|
Will Perez force the dems left? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes |
|
33 | 6.38% |
| No |
|
343 | 66.34% |
| Keith Ellison |
|
54 | 10.44% |
| Pete Buttigieg |
|
71 | 13.73% |
| Jehmu Green |
|
16 | 3.09% |
| Total: | 416 votes | ||
|
And once again, even considering military action as a last resort makes you the same as Hitler. Oh, but Hitler was stopped by military action instead of Diplomacy, so even Hitler wasn't the real Hitler there, FDR was.
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 08:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 19:09 |
|
|
Ah, now you are admitting that military action to stop the Nazis is justified. Though I mustn't be too hasty, after all, given your relationship with Nazis and spewing their propaganda, Crowsbeak, you might not agree with using the military to stop Nazis. Fulchrum fucked around with this message at 08:09 on Mar 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 08:07
|
|
|
Frijolero posted:Gonna break down your really misinformed opinions: quote:Nobody's tried. Our supposedly diplomatic party hasn't tried good relations with Iran because they rather kowtow to the Israel lobby. Not to mention the Clinton-wing of the party advocated for hardline with Iran for 8+ years. quote:Please stop watching Michael Bay movies. There isn't a single nuclear armed state that wants to "end game" the loving world. Countries have historically attained nukes because they want peace. North loving Korea. Or wait, lemme guess, they only wish to save True Korea from South Korean oppression. And every other country that obtained nuclear weapons didn't sign a goddamn nuclear treaty acknowledging that there would have to be military action if they obtained a nuclear weapon after signing it. Fulchrum fucked around with this message at 08:26 on Mar 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 08:23
|
|
|
Frijolero posted:"Iran can't be reasoned with, so we must invade/bomb if they try to get nukes." We loving HAVE reasoned with them. Reasoned, negotiated, and the international community as a whole and them have come to an agreement. That's the loving point. If they then ignore that agreement and keep trying to get a nuke, then that is definitive proof that reasoning with them is a waste of time. You are saying that, in a specific circumstances where they are acting irrationally and unreasonable, that we still need to treat them as rational and reasonable. You are the one who seems completely convinced Iran is insane enough to keep trying to get nukes with the agreement in place.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 08:38
|
|
|
Are you seriously contriving a scenario where invading Iran would be justified and then trying to pretend that this is the view for all situations you stupid stupid gently caress? "Hey, what if France started nuking all its Nato allies, we'd need to stop them doing that wouldn't we?" "I guess" "Whoa, check out this loving psycho who wants to invade France. I guess you just hate them. You loving Hitler".
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 08:48
|
|
|
I'm not the dumbass who insisted we talk about the hypothetical where Iran is batshit enough to break the treaty and put all its resources into getting a nuke asap, then demanded we still treat this hypothetical crazy Iran as totally sane.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 08:53
|
|
|
Chomskyan posted:Yeah, the US has never done anything like this Ah Mr. Trump, was wondering when you'd join us.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 09:18
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:I guess the only way to address the faults of American foreign policy is to join the Republican party, then? That's the only way to engage in that level of false equivalence horseshit on that level and disengage from all nuance and reality, yeah. [Quote ]It's actually quite amazing what an excellent job Trump has done of loving over people like you. You don't recognize the broken clock principle[/quote] Is rhat the thing Bernie Bros used to jusyofy spreading Breitbart propaganda horseshit all over the forums because thwy werent afraid to TELL THE TRUTH!, unlike the Clinton News Network? quote:and are so zealous in your hatred of Donald Trump that you automatically parse anything he says as 100% the opposite of reality. And the thing is you're right 95% of the time of course, it's just that the other 5% of the time he's got you believing wrong things, like America has sensible foreign policy in the Middle East. It's not even that clever or diabolical a tactic on his part - it's just that you're such a mindless partisan even an idiot man-child with a double-digit IQ can play you like a fiddle.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 09:52
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Did I fall into a timewarp. Is this 2003. "Whoa u dont think we should maim and kill thousands of US soldiers and hundreds of thousands of civilians in an open-ended occupation until we finally slink home after wasting lives and treasure for a decade and watch another region collapse into civil war. I bet u would have been all nice 2 Hitler too u hippie appeaser." Someone post groverlist.txt I'm on my phone. Well, how old were you in 2003? Cause if it was under 4 or so, that would explain why you're too dumb to understand what a hypothetical situation is. Also, you do realize you are saying that Iraq did have WMDs if you're saying that talking about attacking Iran solely if we have proof they are devoting all resources to flaunting the treaty is in any way comparable?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 09:57
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:"Let's do Iraq but 100 times worse, and this time we'll start with a military exhausted from 15 years of warfare and a domestic population with sky-high war weariness on day 1." What if you were dead? I assume that worked, that just considering that you might be dead has tricked you into dying. Also, look at how the GOP platform talks about only wanting peace and cooperation with Iran.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 09:58
