OLD TRUMP THREAD GO TO THE NEW ONE

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > C-SPAM > OLD TRUMP THREAD GO TO THE NEW ONE

«‹›7086 »

logikv9: Mar 5, 2009; Ham Wrangler

imagine being so insane that you back another ryan for any position of power

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:08

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 14, 2024 04:17

Martin BadClixx: Jul 14, 2012; ^{dada stijl}

a helpful bear posted:

I'm a big baby where's my full socialism now pacifier!!!!

Watch out for angry mdos!

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:08

MariusLecter: Sep 5, 2009; NI MUERTE NI MIEDO

logikv9 posted:

imagine being so insane that you back another ryan for any position of power

MariusLecter posted:

Its like when the joker said he doesnt have a plan and hes insane but instead of being calculated lies hes completely honest and its true

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:08

hallebarrysoetoro: Jun 14, 2003

GobiasIndustries posted:

lmao thanks Politico

lol specifically targeting addiction treatment

gonna break dat 100k mark by mid 2018

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:08

Bip Roberts: Mar 29, 2005

bump_fn posted:

be a piece of poo poo

how is she a piece of poo poo over some blue dog?

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:09

a helpful bear: Aug 18, 2004; Slippery Tilde

if dems just try to reach out to those Romney voters they could win

* Upper class whites overwhlemingly vote in a giant orange piss monster *

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:09

mdemone: Mar 14, 2001

MariusLecter posted:

Its like when the joker said he doesnt have a plan and hes insane but instead of being calculated lies hes completely honest and its true

I think you missed the point of that line, like real bad.

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:09

ScrubLeague: Feb 11, 2007; Nap Ghost

triple sulk posted:

ff7 actually aged pretty well, graphics aside

it isn't as long as you'll remember but it's a good game

nah it's 1/3 of a good game with a decent conclusion but once you leave midgar it's mostly homework and occasionally something interesting.

vincent is probably the best thing that happens after you leave town

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:09

Gringostar: Nov 12, 2016; Morbid Hound

FAUXTON posted:

lmao "man say ting about old lady I hate, how I giev money"

everything old is new again

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:10

Pook Good Mook: Aug 6, 2013; ENFORCE THE UNITED STATES DRESS CODE AT ALL COSTS!

This message paid for by the Men's Wearhouse& Jos A Bank Lobbying Group

Thatim posted:

Real talk: isnt it knda true?

Seem like someone as 'progresive' as Bernie wouldnt win much swing states cause of scary socialism.

Otoh, running the most impopulair person ever didnt help either. Kinda curious what would have happened if a boring milquetoast dem would have fun that wasnt Clinton.

It's clear to me that there are a lot of people inclined to vote for a Democrat but don't because of ideological purity/liberal firing squads. But at the same time these people are dumb enough to hoist their own personal expectations on a popular candidate who is unlikely to do any of the things they assume he will (Obama).

I hate to be this cynical, but I think the issue is simpler than the decision of hard-left vs. hard-centrist. There are only two things that seem to make a difference to liberal fence sitters: someone who is popular, and someone who doesn't run from the fact that they're a Democrat. Obama and Bill Clinton weren't perfect ideologically, but at least you never saw them try to hem and haw because the Republicans were big meanies. Obama's instincts were right when he realized that on the issues most people are actually pretty frigin liberal but they won't get there voting for someone who is embarrassed by their own positions. Bernie got that. People who voted for Stein, or who wanted Bernie and stayed home are ideologically empty simpletons. They'll vote for someone so long as they're CLOSE to liberal (because they'll hoist their own views on them), and they'll vote for anyone they THINK isn't an empty suit. These people are already dumb enough to think that "not voting sends just as strong a message" when all it does it make things shittier faster. If they aren't cynical enough to vote for the lesser of two evils because of some misguided principle then trick them into voting for someone that doesn't LOOK like the lesser of two evils.

My litmus test for 2020 primaries:

Personally popular
Not embarrassed by their views

Corey Booker is a two-faced rear end, but at least he never apologizes. Clinton didn't lose because she's a neo-liberal, she lost because she appeared fake. I spend every day with rural Iowans. The majority of them don't REALLY pay attention to political positions beyond thinking X politician is a "phony." Maybe a leftist is the right call, but I think it's simpler to just follow the Obama playbook.

