I liked the mayor of Philadelphia's comment about Know Nothings killing Micks. Clearly aimed at Donald's white ethnic vote.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 25, 2016, 06:20:56 PM
I liked the mayor of Philadelphia's comment about Know Nothings killing Micks. Clearly aimed at Donald's white ethnic vote.
Sounds not funny.
CNN talking heads were discussing the rumor that the leaked DNC emails were hacked by Poutine.
So a significant proportion of those Sanders activists at his meeting would rather see America crash and burn, than back Hilary for president. :rolleyes:
No catchy subtitle?
So how's the convention going?
Livestream here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ePB39acAtA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ePB39acAtA)
Lots of booing from the crowd whenever Hillary is mentioned. Berniebros are out in force on the floor. :hmm:
Oh my God, what a shit show. :bleeding:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstream1.gifsoup.com%2Fview%2F479792%2Fel-guapo-dance-o.gif&hash=15589473b32c85e33977b8c4d8a391f1a5408704)
At least El Guapo is entertaining.
Energy picks up a little with Al Franken. Relatively speaking.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstream1.gifsoup.com%2Fview%2F479792%2Fel-guapo-dance-o.gif&hash=15589473b32c85e33977b8c4d8a391f1a5408704)
:lol:
:lol: :thumbsup:
The Scolding of the Trump. :lol:
lol, they have a gork up there speaking about narf! disabilities.
You wouldn't see any retards at the RNC; not a single Palin was invited.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2016, 08:08:22 PM
lol, they have a gork up there speaking about narf! disabilities.
You wouldn't see any retards at the RNC; not a single Palin was invited.
I'd donate Ed's left nut to see Palin Bachmann overdrive at the RNC shirt show.
Quote from: 11B4V on July 25, 2016, 08:11:36 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2016, 08:08:22 PM
lol, they have a gork up there speaking about narf! disabilities.
You wouldn't see any retards at the RNC; not a single Palin was invited.
I'd donate Ed's left nut to see Palin Bachmann overdrive at the RNC shirt show.
MAH NUTS
Quote from: 11B4V on July 25, 2016, 08:11:36 PM
I'd donate Ed's left nut to see Palin Bachmann overdrive at the RNC shirt show.
Why, Joni Ernst would've clipped them both by now.
COULD WE PLEASE STOP TALKING ABOUT MY NUTS?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2016, 08:14:38 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on July 25, 2016, 08:11:36 PM
I'd donate Ed's left nut to see Palin Bachmann overdrive at the RNC shirt show.
Why, Joni Ernst would've clipped them both by now.
She is another wack job.
Sarah Silverman: Confusing Your Dick by Combining "Hot" and "Not Hot" at the Same Time
Bernie, bernie, bernie. :lol:
Has Lena Dunham beached herself yet?
Pretty sure she couldn't get past the Japanese whaling fleet. OOOOH RESEARCH
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 25, 2016, 08:22:17 PM
Has Lena Dunham beached herself yet?
Not yet Captain.
I was gonna turn heel and post some Lena Dunham swimsuit pics, but Safari crashed hard.
:mad:
That wasn't Safari crashing, that was Shamu.
The Recounting of Trump's Greatest Hits.
Quote from: Legbiter on July 25, 2016, 08:44:25 PM
The Recounting of Trump's Greatest Hits.
Just Ivanka, Marla, and Melania, or are they including off season stats too?
I'm loving the Alt Reich Twitters right now. Hilarious.
Did someone say "lash of bondage?" :unsure:
When is Bernie speaking?
After Pocahontas, I think.
Bye, Bye Birdie
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/59/36/a8/5936a8fadb924f48fc050bd856a25dcb.jpg)
:cry:
lol, moron California Bernie delegate doesn't buy his endorsement of Hillary. "It makes me want to leave the party." Clinton or Trump? "Green Party."
Fucking Millennials. :rolleyes:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2016, 10:30:50 PM
Fucking Millennials. :rolleyes:
Just like vote Nader what could possibly go wrong ...
Bernie delegate #2, "Clinton has to do more on her end to trust...we don't know much about her."
Bernie delegate #3: Will you vote for Clinton now that your candidate has endorsed her? "No. Her voting record doesn't match what she says. We need to hear more about her stand against TPP."
ALL HAIL FIRST PRO CONSUL AND EMPEROR TRUMP
Delegate 3 probably couldn't tell the difference between TPP and TP
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 25, 2016, 10:42:03 PM
Delegate 3 probably couldn't tell the difference between TPP and TP
Fuck, I wanted to punch her in her stupid Lena Dunham face fat. Goddamn, I fucking hate young liberals.
I am amazed, disappointed, and baffled that as unpleasant as Trump is, he remains competitive in the polls.
QuoteBernie delegate #3: Will you vote for Clinton now that your candidate has endorsed her? "No. Her voting record doesn't match what she says. We need to hear more about her stand against TPP."
Goddamn it. Fucking Bernie assholes are going to ruin everything. Now it kind of looks like no matter who wins my beloved TPP is dead. But heck almost all of my political ideas are being systematically demolished right now. The 90s seem so far away :P
Ah well.
Quote from: Monoriu on July 25, 2016, 10:45:02 PM
I am amazed, disappointed, and baffled that as unpleasant as Trump is, he remains competitive in the polls.
Imagine he was Chinese. The Mainlanders would love him. Same shit here.
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2016, 10:48:43 PM
QuoteBernie delegate #3: Will you vote for Clinton now that your candidate has endorsed her? "No. Her voting record doesn't match what she says. We need to hear more about her stand against TPP."
Goddamn it. Fucking Bernie assholes are going to ruin everything. Now it kind of looks like no matter who wins my beloved TPP is dead. But heck almost all of my political ideas are being systematically demolished right now. The 90s seem so far away :P
Ah well.
Hillary is open to the TPP, but with modifications. Kaine is a TPP fanboi. It will go through, whether stupid people like it or not.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2016, 10:51:14 PM
Hillary is open to the TPP, but with modifications. Kaine is a TPP fanboi. It will go through, whether stupid people like it or not.
Is he? Well that is comforting. But in order to win Hillary might have to rally to the nutjobs.
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2016, 10:48:43 PM
QuoteBernie delegate #3: Will you vote for Clinton now that your candidate has endorsed her? "No. Her voting record doesn't match what she says. We need to hear more about her stand against TPP."
Goddamn it. Fucking Bernie assholes are going to ruin everything. Now it kind of looks like no matter who wins my beloved TPP is dead. But heck almost all of my political ideas are being systematically demolished right now. The 90s seem so far away :P
Ah well.
Feel the Bern.
Any heavily medicated Jewfros visible among the Berniebots?
Quote from: derspiess on July 25, 2016, 10:58:00 PM
Feel the Bern.
She was all, "Bernie supporters aren't being heard...We had to sit through the 'Hillary Love Fest' all night, only to wait for Bernie to go last."
Because, you know, speaking last is a sign of disrespect.
Quote from: derspiess on July 25, 2016, 10:58:00 PM
Feel the Bern.
Leftists suck and make shitty allies. They always make the perfect the enemy of the good.
But hey all you right wingers are fucking me over on the free trade and international alliances as well these days. Goddamnit I cannot count on any of you people.
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2016, 11:03:38 PM
But hey all you right wingers are fucking me over on the free trade and international alliances as well these days. Goddamnit I cannot count on any of you people.
What are we doing?
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2016, 11:03:38 PM
Quote from: derspiess on July 25, 2016, 10:58:00 PM
Feel the Bern.
Leftists suck and make shitty allies. They always make the perfect the enemy of the good.
But hey all you right wingers are fucking me over on the free trade and international alliances as well these days. Goddamnit I cannot count on any of you people.