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:You are actually mostly the voice of reason on this page, but don't be a dickbag here. The only reason Iran is ahead of us on the "terrorist actions" score is that they're the aspiring-major-regional-power and we're backing the existing regimes. When Saudi Arabia murders some folks, that's not a terrorist activity, that's one of the world's nastier state actors doing a thing state actors can do. Okay, fair enough, claims of false equivalency withdrawn. However, America has demonstrated that it has not even considered at any point up to now distributing either nuclear material or weapons to actors. With Iran, there is no such history or show of restraint. Thus, just blind trust in the nation if it immediately went crazy and started putting everything it had into developing nuclear weapons, would be a poor choice to anyone with half a brain.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 10:04
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I served in Operation Iraqi Freedom, thanks, what were you doing in 2004. I don't feel like sending another cohort of kids to die for some more fantastical scenarios about the swarthy furriner's suicide wish to nuke the world. Once was enough. You're the one bringing up loving fantastical scenarios! The platform is talking about poo poo like Grand Ayatollah Khomenei getting on TV and saying "we're getting nukes now. Nyah nyah nyah." Not a contrived suspicion or a lie, real tangible proof accepted by the International community. That is the situation they are describing would warrant action, and you seem utterly loving convinced that Iran would do that just for fun and we should ignore it if they do, or that Hillary would invade anyway because of some bullshit reason you pulled outta your rear end (she's totally a hawk, she hates Muslims, she hates America, it's her time of the month, pick one cause they all equally apply).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 10:13
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:You just called someone "Mr. Trump" because they suggested that American ME foreign policy isn't all that great. So... quote:Like I said, you don't comprehend the broken clock principle. I share a fair few of opinions with Hitler. Smoking is bad for you. Dogs are good. Animal cruelty is bad. gently caress those Russians. The big difference is that all those opinions I share with Hitler are ones I share with people who know what the gently caress they are talking about on these things. If I realised that I shared an opinion with Trump that was not shared by Obama, Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton, I'd realise that's a real bad sign you loving self important poo poo! Fulchrum fucked around with this message at 10:25 on Mar 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 10:21
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:
I think it was good and a high watermark for international diplomacy prevailing over militarism, however temporarily, though it may still live on through other signatories and if Trump gets distracted. For some reason everyone here seems loving convinced that it failed and Iran really is developing nukes for deployment, and that the Dems hypothetical is something they were totally gonna do any day now.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 10:25
|
|
|
Chomskyan posted:Hey Fulchrum, are you aware that aggressive invasions of other countries is a severe violation of international law? Just curious as before you seemed to be very concerned about international law as it applies to other countries. Yes, just as I am aware that breaking international nuclear treaties is against international law, as is refusing to cease nuclear development even after being caught flouting restrictions. Funny how everyone ignores that part and think that the Dem platform secretly meant that war with Iran would be declared for literally no reason at all.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 11:24
|
|
|
Chomskyan posted:Actually, even if Iran broke international treaties and started developing their own nuclear weapons, it would still be illegal to invade them without a security council resolution. Because the UN security Council would totally back Iran if they just went crazy and started developing nukes in complete violation of the treaty they signed with the rest of the world.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 11:33
|
|
|
Chomskyan posted:Considering France, China, and Russia hold veto power, I doubt it would allow a US invasion The P5 were signatories to the agreement you loving idiot. Oh wait, I forgot that France was opposed to all war ever forever. Fulchrum fucked around with this message at 11:49 on Mar 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 11:44
|
|
|
Arri posted:What right does the US even have to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons? We are literally the only country in the world that has used them, against a civilian populace no less, so I don't really see where we would have the moral authority to tell someone else no. Nuke make big boom! There, I put it in terms that you may be able to understand, judging from your question.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 11:47
|
|
|
Radish posted:I'm getting the feeling from some Democrats that they think the Russian stuff is what they need to focus on and it will sink Trump. It's frustrating since absolutely no one is going to vote based on that. Independents don't really care and Republicans already consider Russia our greatest ally. It's more of the same "well the rules say that if you collude with a foreign government it will cost you exactly 6% elect-ability points and thus we deserve the next election" when the wonky political rules don't matter anymore if they ever did. So just the appearance of doing something illegal absolutely did hurt Hillary, but the reaction to Trump actually committing treason will just be "meh, that's just politics, I am suddenly laser focused on policy as no electorate has ever been before." Also, oh no, I didn't know that Republicans liked Russia! Whatever will we do? Well, we could leverage their hatred for racism - wait, Republicans like racism? Can't oppose that then. But at least we have lgbt rights - they hate those? Oh poo poo! Well, there's Trump's historic unfavorable. Oh no, Republicans approve of Trump? There's no options! As for your horseshit that independents don't care, by an over two to one margin, Americans consider it a serious issue. So by your logic since no independents care and all Republicans think it's good, only 6% of Americans are independent and Democrats are 63% or the population. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/03/06/usa-today-poll-americans-support-independent-investigation-russia/98795364/ Fulchrum fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Mar 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Wait is fulchrum like doing a parody of himself now? I'm not the one who cares desperately enough what Nazis want me to think that I check Breitbart constantly to see what Nazi propaganda I need to be spewing everywhere.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:You're the one who keeps making Breitbart talking points about Iran, and Keith Ellison. Plus you hate the minimum wage. I loving called that you would be enough of a brain dead cretin to try and remove all context from those, so I deliberately put the context right there where you couldn't miss it. That you missed it anyway says you're either the most brain dead piece of crap on the planet, meaning you are definitely a Breitbart reader, or you're the slimiest sleaze st most disingenuous worm ever, meaning you're a Breitbart writer. So do you poo poo, or eat, nazi propaganda? Frijolero posted:Hillary literally had an unauthorized email server. It wasn't made up. It wasn't an appearance of wrongdoing, she admitted it was bad and apologized. Well for the record you're the second worst of Breitbart's useful idiots these boards have vomited up. Fulchrum fucked around with this message at 21:23 on Mar 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 21:15
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Yeah a whole lot of people called you out for wanting war with Iran. Leaving aside that this is you admitting that you knew the context of every other statement and wanted to ignore it anyway (So you're a Breitbart writer then. Guess that's why you decided to defend pedophilia), yes, a lot of posters are either brain dead in that they can't understand what a hypothetical situation is, or brain dead in that they believe Iran is going to completely ignore the security council and try to obtain a nuke, and yet still be the plucky little victim just protecting themselves.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:Yeah I can only speak for myself but the idea that we're all reading Breitbart and parroting the talking points here is pretty laughable. I never read Breitbart, like at all. Someone posted some of their poo poo on my FB feed a couple times so I checked it out and it made my head hurt it's so stupid. I think I have it blocked now, actually. The thing you said only works if dumb person agrees with smart person. Smart person wrong and dumb person right does not happen and is not what you said. What you said is only in make believe. You thinking dumb person right and smart person wrong cause dumb person agree with you makes you dumb. A broken clock is right twice a day. When a broken clock and the atomic clock are saying different things, THE BROKEN CLOCK IS WRONG YOU IMPOSSIBLY DENSE poo poo! This is the exact same loving reasoning that mother fuckers use to try to deny climate change!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:I reported him when he claimed in the last thread that all white people are subhuman filth, and nothing happened. I don't think he's going anywhere. They took one look at your posts and agreed with me.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:Doubling down on your racism, I see. Nice work So you're still trying to claim you're not a useful idiot while crying about racism against whites?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 21:57
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:This is sort of like if a rich person found a starving person and offered to feed them if they would be their slave. The starving person is undoubtedly better off as a fed slave than he/she was before, but that doesn't make keeping them as a slave any less hosed up and wrong. In the same way, a situation where a bunch of people make poverty wages is not okay just because the immediate alternative is no wages at all. The correct response to this situation is "wait, this is hosed up, is there anything we can do to ensure all workers receive decent wages?" Which they did, as the wages have since risen to and exceeded the initially proposed levels. That's yet another part of the story most people who get their hot scoops either directly or indirectly from Breitbart don't know, or just don't care about. The plight of the Haitian people is tragic and no-one is suggesting that keep them starving is a good thing. However, you do have to ay least recognise that the abandonment by businesses is a very likely possibility that the state department was trying to prevent and wasnt just her hating them all and blocking a wage increase just to be evil. Also, you have to acknowledge a lot of people only care about it as a way to attack Hillary Clinton due to needing justification for deeper reasons to hate her. Trump absolutely used it that way, as did Crowsbeak. Actively treating them as good faith actors when they are saying this and not recognizing it as a basic attempt to fracture the dems is a bafflingly stupid move. The only thing I can compare it to is that scene in one of the pirates of the Caribbean movies where Steve from Coupling says he knows everything that Johnny Depp told him is bullshit meant to trick him into doing something stupid, and Depp doesn't mean any of it, but he's going to listen to him anyway. Yes, all of these things do still need to be addressed. But recognise who is bringing them up and why, instead of blindly taking that message and running like a madman with it. Do you think all Nazi propaganda in WW2 was purely aggressive and diminishing? Pure aryans are better than you and that poo poo? No, of course not. There were reams and reams of Goebbels led propaganda campaigns trying to attack British moral high ground over the treatment of India and Africa. How well do you think allied resistance efforts would have gone if every third soldier had decided to start listening to those things and running with attacking Britain because hey, the Nazis have a point on this?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:How is it splitting the vote to run as a Democrat? He means running as a splitter option because going through the Democratic primary is too hard and restrictive, man, and you just get caught up in politics.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2017 01:19