Pook Good Mook has issued a correction as of 04:13 on Jun 23, 2017

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:10

a helpful bear: Aug 18, 2004; Slippery Tilde

Thatim posted:

Watch out for angry mdos!

does that make them MADerators?

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:10

Vertical Lime: Dec 11, 2004

winners: donald trump, he badly needed a policy victory, 2020 is a cinch
losers: hillary clinton for forgetting the common man and e-mails
losers: 23 million that will lose health insurance, we shouldn't write this column without noting this

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:10

FAUXTON: Jun 2, 2005; spero che tu stia bene

Bip Roberts posted:

To the house we're going to need to elect some bad dems in red districts, fyi. I think that's all he was saying.

The 50 state strategy of fielding candidates from every district can result in candidates representative of some real lovely parts of the country

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:10

Nichael: Mar 30, 2011

Bip Roberts posted:

To the house we're going to need to elect some bad dems in red districts, fyi. I think that's all he was saying.

It's not about bad Democrats or good Democrats (socialists), in my opinion. It's about electable Democrats. Each and every candidate needs to be relatable on a personal level. They need to come off as human.

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:10

hallebarrysoetoro: Jun 14, 2003

logikv9 posted:

imagine being so insane that you back another ryan for any position of power

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:11

Homeless Friend: Jul 16, 2007; Can't post for 6 hours!

Thatim posted:

Real talk: isnt it knda true?

Seem like someone as 'progresive' as Bernie wouldnt win much swing states cause of scary socialism.

Otoh, running the most impopulair person ever didnt help either. Kinda curious what would have happened if a boring milquetoast dem would have fun that wasnt Clinton.

They just need to make a goddamn comprehensive societal program/vision then tailor their message for the class/area they're targeting. Also don't run emotionless carpetbaggers with no message lmao.

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:11

Augus: Mar 9, 2015

Montasque posted:

https://twitter.com/BoSnerdley/status/878083341085552641

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:11

ThndrShk2k: Nov 3, 2009; by Nyc_Tattoo; Bread Liar

Montasque posted:

https://twitter.com/ABC/status/878084473069346817

Can't even use 3 characters to add 'an ' to the loving tweet for proper english

:saddowns:

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:11

Tainen: Jan 23, 2004

Has anyone heard from :megaman:

since he was summoned to brief DJT? I hope he is ok.

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:11

Pook Good Mook: Aug 6, 2013; ENFORCE THE UNITED STATES DRESS CODE AT ALL COSTS!

This message paid for by the Men's Wearhouse& Jos A Bank Lobbying Group

Nichael posted:

It's not about bad Democrats or good Democrats (socialists), in my opinion. It's about electable Democrats. Each and every candidate needs to be relatable on a personal level. They need to come off as human.

Agreed. Being a phony is far worse than being a Democrat.

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:11

mdemone: Mar 14, 2001

Homeless Friend posted:

Also don't run emotionless carpetbaggers with no message lmao.

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:12

bump_fn: Apr 12, 2004; _{two of them}

i have no idea who that dude is and I'm sorry if he's a centrist shithead but anyone willing to say pelosi is a capitalist criminal is cool

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:12

Gringostar: Nov 12, 2016; Morbid Hound

Pook Good Mook posted:

It's clear to me that there are a lot of people inclined to vote for a Democrat but don't because of ideological purity/liberal firing squads. But at the same time these people are dumb enough to hoist their own personal expectations on a popular candidate who is unlikely to do any of the things they assume he will (Obama).

I hate to be this cynical, but I think the issue is simpler than the decision of hard-left vs. hard-centrist. There are only two things that seem to make a difference to liberal fence sitters: someone who is popular, and someone who doesn't run from the fact that their a Democrat. Obama and Bill Clinton weren't perfect ideologically, but at least you never saw them try to hem and haw because the Republicans were big meanies. Obama's instincts were right when he realized that on the issues most people are actually pretty frigin liberal but they won't get there voting for someone who is embarrassed by their own positions. Bernie got that. People who voted for Stein, or who wanted Bernie and stayed home are ideologically empty simpletons. They'll vote for someone so long as they're CLOSE to liberal (because they'll hoist their own views on them), and they'll vote for anyone they THINK isn't an empty suit. These people are already dumb enough to think that "not voting sends just as strong a message" when all it does it make things shittier faster. If they aren't cynical enough to vote for the lesser of two evils because of some misguided principle then trick them into voting for someone that doesn't LOOK like the lesser of two evils.

