|
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. |
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
|
On November 02 2016 04:28 Rebs wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2016 04:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:20 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 04:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:10 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:52 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:49 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:48 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
This is just such a different tone coming out of Hillary supporters than it was in the primary. "So what if maybe she murdered a couple thousand people, ran a pedo ring, and took bribes, we HAVE to stop Drumpf!"
I also love how it went from "We don't need those stupid BernieBros anyway" to "well if she loses it's because sexism and stupid BernieBros".
If Hillary loses she and her supporters have no one to blame but themselves. Her supporters made a big stink about Drumpf saying he could shoot someone on 5th ave, meanwhile Hillary supporters would vote for her even if she dropped a bomb on 5th ave.
let me help you out since you seem to have a little trouble following the series of posts you quoted: you do realize this was after a long drawn out hypothetical about if hitlery/ killary was a real thing, right? Yes I know. I wasn't implying they were facts, just that if they were, most of her supporters would still be voting for her. briefly humoring the hypothetical, one of the cool features of american democracy is a thing called checks and balances. Sometimes it's just nice to see it there in black and white (or faded baby blue as it were). I knew it way back when Drumpf made his statement, but I didn't want to believe it. Actually yeah I would still probably vote for her. But heres the beauty of hypotheticals. They are hypothetical and dont actually change anything in reality, and reality is what you are struggling with And yeah if Hillary gets indicted or whatever I would still vote for her so she gets impeached and Kaine gets in easy; I think it exposes the argument for what it is. "We support Hillary, basically no matter what", that's fine, just don't pretend that the reasons others don't is only because they are childish, ignorant, etc... (not saying you personally, but it's frequent here). Some people just draw their line before we get to international child slave rings, and bombing 5th ave and there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it makes the case for Drumpf supporters, in their view, Drumpf can do almost anything and still be closer to their values than Clinton. If bombing 5th ave wouldn't sway a Hillary supporter they have no ground to say that Drumpf supporters who don't disown him after his "grab her by the pussy" comment are any worse than they would be provided the circumstances were different. @Ticklish, Rebs got it, think it's just you having a hard time keeping up. i knew i shouldn't have entertained bullshit hypotheticals for even a moment. i suppose i'm still too charitable even one week before the election and after a year plus of this inanity. People tend to avoid them when they expose a weakness, lesson learned. the whole point of the hypothetical was to expose the weakness. In reality the weakness is significantly weaker and most of them arent real, which is why we ground ourselves in reality and dont like to entertain bullshit hypotheticals. (see waah I did there) The scenario is literally one in which one is asked "how bad does Hillary have to be that one chooses Drumpf over her) So really its more of a reflection on how bad people think Drumpf is. Mind you Hillary could be literally anyone else and it still wouldnt matter in this sort of hypothetical. But sure take it anyway you like to compliment your heavy dose of delusion. Show nested quote +On November 02 2016 04:28 Danglars wrote:On November 02 2016 04:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:10 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:52 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:49 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:48 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 00:37 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
There's only so much damage she can do in the next four years. I'd go back to Europe though. This is just such a different tone coming out of Hillary supporters than it was in the primary. "So what if maybe she murdered a couple thousand people, ran a pedo ring, and took bribes, we HAVE to stop Drumpf!" I also love how it went from "We don't need those stupid BernieBros anyway" to "well if she loses it's because sexism and stupid BernieBros". If Hillary loses she and her supporters have no one to blame but themselves. Her supporters made a big stink about Drumpf saying he could shoot someone on 5th ave, meanwhile Hillary supporters would vote for her even if she dropped a bomb on 5th ave. let me help you out since you seem to have a little trouble following the series of posts you quoted: you do realize this was after a long drawn out hypothetical about if hitlery/ killary was a real thing, right? Yes I know. I wasn't implying they were facts, just that if they were, most of her supporters would still be voting for her. briefly humoring the hypothetical, one of the cool features of american democracy is a thing called checks and balances. Sometimes it's just nice to see it there in black and white (or faded baby blue as it were). I knew it way back when Drumpf made his statement, but I didn't want to believe it. Actually yeah I would still probably vote for her. But heres the beauty of hypotheticals. They are hypothetical and dont actually change anything in reality, and reality is what you are struggling with And yeah if Hillary gets indicted or whatever I would still vote for her so she gets impeached and Kaine gets in easy; I think it exposes the argument for what it is. "We support Hillary, basically no matter what", that's fine, just don't pretend that the reasons others don't is only because they are childish, ignorant, etc... (not saying you personally, but it's frequent here). Some people just draw their line before we get to international child slave rings, and bombing 5th ave and there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it makes the case for Drumpf supporters, in their view, Drumpf can do almost anything and still be closer to their values than Clinton. If bombing 5th ave wouldn't sway a Hillary supporter they have no ground to say that Drumpf supporters who don't disown him after his "grab her by the pussy" comment are any worse than they would be provided the circumstances were different. @Ticklish, Rebs got it, think it's just you having a hard time keeping up. It was an interesting comparison of what things an individual would find disqualifying. It turns out people knowingly tolerate quite a bit when it comes to Hillary, and to no great surprise. See these are the kinds of leaps why bullshit hypotheticals are bad.
