Honestly, it seems like last year Trump would say something insane every month or so and everybody freaks out. Now, it appears it is every single week. Is it because the midterms are coming and he feels the need to rally up his base?
Not sure if insane is the correct therm but I wouldn't exactly say it's logical to give the rich a tax cut, enable the banks to do their high risk stock gamble with people's money ( which caused the financial crisis very recently), cut back on access to affordable medical care for the citizens and then start a trade war with the rest of the world when the debts is as large as it is.
Not sure what you are referring to? but no one hated Obama and he sure as, an amen in church, got a respectful treatment from all the media on the "right"
WTF, are you serious?
Of course, you would say that.
But Obama did not fill up 24/7 shows on the "major mainstream media"
Why do you think that the trust in the media is at an all-time low now, 63% of Americans distrust the media.
Oh god, I'm so out.
Not sure what you are referring to? but no one hated Obama and he sure as, an amen in church, got a respectful treatment from all the media on the "right"
WTF, are you serious?
Of course, you would say that.
But Obama did not fill up 24/7 shows on the "major mainstream media"
Why do you think that the trust in the media is at an all-time low now, 63% of Americans distrust the media.
Oh god, I'm so out.
Ok, still does not change the fact that critic is not the same as the constant non-stop attacks we see now.
I can not recall any president of America ever being treated like this.
WTF, are you serious?
Of course, you would say that.
But Obama did not fill up 24/7 shows on the "major mainstream media"
Why do you think that the trust in the media is at an all-time low now, 63% of Americans distrust the media.
Oh god, I'm so out.
Ok, still does not change the fact that critic is not the same as the constant non-stop attacks we see now.
I can not recall any president of America ever being treated like this.
Because never in America have we had in a clown in office. This is abnormal and 100 years from now people will be laughing at this period. Just like conservatism in the 1860's and their love for slavery. History looks back always as conservatism in the worst of ways.
It's really funny how conservatives try to make themselves feel good by somehow thinking they are in the right side of history, but no. You'll be frowned upon.
WTF, are you serious?
Of course, you would say that.
But Obama did not fill up 24/7 shows on the "major mainstream media"
Why do you think that the trust in the media is at an all-time low now, 63% of Americans distrust the media.
Oh god, I'm so out.
Ok, still does not change the fact that critic is not the same as the constant non-stop attacks we see now.
I can not recall any president of America ever being treated like this.
Because never in America have we had in a clown in office. This is abnormal and 100 years from now people will be laughing at this period. Just like conservatism in the 1860's and their love for slavery. History looks back always as conservatism in the worst of ways.
It's really funny how conservatives try to make themselves feel good by somehow thinking they are in the right side of history, but no. You'll be frowned upon.
So because you think the guy is a "clown" it´s ok to attack him constantly and not accept the will of the people? you know like in a democracy.
Or run "impeachnow" ads on mainstream media against a sitting president outside of campaign season, with no disregard of the actual facts, and so far nothing has been found that would warrant a impeachment.
And the right side of history? WTH are you on about? Sure we may see a reversion of some policies when the next president is elected, but a majority of what Trump has done, do not go against any Republican agenda, not even the "separation of illegals attempting to lie their way into the us" The only difference you will see is a major meltdown of the media and a lot of pundits out of work.
So you think that America has headed right under Obama?
But America has not headed right,
It´s just the world that has headed a lot more left so that the normal moderate now seems to be further right.
Weakening unions and employers(I hope I am not mixing the words here) rights, aren't those typical right wing ideas?
Well, unions are seen as a free market hinderance, so not just conservatives are against it.
Which is also why the UK got rid of them.
You're not really answering the question.
Russia was only held in check by the US.
What other countries do you see having the military power to actually pose a "check" against the Russians?
Certainly not the French or Germans and the UK, well they would have a decent shot, but they also don´t have the military strength and neither does the 3 combined.
And who said anything about them doing what Trump wants? remember we are only 1½ year away from the start of the next presidential election.