The only conflict possible on the left is the conflict between good and best. :)
Quote from: derspiess on July 25, 2016, 11:15:32 PM
Quote from: Valmy on July 25, 2016, 11:03:38 PM
But hey all you right wingers are fucking me over on the free trade and international alliances as well these days. Goddamnit I cannot count on any of you people.
What are we doing?
Voting for Trump.
'Fear Not—She Means You No Harm,' Says Elizabeth Warren, Revealing Docile Hillary Clinton To Crowd
"Despite her menacing reputation, she will not attack you or your progressive movement."
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.onionstatic.com%2Fonion%2F5387%2F8%2F16x9%2F800.jpg&hash=de8ad85a5d0f88d56e15379bbf9027df63c0c0c0)
http://www.theonion.com/article/fear-notshe-means-you-no-harm-says-elizabeth-warre-53324
Michelle Obama: 'Well, These Are 8 Years Of My Life I'll Never Get Back'
"Nearly a decade down the drain. Jesus."
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.onionstatic.com%2Fonion%2F5387%2F3%2F16x9%2F800.jpg&hash=f99a50b411838f5c749458af3ed5e3a8626aa7f3)
http://www.theonion.com/article/michelle-obama-well-there-are-8-years-my-life-ill--53319
Quote from: Monoriu on July 25, 2016, 10:45:02 PM
I am amazed, disappointed, and baffled that as unpleasant as Trump is, he remains competitive in the polls.
As you are someone who supports an unpleasant, oppressive government full of unlikeable characters, I find your position a little odd.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2016, 10:30:50 PM
lol, moron California Bernie delegate doesn't buy his endorsement of Hillary. "It makes me want to leave the party." Clinton or Trump? "Green Party."
Fucking Millennials. :rolleyes:
(https://media.giphy.com/media/3o7TKwMc87fS6yU5yg/giphy.gif)
Good grief.
Looks like fairly unpleasant grief to me.
Quote from: Legbiter on July 26, 2016, 05:24:01 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2016, 10:30:50 PM
lol, moron California Bernie delegate doesn't buy his endorsement of Hillary. "It makes me want to leave the party." Clinton or Trump? "Green Party."
Fucking Millennials. :rolleyes:
(https://media.giphy.com/media/3o7TKwMc87fS6yU5yg/giphy.gif)
I weep for America. :lol:
The email conspiracies fully explained here:
http://m.theregister.co.uk/2016/07/25/latest_on_the_dnc_email_conspiracies/ (http://m.theregister.co.uk/2016/07/25/latest_on_the_dnc_email_conspiracies/)
Quote
The very latest on the DNC email conspiracy. Which conspiracy? All of them, of course!
Anti-semitic, Trump-loving Russians battle with Bernie-hating Clinton acolytes
By Kieren McCarthy, 25 Jul 2016
It was devastating. Absolutely devastating. It's hard to imagine anyone surviving such a shocking revelation. But they probably will of course. Thanks to their connections, if you know what I mean.
What are we talking about? Take your pick because election season is upon us and everyone, absolutely everyone is up to no good and we must shout and yell and tweet and get outrageously angry at whoever is responsible for all of this.
First up: Putin
That Russian monster is personally responsible for the leaks of the emails from the Democratic National Committee's (DNC's) account. Is he actually "Guccifer 2.0" – the hacker that did it? Probably not. No wait, yes, he probably is.
The Russians. Trying to undermine the Greatest Democracy the World Has Ever Known by, umm, publishing people's own emails. And why did he do it – aside from being the embodiment of pure evil? Because he loves Trump! And Trump loves him!
Is Trump a secret Russian mole? No, that's too far. But hang on, maybe yes. We all hate Trump, everyone hates Trump, even the people that will vote for him as president, they hate him. And that could be the majority of the United States' population. That's a lot of hate.
And now Trump's doing a deal with Russia. First Trump says he won't uphold Article 5 of the NATO treaty and then just a few days later, out come these emails. Quid pro quo, Clarice.
Except of course it's all just made up.
Next up: Rooby Mook
........
Welcome to the DNA. https://youtu.be/YXdn6yeAdPM
:lol: I found it funny at least.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2016, 10:38:23 PM
Bernie delegate #2, "Clinton has to do more on her end to trust...we don't know much about her."
WTF? Not trusting Hillary is one thing, but if you don't know much about her, you've been living under a rock for the past quarter century.
Quote from: ValmyBut hey all you right wingers are fucking me over on the free trade and international alliances as well these days.
Hey! When have I not been pro free trade?
I have no idea what you're even talking about as far as international alliances go.
Quote from: lustindarkness on July 26, 2016, 06:51:04 AM
Welcome to the DNA. https://youtu.be/YXdn6yeAdPM
:lol: I found it funny at least.
:yes:
Quote from: dps on July 26, 2016, 07:00:54 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2016, 10:38:23 PM
Bernie delegate #2, "Clinton has to do more on her end to trust...we don't know much about her."
WTF? Not trusting Hillary is one thing, but if you don't know much about her, you've been living under a rock for the past quarter century.
Quote from: ValmyBut hey all you right wingers are fucking me over on the free trade and international alliances as well these days.
Hey! When have I not been pro free trade?
I have no idea what you're even talking about as far as international alliances go.
Confusing you with derspiess I think?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 26, 2016, 08:03:49 AM
Confusing you with derspiess I think?
And you're confusing me with someone else, apparently.
Quote from: dps on July 26, 2016, 07:00:54 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 25, 2016, 10:38:23 PM
Bernie delegate #2, "Clinton has to do more on her end to trust...we don't know much about her."
WTF? Not trusting Hillary is one thing, but if you don't know much about her, you've been living under a rock for the past quarter century.
Yeah, that one was a moron. She had to have been in her late 20's. Sweetie, Hillary was on 60 Minutes before you were even born.
Watching Rachel Maddow goof on the naïveté of the Bernie delegates was a hoot, though. You don realize you are at the
Democratic National Convention, right?
Once again, young people suck
YOUNG PEOPLE NEED TO GROW UP.
Purge the young and the weak.
Yay young people!
Quote from: Monoriu on July 25, 2016, 10:45:02 PM
I am amazed, disappointed, and baffled that as unpleasant as Trump is, he remains competitive in the polls.
That is because people in this country vote based on the little letter next to the candidate. The Republicans could nominate Zombie Hitler and the Democrats could nominate Zombie Stalin and one of them would win, regardless of who else ran.
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on July 26, 2016, 11:04:25 AM
Quote from: Monoriu on July 25, 2016, 10:45:02 PM
I am amazed, disappointed, and baffled that as unpleasant as Trump is, he remains competitive in the polls.
That is because people in this country vote based on the little letter next to the candidate. The Republicans could nominate Zombie Hitler and the Democrats could nominate Zombie Stalin and one of them would win, regardless of who else ran.
Well it doesn't help that the two major third parties are completely and utterly insane and idiotic.
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on July 26, 2016, 11:04:25 AM
That is because people in this country vote based on the little letter next to the candidate. The Republicans could nominate Zombie Hitler and the Democrats could nominate Zombie Stalin and one of them would win, regardless of who else ran.
I think that's changing, which is part of the reason this election is so wonky. There's a large group that either dislike the current parties or politicians, hence the popularity of outsider candidates like Trump, Sanders, Johnson and Stein. However there's still a sizable body of party loyalists, which mean outsider candidates do better by hijacking one of the two main parties rather than working through a third party.
Quote from: Valmy on July 26, 2016, 11:25:39 AM
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on July 26, 2016, 11:04:25 AM
Quote from: Monoriu on July 25, 2016, 10:45:02 PM
I am amazed, disappointed, and baffled that as unpleasant as Trump is, he remains competitive in the polls.
