EPTthe intro sequence. it was just glorious television. a sleepwalker and a media whore have a chat and standing contest on the introduction floor. while the world kinda wants to move on with the program.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2863
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8693 Posts
the intro sequence. it was just glorious television. a sleepwalker and a media whore have a chat and standing contest on the introduction floor. while the world kinda wants to move on with the program. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Then Gloria Steinem says the only reason young women support Sanders in hopes of meeting boys. All in the same night. Talk about a train wreck, hope to draw supporters by insulting them. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18845 Posts
On February 08 2016 00:10 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Madeline Albrigt says there is a special place in hell for women don't support Clinton. Then Gloria Steinem says the only reason young women support Sanders in hopes of meeting boys. All in the same night. Talk about a train wreck, hope to draw supporters by insulting them. What's funny is that this ploy by these prominent female figures belies a fundamental misunderstanding as to why many Democrats are unsure when it comes to supporting Hillary. Piling on the gender rhetoric will only further push away folks worried that Hillary is motivated to pursue the White House for the wrong reasons. | ||
|
Deathstar
9150 Posts
On February 08 2016 00:10 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Madeline Albrigt says there is a special place in hell for women don't support Clinton. Then Gloria Steinem says the only reason young women support Sanders in hopes of meeting boys. All in the same night. Talk about a train wreck, hope to draw supporters by insulting them. These are things you don't say out loud lol | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11722 Posts
On February 08 2016 00:37 Deathstar wrote: These are things you don't say out loud lol Those should be things you don't say out period, because they are really stupid things to say. It is not a good idea to vote for someone just because they are a woman. The same way it is not reasonable to vote for someone just because they are a man. You should vote for the person that better fits your political views and who you think would make a better president, not waste your vote on something superficial like "We get a female president if we vote for her, that would be such a victory for feminism!". No, it would not. The egalitarian thing to do would be ignoring the gender of the candidates, as opposed to making it a major point of their appeal or even. And the second quote is just patently ridiculous, and incredibly sexist. So the only goal of these young women is to meet boys, because obviously that is the one and only thing a woman should aspire to, finding a good husband, marrying him, and being a good wife. As opposed to, for example, being intelligent people capable of participating in politics to support a cause they believe in. That is something only men can do. | ||
|
Kickstart
United States1941 Posts
Don't know why her supporters and campaign feel comfortable touting this woman vote nonsense with such things in her and her husbands pasts. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
If you recognize that, then it's easy to see. | ||
|
Kickstart
United States1941 Posts
Even though I dislike him, he was still a decent president :D. + Show Spoiler + Still a shitty person though. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
| ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On February 08 2016 03:37 Nyxisto wrote: Bill Clinton raped someone? no. There were some allegations from when he was governor iirc. Mostly Kickstart just has an extremely negative view of him. | ||
|
Kickstart
United States1941 Posts
But take away the rapist part and he is still a rather blatant lying womanizing sociopath. EDIT: Yes I view him negatively as a person. He is still a gifted politician and Hillary is still a better option than anyone the republicans have fielded (that has a shot at winning at this point). | ||
|
Dapper_Cad
United Kingdom964 Posts
On February 08 2016 02:06 Simberto wrote: As opposed to, for example, being intelligent people capable of participating in politics to support a cause they believe in. That is something only men can do. In the U.K. contempt for the voting public, whether men or women, is a common feature of members of political class. I'm guessing it's not much different in the U.S. | ||
|
LemOn
United Kingdom8629 Posts
| ||
|
oBlade
United States5823 Posts
On February 07 2016 13:09 m4ini wrote: No, you're not able to read. Obviously nazism is bad. But they certainly are "concepts". Ideologies. There is no 3rd reich anymore, so where do those people come from? Who's recruiting them? What do they resonate with and flock to? I don't feel any guilt for the 3rd reich btw. Maybe you would like me to, but no, not at all. Why would i? Neither my parents nor myself did anything to make me feel bad about it. I certainly acknowledge what nazi-germany did, but as a saying goes, the son of a murderer is not a murderer. PS: 200k ISIS fighters is pretty much considerably less than right-wing extremists in the US. I just said a couple of times now, just because they're less violent (most of them anyway, queue Breivik), doesn't mean they don't exist in big numbers. They do. It's just that nobody gives a shit about them (in fact, they're not prohibited in any country but germany), because usually they don't bomb "us". Explain to me. We can't stop growing neo-nazis (and yes, the numbers grow, even in germany - constantly, and they're potentially dangerous too), how do you expect to stop growing terrorists with the same method? Yeah, that kinda missed the point, considering how likely it is for a islamic extremist to go poof compared to a normal person. You're telling me neo-Nazis are a constantly growing threat in Germany, but you just cited that they're only at 5600. These statements don't add up. If they're not violent, it doesn't matter in what numbers they exist in because you're comparing apples and oranges. How do you still not see that? On February 07 2016 23:26 Simberto wrote: Compare the amounts and popular image of Nazism in Germany today to that in 1944. I'd say you can hardly crush an ideology more. Sure, there are some nazis. But not a lot of them. Completely eradicating an ideology is impossible, but i find it hard to see a reduction by at least one or two orders of magnitude as anything but an amazing success. I don't think anyone would dispute that Nazism is a very Fringe phenomenon in German society today. I actually find your definition of "success" a lot stranger, as it appears to me that you imply that anything but a total victory in all areas without any trace of the opposition left can be deemed a failure, which does not sound like a very reasonable stance to have. I'm also over here trying to figure out what the point is. What they're trying to do is have an excuse for inaction, I believe. The reasoning is something like, 70 years ago the biggest war ever was fought and won, then two fascist countries were occupied, and yet 5600 people still love Nazi websites in Germany. And the conclusion is this all means we have no idea what to do against radical Islam - there's nothing we can do. That, as far as I can tell, is what's being suggested. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22064 Posts
On February 08 2016 00:10 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Madeline Albrigt says there is a special place in hell for women don't support Clinton. Then Gloria Steinem says the only reason young women support Sanders in hopes of meeting boys. All in the same night. Talk about a train wreck, hope to draw supporters by insulting them. If being a women means you have to vote for other women then Carly Fiorina would be doing a whole let better in the Republican race. Same with Carson for black people. Race/Gender have some effect but not nearly as much as people make it out to be. | ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8693 Posts
| ||
The_Templar
your Country52797 Posts
On February 08 2016 00:10 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Madeline Albrigt says there is a special place in hell for women don't support Clinton. Then Gloria Steinem says the only reason young women support Sanders in hopes of meeting boys. All in the same night. Talk about a train wreck, hope to draw supporters by insulting them. Do people actually respect them for saying that? That's horrible. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On February 08 2016 04:21 Doublemint wrote: we should put all the isis fighters and actual nazis made in germany™ in a pit and let them fight to the death to settle this argument once and for all. nazis are white christians! it's what ISIS wants! | ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8693 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + #BernYourEnthusiams | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On February 08 2016 04:36 ticklishmusic wrote: nazis are white christians! it's what ISIS wants! Based on what I've heard, there is almost nothing that ISIS doesn't want. | ||
| ||