Russia do not have the funding for a war. They can launch deadly and effective attacks, but their economy won't let them continue to do so for long.
So you think that America has headed right under Obama?
But America has not headed right,
It´s just the world that has headed a lot more left so that the normal moderate now seems to be further right.
Weakening unions and employers(I hope I am not mixing the words here) rights, aren't those typical right wing ideas?
Well, unions are seen as a free market hinderance, so not just conservatives are against it.
Which is also why the UK got rid of them.
You're not really answering the question.
Russia was only held in check by the US.
What other countries do you see having the military power to actually pose a "check" against the Russians?
Certainly not the French or Germans and the UK, well they would have a decent shot, but they also don´t have the military strength and neither does the 3 combined.
And who said anything about them doing what Trump wants? remember we are only 1½ year away from the start of the next presidential election.
Russia do not have the funding for a war. They can launch deadly and effective attacks, but their economy won't let them continue to do so for long.
Hmm, not sure what you were asking than in the first part, weakening unions is not a conservative agenda, it´s a libertarian "Free market" agenda.
And if Russia goes to war, the problem is not money, the problem is Nukes and they have plenty of nukes.
Not sure what you are referring to? but no one hated Obama and he sure as, an amen in church, got a respectful treatment from all the media on the "right"
WTF, are you serious?
Of course, you would say that.
But Obama did not fill up 24/7 shows on the "major mainstream media"
Why do you think that the trust in the media is at an all-time low now, 63% of Americans distrust the media.
That's all the right wing talking heads did for 8 years .You really are a very biased individual.
Not sure what you are referring to? but no one hated Obama and he sure as, an amen in church, got a respectful treatment from all the media on the "right"
WTF, are you serious?
Of course, you would say that.
But Obama did not fill up 24/7 shows on the "major mainstream media"
Why do you think that the trust in the media is at an all-time low now, 63% of Americans distrust the media.
That's all the right wing talking heads did for 8 years .You really are a very biased individual.
Yeah, pretty much this. If you think that what the right wing media did to Obama for eight years is constructive criticism, but what mainstream media is doing to Trump is an attack then you are either proudly biased or completely delusional. Obama did nothing but extend olive branches to the right wing, he ran on a platform of bipartisanship both times, he tried to consult with Republicans on every single piece of proposed legislation, and all he got in return was stonewalling and name-calling. Trump has been openly antagonistic to Democrats and the press, he's called for measures to punish outlets that say anything negative about him, he's done nothing to reach across the aisle, he endorsed a candidate that body-slammed a reporter for chrisake. That's an actual physical attack that Trump condones, and Jac is saying that it's the left that is attacking Trump? Insane.
I see a man who's got a second term pretty much in his pocket and a party that dominates every instance of power and seems to have enough votes to keep those instances for at least another round.
On the other hand, we have a Democratic Party that seems to believe that moving to the right on every single issue somehow will weaken the Republican Party. Democrats cheer for war, deregulations, and are willing to work on bipartisan "solutions" for everything. They refer to anyone without a master's degree as a deplorable and want nothing to do with blue collar workers who, in theory, should be their natural constituency. Also, for some reason, they seem to be more concerned with winning hashtags wars on Twitter than actually winning elections.
I see a man who's got a second term pretty much in his pocket and a party that dominates every instance of power and seems to have enough votes to keep those instances for at least another round.
On the other hand, we have a Democratic Party that seems to believe that moving to the right on every single issue somehow will weaken the Republican Party. Democrats cheer for war, deregulations, and are willing to work on bipartisan "solutions" for everything. They refer to anyone without a master's degree as a deplorable and want nothing to do with blue collar workers who, in theory, should be their natural constituency. Also, for some reason, they seem to be more concerned with winning hashtags wars on Twitter than actually winning elections.
You won one election in 2016. You've been losing all the special elections in 2018. Stop being delusional.
I see a man who's got a second term pretty much in his pocket and a party that dominates every instance of power and seems to have enough votes to keep those instances for at least another round.
