JoeB131
Diamond Member
Except there was no "Nazi Gun Control". Nazis just loved them some guns. Or do you think it's a coincidence that guns are so much a part of the Neo-Nazi culture in this country? OG Nazis loved guns, too.
CDZ Why are anti gunners so open all of a sudden about banning guns?
- Thread starter 2aguy
- Start date
Except there was no "Nazi Gun Control". Nazis just loved them some guns. Or do you think it's a coincidence that guns are so much a part of the Neo-Nazi culture in this country? OG Nazis loved guns, too.
Soupnazi630
Gold Member
- Dec 9, 2013
- 19,185
- 5,622
- 265
Trump was elected deal with it,.
JoeB131
Diamond Member
We are. We are stopping him from getting anything done, and then we are going to frog march him out of the white house into prison.
Can't wait until Mueller puts his ass on the stand.
Deal with it.
Soupnazi630
Gold Member
- Dec 9, 2013
- 19,185
- 5,622
- 265
Sorry boy you lost that fight long ago and the way you are going he will get re elected.
He is your president for the next six years deal with it.
thewanderer
The Wanderer
I don't disagree with what you've said regarding Trump and the primaries—in fact, you're making my point for me. What I basically said was that the Tea Party remnant "hijacked," to use your word, the primaries and they were able to do so because the base as a whole couldn't coalesce around any one alternative candidate.
Let's try it this way—Trump is an assclown. He's childish, has no guiding principles other than his own narcissism, lacks basic understanding of government and how it works, is amazingly ignorant of the constitution, and is basically a petulant spoiled brat in a 70-something year old body. All of that is true and I freely admit it.
And Hillary Clinton still couldn't beat him in a free election. That's where you find your backlash. And no, the agreed upon rules of the game are what they are. If the other team has more points on the board than you when the buzzer goes off, you lost. It doesn't help to whine that you gained more yards or blocked more shots or had more of some metric that doesn't equal "win." Winning the popular vote is not how you win a presidential election in America. She lost the electoral college, she lost.
The point is that it shouldn't even have been close. And it's also important to note HOW Trump won. He flipped middle American states that have voted Democrat my entire life.
Now before the election sources FROM THE LEFT were getting kind of nervous gong into the election because of what you claimed was bs above. Obama dragged the country way far left and they were worried about that. Turns out they had good reason to be. Because Obama made Sanders possible and Sanders not only siphoned youth votes away from Clinton, he also continued to pull her left.
The Clintons aren't ideologues. Hell, Hillary was a Republican at one time. They are simple opportunists. Clinton would have been much more comfortable in the middle, but she got pulled out of her comfort zone.
And people got the message that she is corrupt because she very obviously is. But yeah, the left mainstream media also couldn't help themselves and started a victory dance way too early. Did it have an effect? I don't know, but it sure as hell was fun to watch those smug idiots on election night.
And no, this election was no more frivolously approached than any other in my lifetime (I'm 47). Electing Obama with no more experience than he had was just as ridiculous. But he was potentially the first black president, so it was exciting to vote for him.Finally, and this point was notably ignored in your first response, I remind you that the POTUS election was not an anomaly. The House, the Senate, the majority of governorships...enough people are not resonating with what the Democratic Party is selling these days that it should concern the left, but it doesn't. It's kind of amazing to watch. It's everybody else's fault—the media's, the Russians', voters are stupid, no, it's the Electoral College's fault. The one place you guys never, ever, look is in the mirror. What if there are still just a lot of people in America who don't want fascist policies enacted like Obamacare? Who think that a guy with a penis and testicles is still a guy even if he wears a dress and makeup? Who recognize that you can have open borders if you want as a country, but you can't do it and maintain a welfare state and a democratic form of government? Who object to killing a million unborn human beings every year? Who are adult enough to understand what the 2nd amendment was for and realize that no, that reason doesn't go out of style? Who see college kids interviewed on YouTube who proudly proclaim that they don't care not just about the 2nd amendment, but about the first amendment as well? Who view the concept of things like "microagression" and "safe spaces" with incredulous contempt and wonder how anyone could possibly take them seriously? Who are tired of paying taxes to fund complete nonsense? Who resent other countries around the world that we protect and fund with our taxes disrespecting us at every opportunity? Who do not have confidence in the economic policies of the left? Who can't understand why we tolerate people being here in the United States who are breaking the law by being here?
