Is anyone else embarrassed about this campaign?

[Pop23]

...rational thought and compromise works better than crazy on either side.

Bingo..

So why has the elite given up on rational thought then. By way of example: 19 TRILLION DEBT

Yep.

That number has been a team effort, too.
.

Yes, when all the actors flip of the audience one tends to look for other entertainment venues

 

[Mac1958]

...rational thought and compromise works better than crazy on either side.

Bingo..

So why has the elite given up on rational thought then. By way of example: 19 TRILLION DEBT

Yep.

That number has been a team effort, too.
.

well, we had a balanced budget when bill clinton was president. then baby bush was the first leader in history to cut taxes during wartime. so we ended up with debt. yes, we could cut all spending...and did, but the economy needed stimulus. and the parties don't agree on what to cut. democrats generally try try not to cut things that help actual people. the GOP establishment keeps wanting to cut taxes for corporations and the top 1%. that leads to disagreement. you want to get rid of debt, cut the military budget (which we can't do right now) or raise taxes to where they were pre bush.(which the right, in keeping with their pledge of allegiance to grover norquist) won't do.

so team effort? in some ways. solution though has to be a team effort and the teams don't mesh on this. and wasn't it dick cheney who said "deficits don't matter"?

Yeah, deficits don't matter, until the other party has them.
.

 

[Pop23]

...rational thought and compromise works better than crazy on either side.

Bingo..

So why has the elite given up on rational thought then. By way of example: 19 TRILLION DEBT

Yep.

That number has been a team effort, too.
.

well, we had a balanced budget when bill clinton was president. then baby bush was the first leader in history to cut taxes during wartime. so we ended up with debt. yes, we could cut all spending...and did, but the economy needed stimulus. and the parties don't agree on what to cut. democrats generally try try not to cut things that help actual people. the GOP establishment keeps wanting to cut taxes for corporations and the top 1%. that leads to disagreement. you want to get rid of debt, cut the military budget (which we can't do right now) or raise taxes to where they were pre bush.(which the right, in keeping with their pledge of allegiance to grover norquist) won't do.

so team effort? in some ways. solution though has to be a team effort and the teams don't mesh on this. and wasn't it dick cheney who said "deficits don't matter"?

Yeah, deficits don't matter, until the other party has them.
.

Seems the "team effort" concept just got flushed

 

[jillian]

...rational thought and compromise works better than crazy on either side.

Bingo..

So why has the elite given up on rational thought then. By way of example: 19 TRILLION DEBT

Yep.

That number has been a team effort, too.
.

well, we had a balanced budget when bill clinton was president. then baby bush was the first leader in history to cut taxes during wartime. so we ended up with debt. yes, we could cut all spending...and did, but the economy needed stimulus. and the parties don't agree on what to cut. democrats generally try try not to cut things that help actual people. the GOP establishment keeps wanting to cut taxes for corporations and the top 1%. that leads to disagreement. you want to get rid of debt, cut the military budget (which we can't do right now) or raise taxes to where they were pre bush.(which the right, in keeping with their pledge of allegiance to grover norquist) won't do.

so team effort? in some ways. solution though has to be a team effort and the teams don't mesh on this. and wasn't it dick cheney who said "deficits don't matter"?

Yeah, deficits don't matter, until the other party has them.
.

there is that. but it is clear we have to hit the raise taxes button at some point. we have infrastructure to rebuild and things that need to be done

 

[Mac1958]

Bingo..

So why has the elite given up on rational thought then. By way of example: 19 TRILLION DEBT

Yep.

That number has been a team effort, too.
.

well, we had a balanced budget when bill clinton was president. then baby bush was the first leader in history to cut taxes during wartime. so we ended up with debt. yes, we could cut all spending...and did, but the economy needed stimulus. and the parties don't agree on what to cut. democrats generally try try not to cut things that help actual people. the GOP establishment keeps wanting to cut taxes for corporations and the top 1%. that leads to disagreement. you want to get rid of debt, cut the military budget (which we can't do right now) or raise taxes to where they were pre bush.(which the right, in keeping with their pledge of allegiance to grover norquist) won't do.

so team effort? in some ways. solution though has to be a team effort and the teams don't mesh on this. and wasn't it dick cheney who said "deficits don't matter"?

Yeah, deficits don't matter, until the other party has them.
.

there is that. but it is clear we have to hit the raise taxes button at some point. we have infrastructure to rebuild and things that need to be done

Personal income taxes, yes. I'm fine with Bernie's numbers on that side of the ledger.
.