On the other hand, we have a Democratic Party that seems to believe that moving to the right on every single issue somehow will weaken the Republican Party. Democrats cheer for war, deregulations, and are willing to work on bipartisan "solutions" for everything. They refer to anyone without a master's degree as a deplorable and want nothing to do with blue collar workers who, in theory, should be their natural constituency. Also, for some reason, they seem to be more concerned with winning hashtags wars on Twitter than actually winning elections.
You won one election in 2016. You've been losing all the special elections in 2018. Stop being delusional.
That is actually not true, the only important special election they have lost is the Moore race, the others Reps won.
I see a man who's got a second term pretty much in his pocket and a party that dominates every instance of power and seems to have enough votes to keep those instances for at least another round.
On the other hand, we have a Democratic Party that seems to believe that moving to the right on every single issue somehow will weaken the Republican Party. Democrats cheer for war, deregulations, and are willing to work on bipartisan "solutions" for everything. They refer to anyone without a master's degree as a deplorable and want nothing to do with blue collar workers who, in theory, should be their natural constituency. Also, for some reason, they seem to be more concerned with winning hashtags wars on Twitter than actually winning elections.
You won one election in 2016. You've been losing all the special elections in 2018. Stop being delusional.
That is actually not true, the only important special election they have lost is the Moore race, the others Reps won.
define what you mean by 'important' and let me just guess..no you first I think I know your answer
I see a man who's got a second term pretty much in his pocket and a party that dominates every instance of power and seems to have enough votes to keep those instances for at least another round.
On the other hand, we have a Democratic Party that seems to believe that moving to the right on every single issue somehow will weaken the Republican Party. Democrats cheer for war, deregulations, and are willing to work on bipartisan "solutions" for everything. They refer to anyone without a master's degree as a deplorable and want nothing to do with blue collar workers who, in theory, should be their natural constituency. Also, for some reason, they seem to be more concerned with winning hashtags wars on Twitter than actually winning elections.
You won one election in 2016. You've been losing all the special elections in 2018. Stop being delusional.
That is actually not true, the only important special election they have lost is the Moore race, the others Reps won.
define what you mean by 'important' and let me just guess..no you first I think I know your answer
What do you think I mean is important, and before you "guess" remember that we have 2 important chambers.
I see a man who's got a second term pretty much in his pocket and a party that dominates every instance of power and seems to have enough votes to keep those instances for at least another round.
On the other hand, we have a Democratic Party that seems to believe that moving to the right on every single issue somehow will weaken the Republican Party. Democrats cheer for war, deregulations, and are willing to work on bipartisan "solutions" for everything. They refer to anyone without a master's degree as a deplorable and want nothing to do with blue collar workers who, in theory, should be their natural constituency. Also, for some reason, they seem to be more concerned with winning hashtags wars on Twitter than actually winning elections.
LOL, you should do standup.
I see a man who's got a second term pretty much in his pocket and a party that dominates every instance of power and seems to have enough votes to keep those instances for at least another round.
On the other hand, we have a Democratic Party that seems to believe that moving to the right on every single issue somehow will weaken the Republican Party. Democrats cheer for war, deregulations, and are willing to work on bipartisan "solutions" for everything. They refer to anyone without a master's degree as a deplorable and want nothing to do with blue collar workers who, in theory, should be their natural constituency. Also, for some reason, they seem to be more concerned with winning hashtags wars on Twitter than actually winning elections.
LOL, you should do standup.
So are you of the opinion that no matter who the Democrats chose to run, they will win?
Or who do you think would be able to beat Trump, remember the key is to convince the independent, not the democratic voters.
You won one election in 2016. You've been losing all the special elections in 2018. Stop being delusional.