Because I think there are. And I don't think they just voted for Trump, I think they voted for the majority of the House, Senate, and governorships first.
And I think you're choosing to remain delusional if you think it's automatic that Trump won't be re-elected. I think he could be a one-term POTUS, but I think it's far from being a foregone conclusion.
I don't disagree with what you've said regarding Trump and the primaries—in fact, you're making my point for me. What I basically said was that the Tea Party remnant "hijacked," to use your word, the primaries and they were able to do so because the base as a whole couldn't coalesce around any one alternative candidate.
Let's try it this way—Trump is an assclown. He's childish, has no guiding principles other than his own narcissism, lacks basic understanding of government and how it works, is amazingly ignorant of the constitution, and is basically a petulant spoiled brat in a 70-something year old body. All of that is true and I freely admit it.
And Hillary Clinton still couldn't beat him in a free election. That's where you find your backlash. And no, the agreed upon rules of the game are what they are. If the other team has more points on the board than you when the buzzer goes off, you lost. It doesn't help to whine that you gained more yards or blocked more shots or had more of some metric that doesn't equal "win." Winning the popular vote is not how you win a presidential election in America. She lost the electoral college, she lost.
The point is that it shouldn't even have been close. And it's also important to note HOW Trump won. He flipped middle American states that have voted Democrat my entire life.
Now before the election sources FROM THE LEFT were getting kind of nervous gong into the election because of what you claimed was bs above. Obama dragged the country way far left and they were worried about that. Turns out they had good reason to be. Because Obama made Sanders possible and Sanders not only siphoned youth votes away from Clinton, he also continued to pull her left.
The Clintons aren't ideologues. Hell, Hillary was a Republican at one time. They are simple opportunists. Clinton would have been much more comfortable in the middle, but she got pulled out of her comfort zone.
And people got the message that she is corrupt because she very obviously is. But yeah, the left mainstream media also couldn't help themselves and started a victory dance way too early. Did it have an effect? I don't know, but it sure as hell was fun to watch those smug idiots on election night.
Finally, and this point was notably ignored in your first response, I remind you that the POTUS election was not an anomaly. The House, the Senate, the majority of governorships...enough people are not resonating with what the Democratic Party is selling these days that it should concern the left, but it doesn't. It's kind of amazing to watch. It's everybody else's fault—the media's, the Russians', voters are stupid, no, it's the Electoral College's fault. The one place you guys never, ever, look is in the mirror. What if there are still just a lot of people in America who don't want fascist policies enacted like Obamacare? Who think that a guy with a penis and testicles is still a guy even if he wears a dress and makeup? Who recognize that you can have open borders if you want as a country, but you can't do it and maintain a welfare state and a democratic form of government? Who object to killing a million unborn human beings every year? Who are adult enough to understand what the 2nd amendment was for and realize that no, that reason doesn't go out of style? Who see college kids interviewed on YouTube who proudly proclaim that they don't care not just about the 2nd amendment, but about the first amendment as well? Who view the concept of things like "microagression" and "safe spaces" with incredulous contempt and wonder how anyone could possibly take them seriously? Who are tired of paying taxes to fund complete nonsense? Who resent other countries around the world that we protect and fund with our taxes disrespecting us at every opportunity? Who do not have confidence in the economic policies of the left? Who can't understand why we tolerate people being here in the United States who are breaking the law by being here?
Because I think there are. And I don't think they just voted for Trump, I think they voted for the majority of the House, Senate, and governorships first.
And I think you're choosing to remain delusional if you think it's automatic that Trump won't be re-elected. I think he could be a one-term POTUS, but I think it's far from being a foregone conclusion.