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:no, it really isn't. Oh gently caress off. You're acting like there is no form or system that can allow income inequality that doesn't automatically go straight to one old white guy owning all the money, and that all regulation and taxation will be meaningless before their unstoppable power.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2017 23:26
|
|
|
Frijolero posted:Remember when Hillary said "No we can't" for a year and a half and then lost miserably? Even if we know it can't happen? Hillary treated voters like adults, Trump treated them like children, mainly cause he has the mind of a toddler. If we're just going to ignore political reality and pretend that there is a handy easy foolproof way to do these things, then all its gonna do is cause people to call the dems sellouts and backstabbers whenever the stars fail to align.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:I'm not; there's plenty of ways that American capitalism can be made "kinder and gentler" without abandoning capitalism. Sanders ran on one; Pelosi mentioned another. Ah, okay, I misinterpreted. Mea culpa.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 01:19
|
|
|
Proud Christian Mom posted:The political reality is that Democrats have lost what, 1000+ seats at Federal and State levels since Obama was elected and Annointed Successor lost an election to Donald J. Trump by having the 'Blue Wall' shattered. Seems pretty clear to me that the Democrats current policy of GOP-lite isn't working and if the answer isn't 'go left' then there isn't a reason for the Democrats to run. If you want to invoke political reality bandying around crap like GOP-lite does not help.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 03:02
|
|
|
Frijolero posted:And we're back to "Hillary was a cool adult, Trump is a baby dummy." Obama and Clinton both made big promises, why not go to them? Oh yeah, because you keep consistently callung them neoliberal shills and backstabbers for (drumroll please) making promises they were unable to keep. In fact, Obama failing to live up to his promises is the number one justification given by leftists for extreme lack of turnout in 2010. Also, Hillary promised jobs that could actually exist and took more than 5 words to explain. Trump said he'd bring obsolete jobs back. Stop treating anyone who voted Trump as if they're not a chimp. Fulchrum fucked around with this message at 04:28 on Mar 23, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 04:25
|
|
|
Frijolero posted:Cool fantasy you've made for yourself. I like how you're just straight up reinventing the past to match what you want to believe now. Very Ingsoc. You'd make a good Republican. I also like how you're switching tracks so fast you've completely derailed your own argument. So Obama promised absolutely nothing. Well, guess this means your claim that voters need to love what you promise just got destroyed. Oh and, you remember the grand bargain. Way to go, you just noticed political reality. And having to deal, or even try to deal, with that political reality, makes him a centrist hack. Fulchrum fucked around with this message at 04:36 on Mar 23, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 04:33
|
|
|
How long this time before somebody clicks the link and figures out what misleading headlines are? C'mon, gotta make sure you fall for right wing propaganda every single time.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 04:47
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Factcheck is right wing, lol. Considering you've defended your constant spewing of nazi propaganda direct from Breitbart to here, you're doing a grand job of illustrating exactly what I mean.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 04:53
|
|
|
Frijolero posted:This is you. You are bad. Stop posting. You're right, voting for an obvious lying conman who has no goddamn clue about politics in the slightest and has every intention to gently caress you over because reading is hard, is definitely a smart and savvy person. And it does say a lot that calling out people repeating Breitbart crap is treated as worse than doing it. Gee, wherever have I seen that?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 05:09
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:Politifact is now Right Wing propaganda, For fucks sake But I'm sure you are totally consistent that Politifact is always a bastion of objective credibility. So you'll agree that Romney and Ryan wanting to destroy medicare really was the biggest lie of 2012. Fulchrum fucked around with this message at 05:16 on Mar 23, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 05:14
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:Right here is the loving quote quote:Have you ever considered that people might rightfully be angry at the Clintons for their actions in the 90s making life pretty loving hard for people on welfare and continuing that legacy of dismantling the public good for private profit. Oh and, I assume you despise FDR for sharing genes with a past president?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 05:45
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:A group is beginning to explore trying. The two Senators named are Manchin and Coons. Shhh! You're bringing reality and context in - it upsets the native goons, they think it steals their souls.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 05:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 19:09 |
|
|
In that she gave virtually everything and they still threw a tantrum and said it's not good enough, I hate you, I'm running away?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 05:53
|
|