|
rezatahs posted:her inability to connect with a docile mammal So that's the reason Bill was always after interns 
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 02:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 10:45 |
|
|
spacetoaster posted:Nah, there won't be a democrat party after Trump appoints another couple of Supreme Court justices. If you had a message that wasn't poo poo and could win elections in places other than lefty strongholds you wouldn't need to rely on ramming views through with sympathetic judges.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 04:11
|
|
|
Popular Human posted:It makes me unreasonably angry that nearly every one of these top-level amateur hour chucklefucks are still holding the reins of the Democratic Party. You'd think after you gently caress up THAT bad you'd at least have the common decency to never show your face in public again. It's not the politicians, its the voters. The average Democrat in this country thinks that if they call someone a racist it neutralizes their vote. At least 50% of this board thinks there is no one but lefties and nazis; moderates literally don't exist.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 04:12
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:well, now your buddies own the judges who will make it easier to buy judges in the future yeah this excuse will definitely win you some of those elections
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 04:14
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:but then, are you suggesting that to capture the moderate vote HRC should have taken even more 'moderate' positions than she already did? We're talking 2016, not 2008.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 04:31
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:trump did no better than romney, he didn't bring out a sudden surge of working class voters, they just kinda stayed home in a choice between a clown and a robot Trump did no better than Romney by winning when Romney lost
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 04:33
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:if trump does the same as romney and then hillary does a lot worse in some key states she loses the election https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2016/12/29/2016-vs-2012-how-trumps-win-and-clintons-votes-stack-up-to-obama-and-romney/#2f9f61131661 Shut up idiot
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 04:38
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:Time to vote for the party of the bosses, that sure is gonna get me more money As opposed to the party that wants to raise the minimum wage to what I'm already making and claimed they helped me while they take contributions from every rich fucklord in Silicon Valley.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 04:44
|
|
|
Stexils posted:you make 12 dollars an hour? goondolences my man No, I'm a method actor. Also, my kid does. Pretty sure she does not want her raise from min wage to $12 an hour to be min wage again when she owes $30,000 in student debt to pay for idiots to make $60,000 as diversity specialists, Because idiots that lost the election can't admit that the left is actually not about helping people.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 04:47
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:people shilling for trump itt lol Maybe if you dsay it enough times he won't be President.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 04:48
|
|
|
Moderates: "You know, calling people racists is pretty stupid if you want them to agree with you" Left: *STOP SHILLING FOR WHITE SUPREMACISTS!!!* *Lose presidency, congress, most state governments* *continue pretending racism is anything but a slur*
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 04:52
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:The truest working class policy is destroying medicare and more tax breaks for wall street while making sure raytheon and lockmart get plenty of business with new wars throughout asia. Yeah because telling people you're gonna put their coal mines out of business, promising them "green energy jobs" in states 2000 miles away with companies that fold in 2 years or "job training" that never happens, while calling them racists and sucking the cock of silicon valley shitlords who drive rents up to $4000 a month while pretending that's totally different from wall street is better "Hey Google built a self driving car you can't afford! gently caress you racist!"
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
Stexils posted:yeah clearly the problem with clinton was she listened to leftists too much and wasn't moderate enough You're right, pointing out why the Democrats lost almost all elections definitely calls for distorting it back onto Hillary and pretending there's no larger issue that resulted in losing everything else as well. Hillary wasn't moderate primarily because she had no actual beliefs at all.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 05:00
|
|
|
Mr President posted:Tell me about it. This is what happens when you're allowed unchecked authority to claim people that disagree with you are socially unacceptable.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
"gently caress making new and interesting characters if we want diversity, let's slap a different coat of pain on the old ones!"