Very good points. I would add that the Republicans should also be looking at the results of the election and realize that the voters really are getting tired of the establishment and want different candidates. Maybe they would run higher quality candidates.
jon_berzerk
Platinum Member
- Mar 5, 2013
- 31,401
- 7,370
- 1,130
thewanderer
The Wanderer
[/QUOTE]
Very good points. I would add that the Republicans should also be looking at the results of the election and realize that the voters really are getting tired of the establishment and want different candidates. Maybe they would run higher quality candidates.[/QUOTE]
And that goes for both parties. Bernie Sanders should have been a forgotten byline by the 2nd month of the primaries, but he made a strong enough run at the nomination that one has to wonder what might have been if the DNC hadn't been so corrupt that they stuck their thumbs on the scale for Clinton. 2016 was about the establishment vs the people, on both sides.
I agree that it is regrettable that we can't find anti-establishment candidates that aren't ridiculous. Seems like your choices are either Same-Old-Same-Old or a complete unicycle-riding, big-red-nose-wearing clown.
I also think it's significant that the side that was sufficiently agitated enough to overcome the inertia of the establishment was the Republican side.
But here's where I fear they may never run better candidates: I honestly do not think that Republicans wish to be the majority party. I think the individual establishment pubs like McCain and McConnell and Ryan etc., want to keep their jobs, of course, but I don't think they want the Republican Party as a whole to win out (which tells you just how far behind the Democratic Party has left a major chunk of America since the Republicans don't even want to be a majority, yet they are beating Democrats). I think that they have to try too hard to come up with excuses for not following through with their agenda when they have the Senate, the WH, and the House.
They wrote, what, 5-6 different Repeal Obamacare bills when he was still the POTUS and there was no chance of it being signed into law? When they have both houses of Congress and the WH I'm supposed to believe that suddenly they can't agree on enough to write one more? Or for that matter, they can't just use one of the ones they already wrote?
Bullshit.
I don't have a tinfoil hat, I'm not a 9/11 Truther, and I'm not an Obama Birther. But I have become convinced that there really is a group of really rich people that actually control most of what our politicians do. Maybe not as a cohesive body, like a group of Bilderburgers hiding 2 miles underneath the Arizona desert in a secret bunker advancing an agreed-upon agenda—maybe it's more just like individual special interests. But I am convinced that corporately or separately, these people pull the strings.
And they want controllable masses. They want the Great Unwashed dependent on the government they control. They do not really want you to have guns. They do not want you to have choices about things like health insurance. They seem to be going sour on the idea of allowing free speech, too.
And the Republicans clearly do their bidding. The Democrats do too, but it's not obvious because they advertise a leftist agenda whereas the Republicans say they want more freedom and personal responsibility, then do something completely different once they get in office. Much easier for them to blame lack of advancing that agenda on majority Democrats.
Very good points. I would add that the Republicans should also be looking at the results of the election and realize that the voters really are getting tired of the establishment and want different candidates. Maybe they would run higher quality candidates.[/QUOTE]
And that goes for both parties. Bernie Sanders should have been a forgotten byline by the 2nd month of the primaries, but he made a strong enough run at the nomination that one has to wonder what might have been if the DNC hadn't been so corrupt that they stuck their thumbs on the scale for Clinton. 2016 was about the establishment vs the people, on both sides.
I agree that it is regrettable that we can't find anti-establishment candidates that aren't ridiculous. Seems like your choices are either Same-Old-Same-Old or a complete unicycle-riding, big-red-nose-wearing clown.
I also think it's significant that the side that was sufficiently agitated enough to overcome the inertia of the establishment was the Republican side.
But here's where I fear they may never run better candidates: I honestly do not think that Republicans wish to be the majority party. I think the individual establishment pubs like McCain and McConnell and Ryan etc., want to keep their jobs, of course, but I don't think they want the Republican Party as a whole to win out (which tells you just how far behind the Democratic Party has left a major chunk of America since the Republicans don't even want to be a majority, yet they are beating Democrats). I think that they have to try too hard to come up with excuses for not following through with their agenda when they have the Senate, the WH, and the House.