My litmus test for 2020 primaries:

Personally popular
Not embarrassed by their views

Corey Booker is a two-faced rear end, but at least he never apologizes. Clinton didn't lose because she's a neo-liberal, she lost because she appeared fake. I spend every day with rural Iowans. The majority of them don't REALLY pay attention to political positions beyond thinking X politician is a "phony." Maybe a leftist is the right call, but I think it's simpler to just follow the Obama playbook.

i'm sorry sir, this is an arbys and we're all going to die

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:12

MariusLecter: Sep 5, 2009; NI MUERTE NI MIEDO

mdemone posted:

I think you missed the point of that line, like real bad.

To manipulate a ideological purist into doing his bidding?

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:13

a helpful bear: Aug 18, 2004; Slippery Tilde

hallebarrysoetoro posted:

The best Ryan despite his creator

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:13

Bip Roberts: Mar 29, 2005

Nichael posted:

It's not about bad Democrats or good Democrats (socialists), in my opinion. It's about electable Democrats. Each and every candidate needs to be relatable on a personal level. They need to come off as human.

right, as some of them are going to have to be relatable centrists like Tim Kane who have a chance of beating out burn-it-all-down tea partiers. The trick is to also elect a poo poo ton of real progressives and force a voting coalition where the center gets pushed along. They'll accept it if it allows them to continue to get elected through good and/or popular politics.

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:13

logikv9: Mar 5, 2009; Ham Wrangler

Homeless Friend posted:

They just need to make a goddamn comprehensive societal program/vision then tailor their message for the class/area they're targeting. Also don't run emotionless carpetbaggers with no message lmao.

actually you'll find that this is a big winner in lovely places like montana

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:14

FAUXTON: Jun 2, 2005; spero che tu stia bene

Homeless Friend posted:

They just need to make a goddamn comprehensive societal program/vision then tailor their message for the class/area they're targeting. Also don't run emotionless carpetbaggers with no message lmao.

Emotionless carpetbaggers are real loving popular in Palo Alto though

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:14

ScrubLeague: Feb 11, 2007; Nap Ghost

realtalk the 23 million "kicked off" number is bullshit, 23 million people are estimated to not have health insurance. probably a huge chunk of them will be priced out or dropped because lmao capitalism, but a not-insignificant number of that group will just choose to not have health insurance like they did a couple years ago.

would be cool if that was just not an option and health insurance was provided by the government and not a faceless multinational conglomerate that provides nothing but costs everything, but hey this is the third world country that's also the richest country in the history of the world we live in

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:14

Pook Good Mook: Aug 6, 2013; ENFORCE THE UNITED STATES DRESS CODE AT ALL COSTS!

This message paid for by the Men's Wearhouse& Jos A Bank Lobbying Group

Gringostar posted:

i'm sorry sir, this is an arbys and we're all going to die

Because of the arbys or the nukes?

You know what, doesn't matter, give me the Reuben.

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:14

Martin BadClixx: Jul 14, 2012; ^{dada stijl}

Pook Good Mook posted:

It's clear to me that there are a lot of people inclined to vote for a Democrat but don't because of ideological purity/liberal firing squads. But at the same time these people are dumb enough to hoist their own personal expectations on a popular candidate who is unlikely to do any of the things they assume he will (Obama).

I hate to be this cynical, but I think the issue is simpler than the decision of hard-left vs. hard-centrist. There are only two things that seem to make a difference to liberal fence sitters: someone who is popular, and someone who doesn't run from the fact that they're a Democrat. Obama and Bill Clinton weren't perfect ideologically, but at least you never saw them try to hem and haw because the Republicans were big meanies. Obama's instincts were right when he realized that on the issues most people are actually pretty frigin liberal but they won't get there voting for someone who is embarrassed by their own positions. Bernie got that. People who voted for Stein, or who wanted Bernie and stayed home are ideologically empty simpletons. They'll vote for someone so long as they're CLOSE to liberal (because they'll hoist their own views on them), and they'll vote for anyone they THINK isn't an empty suit. These people are already dumb enough to think that "not voting sends just as strong a message" when all it does it make things shittier faster. If they aren't cynical enough to vote for the lesser of two evils because of some misguided principle then trick them into voting for someone that doesn't LOOK like the lesser of two evils.