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 23:10
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:i think painting swathes of people with a broad brush, thinking you know what they want better than them, telling them they're wrong both ethically and factually, and thinking you know what's best for everyone while discounting the very things they're saying is a major problem with the modern democratic party and its liberal ideology. That's just it. A huge portion of the left has convinced itself that it literally doesn't need to make an argument for its positions any more, they're so self-evidently virtuous and advantageous that it's completely unnecessary to argue in favor of them. They actually think that a Bill Maher routine late night is all that's needed. It's not just the positions themselves, it's the self-assured bullshit. Any suggestion that "hey you may need to re-think things" or "these are obvious problems with your position, how will you address them" is met with a barrage of enraged shrieking followd by a party of reassuring each other there's really no problem. To take JUST ONE example, how many times has someone made some snarky joke about "lol her emailz" dismissing the whole thing as just a fabricated scandal? Over and over again, but never with any actual reason. People would point to others in jail; even General Petraeus got at least a slap on the wrist - but with Hillary it's not just "not prosecuted" it's literally "well it's just not real because reasons" Or - if they at least admit Hillary was poo poo - it's blase assurance that Bernie would have won. Perhaps he would have, but regardless - Bernie was never condescending. Bernie did not take a poo poo over people with different beliefs. His supporters do. Bernie bors are not worthy of Bernie Sanders, who, loony as his ideas are, is a decent man. It's people completely terrified that they might have to admit that their opponents are not terrible in every conceivable way. "The other party are Uruk-hai" is not just a losing platform, it's a sign of complete detachment from reality.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 04:20
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:meaningless war San Francsico could get vaporized and it would still be "meaningless war" wouldn't it?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 04:26
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:you could have picked any other city and people would have given a contrary answer Even lefties. Unironically, even if it's seoul you could ahve a 6-figure death toll and these worthless fucks would still be trying to blame Trump, secretly fearing they'd get drafted and not just be able to complain on the internet.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 04:29
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:pick was talking about syria it doesn't matter. people who say things like "meaningless war" could see 1,000,000 dead Koreans or even Americans and it still would not cause them to question their conviction that believing every bad thing around the entire world is the fault of those they have designated enemies on the domestic political scene.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
Pick posted:Also the Dems got way too comfortable as being the "party of minorities and women", because someone please convince me that Obama gave a god drat about women at all. More like there is no such thing as "giving a drat about women". Women can decide what's good for them individually; they don't need people telling them "anyone who won't give you unlimited abortion and birth control hates you whether you need those things or not and gently caress you if you DARE disagree!" Similar for minorities. The Democrats need to seriously re-examine the idea that loudmouths speak for certain identity groups because its convenient for Democrats - or for that matter, that loudmouth white men speak for wihte mean because it gives them "Racists" and "misogynists" to gin up outrage over.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 04:38
|
|
|
Pick posted:Trump who is a legitimate danger to our democracy. It's almost as if yo can't tell the difference between a plotline and real life. There's no excuse for actually thinking this - not only is it ridiculous, it sends moderate screaming to the Republicans because it creates the impression that Democrat voters are lunatics with no sense of perspective whatsoever.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 04:43
|
|
|
Pick posted:As long as Republicans deny global warming/EPA, are anti-choice, anti-Equal Rights Amendment, anti-public-education, anti-Migratory Bird Treaty Act, anti-public housing, etc. then I will never vote Republican in my life. On second thought, keep talking. It's not just your positions on these issues, it's the fact that you actually think there's no room for debate (and use a combination of shaming and legal threats to eliminate debate on them) that make things solidly red.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 04:45
|
|
|
Pick posted:Actually, you're right, Trump isn't nearly to the extreme of the current Congress. Congress is really loving warped right now and needs to get its poo poo together, and if they did/had I think people would be voting for better presidents. Congress is having a hard time getting organized. It isn't "extreme". Extreme is not where you think it is.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 04:46
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:north korea would be in retaliation to a peaceful military test, creating a war with a relatively vulnerable country because they're pursuing things we don't want them to have. What's disgusting is your excuse-making for a regime that threatens war every 15 minutes or so and has done things like unprovoked sinkings of SK warships for no real reason. "Peaceful military test" - some serious spologism ITT.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 04:50
|
|
|
Pick posted:The supreme court nomination process was proof that matters are extreme. Democrats going almost entirely against a judge they previously supported unanimously, when they can't possibly win is extreme only in terms of how stupid it is - and it's driven by leftist voters who can't accept that they lost.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 04:56
|
|
|
Blue Raider posted:apparently, and im hardly an expert, nkorea's weird military posturing comes from the years that they were basically japanese slaves and they'll set on never being in that position again. im not defending north korea but i think their shenanigans are a bit more complicated than saber-rattling. I think sinking that SK ship was a lot more than saber rattling, and that's not the only time they've taken pot shots. People are quick to forget they've provoked armed incidents a number of times over the years in their rush to claim we're the aggressive ones for domestic political points.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:they want a deterrent to prevent the US from declaring war on them You're right, they just started their nuke program because of recent events. quote:north korea is not going to start a war that will see its nation destroyed and its leadership culled. people don't get to power in a murderous dictatorship by being suicidal. come on. They already attempted to when they sank that SK frigate. It just didn't work out. quote:i don't think north korea is great, nor do i love it. but i also don't see it as "dangerous." stupid and belligerent sometimes, sure. but so's the US and our belligerence has significantly greater consequences than north korea's. we're the danger. poo poo people in here are calling for war with one of russia's strongest allies, a war that they've declared to be a "red line" that the US shouldn't cross. You should probably stop having opinons seeing as how you're not even acquainted with the facts. NK has a history of trying to provoke armed responses.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