That is actually not true, the only important special election they have lost is the Moore race, the others Reps won.
define what you mean by 'important' and let me just guess..no you first I think I know your answer
What do you think I mean is important, and before you "guess" remember that we have 2 important chambers.
nope..becuase you will tailor your response to what I say,
you tell me what you meant by 'important' specifically to your comment. not 'important' in general, not conceptually important. not 'well that is important' but rahter specicifically what did you mean by important in your exact specific statement in that context. and to put a solid nail in your point you could illustrate how its 'the only important' one. knock it out of the park! with the 'only' part
go!
@needhealing: The **** do you mean with "you"? I'm practically a communist!
You won one election in 2016. You've been losing all the special elections in 2018. Stop being delusional.
That is actually not true, the only important special election they have lost is the Moore race, the others Reps won.
define what you mean by 'important' and let me just guess..no you first I think I know your answer
What do you think I mean is important, and before you "guess" remember that we have 2 important chambers.
nope..becuase you will tailor your response to what I say,
you tell me what you meant by 'important' specifically to your comment. not 'important' in general, not conceptually important. not 'well that is important' but rahter specicifically what did you mean by important in your exact specific statement in that context. and to put a solid nail in your point you could illustrate how its 'the only important' one. knock it out of the park! with the 'only' part
go!
Eh?
I already pointed out what was important, again the Democrats had a major chance to gain a foothold and even control the chamber, but they lost out.
@theone86: Prove me wrong. Or just wait and see. Midterms are around the corner and the Republicans have a solid 30-ish percent, while the Democrats have no discernible strategy to move out of their comfort zone, and even within their comfort zone, all you see is apathy. Trump won with that 30-ish percent that he has now, and that 30-ish percent won the Republican Party everything in 2016.
Hmm, not sure what you were asking than in the first part, weakening unions is not a conservative agenda, it´s a libertarian "Free market" agenda.
And if Russia goes to war, the problem is not money, the problem is Nukes and they have plenty of nukes.
Wait, do Republicans espouse a free-market ideology or not?
define what you mean by 'important' and let me just guess..no you first I think I know your answer
What do you think I mean is important, and before you "guess" remember that we have 2 important chambers.
nope..becuase you will tailor your response to what I say,
you tell me what you meant by 'important' specifically to your comment. not 'important' in general, not conceptually important. not 'well that is important' but rahter specicifically what did you mean by important in your exact specific statement in that context. and to put a solid nail in your point you could illustrate how its 'the only important' one. knock it out of the park! with the 'only' part
go!
Eh?
I already pointed out what was important, again the Democrats had a major chance to gain a foothold and even control the chamber, but they lost out.
how was the election of Roy Moore the ONLYimportant special election that the GOP lost and why was it important for Roy Moore specifically to win?
define what you mean by 'important' and let me just guess..no you first I think I know your answer
What do you think I mean is important, and before you "guess" remember that we have 2 important chambers.
nope..becuase you will tailor your response to what I say,
you tell me what you meant by 'important' specifically to your comment. not 'important' in general, not conceptually important. not 'well that is important' but rahter specicifically what did you mean by important in your exact specific statement in that context. and to put a solid nail in your point you could illustrate how its 'the only important' one. knock it out of the park! with the 'only' part
go!
Eh?
I already pointed out what was important, again the Democrats had a major chance to gain a foothold and even control the chamber, but they lost out.
how was the election of Roy Moore the ONLYimportant special election that the GOP lost and why was it important for Roy Moore specifically to win?
Again i already pointed it out, not sure what you are having a trouble understanding.
Hmm, not sure what you were asking than in the first part, weakening unions is not a conservative agenda, it´s a libertarian "Free market" agenda.
And if Russia goes to war, the problem is not money, the problem is Nukes and they have plenty of nukes.
Wait, do Republicans espouse a free-market ideology or not?
lol weakening unions isn't a conservative agenda. This is fucking classic, just wait for conservatives to gut unions with Janus v. AFSCME soon.
He lives in an alternate reality.
Hmm, not sure what you were asking than in the first part, weakening unions is not a conservative agenda, it´s a libertarian "Free market" agenda.