That is because people in this country vote based on the little letter next to the candidate. The Republicans could nominate Zombie Hitler and the Democrats could nominate Zombie Stalin and one of them would win, regardless of who else ran.
Well it doesn't help that the two major third parties are completely and utterly insane and idiotic.
Indeed.
Quote from: Valmy on July 26, 2016, 11:25:39 AM
Well it doesn't help that the two major third parties are completely and utterly insane and idiotic.
No, though Gary Johnson has done quite a bit to drag the Libertarian Party back towards sanity, as has the increasingly alienated Liberty Wing of the Republican party.
That said, a winner-take-all first-past-the-post system is fundamentally incompatible with more than two parties.
Some congress seats are held by independents, right? So it is not completely impossible to win as a non-mainstream party candidate.
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on July 26, 2016, 12:28:42 PM
Quote from: Valmy on July 26, 2016, 11:25:39 AM
Well it doesn't help that the two major third parties are completely and utterly insane and idiotic.
No, though Gary Johnson has done quite a bit to drag the Libertarian Party back towards sanity,
Party is still wacky but the Presidential vote is individual. He certainly looks more attractive than Donald J.
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on July 26, 2016, 12:28:42 PM
Quote from: Valmy on July 26, 2016, 11:25:39 AM
Well it doesn't help that the two major third parties are completely and utterly insane and idiotic.
No, though Gary Johnson has done quite a bit to drag the Libertarian Party back towards sanity, as has the increasingly alienated Liberty Wing of the Republican party.
That said, a winner-take-all first-past-the-post system is fundamentally incompatible with more than two parties.
I think three parties could work. The Canadians and Brits have made it function to some extent.
I would love to form a purple centrist party and let the social conservatives and leftwing nutcases bask in their own purity.
Quote from: Valmy on July 26, 2016, 12:51:42 PM
I think three parties could work. The Canadians and Brits have made it function to some extent.
I would love to form a purple centrist party and let the social conservatives and leftwing nutcases bask in their own purity.
The closest to that we have and will ever have in our lifetimes is the independent/non-party affiliated bloc of voters. As far as a formal party goes, forget about it. Even Independents prefer to vote for someone with a D or R next to their name.
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on July 26, 2016, 11:04:25 AM
Quote from: Monoriu on July 25, 2016, 10:45:02 PM
I am amazed, disappointed, and baffled that as unpleasant as Trump is, he remains competitive in the polls.
That is because people in this country vote based on the little letter next to the candidate. The Republicans could nominate Zombie Hitler and the Democrats could nominate Zombie Stalin and one of them would win, regardless of who else ran.
Well, in a parliamentary democracy actual Hitler won. The two party system is suppose to weed on the kooks. It was successful this year for the Democrats but not the Republicans.
Quote from: Zanza on July 26, 2016, 12:44:26 PM
Some congress seats are held by independents, right? So it is not completely impossible to win as a non-mainstream party candidate.
True, but Bernie Sanders was one of them, and he didn't run for President as an independent, either.
Quote from: frunk on July 26, 2016, 11:36:07 AM
I think that's changing, which is part of the reason this election is so wonky. There's a large group that either dislike the current parties or politicians, hence the popularity of outsider candidates like Trump, Sanders, Johnson and Stein. However there's still a sizable body of party loyalists, which mean outsider candidates do better by hijacking one of the two main parties rather than working through a third party.
This is precisely what Sanders tried to do, and I think you have nailed the reason for it: there are party members who will vote for a pig if it has that (R) or (D) next to its name.
Quote from: grumbler on July 26, 2016, 01:06:49 PM
Quote from: Zanza on July 26, 2016, 12:44:26 PM
Some congress seats are held by independents, right? So it is not completely impossible to win as a non-mainstream party candidate.
True, but Bernie Sanders was one of them, and he didn't run for President as an independent, either.
Sure. Just wanted to counter the "fundamentally impossible" by von Moltke.
Quote from: Zanza on July 26, 2016, 01:44:21 PM
Quote from: grumbler on July 26, 2016, 01:06:49 PM
Quote from: Zanza on July 26, 2016, 12:44:26 PM
Some congress seats are held by independents, right? So it is not completely impossible to win as a non-mainstream party candidate.
True, but Bernie Sanders was one of them, and he didn't run for President as an independent, either.
Sure. Just wanted to counter the "fundamentally impossible" by von Moltke.
I should have explicitly stated I was referring to the Presidential election setup, though the system makes getting elected in any partisan election with both a Democrat and a Republican running seriously hard.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 26, 2016, 01:06:32 PM
Well, in a parliamentary democracy actual Hitler won.
No he didn't. :huh: Hindenburg won the election, decisively I might add. Hitler was appointed Chancellor by Hindenburg afterward.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 26, 2016, 01:06:32 PM
Well, in a parliamentary democracy actual Hitler won. The two party system is suppose to weed on the kooks. It was successful this year for the Democrats but not the Republicans.
Considering it also forces homogenization of opinion and enables national-level power brokers, I think the cure is worse than the disease.
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on July 26, 2016, 02:13:50 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 26, 2016, 01:06:32 PM
Well, in a parliamentary democracy actual Hitler won.
No he didn't. :huh: Hindenburg won the election, decisively I might add. Hitler was appointed Chancellor by Hindenburg afterward.
Hindenburg was the President. He wasn't part of the "parliament." Hindenburg appointed Hitler because the Nazi party was the largest party after the Nov 1932 elections and von Papen (who had headed a non-democratic coalition that kept the Nazis out of power despite them being the largest party after the July elections) couldn't keep going.
Hitler did run against Hindenburg in the Presidential elections earlier in 1932. Hindenburg squeaked out a win in that election (failed to gain a majority in the first round, got 53% in the second) but was fatally weakened by his continued lack of popular support (he only got in the first time by a plurality). Hindenburg wanted to keep Hitler out of power, but he was only accomplishing that via rule by decree, and the Reichstag wouldn't let him keep doing that.
There was never anything "decisive" about Hindenburg as a politician.
Quote from: grumbler on July 26, 2016, 03:46:05 PM
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on July 26, 2016, 02:13:50 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 26, 2016, 01:06:32 PM
Well, in a parliamentary democracy actual Hitler won.
No he didn't. :huh: Hindenburg won the election, decisively I might add. Hitler was appointed Chancellor by Hindenburg afterward.
Hindenburg was the President. He wasn't part of the "parliament." Hindenburg appointed Hitler because the Nazi party was the largest party after the Nov 1932 elections and von Papen (who had headed a non-democratic coalition that kept the Nazis out of power despite them being the largest party after the July elections) couldn't keep going.
Hitler did run against Hindenburg in the Presidential elections earlier in 1932. Hindenburg squeaked out a win in that election (failed to gain a majority in the first round, got 53% in the second) but was fatally weakened by his continued lack of popular support (he only got in the first time by a plurality). Hindenburg wanted to keep Hitler out of power, but he was only accomplishing that via rule by decree, and the Reichstag wouldn't let him keep doing that.
There was never anything "decisive" about Hindenburg as a politician.
OK, "decisive" was an overstep. :P My point, as Raz was clearly talking about the US Presidential election in reference to "keeping the kooks out", is that Hitler never actually won a (free and fair) national election. Yes, the Nazi party was the most powerful in Germany in 1932. That was on the basis of local parliamentary elections, though. Considering our system does jack shit to keep our kooks out of such offices, he still doesn't have a point.
Hindenburg was full of gas. He later crashed and burned.
Hitler came in first in the 32 federal (national) election. By a very big margin.