 

[jon_berzerk]

It's only "Dirty Tricks" if yer on the receiving end.

**** Ted Cruz. Excuse me, Copulate Ted Cruz.

coitus ted cruz

 

[jillian]

So why has the elite given up on rational thought then. By way of example: 19 TRILLION DEBT

Yep.

That number has been a team effort, too.
.

well, we had a balanced budget when bill clinton was president. then baby bush was the first leader in history to cut taxes during wartime. so we ended up with debt. yes, we could cut all spending...and did, but the economy needed stimulus. and the parties don't agree on what to cut. democrats generally try try not to cut things that help actual people. the GOP establishment keeps wanting to cut taxes for corporations and the top 1%. that leads to disagreement. you want to get rid of debt, cut the military budget (which we can't do right now) or raise taxes to where they were pre bush.(which the right, in keeping with their pledge of allegiance to grover norquist) won't do.

so team effort? in some ways. solution though has to be a team effort and the teams don't mesh on this. and wasn't it dick cheney who said "deficits don't matter"?

Yeah, deficits don't matter, until the other party has them.
.

there is that. but it is clear we have to hit the raise taxes button at some point. we have infrastructure to rebuild and things that need to be done

Personal income taxes, yes. I'm fine with Bernie's numbers on that side of the ledger.
.

it should certainly be part of the discussion.

but the GOP guys all swore on grover norquiest that they won't consider raising taxes. it's economic malpractice.

 

[Mac1958]

Yep.

That number has been a team effort, too.
.

well, we had a balanced budget when bill clinton was president. then baby bush was the first leader in history to cut taxes during wartime. so we ended up with debt. yes, we could cut all spending...and did, but the economy needed stimulus. and the parties don't agree on what to cut. democrats generally try try not to cut things that help actual people. the GOP establishment keeps wanting to cut taxes for corporations and the top 1%. that leads to disagreement. you want to get rid of debt, cut the military budget (which we can't do right now) or raise taxes to where they were pre bush.(which the right, in keeping with their pledge of allegiance to grover norquist) won't do.

so team effort? in some ways. solution though has to be a team effort and the teams don't mesh on this. and wasn't it dick cheney who said "deficits don't matter"?

Yeah, deficits don't matter, until the other party has them.
.

there is that. but it is clear we have to hit the raise taxes button at some point. we have infrastructure to rebuild and things that need to be done

Personal income taxes, yes. I'm fine with Bernie's numbers on that side of the ledger.
.

it should certainly be part of the discussion.

but the GOP guys all swore on grover torquiest that they won't consider raising taxes. it's economic malpractice.

It's what you get when you multiply absolutism by echo chamber.
.

 

[jillian]

well, we had a balanced budget when bill clinton was president. then baby bush was the first leader in history to cut taxes during wartime. so we ended up with debt. yes, we could cut all spending...and did, but the economy needed stimulus. and the parties don't agree on what to cut. democrats generally try try not to cut things that help actual people. the GOP establishment keeps wanting to cut taxes for corporations and the top 1%. that leads to disagreement. you want to get rid of debt, cut the military budget (which we can't do right now) or raise taxes to where they were pre bush.(which the right, in keeping with their pledge of allegiance to grover norquist) won't do.

so team effort? in some ways. solution though has to be a team effort and the teams don't mesh on this. and wasn't it dick cheney who said "deficits don't matter"?

Yeah, deficits don't matter, until the other party has them.
.

there is that. but it is clear we have to hit the raise taxes button at some point. we have infrastructure to rebuild and things that need to be done

Personal income taxes, yes. I'm fine with Bernie's numbers on that side of the ledger.
.

it should certainly be part of the discussion.

but the GOP guys all swore on grover torquiest that they won't consider raising taxes. it's economic malpractice.

It's what you get when you multiply absolutism by echo chamber.
.

it is.

and it's what happens when congressional districts are so gerrymandered that the parties don't compete with each other, they get challenged from their furthest flanks.

 

[rightwinger]

Both sides? Really?

WH is it that you people cannot discuss the crazy GOP campaign without bringing up the very subdued Dem campaign?

Of course it is subdued. If your opponent front runner is a mind-numbing jackass why on earth would you do anything to interrupt him?
My point is on the right - you have a large group of sheep falling for someone who is using the nations anger as a ruse; it is amazing how many people have fell for his garbage.
On the left, you have an elitist/corporatist who is the exact opposite of what leftist stand for - yet because she has a (D) after her name - they follow her. Equally duped.