And if Russia goes to war, the problem is not money, the problem is Nukes and they have plenty of nukes.
Wait, do Republicans espouse a free-market ideology or not?
Of course, the Republicans are for a Free Market.
That does not mean your libertarian "free market" though.
What do you think I mean is important, and before you "guess" remember that we have 2 important chambers.
nope..becuase you will tailor your response to what I say,
you tell me what you meant by 'important' specifically to your comment. not 'important' in general, not conceptually important. not 'well that is important' but rahter specicifically what did you mean by important in your exact specific statement in that context. and to put a solid nail in your point you could illustrate how its 'the only important' one. knock it out of the park! with the 'only' part
go!
Eh?
I already pointed out what was important, again the Democrats had a major chance to gain a foothold and even control the chamber, but they lost out.
how was the election of Roy Moore the ONLYimportant special election that the GOP lost and why was it important for Roy Moore specifically to win?
Again i already pointed it out, not sure what you are having a trouble understanding.
you explained why it was important for Roy Moore to win and why it was the ONLY IMPORTANT special election that the GOP lost.
just repeat it here and I find it intresting how you dont find it ironic given who Roy Moore is specifically
Hmm, not sure what you were asking than in the first part, weakening unions is not a conservative agenda, it´s a libertarian "Free market" agenda.
And if Russia goes to war, the problem is not money, the problem is Nukes and they have plenty of nukes.
Wait, do Republicans espouse a free-market ideology or not?
Of course, the Republicans are for a Free Market.
That does not mean your libertarian "free market" though.
If you're making the argument that Republicans don't and/or should not weaken unions, you should probably tell that to the party. They haven't received the message.
The left and right have both gone crazy and continue to push the limit of insanity. It’s delusional to think that calling one side crazy somehow makes the other side less crazy.
So yeah y’all crazy is basically what I’m sayin.
Welcome to Political Gamers, where you can be called SJW from one side, and a Nazi from the other, and all in the same thread! Enjoy your stay.
To be honest, I'd rather be a social justice warrior fighting for equality than a Nazi that enjoys putting kids in cages.
I like being neither. They’re so similar in how fascist-like they talk. No thanks!
Hmm, not sure what you were asking than in the first part, weakening unions is not a conservative agenda, it´s a libertarian "Free market" agenda.
And if Russia goes to war, the problem is not money, the problem is Nukes and they have plenty of nukes.
Wait, do Republicans espouse a free-market ideology or not?
Of course, the Republicans are for a Free Market.
That does not mean your libertarian "free market" though.
If you're making the argument that Republicans don't and/or should not weaken unions, you should probably tell that to the party. They haven't received the message.
Not making that argument, i am pointing out that the best course is to abolish unions completly not "weaken" them.
you explained why it was important for Roy Moore to win and why it was the ONLY IMPORTANT special election that the GOP lost.
just repeat it here and I find it intresting how you dont find it ironic given who Roy Moore is specifically
Again I said that Moore was the only one the Republicans lost, the 5 other house races they won.
Hmm, not sure what you were asking than in the first part, weakening unions is not a conservative agenda, it´s a libertarian "Free market" agenda.
And if Russia goes to war, the problem is not money, the problem is Nukes and they have plenty of nukes.
Wait, do Republicans espouse a free-market ideology or not?
Of course, the Republicans are for a Free Market.
That does not mean your libertarian "free market" though.
If you're making the argument that Republicans don't and/or should not weaken unions, you should probably tell that to the party. They haven't received the message.
Not making that argument, i am pointing out that the best course is to abolish unions completly not "weaken" them.
So your argument to Horgen was... what? That weakening unions isn't a conservative ideal because instead they want to destroy them?
Wait, do Republicans espouse a free-market ideology or not?
Of course, the Republicans are for a Free Market.
That does not mean your libertarian "free market" though.
If you're making the argument that Republicans don't and/or should not weaken unions, you should probably tell that to the party. They haven't received the message.
Not making that argument, i am pointing out that the best course is to abolish unions completly not "weaken" them.