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on July 26, 2016, 03:57:34 PM
OK, "decisive" was an overstep. :P My point, as Raz was clearly talking about the US Presidential election in reference to "keeping the kooks out", is that Hitler never actually won a (free and fair) national election. Yes, the Nazi party was the most powerful in Germany in 1932. That was on the basis of local parliamentary elections, though. Considering our system does jack shit to keep our kooks out of such offices, he still doesn't have a point.
Our system is build on empowering the kooks. That is what local government is all about.
My main concern with proportional representation in the US is that I feel like it would create powerful identity politics parties.
Quote from: derspiess on July 26, 2016, 01:00:09 PM
The closest to that we have and will ever have in our lifetimes is the independent/non-party affiliated bloc of voters. As far as a formal party goes, forget about it. Even Independents prefer to vote for someone with a D or R next to their name.
Probably. But hey maybe once Trump wins and purges all the cuckservatives they can find allies in all the corporatist/fascist Democrats purged by the mighty Berniebros.
Eh probably not.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 26, 2016, 09:25:19 AM
Watching Rachel Maddow goof on the naïveté of the Bernie delegates was a hoot, though. You don realize you are at the Democratic National Convention, right?
I know they're outraged that the Democratic Party did everything they could to help stop a man who only joined their party so he could run for President from winning the nomination. Christ, if only the Republicans had that much common sense.
Also for all the trouble the word gets I can't think of a better example of 'privilege' than these fucking Bernie or bust lads <_< :ultra:
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 26, 2016, 04:00:38 PM
Hitler came in first in the 32 federal (national) election. By a very big margin.
Only in the sense that he was leader of the party that did. They weren't votes for
Hitler, they were votes for
the NSDAP.
Are superdelegates included in the state total during the roll call, anyone know?
I love that someone shouted this with enthusiasm: "the state of Prince's Purple Rain and the birthplace of Tim Kaine." :lol: :wub:
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on July 26, 2016, 03:57:34 PM
OK, "decisive" was an overstep. :P My point, as Raz was clearly talking about the US Presidential election in reference to "keeping the kooks out", is that Hitler never actually won a (free and fair) national election. Yes, the Nazi party was the most powerful in Germany in 1932. That was on the basis of local parliamentary elections, though. Considering our system does jack shit to keep our kooks out of such offices, he still doesn't have a point.
Hitler didn't get a majority in any free and fair election, that is true. He was, however, by far the most popular politician in Germany in 1932. Hindenburg won the presidential election by leading an anti-Hitler coalition, not by being personally popular.
The Vermont delegation political theater was pretty underwhelming. :mellow:
Quote from: lustindarkness on July 26, 2016, 03:58:08 PM
Hindenburg was full of gas. He later crashed and burned.
:lol:
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on July 26, 2016, 05:07:30 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 26, 2016, 04:00:38 PM
Hitler came in first in the 32 federal (national) election. By a very big margin.
Only in the sense that he was leader of the party that did. They weren't votes for Hitler, they were votes for the NSDAP.
Please. The fuhrerprizip was already long established and known to the voters. They weren't voting for Hess and Borman.
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on July 26, 2016, 03:57:34 PM
Quote from: grumbler on July 26, 2016, 03:46:05 PM
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on July 26, 2016, 02:13:50 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 26, 2016, 01:06:32 PM
Well, in a parliamentary democracy actual Hitler won.
No he didn't. :huh: Hindenburg won the election, decisively I might add. Hitler was appointed Chancellor by Hindenburg afterward.
Hindenburg was the President. He wasn't part of the "parliament." Hindenburg appointed Hitler because the Nazi party was the largest party after the Nov 1932 elections and von Papen (who had headed a non-democratic coalition that kept the Nazis out of power despite them being the largest party after the July elections) couldn't keep going.
Hitler did run against Hindenburg in the Presidential elections earlier in 1932. Hindenburg squeaked out a win in that election (failed to gain a majority in the first round, got 53% in the second) but was fatally weakened by his continued lack of popular support (he only got in the first time by a plurality). Hindenburg wanted to keep Hitler out of power, but he was only accomplishing that via rule by decree, and the Reichstag wouldn't let him keep doing that.
There was never anything "decisive" about Hindenburg as a politician.
OK, "decisive" was an overstep. :P My point, as Raz was clearly talking about the US Presidential election in reference to "keeping the kooks out", is that Hitler never actually won a (free and fair) national election. Yes, the Nazi party was the most powerful in Germany in 1932. That was on the basis of local parliamentary elections, though. Considering our system does jack shit to keep our kooks out of such offices, he still doesn't have a point.
It does quite well at keeping kooks out of office. We aren't required to form coalition governments with Communists or Nazis or other loons. We have managed to keep out Libertarians, Know-nothings, Greens, Fascists, Anti-masons, and other weirdos. Our system has kept Strom Thurmond, George Wallace and Ross Perot from the Whitehouse.
The multiple elections in 1932 were all about Hitler. The sole purpose of the NSDAP was to propel Hitler into the top level of power; this was understood by everyone in Germany. There were multiple election in 1932 because Hitler would only be satisfied with the chancellorship, something that conservative parties were not willing to concede.
It is the nature of parliamentary parties that fringe groups can take power particularly when there are a lot of political parties.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 26, 2016, 09:33:00 PM
It does quite well at keeping kooks out of office. We aren't required to form coalition governments with Communists or Nazis or other loons. We have managed to keep out Libertarians, Know-nothings, Greens, Fascists, Anti-masons, and other weirdos. Our system has kept Strom Thurmond, George Wallace and Ross Perot from the Whitehouse.
Trump now has a good shot at getting into the White House though.
Getting Bubba back into the White House is a priority of the highest national urgency.
:wub:
Heard a snip on NPR about some Bernie delegates walking out of the hall in protest because they were "being shut out of the party."
You know, i had thought that Cleveland would've been the big delegate mess, what with so many knuckledragging first-timers coming out to support Trump and not knowing their mouthbreathing heads from their 5.56mm yuge asses--turns out it the DNC still needs the Chicago PD to start nightsticking some sense into these goddamned hippies.
Where the fuck is Frank Rizzo and a daisycutter when you need one.
Whoa, did Alicia Keyes pack on a few pounds? Looks like Alan Keyes. Damn, woman.
Quote from: dps on July 26, 2016, 07:00:54 AM
Hey! When have I not been pro free trade?
I have no idea what you're even talking about as far as international alliances go.
I am not talking about you I am talking about the Trumpites. Wanting to destroy NATO and rip up all of our trade agreements.
Quote from: Monoriu on July 26, 2016, 09:40:31 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 26, 2016, 09:33:00 PM
It does quite well at keeping kooks out of office. We aren't required to form coalition governments with Communists or Nazis or other loons. We have managed to keep out Libertarians, Know-nothings, Greens, Fascists, Anti-masons, and other weirdos. Our system has kept Strom Thurmond, George Wallace and Ross Perot from the Whitehouse.
Trump now has a good shot at getting into the White House though.
This is true. The system is failing.
Quote from: Valmy on July 26, 2016, 10:20:27 PM
I am not talking about you I am talking about the Trumpites. Wanting to destroy NATO and rip up all of our trade agreements.
Just the Free Trade Agreements. We're going to have Great Trade Agreements instead. WIN
At this point I wouldn't be surprised if Trump became the first presidential candidate to get a nomination bump for both conventions.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 26, 2016, 10:12:23 PM
Where the fuck is Frank Rizzo and a daisycutter when you need one.
It was Wilson Goode. :lol:
Probably nobody else here will get that joke. :sleep:
Saw some pics of Bernie Bros carrying North Korean flags. What's up with that?
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2016, 10:47:06 AM
Saw some pics of Bernie Bros carrying North Korean flags. What's up with that?