Silly nutter. There are not many leftists pulling levers in this nation. Why would a leftist ever become POTUS?

Hillary, like Obama is a centrist with a slight lean to the left. That's where most Americans are. That's why they get lots of support. Your take on what makes up the bulk of the Dem base is off. Moderate liberals are what is asked for. Stop buying the overblown rhetoric and you might figure it out.

Bernie is to the left of Hillary. Just far enough left that he won't likely win the nomination.

You are so clueless.
Obama and Hillary are elitist/corporatist. PERIOD
They both want a nation where all aspects of civilization are controlled by an ever-expanding government, that is deeply corrupted by a small elite group of "super citizens" who own the vast majority of wealth and power. That is what America is becoming. A plutocratic Corporatocracy.

Which policies has Hillary proposed that involve Government controlling our civilization?

Just one example would be fine

You cannot be so naive, can you?

Hillary Clinton’s Complex Corporate Ties

You didn't answer my question did you

 

[ChrisL]

Of course it is subdued. If your opponent front runner is a mind-numbing jackass why on earth would you do anything to interrupt him?
My point is on the right - you have a large group of sheep falling for someone who is using the nations anger as a ruse; it is amazing how many people have fell for his garbage.
On the left, you have an elitist/corporatist who is the exact opposite of what leftist stand for - yet because she has a (D) after her name - they follow her. Equally duped.

Silly nutter. There are not many leftists pulling levers in this nation. Why would a leftist ever become POTUS?

Hillary, like Obama is a centrist with a slight lean to the left. That's where most Americans are. That's why they get lots of support. Your take on what makes up the bulk of the Dem base is off. Moderate liberals are what is asked for. Stop buying the overblown rhetoric and you might figure it out.

Bernie is to the left of Hillary. Just far enough left that he won't likely win the nomination.

You are so clueless.
Obama and Hillary are elitist/corporatist. PERIOD
They both want a nation where all aspects of civilization are controlled by an ever-expanding government, that is deeply corrupted by a small elite group of "super citizens" who own the vast majority of wealth and power. That is what America is becoming. A plutocratic Corporatocracy.

Which policies has Hillary proposed that involve Government controlling our civilization?

Just one example would be fine

You cannot be so naive, can you?

Hillary Clinton’s Complex Corporate Ties

You didn't answer my question did you

Yes, I believe I did.

 

[rightwinger]

Silly nutter. There are not many leftists pulling levers in this nation. Why would a leftist ever become POTUS?

Hillary, like Obama is a centrist with a slight lean to the left. That's where most Americans are. That's why they get lots of support. Your take on what makes up the bulk of the Dem base is off. Moderate liberals are what is asked for. Stop buying the overblown rhetoric and you might figure it out.

Bernie is to the left of Hillary. Just far enough left that he won't likely win the nomination.

You are so clueless.
Obama and Hillary are elitist/corporatist. PERIOD
They both want a nation where all aspects of civilization are controlled by an ever-expanding government, that is deeply corrupted by a small elite group of "super citizens" who own the vast majority of wealth and power. That is what America is becoming. A plutocratic Corporatocracy.

Which policies has Hillary proposed that involve Government controlling our civilization?

Just one example would be fine

You cannot be so naive, can you?

Hillary Clinton’s Complex Corporate Ties

You didn't answer my question did you

Yes, I believe I did.

Name the policies

I see Trump is offering a massive corporate tax break and huge trade embargo

What has Hillary offered corporate America?




.

 

[rcfieldz]

It's about the size of one's ICBM.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Jefferson put an embargo on trade near the end of his second term, in an effort to avoid getting dragged in to a war between England and France. It wrecked the shipping industry and the whole economy. if his term had not already almost expired, he might have been impeached.

 

[Correll]

I was on my second scotch last night when I saw this, and this morning I was thinking to myself "I must be imagining what I think I heard".

Well, I checked it out, and sadly I remembered it correctly.

So far in this campaign - and we still have a ways to go, mind you - we have had a candidate from a major party talk about the size of his dick during an official, nationally televised debate.

Now, as of yesterday, we have had the main opponent of that candidate confirm that he does not want to have sex with that man.

Is anyone else embarrassed? Is this really what we want?