They wrote, what, 5-6 different Repeal Obamacare bills when he was still the POTUS and there was no chance of it being signed into law? When they have both houses of Congress and the WH I'm supposed to believe that suddenly they can't agree on enough to write one more? Or for that matter, they can't just use one of the ones they already wrote?
Bullshit.
I don't have a tinfoil hat, I'm not a 9/11 Truther, and I'm not an Obama Birther. But I have become convinced that there really is a group of really rich people that actually control most of what our politicians do. Maybe not as a cohesive body, like a group of Bilderburgers hiding 2 miles underneath the Arizona desert in a secret bunker advancing an agreed-upon agenda—maybe it's more just like individual special interests. But I am convinced that corporately or separately, these people pull the strings.
And they want controllable masses. They want the Great Unwashed dependent on the government they control. They do not really want you to have guns. They do not want you to have choices about things like health insurance. They seem to be going sour on the idea of allowing free speech, too.
And the Republicans clearly do their bidding. The Democrats do too, but it's not obvious because they advertise a leftist agenda whereas the Republicans say they want more freedom and personal responsibility, then do something completely different once they get in office. Much easier for them to blame lack of advancing that agenda on majority Democrats.
JoeB131
Diamond Member
I don't think he'll complete four. Sooo many ways to get him out, and Republicans hate him as much as Democrats.
JoeB131
Diamond Member
Except she won a free election by 3 million votes. She lost in the racist anachronism from the 18th century.
So either you argue that Trump manipulated a bad system better, that's fine. But THE PEOPLE SAID NO. The People got this one right. The system got it wrong.
Except - ONE MORE TIME- He got no more votes than Romney got in those states, either.
He won the exact same inbred, uneducated, racist, stupid White people who've been voting for Republicans since Nixon.
The people I blame are not the dumb as stump people who vote Republicans when the Banksters are foreclosing on their double wide. You can't cure stupid.
I blame the people who voted for Johnson and Stein because they wanted to show how "above it all" they were.
Nonsense. Sanders would have beaten Trump. Easily.
Because he new how to talk to the White Working Class and Hillary didn't.
Or maybe they realize that running as "Republican Lite" isn't going to make things any better. Here's the thing, the Democrats won the Senate and House in 2006 by running a lot of "Republican Lite" guys and they were utterly useless in a fight. It's why we got "RomneyCare II" instead of what we should have done, Single Payer.
You see, demographics are on the Democrats side in the long run. YOu can't keep papering over it with gerrymandering and saying, "See, we won this state with almost no people in it, but the few people we have here are white!"
JoeB131
Diamond Member
Whoopie. They'll all be citizens soon enough... citizens who will never vote for your side.
Soupnazi630
Gold Member
- Dec 9, 2013
- 19,185
- 5,622
- 265
No way to get him out sorry the Russian collusion thing is an epic failure.
thewanderer
The Wanderer
"Except she won a free election by 3 million votes."
She did? Hillary Clinton won the election?
Oh, I know which one you mean...she won the CHEESE election.
The one in which Hillary Clinton is NACHO president.
She did? Hillary Clinton won the election?
Oh, I know which one you mean...she won the CHEESE election.
The one in which Hillary Clinton is NACHO president.
JoeB131
Diamond Member
They don't have to. Obstruction of Justice.
Again, no real evidence that happens, but the sooner we take this country away from the Right Wing, the better.
Grow up. YOu can't go around claiming that Trump won some kind of mandate for change or changed any minds when he won on a technicality.
The people said no.
Technicality, it is to laugh. He won by the only metric that counts.
Soupnazi630
Gold Member
- Dec 9, 2013
- 19,185
- 5,622
- 265
No evidence of obstruction either you lose and he is your president for keeps
JoeB131
Diamond Member
He fired Comey. Obstruction.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
The thread where you can document all the good that we get from being kind to immigrsants.- Started by the watcher
- Replies: 6
-
-
-
-
[Columbia U] Mahmoud Khalil/Joseph Massad's "bibol" of 'balestine'- Started by Sayaras
- Replies: 2