Amarcarts posted:So what's the deal with Benghazi? People make a big fuss but has anyone actually articulated what Hillary personally did wrong? As far I can tell she didn't increase security after a request for more security, but that seems like more of an oversight rather than "treason", since the state department probably deals with thousands of different communications/requests on a daily basis. Putting an embassy in a wildly unstable country with no meaningful security force seems like a bad decision, tbh
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2017 04:37
|
|
|
nigga crab pollock posted:The MQ-9 Reaper represents the next step in remote plane technology. And that step is rigged to explode. The Reaper carries more ordinance than any other unmanned vehicle in the air, 3000+ lbs of explosives, or 14 Hellfire missiles. Standard Predators carry 2 or less. Each of these missiles are capable of taking out anything from snipers to tanks. The MQ-9 is the modern hunter-killer, made all the more remarkable because its pilots fly the UAVs in utter safety from Creech Air Force Base in Nevada. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-114_Hellfire The hellfire weighs just over 100 lbs. That's 1400 lbs, not 3000 The warhead is around 20 lbs, so the actual explosive weight is about 280 lbs.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2017 04:36
|
|
|
Creamed Cormp posted:I'm starting to believe the few die hard SS loyalists that fought to the end to defend the Führer's bunker were more objective about why they lost than hillary's people. It's a lot harder to rant when you're getting the poo poo shelled out of you by the Red Army.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2017 22:33
|
|
|
JB50 posted:Hillary to everyone in this thread: She's kind of got a point; at least she threw herself in and got her rear end kicked good and proper.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2017 22:33
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:Bill was actually likeable and knew how to win He also knew how to make a deal. The difference between Bill Clinton and current Democrats is that sometime between they started believing their own propaganda.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 01:40
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:I don't really think this election was a foregone conclusion- Hillary could have won with a better-managed campaign because I don't think Donald Trump ran a particularly good campaign, just victory tends to gloss over problems. It was close enough that some different tactics could've won, despite Hillary's weakness as a candidate. The problems with Trump's campaign were laid bare repeatedly while the election was going on. TIME published entire issues on the subject. Just getting him to stop tweeting bullshit for a few weeks was a colossal effort by his staff. This actually probably led to lack of examination of Hillary's campaign. Trump's was such a clowncar that no one ever thought "hey, maybe look at Hillary's campaign instead of specualting about the email investigation for the 1,000th time". If anyone had suggested "hey maybe her campaign has problems too" they would have been laughed out of the room. Sure, there might be some inefficiency but how could it be bad enough to lose to Trump. The glaring red warning sign of "can't put away a whackjob old man from Vermont who looks like he's going to keel over at the podium until almost the last primary" of course, was ignored because superdelegates. You know, those things that don't exist in the Republican party or the general election.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:well, no, he wasn't identical but no one ever is "If you like your wars, you can keep your wars!"
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 16:52
|
|
" when it goes tits up, and when you run as the anti-war candidate and then expand wars to more nations, and when you expand the surveillance state with zero regard while also being extremely vicious towards whistleblowers..... you're probably a gigantic rear end in a top hat
|
Krustic posted:So a comedy hack bootlicker is defending the first black president who is half white for taking money for "speeches" and using his skin color to deflect any criticism of this widely used non-ethical practice? I'm shocked. I'm dying to hear why it's unethical for a man who is now out of office to take money for speeches. It wasn't even unethical when Hillary did it - just wildly hypocritical. And I don't like Obama's policies and think Hillary Clinton is a completed retard, but in this regard they haven't done anything unethical just unpopular.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 16:55
|
|
|
etalian posted:He put almost no resources going after Wall Street in the aftermath of the 2008 crash and now is collecting 400k paychecks from them. So... 9 years later he takes money for speeches. Yeah I'm sure in 2009 and 2010 he had it all planned out to get $400,000k for some speeches, rather than the inevitable book deal which is for 150 times more money. Sounds exactly like his thought process. Here's the thing about flinging "unethcial" at trivialities - you trivialize it when it really appears. Trust me, I would LOVE to see public dirt on Obama, but this just doesn't measure up.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 17:00
|
|
|
fruit on the bottom posted:The irony of the superdelegates is that they exist in order to prevent the selection of a candidate who is going to lose in a humiliating fashion, a la McGovern and 1980!Carter. Problem was you didn't have any candidates like that. Well, maybe O'Malley or Webb, but everyone just lol'd at the run-of-the-mill Democrat and the centrist who'd worked in the Reagan administration and could work across the partisan divide in favor of the crypt keeper and the idea that running for president for 25 years because you're a lawyer with a vagina is going to work.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 17:05
|
|
|
nigga crab pollock posted:i like how woke twitter people with flower and fist and pin emojis arent even buying his line of crap lol I think he thinks he's talking to Republicans and centrist independents, and doesn't realize that the only people watching late-night comedy are leftists who like being part of the choir being preached to.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 17:05
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:So Obama let criminals who stole billions of dollars from the American people get off scot free, and then turned around and took a check for 400,000 dollars from them. How is that bad? How does that reveal what a loving sham Obama was and how broken our democracy is? How does that make you want to google "how to build a guillotine" and start shopping for tumbrils? It makes me realize that the kind of person wigging out over this is the problem with our democracy.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 17:15
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 10:45 |
|
|
maskenfreiheit posted:and denying you're a racist is like, the #1 sign you're a racist................. Actually it's the #1 sign you're talking to an idiot who uses the word "Racist" in the first place.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 17:19
|
|