US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4177
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. | ||
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 07 2016 12:41 ticklishmusic wrote: i love how people cite hillary's "shitty record". it's either they're being disingenuous or are straight up ignorant of what positions she actually took with regards to iraq, libya, etc. People believe what the Internet tells them and then claim you don't remember shit you lived through. | ||
m4ini
4215 Posts
On July 07 2016 12:40 Plansix wrote: Mostly I got bored explaining myself to a stranger on the internet talking at me. Your approval of my voting decisions and reasons does not matter to me. Likely never will. Ahm.. US politics mega thread. If you don't want to explain your positions etc to strangers on the internet, .. You'll know where i'm going. i love how people cite hillary's "shitty record". it's either they're being disingenuous or are straight up ignorant of what positions she actually took with regards to iraq, libya, etc. Works both ways. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 07 2016 12:44 m4ini wrote: Ahm.. US politics mega thread. If you don't want to explain your positions etc to strangers on the internet, .. You'll know where i'm going. I reserve the right to decide when a discussion is disingenuous and move on. Especially when I did not engage the person in the first place. There is no requirement to respond to any post. | ||
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On July 07 2016 12:41 ticklishmusic wrote: i love how people cite hillary's "shitty record". it's either they're being disingenuous or are straight up ignorant of what positions she actually took with regards to iraq, libya, etc. Yugoslavia and Kosovo: Bomb that shit. Iraq: Zomg WMDs, bomb that shit. Libya: Bomb that shit. Syria: Overthrow Assad. Might as well be John Rambo McCain on this issue. On July 07 2016 12:47 Plansix wrote: I reserve the right to decide when a discussion is disingenuous and move on. Especially when I did not engage the person in the first place. There is no requirement to respond to any post. Sure, you don't have to respond. Making a big deal about "I don't have to explain anything to you!!!!" ... not really a great thing to do. | ||
m4ini
4215 Posts
On July 07 2016 12:47 Plansix wrote: I reserve the right to decide when a discussion is disingenuous and move on. Especially when I did not engage the person in the first place. Didn't seem disingenuous to me. The questions might've been "loaded", but they're valid nonetheless. You can certainly say that you simply don't want to answer them because it'd make your position look weaker or incoherent, that's fine. If you just wash off any (valid, if maybe mis-nuanced) criticism because you simply don't like it, that's lame. Especially with your field record of exactly doing the same. | ||
GGTeMpLaR
United States7226 Posts
The FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server while secretary of state has concluded with a recommendation that she not face criminal charges. While the fevered dreams of some on the right (and left) that Mrs Clinton would be frog-marched from campaign stage to jail cell have been dashed, the presumptive Democratic nominee's political pain is far from over. But how bad is it, exactly? Here are some reasons why it could be a grievous wound - or nothing but a scratch. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36719054 | ||
GreenHorizons
United States22739 Posts
Ross Perot took 20% of the popular vote but didn't get a single electoral vote Yeah and Bernie would get at least 3 electoral votes with less than 1% for sure. The electoral college is complicated if you break the paradigm on which it's currently navigated. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 07 2016 12:51 m4ini wrote: Didn't seem disingenuous to me. The questions might've been "loaded", but they're valid nonetheless. You can certainly say that you simply don't want to answer them because it'd make your position look weaker or incoherent, that's fine. If you just wash off any (valid, if maybe mis-nuanced) criticism because you simply don't like it, that's lame. Especially with your field record of exactly doing the same. I find the discussions of which candidate did more terrible things to be dull. Especially when much of the discussion revolves around vague, sometime inaccurate, concepts of each of the candidates perceived faults. And I have little interest in disabusing someone of their perception of either Hilary or Trump. But mostly I was asked a question and answered honestly, as I have before. Once I saw the direction of the discussion was headed and the general tone of it, I decided I didn't want to take part. | ||
GreenHorizons
United States22739 Posts
So done with America today. | ||
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On July 07 2016 12:11 GGTeMpLaR wrote: I've already got a 100$ bet on it. I gain nothing from you being banned for 90 days from TL. Is this something you'd actually want to bet on though? I love it how the same people saying these sorts of things (including also but not limited to him being literally Hitler, will end the world in nuclear warfare, destroy the American economy, etc) are the same people accusing him of fear-mongering. You just can't make this shit up. I'll bet you $1,000 if that's more interesting for you. | ||
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On July 07 2016 13:33 GreenHorizons wrote: So apparently the police have picked up on Trump's "just give them a new headline" strategy... So done with America today. | ||
kapibara-san
Japan415 Posts
On July 07 2016 12:11 GGTeMpLaR wrote: I've already got a 100$ bet on it. I gain nothing from you being banned for 90 days from TL. Is this something you'd actually want to bet on though? I love it how the same people saying these sorts of things (including also but not limited to him being literally Hitler, will end the world in nuclear warfare, destroy the American economy, etc) are the same people accusing him of fear-mongering. You just can't make this shit up. apparently u did cuz i only said one of those things and not the other also down to bet up to 500usd | ||
GreenHorizons
United States22739 Posts
Sooooooooooooooo done. | ||
Introvert
United States4663 Posts
Kill me now. | ||
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
He really should just... ![]() | ||
kapibara-san
Japan415 Posts
| ||
oBlade
United States5299 Posts
| ||
OuchyDathurts
United States4588 Posts
A man was shot by police in Falcon Heights on Wednesday evening. In a video posted on Facebook, the man’s girlfriend says the “police shot him for no apparent reason, no reason at all.” Friends at the scene identified the man as Philando Castile, 32. Castile’s cousin said he was dead, WCCO-TV reported. That could not be confirmed. The girlfriend started the live-stream video with the man in the driver’s seat slumped next to her, his white T-shirt soaked with blood on the left side. In the video, taken with her phone, she says they were pulled over at Larpenteur Avenue and Fry Street for a broken taillight. The video was posted on a Facebook page belonging to Lavish Reynolds, but it’s not clear if it is the girlfriend’s page or whether she sent the video to someone else to post. The girlfriend says the officer “asked him for license and registration. He told him that it was in his wallet, but he had a pistol on him because he’s licensed to carry. The officer said don’t move. As he was putting his hands back up, the officer shot him in the arm four or five times.” Source | ||
CorsairHero
Canada9489 Posts
On July 07 2016 13:52 IgnE wrote: I'll bet you $1,000 if that's more interesting for you. considering hillary is at -340, thats a steal for you ![]() On the otherhand, ggtemplar should bet online and post the slip. You'd triple your money anyways if Trump wins. Interesting odds for VP: Bill Clinton +10000 Warren +300 Time Kaine +160 Cory Booker +700 Sanders +1200 Gingrich +160 Joni Ernst +250 Christie +750 Kasich +2500 Palin +4000 Ben Carson +6600 Cruz not available | ||
| ||