 93% in terms of voting record and has been a fantastic candidate in her own right despite dealing with poo poo no other candidate would probably have had to deal with
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
Protip: McMagic will never concede any point. It's like pulling teeth. He has his opinions, he treats them as fact, and nothing will change them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:54
|
|
|
Endorph posted:FLASH FAVORABILITY POLL If this poll was about Bernie Sanders posting he would be winning by 8 points
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
canepazzo posted:Jesus Christ HuffPo Good. Dunk on this small fraction of a human being.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:As far as 45-48% of Americans are concerned, Hillary Clinton is less deserving of the presidency of the united states than a failed businessman, serial sexual assaulter, and inveterate racist with an attention span no longer than five seconds. Those people who favor Trump over Clinton are republicans. There is probably no democrat that they would prefer over Trump. Also, "least unpalatable" is literally the same thing as popularity.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
Kit Walker posted:Mcmagic has completely convinced me. Bernie would've been a better candidate. I'm voting Hillary anyway since she aligns with Bernie 93% in terms of voting record and has been a fantastic candidate in her own right despite dealing with poo poo no other candidate would probably have had to deal with I'm also voting for her. Ein Sexmonster posted:Protip: McMagic will never concede any point. It's like pulling teeth. Try having less terrible points.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:It's one of the less incendiary but more revealing leaks; the one where people are trying to workshop what reason they should give for Hillary Clinton running for president, and are coming up with nothing. Really? Would you care to link that one? I've looked through most of the leaks and I certainly don't remember "Hillary Clinton's staff all says nobody likes her." It seems like it would be a memorable one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
Endorph posted:because regardless of whether or not we need a military, we have the largest one in the world, and veteran benefits - pay, mental and physical health care, etc - are pretty hosed and should be a bigger issue than they are. Climate change is way more important because that affects everyone on the planet, not just the military.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
sumie posted:The sad thing is that they've been posted multiple times, but it's still essentially the exact same conversation It's a bit like that flash headline of '33% of voters say they're less likely to vote Hillary due to EMAILS! (except that 95% of them are Republicans already)'
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Try having less terrible points.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
Phone posted:Because we've done "mcmagic, I disagree - I think you're overstating Clinton's unfavourabilities and underestimating her strengths. For example, ..." for almost a year now with this loving clown. mcmagic posted:So your argument is that Trump is a better general election candidate than John Kasich or Marco Rubio? I guess you could just be a moron. Still, this piling on dissent is terrible, even if the piled-on opinion is genuinely terrible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
"Gary Hart would have been up by 10 points." - mcmagic, 1984
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
Kit Walker posted:Mcmagic has completely convinced me. Bernie would've been a better candidate. I'm voting Hillary anyway since she aligns with Bernie 93% in terms of voting record and has been a fantastic candidate in her own right despite dealing with poo poo no other candidate would probably have had to deal with Bernie would have been terrible. And HRC has dealt with poo poo no other candidate would have had to, because she has done some pretty uniquely bad, corrupt, and incompetent things.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:Nobody gets hurt from mcmagic posting stuff. Just ignore it if you don't like it. Can't become a derail if you don't reply. Nobody gets hurt from us posting about mcmagic posting stuff. Just ignore it if you don't like it. Can't become a derail if you don't reply.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
BigRed0427 posted:So is the Trump/ Russia stuff getting any kind of play? No. Case in point: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html which has the headline "Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia" If Trump were subject to the same level of scrutiny as Clinton, the headline would be screaming "FBI investigation opened into possible Trump-Russia connections" or "FBI investigating Russian puppet-mastering of GOP candidate Trump" and the content of the article slanted to imply much more against him.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:57
|
|
|
Instant Sunrise posted:"Gary Hart would have been up by 10 points." - mcmagic, 1984 You really have been high content posting for the last 2 pages. Good job.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:57
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:And HRC has dealt with poo poo no other candidate would have had to, because she has done some pretty uniquely bad, corrupt, and incompetent things. Like be a female political figure before 2004.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:At some point they decided that they want to be as objective and accurate as Breitbart, but from the left. HuffPo has always been a lovely blog, rather than a useful source.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:At some point they decided that they want to be as objective and accurate as Breitbart, but from the left. What's inaccurate in that article?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:57
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:You really have been high content posting for the last 2 pages. Good job. Meanwhile, you're posting "Hillary Clinton unlikable" for the 80th time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:57
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:You really have been high content posting for the last 2 pages. Good job.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 15:42 |
|
|
mcmagic posted:So? Whining about white men doesn't make them not exist or be a large portion of the electorate. so i'm tired of having to act like straight white dude opinions are the only ones that matter
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 15:58
|
|