Probably something about Hillary being the new Dear Leader or something even more insane.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CoO-Ek5WAAEbBAZ.jpg)
Quote from: Caliga on July 27, 2016, 07:02:46 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 26, 2016, 10:12:23 PM
Where the fuck is Frank Rizzo and a daisycutter when you need one.
It was Wilson Goode. :lol:
Probably nobody else here will get that joke. :sleep:
Yeah, but Frank had more panache.
Good grief Bill if full of BS as regards his attitude towards his wife.
Quote from: mongers on July 27, 2016, 03:55:04 PM
Good grief Bill if full of BS as regards his attitude towards his wife.
:lol: I loved it. But then I love Bill and will be a WRECK after what is likely Joe Biden's last major speech :weep: :cry:
Quote from: Sheilbh on July 27, 2016, 04:57:12 PM
Quote from: mongers on July 27, 2016, 03:55:04 PM
Good grief Bill if full of BS as regards his attitude towards his wife.
:lol: I loved it. But then I love Bill and will be a WRECK after what is likely Joe Biden's last major speech :weep: :cry:
Oh I'd have bought it if there'd been some humility to it, something along the lines of his philandering not honouring the woman he was so lucky to get etc.
Thanks for the the Biden headsup, I'll try and catch it.
Harry Reid tribute. :bleeding:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 26, 2016, 10:12:23 PM
You know, i had thought that Cleveland would've been the big delegate mess, what with so many knuckledragging first-timers coming out to support Trump and not knowing their mouthbreathing heads from their 5.56mm yuge asses--turns out it the DNC still needs the Chicago PD to start nightsticking some sense into these goddamned hippies.
Where the fuck is Frank Rizzo and a daisycutter when you need one.
Whoa, did Alicia Keyes pack on a few pounds? Looks like Alan Keyes. Damn, woman.
This is a link to a very popular outdoor site. The trump folks are not only so bent on "anybody but Hillary", but also only a Republican in the white house. Take a read, these folks are so delusional it's scary. Every major outdoor/gun site is this way. Seriously take a read. Eye opening to say the least.
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/forums/21/1/Hunter's_Campfire
Browse just one day of threads.
Quote from: 11B4V on July 27, 2016, 06:15:39 PM
The trump folks are not only so bent on "anybody but Hillary", but also only a Republican in the white house.
Dude, that's not new; we've gone over this before on the forum as far back as the 2008 election: Republicans have a sense of entitlement to the White House that automatically renders any Democratic presidency as illegitimate. Been that way since '92.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 27, 2016, 06:40:20 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on July 27, 2016, 06:15:39 PM
The trump folks are not only so bent on "anybody but Hillary", but also only a Republican in the white house.
Dude, that's not new; we've gone over this before on the forum as far back as the 2008 election: Republicans have a sense of entitlement to the White House that automatically renders any Democratic presidency as illegitimate. Been that way since '92.
It's gotten worse. Peer into madness.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 27, 2016, 06:40:20 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on July 27, 2016, 06:15:39 PM
The trump folks are not only so bent on "anybody but Hillary", but also only a Republican in the white house.
Dude, that's not new; we've gone over this before on the forum as far back as the 2008 election: Republicans have a sense of entitlement to the White House that automatically renders any Democratic presidency as illegitimate. Been that way since '92.
That's actually a good point. Might I add that the Dems feel the same way about Congress.
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2016, 07:59:38 PM
That's actually a good point. Might I add that the Dems feel the same way about Congress.
Only because the GOP never gave two shits about Congress at all. :lol:
Wikileaks is dropping a bunch of DNC voicemails :ph34r:
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2016, 08:11:47 PM
Wikileaks is dropping a bunch of DNC voicemails :ph34r:
Oh boy! Hillary's heavy breathing!
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2016, 07:59:38 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 27, 2016, 06:40:20 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on July 27, 2016, 06:15:39 PM
The trump folks are not only so bent on "anybody but Hillary", but also only a Republican in the white house.
Dude, that's not new; we've gone over this before on the forum as far back as the 2008 election: Republicans have a sense of entitlement to the White House that automatically renders any Democratic presidency as illegitimate. Been that way since '92.
That's actually a good point. Might I add that the Dems feel the same way about Congress.
You would make a good Russian propaganda troll. If all else fails, and bad behavior can't be explained away, just say that you're naive if you don't think the other side does it even worse, just in a more concealed manner.
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 27, 2016, 08:14:42 PM
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2016, 08:11:47 PM
Wikileaks is dropping a bunch of DNC voicemails :ph34r:
Oh boy! Hillary's heavy breathing!
More like audio of her being confused between whether she's talking to a real person or to voicemail.
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2016, 08:19:27 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 27, 2016, 08:14:42 PM
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2016, 08:11:47 PM
Wikileaks is dropping a bunch of DNC voicemails :ph34r:
Oh boy! Hillary's heavy breathing!
More like audio of her being confused between whether she's talking to a real person or to voicemail.
Huma's phonesex calls to Bill.
She looks like a foot.
#MoreWeinerCrotchshotsPlz
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 27, 2016, 08:32:05 PM
#MoreWeinerCrotchshotsPlz
(https://38.media.tumblr.com/4d0a40341df931892b33664321246c06/tumblr_inline_nn41dh7qfV1sjh1ps_500.gif)
Can you tell I'm bored?
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic3.therichestimages.com%2Fcdn%2F568%2F299%2F90%2Fc%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F07%2FKenny_death_sexual_healing.jpg&hash=207cc574aa63392d895c9cfc6d1986b6c1702851)
:XD:
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 27, 2016, 08:34:03 PM
Can you tell I'm bored?
I picked up on it a bit more than a decade ago.
Malarkey :wub:
Man, I wish he was the nominee.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/07/27/joe_biden_dnc_speech_will_be_known_for_centuries_as_the_malarkey_speech.html
Good speech
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-obama-2016-convention-speech-transcript-20160727-snap-story.html
Due to The Trump Corporation's legacy of greed around the globe, Hizzoner Bloomberg taught a lesson in the real use of wealth...you were all witnesses.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 27, 2016, 11:35:20 PM
Good speech
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-obama-2016-convention-speech-transcript-20160727-snap-story.html
very good speech. I wish he'd be the new President now. :P
Is Tim Kaine gay?
Quote from: viper37 on July 28, 2016, 11:27:22 AM
very good speech. I wish he'd be the new President now. :P
Obama has been a very good Head of State, not nearly as good Head of Government.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 27, 2016, 11:35:20 PM
Good speech
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-obama-2016-convention-speech-transcript-20160727-snap-story.html
Yep, he referred to himself 119 times during the speech. Might even be a record for him.
Quote from: derspiess on July 27, 2016, 08:11:47 PM
Wikileaks is dropping a bunch of DNC voicemails :ph34r:
FSB answers the call of Comrade Trump.
My sister in law will be speaking around 5:20, the first openly transgender woman to do so http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/trans-activist-sarah-mcbride-make-history-dnc-n618021/
That's awesome, chip :cool:
:cool:
Quote from: chipwich on July 28, 2016, 03:52:36 PM
My sister in law will be speaking around 5:20, the first openly transgender woman to do so http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/trans-activist-sarah-mcbride-make-history-dnc-n618021/
:cheers:
Dude they have on right now is a trip. HILLARY CLINTON WON'T STAY THROWED
Quote from: chipwich on July 28, 2016, 03:52:36 PM
My sister in law will be speaking around 5:20, the first openly transgender woman to do so http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/trans-activist-sarah-mcbride-make-history-dnc-n618021/
:cool::cheers:
Quote from: chipwich on July 28, 2016, 03:52:36 PM
My sister in law will be speaking around 5:20, the first openly transgender woman to do so http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/trans-activist-sarah-mcbride-make-history-dnc-n618021/
Good on her :)
Liked the Donald Trump bully montage. :lol:
lol, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar just drove the key and windmilled Trump.