"And I would note that Mr. Stone is a man who has fifty years of dirty tricks behind him. He's a man for whom a term was coined for copulating with a rodent. Well let me be clear: Donald Trump may be a rat, but I have no desire to copulate with him."

The Powers that Be are desperate.

This is driven by their belief that they are entitled to power.

Do you mean the GOP establishment? Do you think they're to blame for this?
.

The specific examples you mention, yes.

BUt the dems have been just as shitty.

It is just that their offenses are similar to what they always do, just louder and more shrill. So, you don't notice it as much.

If Trump gets to the General, you can expect to see them pull out all the stops and go even more to the gutter.

 

[Correll]

A total embarrassment to our country.

One of my brothers lives in England, and he's having G-R-E-A-T fun giving me shit about all this.


.

Tell him one of the Trump supporters on your board told you to ask him about the Rape Rings, and which country is more fucked up.

 

[Correll]

I was on my second scotch last night when I saw this, and this morning I was thinking to myself "I must be imagining what I think I heard".

Well, I checked it out, and sadly I remembered it correctly.

So far in this campaign - and we still have a ways to go, mind you - we have had a candidate from a major party talk about the size of his dick during an official, nationally televised debate.

Now, as of yesterday, we have had the main opponent of that candidate confirm that he does not want to have sex with that man.

Is anyone else embarrassed? Is this really what we want?

"And I would note that Mr. Stone is a man who has fifty years of dirty tricks behind him. He's a man for whom a term was coined for copulating with a rodent. Well let me be clear: Donald Trump may be a rat, but I have no desire to copulate with him."

Honestly? Saw this coming for 20+ years

The political elite have been screwing the public that entire time, giving the public the finger the entire time. Wasting our time and money. The public is simply giving the finger back to the elite

I do understand that part of it, yeah. I'm not terribly fond of professional politicians in general myself. And I think there are fixes to a system that allows them to behave the way they do.

It's the messenger I question.
.

The public is picking the messenger. Like it or not, it's actually refreshing for a change.

The media is picking the messenger.

They are certainly trying. With the GOP's help they may succeed.

If so, it will be a dark day for our nation.

 

[Correll]

...rational thought and compromise works better than crazy on either side.

Bingo..

So why has the elite given up on rational thought then. By way of example: 19 TRILLION DEBT

Yep.

That number has been a team effort, too.
.

well, we had a balanced budget when bill clinton was president. ...?

We had a balanced budget when a Dem was President and Congress was controlled by the GOP.

Gridlock. That's the only time we managed to have any spending restraint.

 

[Correll]

You are so clueless.
Obama and Hillary are elitist/corporatist. PERIOD
They both want a nation where all aspects of civilization are controlled by an ever-expanding government, that is deeply corrupted by a small elite group of "super citizens" who own the vast majority of wealth and power. That is what America is becoming. A plutocratic Corporatocracy.

Which policies has Hillary proposed that involve Government controlling our civilization?

Just one example would be fine

You cannot be so naive, can you?

Hillary Clinton’s Complex Corporate Ties

You didn't answer my question did you

Yes, I believe I did.

Name the policies

I see Trump is offering a massive corporate tax break and huge trade embargo

What has Hillary offered corporate America?




.

Threatening tariffs is not a huge trade embargo.

 

[Vandalshandle]

A short history of the result of tariff's on world trade in the 1920's and 1930's:

Protectionism in the Interwar Period - 1921–1936 - Milestones - Office of the Historian

" the Tariff Act of 1930, more commonly known as the Smoot-Hawley tariff, that entrenched the protectionism of the Fordney-McCumber tariff.

Scholars disagree over the extent of protection actually afforded by the Smoot-Hawley tariff; they also differ over the issue of whether the tariff provoked a wave of foreign retaliation that plunged the world deeper into the Great Depression. What is certain, however, is that Smoot-Hawley did nothing to foster cooperation among nations in either the economic or political realm during a perilous era in international relations. It quickly became a symbol of the “beggar-thy-neighbor” policies of the 1930s. Such policies, which were adopted by many countries during this time, contributed to a drastic contraction of international trade. For example, U.S. imports from Europe declined from a 1929 high of $1,334 million to just $390 million in 1932, while U.S. exports to Europe fell from $2,341 million in 1929 to $784 million in 1932. Overall, world trade declined by some 66% between 1929 and 1934."

It is unfortunate that Trump, who is so fond of twittering, has failed to embrace googling, where he could learn what they teach in Econ 101 at college about tariffs.