So your argument to Horgen was... what? That weakening unions isn't a conservative ideal because instead they want to destroy them?
Well, weakening means leaving them in place, but with a limited range.
Which is not the case, like in the UK they need to be abolished since they are a hindrance to the free market.
Of course, the Republicans are for a Free Market.
That does not mean your libertarian "free market" though.
If you're making the argument that Republicans don't and/or should not weaken unions, you should probably tell that to the party. They haven't received the message.
Not making that argument, i am pointing out that the best course is to abolish unions completly not "weaken" them.
So your argument to Horgen was... what? That weakening unions isn't a conservative ideal because instead they want to destroy them?
Well, weakening means leaving them in place, but with a limited range.
Which is not the case, like in the UK they need to be abolished since they are a hindrance to the free market.
True, Why ensure workers have some rights in the workplace when you can make them work longer hours for little pay and kick out those who protest. That is the capitalist way.
Not making that argument, i am pointing out that the best course is to abolish unions completly not "weaken" them.
So your argument to Horgen was... what? That weakening unions isn't a conservative ideal because instead they want to destroy them?
Well, weakening means leaving them in place, but with a limited range.
Which is not the case, like in the UK they need to be abolished since they are a hindrance to the free market.
Just when I think conservatives couldn't go any lower they want to abolish rights for employees. Despicable.
Wait, do Republicans espouse a free-market ideology or not?
Of course, the Republicans are for a Free Market.
That does not mean your libertarian "free market" though.
If you're making the argument that Republicans don't and/or should not weaken unions, you should probably tell that to the party. They haven't received the message.
Not making that argument, i am pointing out that the best course is to abolish unions completly not "weaken" them.
you explained why it was important for Roy Moore to win and why it was the ONLY IMPORTANT special election that the GOP lost.
just repeat it here and I find it intresting how you dont find it ironic given who Roy Moore is specifically
Again I said that Moore was the only one the Republicans lost, the 5 other house races they won.
yeah I know what you said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That is actually not true, the only important special election they have lost is the Moore race, the others Reps won.
'the only important special election that they lost'
1. why is it the ONLY IMPORTANT
2. why were the others not imporant?
3. why was Moore winning the important outcome for the GOP? (yes I know Moore lost my question is why do you feel it was important for him to win for the GOP). that should have been a biaparistian win for him to not win
jesus christ you only draw more attention to what you said
@tryit: He's not going to reply to that. He evades direct questions.
@theone86: Prove me wrong. Or just wait and see. Midterms are around the corner and the Republicans have a solid 30-ish percent, while the Democrats have no discernible strategy to move out of their comfort zone, and even within their comfort zone, all you see is apathy. Trump won with that 30-ish percent that he has now, and that 30-ish percent won the Republican Party everything in 2016.
Prove yourself right first. No offense, but 95% of what you said is complete horseshit, a bunch of empty rhetoric with no connection to actual facts. If all you want to do is live in your delusional little dream world where everything you see conveniently proves that Democrats would win if only they would take up each and every one of your own political positions with absolutely no variation then go ahead. I choose to continue living in the real world, where this is still a divided country with diverse constituencies that can't be won over by just beating your fists on the podium.
@theone86: Here's what I'll do: I'll upload a screenshot of what you just said to my cloud service and I'll wait until the midterm elections. After that, we'll see. In the mean time, let's just keep in mind that I never offended you, which is more than what can be said about you.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/germanys-largest-auto-makers-back-abolition-of-eu-u-s-car-import-tariffs-1529492027
Germany’s Largest Auto Makers Back Abolition of EU-U.S. Car Import Tariffs
German auto industry agrees with Trump's call for zero tariff!.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-20/auto-tariff-truce-with-eu-said-to-be-pitched-by-u-s-ambassador
Grenell will deliver the message to Trump administration officials following meetings he held with major German carmakers including Daimler AG, BMW AG and Volkswagen AG, the person said. The framework seeks for President Donald Trump to refrain from slapping a threatened 25 percent import duty on autos made in Europe in exchange for the European Union dropping the bloc’s 10 percent levy on cars and light trucks imported from the U.S., the person said.