That pastor has Dr. King's cadence and even some of his vocabulary down pat! Great speech.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 28, 2016, 08:09:17 PM
That pastor has Dr. King's cadence and even some of his vocabulary down pat! Great speech.
Yes, he was very articulate. Moron.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 28, 2016, 08:10:34 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 28, 2016, 08:09:17 PM
That pastor has Dr. King's cadence and even some of his vocabulary down pat! Great speech.
Yes, he was very articulate. Moron.
I didn't mean it like that and you know it. <_<
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 28, 2016, 08:12:34 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 28, 2016, 08:10:34 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 28, 2016, 08:09:17 PM
That pastor has Dr. King's cadence and even some of his vocabulary down pat! Great speech.
Yes, he was very articulate. Moron.
I didn't mean it like that and you know it. <_<
You do know they train for that specific style of oratory, don't you? It's not just a thingy. Mutt.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 28, 2016, 08:15:34 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 28, 2016, 08:12:34 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 28, 2016, 08:10:34 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 28, 2016, 08:09:17 PM
That pastor has Dr. King's cadence and even some of his vocabulary down pat! Great speech.
Yes, he was very articulate. Moron.
I didn't mean it like that and you know it. <_<
You do know they train for that specific style of oratory, don't you? It's not just a thingy. Mutt.
I've heard black preachers speak before. They don't sound like that anymore.
Racist.
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 28, 2016, 08:18:28 PM
Racist.
Speech styles and patterns change every generation, it's natural.
I've been telling you to put your head in a wheat thresher for years. Hasn't changed a bit.
I would so fuck Katy Perry with a rolled up Taylor Swift.
Katy Perry is really good looking, and if she's anything like her public persona in private, you've got to think she'd be a lot of fun in bed (and out of it, for that matter), but you have to consider if you want to touch anything Russell Brand has touched.
Yeah, Russell Brand has cooties.
That "little men" quote, ice cold.
:lol:Even if spouses joining the candidates weren't a tradition at the end, Bill would still have stormed the stage anyway. :lol:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 28, 2016, 10:32:33 PM
:lol:Even if spouses joining the candidates weren't a tradition at the end, Bill would still have stormed the stage anyway. :lol:
I like extended family on stage. The kids enjoyed their time with the balloons.
QuoteWil Wheaton (@wilw)
14 mins ago - View on Twitter
Donald Trump desperately trying to think of Tweets right now like Dirk Diggler trying to get it up in Boogie Nights. You know the scene.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cogb_e_UkAY_sqh.jpg)
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 28, 2016, 11:15:23 PM
QuoteWil Wheaton (@wilw)
14 mins ago - View on Twitter
Donald Trump desperately trying to think of Tweets right now like Dirk Diggler trying to get it up in Boogie Nights. You know the scene.
You quoted Wesley. I am.....disappointed.
I thought this op-ed by David Brooks was interesting.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/29/opinion/the-democrats-win-the-summer.html?mwrsm=Facebook&_r=0
QuoteThe Democrats Win the Summer
Donald Trump has found an ingenious way to save the Democratic Party. Basically, he's abandoned the great patriotic themes that used to fire up the G.O.P. and he's allowed the Democrats to seize that ground. If you visited the two conventions this year you would have come away thinking that the Democrats are the more patriotic of the two parties — and the more culturally conservative.
Trump has abandoned the Judeo-Christian aspirations that have always represented America's highest moral ideals: toward love, charity, humility, goodness, faith, temperance and gentleness.
He left the ground open for Joe Biden to remind us that decent people don't enjoy firing other human beings.
Trump has abandoned the basic modesty code that has always ennobled the American middle class: Don't brag, don't let your life be defined by gilded luxuries.
He left the ground open for the Democrats to seize middle-class values with one quick passage in a Tim Kaine video — about a guy who goes to the same church where he was married, who taught carpentry as a Christian missionary in Honduras, who has lived in the same house for the last 24 years.
Trump has also abandoned the American ideal of popular self-rule.
He left the ground open for Barack Obama to remind us that our founders wanted active engaged citizens, not a government run by a solipsistic and self-appointed savior who wants everything his way.
Trump has abandoned the deep and pervasive optimism that has always energized the American nation.
He left the ground open for Michelle Obama to embrace the underlying chorus of hope that runs through the American story: that our national history is an arc toward justice; that evil rises for a day but contains the seeds of its own destruction; that beneath the vicissitudes that darken our days, we live in an orderly cosmos governed by love.
For decades the Republican Party has embraced America's open, future-oriented nationalism. But when you nominate a Silvio Berlusconi you give up a piece of that. When you nominate a blood-and-soil nationalist you're no longer speaking in the voice of Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt and every Republican nominee from Reagan to McCain to Romney.
Democrats have often been ambivalent about that ardent nationalistic voice, but this week they were happy to accept Trump's unintentional gift. There were an unusually high number of great speeches at the Democratic convention this year: the Obamas, Biden, Booker, Clinton, the Mothers of the Movement and so on.
These speakers found their eloquence in staving off this demagogue. They effectively separated Trump from America. They separated him from conservatism. They made full use of the deep nationalist chords that touch American hearts.
Trump has allowed the Democrats to mask their deep problems. A Democratic administration has presided over a time of growing world chaos, growing violence and growing anger. But the Democrats seem positively organized and orderly compared to Candidate Chaos on the other side.
The Sanders people have 90 percent of the Democratic Party's passion and 95 percent of the ideas. Most Sanders people are kind- and open-hearted, but there is a core that is corrupted by moral preening, an uncompromising absolutism and a paranoid unwillingness to play by the rules of civic life.
But the extremist fringe that threatens to take over the Democratic Party seems less menacing than the lunatic fringe that has already taken over the Republican one.
This week I left the arena here each night burning with indignation at Mike Pence. I almost don't blame Trump. He is a morally untethered, spiritually vacuous man who appears haunted by multiple personality disorders. It is the "sane" and "reasonable" Republicans who deserve the shame — the ones who stood silently by, or worse, while Donald Trump gave away their party's sacred inheritance.
The Democrats had by far the better of the conventions. But the final and shocking possibility is this: In immediate political terms it may not make a difference.
The Democratic speakers hit doubles, triples and home runs. But the normal rules may no longer apply. The Democrats may have just dominated a game we are no longer playing.
Both conventions featured one grieving parent after another. The fear of violent death is on everybody's mind — from ISIS, cops, lone sociopaths. The essential contract of society — that if you behave responsibly things will work out — has been severed for many people.
It could be that in this moment of fear, cynicism, anxiety and extreme pessimism, many voters may have decided that civility is a surrender to a rigged system, that optimism is the opiate of the idiots and that humility and gentleness are simply surrendering to the butchers of ISIS. If that's the case then the throes of a completely new birth are upon us and Trump is a man from the future.
If that's true it's not just politics that has changed, but the country.
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 29, 2016, 08:36:25 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 28, 2016, 11:15:23 PM
QuoteWil Wheaton (@wilw)
14 mins ago - View on Twitter
Donald Trump desperately trying to think of Tweets right now like Dirk Diggler trying to get it up in Boogie Nights. You know the scene.
You quoted Wesley. I am.....disappointed.
Any man brave enough to reference Dirk Diggler can drink from my canteen any day.
QuoteMost Sanders people are kind- and open-hearted, but there is a core that is corrupted by moral preening, an uncompromising absolutism and a paranoid unwillingness to play by the rules of civic life.
Lol, no joke. Like the Weekend Update guy asked, "What's with all the white girls crying? Did Dave Matthews just play, 'Crash Into Me' or something?"