My litmus test for 2020 primaries:

Personally popular
Not embarrassed by their views

Corey Booker is a two-faced rear end, but at least he never apologizes. Clinton didn't lose because she's a neo-liberal, she lost because she appeared fake. I spend every day with rural Iowans. The majority of them don't REALLY pay attention to political positions beyond thinking X politician is a "phony." Maybe a leftist is the right call, but I think it's simpler to just follow the Obama playbook.

Thanks, much apprixiated the effort post

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:14

hallebarrysoetoro: Jun 14, 2003

Pook Good Mook posted:

Corey Booker is a two-faced rear end, but at least he never apologizes. Clinton didn't lose because she's a neo-liberal, she lost because she appeared fake. I spend every day with rural Iowans. The majority of them don't REALLY pay attention to political positions beyond thinking X politician is a "phony." Maybe a leftist is the right call, but I think it's simpler to just follow the Obama playbook.

clinton lost because of the economy

rural america is dying and trump promised them a return to glory

suburban trash gloms onto the whole blue collar spiel (see the continuing fad of poo poo like harleys or unironically wearing carhartt while they go pick up tucker and cullen from their ice hockey practice)

clinton can win in 2020 when the economy has been in the shitter for 2 years

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:14

Squizzle: Apr 24, 2008

oddium posted:

my favorite super sentai gif is the one where the kaijin turns into a sick Outer Heaven skull/rose (??)

also please post it again

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:14

Martin BadClixx: Jul 14, 2012; ^{dada stijl}

Nichael posted:

It's not about bad Democrats or good Democrats (socialists), in my opinion. It's about electable Democrats. Each and every candidate needs to be relatable on a personal level. They need to come off as human.

Lol

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:14

Gringostar: Nov 12, 2016; Morbid Hound

also, people like genuine politicians

that politician can be a genuine piece of poo poo, but at least you know what you're getting

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:14

RealityWarCriminal: Aug 10, 2016

ThndrShk2k posted:

Can't even use 3 characters to add 'an ' to the loving tweet for proper english

it's almost like twitter is a garbage platform

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:14

Nichael: Mar 30, 2011

Pook Good Mook posted:

It's clear to me that there are a lot of people inclined to vote for a Democrat but don't because of ideological purity/liberal firing squads. But at the same time these people are dumb enough to hoist their own personal expectations on a popular candidate who is unlikely to do any of the things they assume he will (Obama).

I hate to be this cynical, but I think the issue is simpler than the decision of hard-left vs. hard-centrist. There are only two things that seem to make a difference to liberal fence sitters: someone who is popular, and someone who doesn't run from the fact that they're a Democrat. Obama and Bill Clinton weren't perfect ideologically, but at least you never saw them try to hem and haw because the Republicans were big meanies. Obama's instincts were right when he realized that on the issues most people are actually pretty frigin liberal but they won't get there voting for someone who is embarrassed by their own positions. Bernie got that. People who voted for Stein, or who wanted Bernie and stayed home are ideologically empty simpletons. They'll vote for someone so long as they're CLOSE to liberal (because they'll hoist their own views on them), and they'll vote for anyone they THINK isn't an empty suit. These people are already dumb enough to think that "not voting sends just as strong a message" when all it does it make things shittier faster. If they aren't cynical enough to vote for the lesser of two evils because of some misguided principle then trick them into voting for someone that doesn't LOOK like the lesser of two evils.

My litmus test for 2020 primaries:

Personally popular
Not embarrassed by their views

Corey Booker is a two-faced rear end, but at least he never apologizes. Clinton didn't lose because she's a neo-liberal, she lost because she appeared fake. I spend every day with rural Iowans. The majority of them don't REALLY pay attention to political positions beyond thinking X politician is a "phony." Maybe a leftist is the right call, but I think it's simpler to just follow the Obama playbook.

You said it better than me, good post.

# ? Jun 23, 2017 04:14