Germany offered to drop it's 10 percent tariff on US made cars in exchange for not applying US's 25 percent tariff on EU made cars i.e. German auto industry agrees on Trump's tariff reciprocity. EU is slow while Germany auto industry and Trump's trade talks are faster.
@theone86: Here's what I'll do: I'll upload a screenshot of what you just said to my cloud service and I'll wait until the midterm elections. After that, we'll see. In the mean time, let's just keep in mind that I never offended you, which is more than what can be said about you.
I wasn't talking about your prediction, I was talking about everything you said. Pure, grade A, ****ing bullshit. People like you are the problem. You're worse than Trumpettes. You disagree with everything he stands for, but you empower him because you don't get every single thing you want from Democrats. You're a baby whining for a bottle. You see what's going on with the Supreme Court? All the 5-4 decisions? That's your fault. That happened because people like you couldn't swallow your pride and vote for someone you actually agreed with on most issues. Did you see that Anthony Kennedy is retiring? Trump gets to appoint two Supreme Court justices, that happened because people like you can't see the bigger picture. You're having wet dreams of progressive domination of elections once a major party adopts a true progressive platform? You can say goodbye to that, because Republicans have free reign to gerrymander, suppress votes, and prevent reform thanks to Trump's election. You think that even if a progressive party somehow got elected they could pass progressive legislation? Not with the most conservative supreme court in history having a permanent 5-4 or 6-3 majority. They've already rolled back protections for unions, voting rights, and Roe v. Wade is next. You want to know what a progressive government's accomplishments would be? Take a look back at the Roosevelt administration's fight with the Supreme Court. People like you sold out the only real chance to take this country further left for your own damn pride. It was naive, short-sighted, and downright moronic. Enjoy the Christian theocracy that's on its way, you helped build it.
@theone86: Here's what I'll do: I'll upload a screenshot of what you just said to my cloud service and I'll wait until the midterm elections. After that, we'll see. In the mean time, let's just keep in mind that I never offended you, which is more than what can be said about you.
does that just mean you are more sensitive is all?
@theone86: Here's what I'll do: I'll upload a screenshot of what you just said to my cloud service and I'll wait until the midterm elections. After that, we'll see. In the mean time, let's just keep in mind that I never offended you, which is more than what can be said about you.
I wasn't talking about your prediction, I was talking about everything you said. Pure, grade A, ****ing bullshit. People like you are the problem. You're worse than Trumpettes. You disagree with everything he stands for, but you empower him because you don't get every single thing you want from Democrats. You're a baby whining for a bottle. You see what's going on with the Supreme Court? All the 5-4 decisions? That's your fault. That happened because people like you couldn't swallow your pride and vote for someone you actually agreed with on most issues. Did you see that Anthony Kennedy is retiring? Trump gets to appoint two Supreme Court justices, that happened because people like you can't see the bigger picture. You're having wet dreams of progressive domination of elections once a major party adopts a true progressive platform? You can say goodbye to that, because Republicans have free reign to gerrymander, suppress votes, and prevent reform thanks to Trump's election. You think that even if a progressive party somehow got elected they could pass progressive legislation? Not with the most conservative supreme court in history having a permanent 5-4 or 6-3 majority. They've already rolled back protections for unions, voting rights, and Roe v. Wade is next. You want to know what a progressive government's accomplishments would be? Take a look back at the Roosevelt administration's fight with the Supreme Court. People like you sold out the only real chance to take this country further left for your own damn pride. It was naive, short-sighted, and downright moronic. Enjoy the Christian theocracy that's on its way, you helped build it.
Geez, even if I wanted to be THAT harmful and evil, I wouldn't be able to, because I'm not American.