I get the idea that bullshit fascistic doomsday theories are fine when you're talking about The Trump, but see no double standard to calling out wackos that thought Obama was going to suspend elections. One's a rational expectation of outcomes, the other's racism. It's like Trump is an alt right puppet and only the enlightened can see it.
|
On November 02 2016 04:39 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2016 04:28 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:20 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 04:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:10 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:52 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:49 ticklishmusic wrote:
[quote]
let me help you out since you seem to have a little trouble following the series of posts you quoted:
you do realize this was after a long drawn out hypothetical about if hitlery/ killary was a real thing, right? Yes I know. I wasn't implying they were facts, just that if they were, most of her supporters would still be voting for her. briefly humoring the hypothetical, one of the cool features of american democracy is a thing called checks and balances. Sometimes it's just nice to see it there in black and white (or faded baby blue as it were). I knew it way back when Drumpf made his statement, but I didn't want to believe it. Actually yeah I would still probably vote for her. But heres the beauty of hypotheticals. They are hypothetical and dont actually change anything in reality, and reality is what you are struggling with And yeah if Hillary gets indicted or whatever I would still vote for her so she gets impeached and Kaine gets in easy; I think it exposes the argument for what it is. "We support Hillary, basically no matter what", that's fine, just don't pretend that the reasons others don't is only because they are childish, ignorant, etc... (not saying you personally, but it's frequent here). Some people just draw their line before we get to international child slave rings, and bombing 5th ave and there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it makes the case for Drumpf supporters, in their view, Drumpf can do almost anything and still be closer to their values than Clinton. If bombing 5th ave wouldn't sway a Hillary supporter they have no ground to say that Drumpf supporters who don't disown him after his "grab her by the pussy" comment are any worse than they would be provided the circumstances were different. @Ticklish, Rebs got it, think it's just you having a hard time keeping up. i knew i shouldn't have entertained bullshit hypotheticals for even a moment. i suppose i'm still too charitable even one week before the election and after a year plus of this inanity. People tend to avoid them when they expose a weakness, lesson learned. the whole point of the hypothetical was to expose the weakness. In reality the weakness is significantly weaker and most of them arent real, which is why we ground ourselves in reality and dont like to entertain bullshit hypotheticals. (see waah I did there) The scenario is literally one in which one is asked "how bad does Hillary have to be that one chooses Drumpf over her) So really its more of a reflection on how bad people think Drumpf is. Mind you Hillary could be literally anyone else and it still wouldnt matter in this sort of hypothetical. But sure take it anyway you like to compliment your heavy dose of delusion. On November 02 2016 04:28 Danglars wrote:On November 02 2016 04:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:10 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:52 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:49 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:48 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
This is just such a different tone coming out of Hillary supporters than it was in the primary. "So what if maybe she murdered a couple thousand people, ran a pedo ring, and took bribes, we HAVE to stop Drumpf!"
I also love how it went from "We don't need those stupid BernieBros anyway" to "well if she loses it's because sexism and stupid BernieBros".
If Hillary loses she and her supporters have no one to blame but themselves. Her supporters made a big stink about Drumpf saying he could shoot someone on 5th ave, meanwhile Hillary supporters would vote for her even if she dropped a bomb on 5th ave.
let me help you out since you seem to have a little trouble following the series of posts you quoted: you do realize this was after a long drawn out hypothetical about if hitlery/ killary was a real thing, right? Yes I know. I wasn't implying they were facts, just that if they were, most of her supporters would still be voting for her. briefly humoring the hypothetical, one of the cool features of american democracy is a thing called checks and balances. Sometimes it's just nice to see it there in black and white (or faded baby blue as it were). I knew it way back when Drumpf made his statement, but I didn't want to believe it. Actually yeah I would still probably vote for her. But heres the beauty of hypotheticals. They are hypothetical and dont actually change anything in reality, and reality is what you are struggling with And yeah if Hillary gets indicted or whatever I would still vote for her so she gets impeached and Kaine gets in easy; I think it exposes the argument for what it is. "We support Hillary, basically no matter what", that's fine, just don't pretend that the reasons others don't is only because they are childish, ignorant, etc... (not saying you personally, but it's frequent here). Some people just draw their line before we get to international child slave rings, and bombing 5th ave and there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it makes the case for Drumpf supporters, in their view, Drumpf can do almost anything and still be closer to their values than Clinton. If bombing 5th ave wouldn't sway a Hillary supporter they have no ground to say that Drumpf supporters who don't disown him after his "grab her by the pussy" comment are any worse than they would be provided the circumstances were different. @Ticklish, Rebs got it, think it's just you having a hard time keeping up. It was an interesting comparison of what things an individual would find disqualifying. It turns out people knowingly tolerate quite a bit when it comes to Hillary, and to no great surprise. See these are the kinds of leaps why bullshit hypotheticals are bad. I get the idea that bullshit fascistic doomsday theories are fine when you're talking about The Drumpf, but see no double standard to calling out wackos that thought Obama was going to suspend elections. One's a rational expectation of outcomes, the other's racism. It's like Drumpf is an alt right puppet and only the enlightened can see it.
What bullshit fascistic doomsday theories. Just repeat everything he says, add all the context you want. Or are you saying hes a liar?
Sure that Russian agent stuff is far fetched but you dont need to go that far to see the obvious fascism.
|
On November 02 2016 04:41 Rebs wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2016 04:39 Danglars wrote:On November 02 2016 04:28 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:20 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 04:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:10 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:52 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:51 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
Yes I know. I wasn't implying they were facts, just that if they were, most of her supporters would still be voting for her. briefly humoring the hypothetical, one of the cool features of american democracy is a thing called checks and balances. Sometimes it's just nice to see it there in black and white (or faded baby blue as it were). I knew it way back when Drumpf made his statement, but I didn't want to believe it. Actually yeah I would still probably vote for her. But heres the beauty of hypotheticals. They are hypothetical and dont actually change anything in reality, and reality is what you are struggling with And yeah if Hillary gets indicted or whatever I would still vote for her so she gets impeached and Kaine gets in easy; I think it exposes the argument for what it is. "We support Hillary, basically no matter what", that's fine, just don't pretend that the reasons others don't is only because they are childish, ignorant, etc... (not saying you personally, but it's frequent here). Some people just draw their line before we get to international child slave rings, and bombing 5th ave and there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it makes the case for Drumpf supporters, in their view, Drumpf can do almost anything and still be closer to their values than Clinton. If bombing 5th ave wouldn't sway a Hillary supporter they have no ground to say that Drumpf supporters who don't disown him after his "grab her by the pussy" comment are any worse than they would be provided the circumstances were different. @Ticklish, Rebs got it, think it's just you having a hard time keeping up. i knew i shouldn't have entertained bullshit hypotheticals for even a moment. i suppose i'm still too charitable even one week before the election and after a year plus of this inanity. People tend to avoid them when they expose a weakness, lesson learned. the whole point of the hypothetical was to expose the weakness. In reality the weakness is significantly weaker and most of them arent real, which is why we ground ourselves in reality and dont like to entertain bullshit hypotheticals. (see waah I did there) The scenario is literally one in which one is asked "how bad does Hillary have to be that one chooses Drumpf over her) So really its more of a reflection on how bad people think Drumpf is. Mind you Hillary could be literally anyone else and it still wouldnt matter in this sort of hypothetical. But sure take it anyway you like to compliment your heavy dose of delusion. On November 02 2016 04:28 Danglars wrote:On November 02 2016 04:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:10 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:52 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:49 ticklishmusic wrote:
[quote]
let me help you out since you seem to have a little trouble following the series of posts you quoted:
you do realize this was after a long drawn out hypothetical about if hitlery/ killary was a real thing, right? Yes I know. I wasn't implying they were facts, just that if they were, most of her supporters would still be voting for her. briefly humoring the hypothetical, one of the cool features of american democracy is a thing called checks and balances. Sometimes it's just nice to see it there in black and white (or faded baby blue as it were). I knew it way back when Drumpf made his statement, but I didn't want to believe it. Actually yeah I would still probably vote for her. But heres the beauty of hypotheticals. They are hypothetical and dont actually change anything in reality, and reality is what you are struggling with And yeah if Hillary gets indicted or whatever I would still vote for her so she gets impeached and Kaine gets in easy; I think it exposes the argument for what it is. "We support Hillary, basically no matter what", that's fine, just don't pretend that the reasons others don't is only because they are childish, ignorant, etc... (not saying you personally, but it's frequent here). Some people just draw their line before we get to international child slave rings, and bombing 5th ave and there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it makes the case for Drumpf supporters, in their view, Drumpf can do almost anything and still be closer to their values than Clinton. If bombing 5th ave wouldn't sway a Hillary supporter they have no ground to say that Drumpf supporters who don't disown him after his "grab her by the pussy" comment are any worse than they would be provided the circumstances were different. @Ticklish, Rebs got it, think it's just you having a hard time keeping up. It was an interesting comparison of what things an individual would find disqualifying. It turns out people knowingly tolerate quite a bit when it comes to Hillary, and to no great surprise. See these are the kinds of leaps why bullshit hypotheticals are bad. I get the idea that bullshit fascistic doomsday theories are fine when you're talking about The Drumpf, but see no double standard to calling out wackos that thought Obama was going to suspend elections. One's a rational expectation of outcomes, the other's racism. It's like Drumpf is an alt right puppet and only the enlightened can see it. What bullshit fascistic doomsday theories. Just repeat everything he says, add all the context you want. Or are you saying hes a liar? Sure that Russian agent stuff is far fetched but you dont need to go that far to see the obvious fascism.
Giving Trump any more credit than maybe being proto-fascist is an insult to fascists everywhere.
|
This miss universe clearly used to bait trump, please don't fall for it.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
wonder what the sdny and new york fbi can tell us about trump mob ties.
|
United States43968 Posts
On November 02 2016 04:39 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2016 04:28 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:20 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 04:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:10 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:52 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:49 ticklishmusic wrote:
[quote]
let me help you out since you seem to have a little trouble following the series of posts you quoted:
you do realize this was after a long drawn out hypothetical about if hitlery/ killary was a real thing, right? Yes I know. I wasn't implying they were facts, just that if they were, most of her supporters would still be voting for her. briefly humoring the hypothetical, one of the cool features of american democracy is a thing called checks and balances. Sometimes it's just nice to see it there in black and white (or faded baby blue as it were). I knew it way back when Drumpf made his statement, but I didn't want to believe it. Actually yeah I would still probably vote for her. But heres the beauty of hypotheticals. They are hypothetical and dont actually change anything in reality, and reality is what you are struggling with And yeah if Hillary gets indicted or whatever I would still vote for her so she gets impeached and Kaine gets in easy; I think it exposes the argument for what it is. "We support Hillary, basically no matter what", that's fine, just don't pretend that the reasons others don't is only because they are childish, ignorant, etc... (not saying you personally, but it's frequent here). Some people just draw their line before we get to international child slave rings, and bombing 5th ave and there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it makes the case for Drumpf supporters, in their view, Drumpf can do almost anything and still be closer to their values than Clinton. If bombing 5th ave wouldn't sway a Hillary supporter they have no ground to say that Drumpf supporters who don't disown him after his "grab her by the pussy" comment are any worse than they would be provided the circumstances were different. @Ticklish, Rebs got it, think it's just you having a hard time keeping up. i knew i shouldn't have entertained bullshit hypotheticals for even a moment. i suppose i'm still too charitable even one week before the election and after a year plus of this inanity. People tend to avoid them when they expose a weakness, lesson learned. the whole point of the hypothetical was to expose the weakness. In reality the weakness is significantly weaker and most of them arent real, which is why we ground ourselves in reality and dont like to entertain bullshit hypotheticals. (see waah I did there) The scenario is literally one in which one is asked "how bad does Hillary have to be that one chooses Drumpf over her) So really its more of a reflection on how bad people think Drumpf is. Mind you Hillary could be literally anyone else and it still wouldnt matter in this sort of hypothetical. But sure take it anyway you like to compliment your heavy dose of delusion. On November 02 2016 04:28 Danglars wrote:On November 02 2016 04:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:10 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:52 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:49 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:48 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
This is just such a different tone coming out of Hillary supporters than it was in the primary. "So what if maybe she murdered a couple thousand people, ran a pedo ring, and took bribes, we HAVE to stop Drumpf!"
I also love how it went from "We don't need those stupid BernieBros anyway" to "well if she loses it's because sexism and stupid BernieBros".
If Hillary loses she and her supporters have no one to blame but themselves. Her supporters made a big stink about Drumpf saying he could shoot someone on 5th ave, meanwhile Hillary supporters would vote for her even if she dropped a bomb on 5th ave.
let me help you out since you seem to have a little trouble following the series of posts you quoted: you do realize this was after a long drawn out hypothetical about if hitlery/ killary was a real thing, right? Yes I know. I wasn't implying they were facts, just that if they were, most of her supporters would still be voting for her. briefly humoring the hypothetical, one of the cool features of american democracy is a thing called checks and balances. Sometimes it's just nice to see it there in black and white (or faded baby blue as it were). I knew it way back when Drumpf made his statement, but I didn't want to believe it. Actually yeah I would still probably vote for her. But heres the beauty of hypotheticals. They are hypothetical and dont actually change anything in reality, and reality is what you are struggling with And yeah if Hillary gets indicted or whatever I would still vote for her so she gets impeached and Kaine gets in easy; I think it exposes the argument for what it is. "We support Hillary, basically no matter what", that's fine, just don't pretend that the reasons others don't is only because they are childish, ignorant, etc... (not saying you personally, but it's frequent here). Some people just draw their line before we get to international child slave rings, and bombing 5th ave and there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it makes the case for Drumpf supporters, in their view, Drumpf can do almost anything and still be closer to their values than Clinton. If bombing 5th ave wouldn't sway a Hillary supporter they have no ground to say that Drumpf supporters who don't disown him after his "grab her by the pussy" comment are any worse than they would be provided the circumstances were different. @Ticklish, Rebs got it, think it's just you having a hard time keeping up. It was an interesting comparison of what things an individual would find disqualifying. It turns out people knowingly tolerate quite a bit when it comes to Hillary, and to no great surprise. See these are the kinds of leaps why bullshit hypotheticals are bad. I get the idea that bullshit fascistic doomsday theories are fine when you're talking about The Trump, but see no double standard to calling out wackos that thought Obama was going to suspend elections. One's a rational expectation of outcomes, the other's racism. It's like Trump is an alt right puppet and only the enlightened can see it.
Obama and Trump aren't even remotely comparable. If Obama disagrees with a decision made by a judge then he says he disagrees with the decision without calling into question the system itself. If Trump disagrees then he says the judge was out to get him, the justice system is corrupt, broken, and in need of reformation in line with his vision for a better America. In one there is respect for the system itself, regardless of the partisan view on the outcome, in the other the system is an obstacle to be swept away.
If Obama had lost to Romney there was never a question of whether he would concede. Nor whether he would make accusations of rigging. Nor whether he would have mobs storm the polling booths. Nor whether "people with guns" should "stop" Romney. The idea that Trump is a victim of being judged by the things that he has voluntarily disclosed about his plans for America is absurd. Nobody is projecting anything onto him. These are the things that he chooses to say when asked. Obama said different things.
|
On November 02 2016 04:39 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2016 04:28 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:20 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 04:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:10 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:52 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:49 ticklishmusic wrote:
[quote]
let me help you out since you seem to have a little trouble following the series of posts you quoted:
you do realize this was after a long drawn out hypothetical about if hitlery/ killary was a real thing, right? Yes I know. I wasn't implying they were facts, just that if they were, most of her supporters would still be voting for her. briefly humoring the hypothetical, one of the cool features of american democracy is a thing called checks and balances. Sometimes it's just nice to see it there in black and white (or faded baby blue as it were). I knew it way back when Drumpf made his statement, but I didn't want to believe it. Actually yeah I would still probably vote for her. But heres the beauty of hypotheticals. They are hypothetical and dont actually change anything in reality, and reality is what you are struggling with And yeah if Hillary gets indicted or whatever I would still vote for her so she gets impeached and Kaine gets in easy; I think it exposes the argument for what it is. "We support Hillary, basically no matter what", that's fine, just don't pretend that the reasons others don't is only because they are childish, ignorant, etc... (not saying you personally, but it's frequent here). Some people just draw their line before we get to international child slave rings, and bombing 5th ave and there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it makes the case for Drumpf supporters, in their view, Drumpf can do almost anything and still be closer to their values than Clinton. If bombing 5th ave wouldn't sway a Hillary supporter they have no ground to say that Drumpf supporters who don't disown him after his "grab her by the pussy" comment are any worse than they would be provided the circumstances were different. @Ticklish, Rebs got it, think it's just you having a hard time keeping up. i knew i shouldn't have entertained bullshit hypotheticals for even a moment. i suppose i'm still too charitable even one week before the election and after a year plus of this inanity. People tend to avoid them when they expose a weakness, lesson learned. the whole point of the hypothetical was to expose the weakness. In reality the weakness is significantly weaker and most of them arent real, which is why we ground ourselves in reality and dont like to entertain bullshit hypotheticals. (see waah I did there) The scenario is literally one in which one is asked "how bad does Hillary have to be that one chooses Drumpf over her) So really its more of a reflection on how bad people think Drumpf is. Mind you Hillary could be literally anyone else and it still wouldnt matter in this sort of hypothetical. But sure take it anyway you like to compliment your heavy dose of delusion. On November 02 2016 04:28 Danglars wrote:On November 02 2016 04:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:10 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:52 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:49 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:48 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
This is just such a different tone coming out of Hillary supporters than it was in the primary. "So what if maybe she murdered a couple thousand people, ran a pedo ring, and took bribes, we HAVE to stop Drumpf!"
I also love how it went from "We don't need those stupid BernieBros anyway" to "well if she loses it's because sexism and stupid BernieBros".
If Hillary loses she and her supporters have no one to blame but themselves. Her supporters made a big stink about Drumpf saying he could shoot someone on 5th ave, meanwhile Hillary supporters would vote for her even if she dropped a bomb on 5th ave.
let me help you out since you seem to have a little trouble following the series of posts you quoted: you do realize this was after a long drawn out hypothetical about if hitlery/ killary was a real thing, right? Yes I know. I wasn't implying they were facts, just that if they were, most of her supporters would still be voting for her. briefly humoring the hypothetical, one of the cool features of american democracy is a thing called checks and balances. Sometimes it's just nice to see it there in black and white (or faded baby blue as it were). I knew it way back when Drumpf made his statement, but I didn't want to believe it. Actually yeah I would still probably vote for her. But heres the beauty of hypotheticals. They are hypothetical and dont actually change anything in reality, and reality is what you are struggling with And yeah if Hillary gets indicted or whatever I would still vote for her so she gets impeached and Kaine gets in easy; I think it exposes the argument for what it is. "We support Hillary, basically no matter what", that's fine, just don't pretend that the reasons others don't is only because they are childish, ignorant, etc... (not saying you personally, but it's frequent here). Some people just draw their line before we get to international child slave rings, and bombing 5th ave and there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it makes the case for Drumpf supporters, in their view, Drumpf can do almost anything and still be closer to their values than Clinton. If bombing 5th ave wouldn't sway a Hillary supporter they have no ground to say that Drumpf supporters who don't disown him after his "grab her by the pussy" comment are any worse than they would be provided the circumstances were different. @Ticklish, Rebs got it, think it's just you having a hard time keeping up. It was an interesting comparison of what things an individual would find disqualifying. It turns out people knowingly tolerate quite a bit when it comes to Hillary, and to no great surprise. See these are the kinds of leaps why bullshit hypotheticals are bad. I get the idea that bullshit fascistic doomsday theories are fine when you're talking about The Trump, but see no double standard to calling out wackos that thought Obama was going to suspend elections. One's a rational expectation of outcomes, the other's racism. It's like Trump is an alt right puppet and only the enlightened can see it.
Given the fact that Obama has been a long time public servant and had made no assertions that would actually grant support to all these authoritarian claims, there's no reason to assert a double standard. Nobody in recent American political history has been as unqualified and as emotionally unhinged as Trump. And the platform is uniquely authoritarian too, especially by Republican standards.
Obama was depicted as a doomsday candidate because he is black, Trump because of the platform he's running on. Subtle difference eh?
|
On November 02 2016 04:45 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2016 04:41 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:39 Danglars wrote:On November 02 2016 04:28 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:20 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 04:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:10 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:52 ticklishmusic wrote:
[quote]
briefly humoring the hypothetical, one of the cool features of american democracy is a thing called checks and balances. Sometimes it's just nice to see it there in black and white (or faded baby blue as it were). I knew it way back when Drumpf made his statement, but I didn't want to believe it. Actually yeah I would still probably vote for her. But heres the beauty of hypotheticals. They are hypothetical and dont actually change anything in reality, and reality is what you are struggling with And yeah if Hillary gets indicted or whatever I would still vote for her so she gets impeached and Kaine gets in easy; I think it exposes the argument for what it is. "We support Hillary, basically no matter what", that's fine, just don't pretend that the reasons others don't is only because they are childish, ignorant, etc... (not saying you personally, but it's frequent here). Some people just draw their line before we get to international child slave rings, and bombing 5th ave and there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it makes the case for Drumpf supporters, in their view, Drumpf can do almost anything and still be closer to their values than Clinton. If bombing 5th ave wouldn't sway a Hillary supporter they have no ground to say that Drumpf supporters who don't disown him after his "grab her by the pussy" comment are any worse than they would be provided the circumstances were different. @Ticklish, Rebs got it, think it's just you having a hard time keeping up. i knew i shouldn't have entertained bullshit hypotheticals for even a moment. i suppose i'm still too charitable even one week before the election and after a year plus of this inanity. People tend to avoid them when they expose a weakness, lesson learned. the whole point of the hypothetical was to expose the weakness. In reality the weakness is significantly weaker and most of them arent real, which is why we ground ourselves in reality and dont like to entertain bullshit hypotheticals. (see waah I did there) The scenario is literally one in which one is asked "how bad does Hillary have to be that one chooses Drumpf over her) So really its more of a reflection on how bad people think Drumpf is. Mind you Hillary could be literally anyone else and it still wouldnt matter in this sort of hypothetical. But sure take it anyway you like to compliment your heavy dose of delusion. On November 02 2016 04:28 Danglars wrote:On November 02 2016 04:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:10 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:52 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:51 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
Yes I know. I wasn't implying they were facts, just that if they were, most of her supporters would still be voting for her. briefly humoring the hypothetical, one of the cool features of american democracy is a thing called checks and balances. Sometimes it's just nice to see it there in black and white (or faded baby blue as it were). I knew it way back when Drumpf made his statement, but I didn't want to believe it. Actually yeah I would still probably vote for her. But heres the beauty of hypotheticals. They are hypothetical and dont actually change anything in reality, and reality is what you are struggling with And yeah if Hillary gets indicted or whatever I would still vote for her so she gets impeached and Kaine gets in easy; I think it exposes the argument for what it is. "We support Hillary, basically no matter what", that's fine, just don't pretend that the reasons others don't is only because they are childish, ignorant, etc... (not saying you personally, but it's frequent here). Some people just draw their line before we get to international child slave rings, and bombing 5th ave and there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it makes the case for Drumpf supporters, in their view, Drumpf can do almost anything and still be closer to their values than Clinton. If bombing 5th ave wouldn't sway a Hillary supporter they have no ground to say that Drumpf supporters who don't disown him after his "grab her by the pussy" comment are any worse than they would be provided the circumstances were different. @Ticklish, Rebs got it, think it's just you having a hard time keeping up. It was an interesting comparison of what things an individual would find disqualifying. It turns out people knowingly tolerate quite a bit when it comes to Hillary, and to no great surprise. See these are the kinds of leaps why bullshit hypotheticals are bad. I get the idea that bullshit fascistic doomsday theories are fine when you're talking about The Drumpf, but see no double standard to calling out wackos that thought Obama was going to suspend elections. One's a rational expectation of outcomes, the other's racism. It's like Drumpf is an alt right puppet and only the enlightened can see it. What bullshit fascistic doomsday theories. Just repeat everything he says, add all the context you want. Or are you saying hes a liar? Sure that Russian agent stuff is far fetched but you dont need to go that far to see the obvious fascism. Giving Drumpf any more credit than maybe being proto-fascist is an insult to fascists everywhere.
Ok lets agree with that, given my experience living under fascism (the millitary kind no less) I can assure you that even proto fascism, poisons the well so badly it will make Hillarys "corruption" look like daycare.
|
On November 02 2016 04:39 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2016 04:28 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:20 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 04:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:10 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:52 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:49 ticklishmusic wrote:
[quote]
let me help you out since you seem to have a little trouble following the series of posts you quoted:
you do realize this was after a long drawn out hypothetical about if hitlery/ killary was a real thing, right? Yes I know. I wasn't implying they were facts, just that if they were, most of her supporters would still be voting for her. briefly humoring the hypothetical, one of the cool features of american democracy is a thing called checks and balances. Sometimes it's just nice to see it there in black and white (or faded baby blue as it were). I knew it way back when Drumpf made his statement, but I didn't want to believe it. Actually yeah I would still probably vote for her. But heres the beauty of hypotheticals. They are hypothetical and dont actually change anything in reality, and reality is what you are struggling with And yeah if Hillary gets indicted or whatever I would still vote for her so she gets impeached and Kaine gets in easy; I think it exposes the argument for what it is. "We support Hillary, basically no matter what", that's fine, just don't pretend that the reasons others don't is only because they are childish, ignorant, etc... (not saying you personally, but it's frequent here). Some people just draw their line before we get to international child slave rings, and bombing 5th ave and there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it makes the case for Drumpf supporters, in their view, Drumpf can do almost anything and still be closer to their values than Clinton. If bombing 5th ave wouldn't sway a Hillary supporter they have no ground to say that Drumpf supporters who don't disown him after his "grab her by the pussy" comment are any worse than they would be provided the circumstances were different. @Ticklish, Rebs got it, think it's just you having a hard time keeping up. i knew i shouldn't have entertained bullshit hypotheticals for even a moment. i suppose i'm still too charitable even one week before the election and after a year plus of this inanity. People tend to avoid them when they expose a weakness, lesson learned. the whole point of the hypothetical was to expose the weakness. In reality the weakness is significantly weaker and most of them arent real, which is why we ground ourselves in reality and dont like to entertain bullshit hypotheticals. (see waah I did there) The scenario is literally one in which one is asked "how bad does Hillary have to be that one chooses Drumpf over her) So really its more of a reflection on how bad people think Drumpf is. Mind you Hillary could be literally anyone else and it still wouldnt matter in this sort of hypothetical. But sure take it anyway you like to compliment your heavy dose of delusion. On November 02 2016 04:28 Danglars wrote:On November 02 2016 04:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:10 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:52 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:49 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 03:48 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
This is just such a different tone coming out of Hillary supporters than it was in the primary. "So what if maybe she murdered a couple thousand people, ran a pedo ring, and took bribes, we HAVE to stop Drumpf!"
I also love how it went from "We don't need those stupid BernieBros anyway" to "well if she loses it's because sexism and stupid BernieBros".
If Hillary loses she and her supporters have no one to blame but themselves. Her supporters made a big stink about Drumpf saying he could shoot someone on 5th ave, meanwhile Hillary supporters would vote for her even if she dropped a bomb on 5th ave.
let me help you out since you seem to have a little trouble following the series of posts you quoted: you do realize this was after a long drawn out hypothetical about if hitlery/ killary was a real thing, right? Yes I know. I wasn't implying they were facts, just that if they were, most of her supporters would still be voting for her. briefly humoring the hypothetical, one of the cool features of american democracy is a thing called checks and balances. Sometimes it's just nice to see it there in black and white (or faded baby blue as it were). I knew it way back when Drumpf made his statement, but I didn't want to believe it. Actually yeah I would still probably vote for her. But heres the beauty of hypotheticals. They are hypothetical and dont actually change anything in reality, and reality is what you are struggling with And yeah if Hillary gets indicted or whatever I would still vote for her so she gets impeached and Kaine gets in easy; I think it exposes the argument for what it is. "We support Hillary, basically no matter what", that's fine, just don't pretend that the reasons others don't is only because they are childish, ignorant, etc... (not saying you personally, but it's frequent here). Some people just draw their line before we get to international child slave rings, and bombing 5th ave and there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it makes the case for Drumpf supporters, in their view, Drumpf can do almost anything and still be closer to their values than Clinton. If bombing 5th ave wouldn't sway a Hillary supporter they have no ground to say that Drumpf supporters who don't disown him after his "grab her by the pussy" comment are any worse than they would be provided the circumstances were different. @Ticklish, Rebs got it, think it's just you having a hard time keeping up. It was an interesting comparison of what things an individual would find disqualifying. It turns out people knowingly tolerate quite a bit when it comes to Hillary, and to no great surprise. See these are the kinds of leaps why bullshit hypotheticals are bad. I get the idea that bullshit fascistic doomsday theories are fine when you're talking about The Trump, but see no double standard to calling out wackos that thought Obama was going to suspend elections. One's a rational expectation of outcomes, the other's racism. It's like Trump is an alt right puppet and only the enlightened can see it.
There is no double standard.
Obama never hinted at destroying Democracy.
Trump has openly said he wants to limit press freedom and has said he will respect the outcome of the election
|
I normally don't follow US elections, but does it always consist of the two candidates throwing dirt at each other, or is it because both of them are incompetent? Trump throws some of his own dirt on himself as well...
|
United States43968 Posts
Normally dirty, this one is worse. Although most of the shit thrown at Trump was shit that he bragged about doing, he's a horrible individual.
|
On November 02 2016 05:01 Rebs wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2016 04:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:41 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:39 Danglars wrote:On November 02 2016 04:28 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:20 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 04:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:10 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
Sometimes it's just nice to see it there in black and white (or faded baby blue as it were). I knew it way back when Drumpf made his statement, but I didn't want to believe it.
Actually yeah I would still probably vote for her. But heres the beauty of hypotheticals. They are hypothetical and dont actually change anything in reality, and reality is what you are struggling with And yeah if Hillary gets indicted or whatever I would still vote for her so she gets impeached and Kaine gets in easy; I think it exposes the argument for what it is. "We support Hillary, basically no matter what", that's fine, just don't pretend that the reasons others don't is only because they are childish, ignorant, etc... (not saying you personally, but it's frequent here). Some people just draw their line before we get to international child slave rings, and bombing 5th ave and there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it makes the case for Drumpf supporters, in their view, Drumpf can do almost anything and still be closer to their values than Clinton. If bombing 5th ave wouldn't sway a Hillary supporter they have no ground to say that Drumpf supporters who don't disown him after his "grab her by the pussy" comment are any worse than they would be provided the circumstances were different. @Ticklish, Rebs got it, think it's just you having a hard time keeping up. i knew i shouldn't have entertained bullshit hypotheticals for even a moment. i suppose i'm still too charitable even one week before the election and after a year plus of this inanity. People tend to avoid them when they expose a weakness, lesson learned. the whole point of the hypothetical was to expose the weakness. In reality the weakness is significantly weaker and most of them arent real, which is why we ground ourselves in reality and dont like to entertain bullshit hypotheticals. (see waah I did there) The scenario is literally one in which one is asked "how bad does Hillary have to be that one chooses Drumpf over her) So really its more of a reflection on how bad people think Drumpf is. Mind you Hillary could be literally anyone else and it still wouldnt matter in this sort of hypothetical. But sure take it anyway you like to compliment your heavy dose of delusion. On November 02 2016 04:28 Danglars wrote:On November 02 2016 04:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:10 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 03:52 ticklishmusic wrote:
[quote]
briefly humoring the hypothetical, one of the cool features of american democracy is a thing called checks and balances. Sometimes it's just nice to see it there in black and white (or faded baby blue as it were). I knew it way back when Drumpf made his statement, but I didn't want to believe it. Actually yeah I would still probably vote for her. But heres the beauty of hypotheticals. They are hypothetical and dont actually change anything in reality, and reality is what you are struggling with And yeah if Hillary gets indicted or whatever I would still vote for her so she gets impeached and Kaine gets in easy; I think it exposes the argument for what it is. "We support Hillary, basically no matter what", that's fine, just don't pretend that the reasons others don't is only because they are childish, ignorant, etc... (not saying you personally, but it's frequent here). Some people just draw their line before we get to international child slave rings, and bombing 5th ave and there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it makes the case for Drumpf supporters, in their view, Drumpf can do almost anything and still be closer to their values than Clinton. If bombing 5th ave wouldn't sway a Hillary supporter they have no ground to say that Drumpf supporters who don't disown him after his "grab her by the pussy" comment are any worse than they would be provided the circumstances were different. @Ticklish, Rebs got it, think it's just you having a hard time keeping up. It was an interesting comparison of what things an individual would find disqualifying. It turns out people knowingly tolerate quite a bit when it comes to Hillary, and to no great surprise. See these are the kinds of leaps why bullshit hypotheticals are bad. I get the idea that bullshit fascistic doomsday theories are fine when you're talking about The Drumpf, but see no double standard to calling out wackos that thought Obama was going to suspend elections. One's a rational expectation of outcomes, the other's racism. It's like Drumpf is an alt right puppet and only the enlightened can see it. What bullshit fascistic doomsday theories. Just repeat everything he says, add all the context you want. Or are you saying hes a liar? Sure that Russian agent stuff is far fetched but you dont need to go that far to see the obvious fascism. Giving Drumpf any more credit than maybe being proto-fascist is an insult to fascists everywhere. Ok lets agree with that, given my experience living under fascism (the millitary kind no less) I can assure you that even proto fascism, poisons the well so badly it will make Hillarys "corruption" look like daycare.
I'm more optimistic about the will of the people to fight. It's fair to say Trump could lead us down that track. Not sure the plutocracy alternative is automatically the one that ends better though.
|
On November 02 2016 05:06 raga4ka wrote:
I normally don't follow US elections, but does it always consist of the two candidates throwing dirt at each other, or is it because both of them are incompetent? Trump throws some of his own dirt on himself as well...
This is pretty normal.
Yes its bad, no its not going to change
The election is a 1.5 year shit show even without Trump and Hillary.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
the plutocracy's choice was rubio then cruz.
|
On November 02 2016 05:10 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2016 05:01 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:41 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:39 Danglars wrote:On November 02 2016 04:28 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:20 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 02 2016 04:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:10 Rebs wrote:
[quote]
Actually yeah I would still probably vote for her. But heres the beauty of hypotheticals. They are hypothetical and dont actually change anything in reality, and reality is what you are struggling with
And yeah if Hillary gets indicted or whatever I would still vote for her so she gets impeached and Kaine gets in easy;
I think it exposes the argument for what it is. "We support Hillary, basically no matter what", that's fine, just don't pretend that the reasons others don't is only because they are childish, ignorant, etc... (not saying you personally, but it's frequent here). Some people just draw their line before we get to international child slave rings, and bombing 5th ave and there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it makes the case for Drumpf supporters, in their view, Drumpf can do almost anything and still be closer to their values than Clinton. If bombing 5th ave wouldn't sway a Hillary supporter they have no ground to say that Drumpf supporters who don't disown him after his "grab her by the pussy" comment are any worse than they would be provided the circumstances were different. @Ticklish, Rebs got it, think it's just you having a hard time keeping up. i knew i shouldn't have entertained bullshit hypotheticals for even a moment. i suppose i'm still too charitable even one week before the election and after a year plus of this inanity. People tend to avoid them when they expose a weakness, lesson learned. the whole point of the hypothetical was to expose the weakness. In reality the weakness is significantly weaker and most of them arent real, which is why we ground ourselves in reality and dont like to entertain bullshit hypotheticals. (see waah I did there) The scenario is literally one in which one is asked "how bad does Hillary have to be that one chooses Drumpf over her) So really its more of a reflection on how bad people think Drumpf is. Mind you Hillary could be literally anyone else and it still wouldnt matter in this sort of hypothetical. But sure take it anyway you like to compliment your heavy dose of delusion. On November 02 2016 04:28 Danglars wrote:On November 02 2016 04:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 02 2016 04:10 Rebs wrote:On November 02 2016 04:03 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
Sometimes it's just nice to see it there in black and white (or faded baby blue as it were). I knew it way back when Drumpf made his statement, but I didn't want to believe it.
Actually yeah I would still probably vote for her. But heres the beauty of hypotheticals. They are hypothetical and dont actually change anything in reality, and reality is what you are struggling with And yeah if Hillary gets indicted or whatever I would still vote for her so she gets impeached and Kaine gets in easy; I think it exposes the argument for what it is. "We support Hillary, basically no matter what", that's fine, just don't pretend that the reasons others don't is only because they are childish, ignorant, etc... (not saying you personally, but it's frequent here). Some people just draw their line before we get to international child slave rings, and bombing 5th ave and there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it makes the case for Drumpf supporters, in their view, Drumpf can do almost anything and still be closer to their values than Clinton. If bombing 5th ave wouldn't sway a Hillary supporter they have no ground to say that Drumpf supporters who don't disown him after his "grab her by the pussy" comment are any worse than they would be provided the circumstances were different. @Ticklish, Rebs got it, think it's just you having a hard time keeping up. It was an interesting comparison of what things an individual would find disqualifying. It turns out people knowingly tolerate quite a bit when it comes to Hillary, and to no great surprise. See these are the kinds of leaps why bullshit hypotheticals are bad. I get the idea that bullshit fascistic doomsday theories are fine when you're talking about The Drumpf, but see no double standard to calling out wackos that thought Obama was going to suspend elections. One's a rational expectation of outcomes, the other's racism. It's like Drumpf is an alt right puppet and only the enlightened can see it. What bullshit fascistic doomsday theories. Just repeat everything he says, add all the context you want. Or are you saying hes a liar? Sure that Russian agent stuff is far fetched but you dont need to go that far to see the obvious fascism. Giving Drumpf any more credit than maybe being proto-fascist is an insult to fascists everywhere. Ok lets agree with that, given my experience living under fascism (the millitary kind no less) I can assure you that even proto fascism, poisons the well so badly it will make Hillarys "corruption" look like daycare. I'm more optimistic about the will of the people to fight. It's fair to say Trump could lead us down that track. Not sure the plutocracy alternative is automatically the one that ends better though.
People accepted the Patriot Act easily enough
|
Kasich is the hero Republicans need.
Ohio Gov. John Kasich voted Monday for 2008 Republican nominee John McCain instead of for 2016 Republican nominee Donald Trump.
Kasich wrote in McCain's name at the top of the ticket, Kasich spokesman Chris Schrimpf said, on his absentee ballot.
CNN
|
On November 02 2016 05:06 raga4ka wrote:
I normally don't follow US elections, but does it always consist of the two candidates throwing dirt at each other, or is it because both of them are incompetent? Trump throws some of his own dirt on himself as well...
It's for a couple reasons. One is that represent starkly different directions for the country, another is that they're an asymmetrical pair of candidates. What I mean is one is an outsider with no political record and the other has never done anything but climb the ladder. So flinging shit is one of the only overlaps they have in common.
As an aside I can't help but pity the mental state of someone obsessed enough to install a browser plugin to filter Trump to Drumpf.
|
On November 02 2016 05:11 oneofthem wrote:
the plutocracy's choice was rubio then cruz.
On the right maybe, but it was clear the left leaning plutocrats had Hillary picked years ago. Since, she's picked up quite a few of the right leaning plutocrats and their minions as well.
|
On November 02 2016 03:48 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2016 00:37 KwarK wrote:On November 02 2016 00:35 LegalLord wrote:On November 02 2016 00:30 KwarK wrote:On November 02 2016 00:28 LegalLord wrote:On November 02 2016 00:23 KwarK wrote:On November 02 2016 00:19 LegalLord wrote:On November 02 2016 00:13 KwarK wrote:On November 02 2016 00:11 LegalLord wrote:On November 02 2016 00:08 zlefin wrote:
Why no escape clauses? that seems dumb, since in reality there are in fact escape clauses. Because the entire purpose is to see what it would take for said Hillary supporters to be so turned off from her that they would vote for Trump. Like, how bad does it have to be for them to actually tick off Trump in the ballot booth because Hillary was bad enough. For me the question reads "what would it take for you to support the rise of fascism?" so you can see how it's a tricky one to really answer. As I said, certainly not murder or anything like that. Would you vote for Trump in my scenario if it turned out she was extensively - and directly - involved in perpetuating the Rwandan Genocide? (purely hypothetical, there's no follow up "bombshell" I'm intending to link for this question) No, but I would support her indictment and trial for war crimes following Kaine taking office. Alright, then let's up the stakes a little bit. Say that tomorrow, Congress passes a law - and Obama signs - which holds that anyone elected president is immune from prosecution for all crimes committed before taking office, starting from when said candidate becomes president-elect until their last day in office. Would you vote for Trump then? No. And furthermore if she said she was going to use her four years exclusively to roam the country and hunt people for sport while using that new sovereign immunity from prosecution I'd still vote for her over Trump. Well, if you'd vote for genocidal sovereign immunity Clinton over as-is Trump, then I guess your support for her is about as rock-solid as it gets. There's only so much damage she can do in the next four years. I'd go back to Europe though. This is just such a different tone coming out of Hillary supporters than it was in the primary. "So what if maybe she murdered a couple thousand people, ran a pedo ring, and took bribes, we HAVE to stop Trump!" I also love how it went from "We don't need those stupid BernieBros anyway" to "well if she loses it's because sexism and stupid BernieBros". If Hillary loses she and her supporters have no one to blame but themselves. Her supporters made a big stink about Trump saying he could shoot someone on 5th ave, meanwhile Hillary supporters would vote for her even if she dropped a bomb on 5th ave.
iirc Hillary supporters were primarily pointing out how stupid Bernie was at being unable to answer questions about his own plan.
Then we started pointing out the inherent race issues and sexism bias in Sander's camp. Then we started pointing out the sexism and hate in Trump's campaign.
The sexism is still there whether Hillary wins or loses. The race issues are still there whether Hillary wins or loses. And Bernie will forever be the guy who thinks the best way to help Muslims under threat of genocide is to throw more Muslims into the grinder.
Those are not Hillary's issues, those are BernieBro and Trump Supporter issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