Trump vs. Bloomberg
Quote"'Little' Michael Bloomberg, who never had the guts to run for president, knows nothing about me. His last term as Mayor was a disaster," Trump tweeted Friday morning, directly contradicting his praise for Bloomberg during his final term just four years ago.
"Mike Bloomberg is doing a great job as Mayor of New York City," Trump tweeted April 16, 2012. (Bloomberg left office after three terms at the end of 2013.)
As the Donald would say: "SAD"
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 29, 2016, 10:57:51 AM
Trump vs. Bloomberg
Quote"'Little' Michael Bloomberg, who never had the guts to run for president, knows nothing about me. His last term as Mayor was a disaster," Trump tweeted Friday morning, directly contradicting his praise for Bloomberg during his final term just four years ago.
"Mike Bloomberg is doing a great job as Mayor of New York City," Trump tweeted April 16, 2012. (Bloomberg left office after three terms at the end of 2013.)
As the Donald would say: "SAD"
Sad would be my gut instinct that Trump will still win out in November. <_<
Quote from: mongers on July 29, 2016, 11:14:01 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 29, 2016, 10:57:51 AM
Trump vs. Bloomberg
Quote"'Little' Michael Bloomberg, who never had the guts to run for president, knows nothing about me. His last term as Mayor was a disaster," Trump tweeted Friday morning, directly contradicting his praise for Bloomberg during his final term just four years ago.
"Mike Bloomberg is doing a great job as Mayor of New York City," Trump tweeted April 16, 2012. (Bloomberg left office after three terms at the end of 2013.)
As the Donald would say: "SAD"
Sad would be my gut instinct that Trump will still win out in November. <_<
I'm more worried than I was at the minute :( :ph34r:
The week in "Bernie or Bust":
Quote
Hundreds Of Sanders Delegates Mass walk out at DNC And Launch protest In Philly Streets
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSBp5Pd9B3Y (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSBp5Pd9B3Y)
Anti-DNC Protests Way Bigger Than Corporate Media Is Reporting
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ls737WjMvc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ls737WjMvc)
Quote from: Sheilbh on July 29, 2016, 04:08:04 PM
Quote from: mongers on July 29, 2016, 11:14:01 AM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 29, 2016, 10:57:51 AM
Trump vs. Bloomberg
Quote"'Little' Michael Bloomberg, who never had the guts to run for president, knows nothing about me. His last term as Mayor was a disaster," Trump tweeted Friday morning, directly contradicting his praise for Bloomberg during his final term just four years ago.
"Mike Bloomberg is doing a great job as Mayor of New York City," Trump tweeted April 16, 2012. (Bloomberg left office after three terms at the end of 2013.)
As the Donald would say: "SAD"
Sad would be my gut instinct that Trump will still win out in November. <_<
I'm more worried than I was at the minute :( :ph34r:
I'm worried as well. I know what to expect from a Cruz, or a Bush or a Rubio. It's not what I like (particularly Cruz), but it's not the yawning abyss.
So apparently Teump started receiving intel briefings today, and now he's mentioning American bases in Saudi Arabia when the U.S. has no such bases (at least officially)?
Quote from: Jacob on July 29, 2016, 08:42:33 PM
So apparently Teump started receiving intel briefings today, and now he's mentioning American bases in Saudi Arabia when the U.S. has no such bases (at least officially)?
He's still better than Hillary, because she would've lied about it. #VaginasLie
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 29, 2016, 08:47:15 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 29, 2016, 08:42:33 PM
So apparently Teump started receiving intel briefings today, and now he's mentioning American bases in Saudi Arabia when the U.S. has no such bases (at least officially)?
He's still better than Hillary, because she would've lied about it. #VaginasLie
#hervaginahasteeth
Quote from: derspiess on July 28, 2016, 02:41:55 PM
Yep, he referred to himself 119 times during the speech. Might even be a record for him.
Hey, Rain Man, how many times did Hillary refer to herself in her speech?
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Firuntheinternet.com%2Flulzdump%2Fimages%2Fgifs%2Fkaty-perry-clevage-boobs-bill-clinton-looking-1368359986k.gif&hash=db1c6557f575498d7c9278d3cf9dd2dd9f3b9ea3)
Is that real?
It was on my Facebook so must be.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 29, 2016, 08:47:15 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 29, 2016, 08:42:33 PM
So apparently Teump started receiving intel briefings today, and now he's mentioning American bases in Saudi Arabia when the U.S. has no such bases (at least officially)?
He's still better than Hillary, because she would've lied about it. #VaginasLie
We should all vote for Gary Johnson.
Wasn't aware presidential candidates received this kind of intel? What's the rationale for this?
Quote from: celedhring on July 30, 2016, 07:18:33 AM
Wasn't aware presidential candidates received this kind of intel? What's the rationale for this?
Gives them the ability to fuck things up even if not elected in November?
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2016, 07:16:23 AM
We should all vote for Gary Johnson.
What's this "we" shit, Borat?
Quote from: Martinus on July 30, 2016, 07:16:23 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 29, 2016, 08:47:15 PM
Quote from: Jacob on July 29, 2016, 08:42:33 PM
So apparently Teump started receiving intel briefings today, and now he's mentioning American bases in Saudi Arabia when the U.S. has no such bases (at least officially)?
He's still better than Hillary, because she would've lied about it. #VaginasLie
We should all vote for Gary Johnson.
Or write in Bernie.
OLIGARCHY
Quote from: Jacob on July 29, 2016, 08:42:33 PM
So apparently Teump started receiving intel briefings today, and now he's mentioning American bases in Saudi Arabia when the U.S. has no such bases (at least officially)?
I would have never guessed that the fact that we have bases in Saudi Arabia was classified. I've talked to a lot of Air Force guys who were based there at one time or the other, and I never realized that they were giving away secrets by telling us where they had served.
Quote from: dps on July 31, 2016, 10:29:44 AM
Quote from: Jacob on July 29, 2016, 08:42:33 PM
So apparently Teump started receiving intel briefings today, and now he's mentioning American bases in Saudi Arabia when the U.S. has no such bases (at least officially)?
I would have never guessed that the fact that we have bases in Saudi Arabia was classified. I've talked to a lot of Air Force guys who were based there at one time or the other, and I never realized that they were giving away secrets by telling us where they had served.
you're as guilty as Hillary.
Quote from: dps on July 31, 2016, 10:29:44 AM
Quote from: Jacob on July 29, 2016, 08:42:33 PM
So apparently Teump started receiving intel briefings today, and now he's mentioning American bases in Saudi Arabia when the U.S. has no such bases (at least officially)?
I would have never guessed that the fact that we have bases in Saudi Arabia was classified. I've talked to a lot of Air Force guys who were based there at one time or the other, and I never realized that they were giving away secrets by telling us where they had served.
Well, we have no bases in Saudi Arabia according to the DoD and State, so if your buds are claiming to have been based at a US base there since 2003, they are all either lying, confused, or are revealing classified info.
The Trump stuff is nonsense, of course; he hasn't yet received any briefings, and he makes up almost all of the "evidence" he presets to support his wacky ideas, so why would anyone think this claim had any credibility?
Quote from: grumbler on July 31, 2016, 11:53:59 AM
why would anyone think this claim had any credibility?
Same people who think he will replace free trade with "great" trade and Mexico will pay to build the wall.
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 31, 2016, 02:31:56 PM
Quote from: grumbler on July 31, 2016, 11:53:59 AM
why would anyone think this claim had any credibility?
Same people who think he will replace free trade with "great" trade and Mexico will pay to build the wall.
I don't know of anyone who actually believes either of those claims; even Trump's supporters acknowledge that those statements are just "Donald being Donald."
OTOH, I think that there
are people who believe his statements that Cruz's father killed JFK, and that Obama was born in Kenya, because those are claims so outrageous that even Trump wouldn't make them unless they were true.
Quote from: grumbler on July 31, 2016, 11:53:59 AM
Quote from: dps on July 31, 2016, 10:29:44 AM
Quote from: Jacob on July 29, 2016, 08:42:33 PM
So apparently Teump started receiving intel briefings today, and now he's mentioning American bases in Saudi Arabia when the U.S. has no such bases (at least officially)?
I would have never guessed that the fact that we have bases in Saudi Arabia was classified. I've talked to a lot of Air Force guys who were based there at one time or the other, and I never realized that they were giving away secrets by telling us where they had served.
Well, we have no bases in Saudi Arabia according to the DoD and State, so if your buds are claiming to have been based at a US base there since 2003, they are all either lying, confused, or are revealing classified info.
Post 2003, hm. No, the guys I'm talking about were there before that.
Quote from: grumbler on July 31, 2016, 02:38:30 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 31, 2016, 02:31:56 PM
Quote from: grumbler on July 31, 2016, 11:53:59 AM
why would anyone think this claim had any credibility?
Same people who think he will replace free trade with "great" trade and Mexico will pay to build the wall.
I don't know of anyone who actually believes either of those claims; even Trump's supporters acknowledge that those statements are just "Donald being Donald."
The fact you dont know anyone who believes it speaks more about the group of people you know than anything. ;)
One poll result suggest you should mix with your fellow Americans a bit more :P
QuoteTrump supporters strongly believe in their candidates' ability to convince Mexico to pay for the cost.
http://politicalmachination.com/do-trump-supporters-really-think-mexico-will-pay-for-the-wall/
Quote from: dps on July 31, 2016, 07:12:10 PM
Quote from: grumbler on July 31, 2016, 11:53:59 AM
Quote from: dps on July 31, 2016, 10:29:44 AM
Quote from: Jacob on July 29, 2016, 08:42:33 PM
So apparently Teump started receiving intel briefings today, and now he's mentioning American bases in Saudi Arabia when the U.S. has no such bases (at least officially)?
I would have never guessed that the fact that we have bases in Saudi Arabia was classified. I've talked to a lot of Air Force guys who were based there at one time or the other, and I never realized that they were giving away secrets by telling us where they had served.
Well, we have no bases in Saudi Arabia according to the DoD and State, so if your buds are claiming to have been based at a US base there since 2003, they are all either lying, confused, or are revealing classified info.
Post 2003, hm. No, the guys I'm talking about were there before that.
Not sure what the relevance of your comment then. Trump is talking out his ass about what is going on now ;)
It is entirely possible that the US operates out of a Saudi base somewhere. Spilling the beans about such an arrangement would be extremely unwise.
I could see Yemeni drone strikes and drone recon being based out of Saudi. Probably no secure sites left in Yemen.
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 31, 2016, 07:36:39 PM
Trump is talking out his ass about what is going on now ;)
I wish he would talk out of his ass. It would be more edifying and less disgusting then what is coming out of his mouth.
Apparently the plan is to basically extort the money from Mexico: The Trump administration will propose a regulation that would prevent undocumented aliens from wiring money outside of the United States--and then drop it on the condition that Mexico agrees to pay for the Wall.
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 31, 2016, 07:34:57 PM
Quote from: grumbler on July 31, 2016, 02:38:30 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 31, 2016, 02:31:56 PM
Quote from: grumbler on July 31, 2016, 11:53:59 AM
why would anyone think this claim had any credibility?
Same people who think he will replace free trade with "great" trade and Mexico will pay to build the wall.
I don't know of anyone who actually believes either of those claims; even Trump's supporters acknowledge that those statements are just "Donald being Donald."
The fact you dont know anyone who believes it speaks more about the group of people you know than anything. ;)
One poll result suggest you should mix with your fellow Americans a bit more :P
QuoteTrump supporters strongly believe in their candidates' ability to convince Mexico to pay for the cost.
http://politicalmachination.com/do-trump-supporters-really-think-mexico-will-pay-for-the-wall/
Actually, the results say that even Trump supporters mostly won't tell a pollster that they think Mexico will pay for the wall, so thanks for the evidence for my argument. You might want to re-read your source, since it doesn't say what you want it to.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 31, 2016, 09:49:45 PM
I could see Yemeni drone strikes and drone recon being based out of Saudi. Probably no secure sites left in Yemen.
Having some units based there and having bases that the US "pays rent for" are two different things. Not that Trump likely understands the difference. He probably thinks that paying rent is for chumps without access to bankruptcy courts.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 31, 2016, 11:42:44 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 31, 2016, 07:36:39 PM
Trump is talking out his ass about what is going on now ;)
I wish he would talk out of his ass. It would be more edifying and less disgusting then what is coming out of his mouth.
True
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on August 01, 2016, 02:59:54 AM
Apparently the plan is to basically extort the money from Mexico: The Trump administration will propose a regulation that would prevent undocumented aliens from wiring money outside of the United States--and then drop it on the condition that Mexico agrees to pay for the Wall.
Yes that is what his campaign has said. impound remittances. Unconstitutional, unenforceable and would threaten the credibility of the entire dollar-based payments system. I.e. typical Trump.
The proposal was set forth in a memo the campaign sent earlier this year to the Washington Post after the Post pressed for details: https://www.washingtonpost.com/apps/g/page/politics/memo-explains-how-donald-trump-plans-to-pay-for-border-wall/2007/
There is a reference to certain detailed regulations at 31 CFR 130.120-121. Trump proposes an amendment to 31 CFR130.121.
There is no 31 CFR 130.120-121. The entire Part 130 has been reserved
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on August 01, 2016, 09:56:23 AM
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on August 01, 2016, 02:59:54 AM
Apparently the plan is to basically extort the money from Mexico: The Trump administration will propose a regulation that would prevent undocumented aliens from wiring money outside of the United States--and then drop it on the condition that Mexico agrees to pay for the Wall.
Yes that is what his campaign has said. impound remittances. Unconstitutional, unenforceable and would threaten the credibility of the entire dollar-based payments system. I.e. typical Trump.
The proposal was set forth in a memo the campaign sent earlier this year to the Washington Post after the Post pressed for details: https://www.washingtonpost.com/apps/g/page/politics/memo-explains-how-donald-trump-plans-to-pay-for-border-wall/2007/
There is a reference to certain detailed regulations at 31 CFR 130.120-121. Trump proposes an amendment to 31 CFR130.121.
There is no 31 CFR 130.120-121. The entire Part 130 has been reserved
Don't worry, Grumbler doesn't know anyone who believes those claims. So there is no concern Trump will win. Right?
If only that was true. :(
Quote from: crazy canuck on August 01, 2016, 10:49:57 AM
Don't worry, Grumbler doesn't know anyone who believes those claims. So there is no concern Trump will win. Right?
:lmfao: Find whoever it was that taught you logic, and get a refund!
Quote from: grumbler on August 01, 2016, 10:55:26 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on August 01, 2016, 10:49:57 AM
Don't worry, Grumbler doesn't know anyone who believes those claims. So there is no concern Trump will win. Right?
:lmfao: Find whoever it was that taught you logic, and get a refund!
I miss our little banter Grumbles. You are a real gem :)
Quote from: grumbler on August 01, 2016, 10:55:26 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on August 01, 2016, 10:49:57 AM
Don't worry, Grumbler doesn't know anyone who believes those claims. So there is no concern Trump will win. Right?
:lmfao: Find whoever it was that taught you logic, and get a refund!
All my sales are final. Says so in the policy.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 31, 2016, 09:49:45 PM
I could see Yemeni drone strikes and drone recon being based out of Saudi. Probably no secure sites left in Yemen.
Djibouti seems to be the better option. Right across the door, less hassle than with those headhunters.