Then again, even if I were, you really aren't even trying to win me over, which should be easy, because I'm on the left, the far left, in fact. Here's a tip, sport: Stop blaming the people for not voting for your shitty Democratic candidates and start blaming the shitty candidates. Maybe then the party will consider giving other people a chance; people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who, by the way, just won the primary!
You see? Good things can happen despite all the horrible messages that this foreign devil -yours truly- is posting on a video game forum!
@tryit: Oh, no. I just try not to be a dick. And, sometimes, you kind of have to remind other people that you, in fact, are trying not to be a dick and that they should give not being a dick a try every now and then.
@theone86: Here's what I'll do: I'll upload a screenshot of what you just said to my cloud service and I'll wait until the midterm elections. After that, we'll see. In the mean time, let's just keep in mind that I never offended you, which is more than what can be said about you.
I wasn't talking about your prediction, I was talking about everything you said. Pure, grade A, ****ing bullshit. People like you are the problem. You're worse than Trumpettes. You disagree with everything he stands for, but you empower him because you don't get every single thing you want from Democrats. You're a baby whining for a bottle. You see what's going on with the Supreme Court? All the 5-4 decisions? That's your fault. That happened because people like you couldn't swallow your pride and vote for someone you actually agreed with on most issues. Did you see that Anthony Kennedy is retiring? Trump gets to appoint two Supreme Court justices, that happened because people like you can't see the bigger picture. You're having wet dreams of progressive domination of elections once a major party adopts a true progressive platform? You can say goodbye to that, because Republicans have free reign to gerrymander, suppress votes, and prevent reform thanks to Trump's election. You think that even if a progressive party somehow got elected they could pass progressive legislation? Not with the most conservative supreme court in history having a permanent 5-4 or 6-3 majority. They've already rolled back protections for unions, voting rights, and Roe v. Wade is next. You want to know what a progressive government's accomplishments would be? Take a look back at the Roosevelt administration's fight with the Supreme Court. People like you sold out the only real chance to take this country further left for your own damn pride. It was naive, short-sighted, and downright moronic. Enjoy the Christian theocracy that's on its way, you helped build it.
Geez, even if I wanted to be THAT harmful and evil, I wouldn't be able to, because I'm not American.
Then again, even if I were, you really aren't even trying to win me over, which should be easy, because I'm on the left, the far left, in fact. Here's a tip, sport: Stop blaming the people for not voting for your shitty Democratic candidates and start blaming the shitty candidates. Maybe then the party will consider giving other people a chance; people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who, by the way, just won the primary!
You see? Good things can happen despite all the horrible messages that this foreign devil -yours truly- is posting on a video game forum!
Rhetoric matters more than votes, and rhetoric like yours hurts progressive politics in America. It's even worse given that you clearly don't understand the minutia of our political system. That I can forgive, but running your mouth like you do when you don't have all the facts I can't. And I will never stop blaming people who go out and actively shame viable candidates for not being ideologically pure enough. It's a shitty and self-defeating tactic, and it completely ignores the reality of the American electorate.
As for your candidate, she won a primary, not a general election. If she loses I'm going to be right back here rubbing your nose in it. And regardless of whether she wins or loses, which I don't care about by the way, it's not going to make a difference. It's not going to make a difference because even if a candidate you personally approved miraculously won in enough seats to give them a majority, they're still facing an uphill battle in the Supreme Court with any legislation they pass, again, thanks to people like you. Here's the difference between you and me, if a socialist wins I'm fine with it. I probably agree with most of her positions, and even if I didn't I probably agree with her general outlook and trust her to act in good faith as part of the Democratic Party. If someone wins whom you disagree with on certain issues but nonetheless shares your general perspective, you throw a hissy fit and do your best to sabotage them even, maybe even especially, if it means that a FAR more dangerous and extremist candidate is going to be put into office. You are selfish, petty, arrogant, short-sighted, naive, and completely ignorant of any consequences of your actions. When someone finally calls you on your shit you deflect and pass the blame. People like you are a cancer to society.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment