Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

01-24-2017 , 08:23 PM
Haha you guys replying to that Sushy guy.
01-24-2017 , 08:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BroadwaySushy
California has the highest number of illegal immigrants, so do the math.
And?
01-24-2017 , 08:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eurodp
It still amazes me how many of you Clinton supporters would have preferred your precious candidate never get attacked during the primary and the fact that she did is why she lost. This argument still pops up on twitter from "prominent" people. If Clinton needed a safe space to win the presidency then maybe she shouldn't have ran in the first place and was a weak candidate! Even 538 tried to quantify contentious primaries to see if they correlated with losses and they found nothing. Don't even need to look further than the Republican primary to see how insanely fractured and nasty that was and yet they won.

Who is Zedd? Like the EDM artist?
You deserve Trump. You truly do.

She beat Sanders. And all you guys can say is "rigged" like Trump. And she is a bad candidate. A bad candidate your dude lost to.

Not electing a megalomaniac is more important than tar and feathering candidates because they happen to be capitalist in a capitalist country.
01-24-2017 , 08:25 PM
Please never ban Sushy. He's our window into **** Trump supporters actually believe. Otherwise I have to text my religious aunt for the low down.
01-24-2017 , 08:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul D
This is kaka.

Sanders' supporters promoted the notion Hillary Clinton couldn't be trusted. Guess what? People who are liberal (some I know) didn't vote for Clinton because of that crap. If you couldn't trust Clinton and voted against her you are responsible for Trump. If you wanted the DNC to be reformed besides DWS getting booted in the moment. It should have waited. Congrats, you did Limbaugh's job for him.

You can read all the Chomsky or Zedd you like, and whine about "elites", and other populist nonsense all you want. But if you promoted the "shillary" nonsense, you sent a clear message that you didn't give a **** about our collective chances of beating Trump.
Umm no. Clinton and sanders fought a primary campaign and mean things were said, granted. Trump fought a primary campaign against the entire GOP and got roasted by everybody for months. Then, Clinton proceeded to lose to an orange clown in the general. **** her and the dnc. They lost to a 70yo reality tv host. A narcissistic lunatic who is wholly incapable of stringing together a proper sentence, let alone a single policy proposal. This fiasco is entirely on Clinton and her friends. **** all of you who try to make excuses for her craptastic campaign.
01-24-2017 , 08:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eurodp
So I'm tired of hearing it was Sanders fault or ****ing idiot Stein or whomever. Start putting the majority of blame where it belongs...on Clinton and the Dem party for losing to a ****ing clown!
I have no issue with Sanders at all.

I definitely blame Clinton for losing to a clown.

I still blame Stein for being half a clown and also for the opportunistic pseudo-liberal position she took on Clinton's emails, as well as giving aid and comfort to anti-vaxxers.
01-24-2017 , 08:26 PM
No
01-24-2017 , 08:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
Those are two different pipelines that have nothing to do with the other. They don't even carry the same product.

There is a lot of really bad science and misinformation around pipelines on this forum.
this post is extremely tilting. before you accuse people of "really bad science and misinformation," i would strongly recommend finding new sources for your own information.

the first sentence of my post clearly mentioned standing rock, which to anyone even remotely informed on the matter would equate with the dakota access pipeline. plus you also seem to be very confused about some second pipeline which was never even mentioned at any point in my post.
01-24-2017 , 08:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eurodp
<snip>kindly go **** yourself! </snip>
If you could, would you?
01-24-2017 , 08:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99
Please never ban Sushy. He's our window into **** Trump supporters actually believe.
He really isn't, though. I asked him about the crowd stuff from over the weekend and he was clearly too embarrassed to give his real thoughts on any of it. He's just a troll who comes in for cheap laughs and leaves before having to actually defend anything Trump does.
01-24-2017 , 08:32 PM
Eurodp is obviously correct and Paul D is of course laughably wrong.

And Paul, maybe you meant Zinn



And not Zedd?



lol. Seems like reading some Zinn might be a good idea.
01-24-2017 , 08:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl
So Chait ran this article arguing against the Democrat infrastructure bill



http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...68ujvp27d.html

The logical conclusion of this article, though Chait tries to hedge it, is that the electoral incentives all line up for Democrats to go total obstructionism, and not even try to propose anything. But if the "moderate" Democrats are proposing total obstruction, isn't just better to admit that the US system of governance has failed? The logical conclusion is that the out of power party should obstruct everything, all the time, until people get fed up with the people in power and elect the opposition, at which time the parties will simply switch with the other side simply obstructing everything.

If that's what the game theory leads to, then wouldn't it be better to have a British system parliamentary system where the opposition has no real power, but merely is there to provide alternative viewpoints until the majority party is voted out, instead of two years of majority control, 2 years to 6 years of gridlock, and then 2 years of the alternative majority control?
This isn't new, there have been politards saying for years that the American system is so flawed that it's essentially about to grind to a total halt.

It's also the reason why the US is so far behind other developed countries in terms of social policies.
01-24-2017 , 08:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BroadwaySushy
California has the highest number of illegal immigrants, so do the math.
Funny how it's always the immigrants you people point your finger at, and not the people who are hiring them to work for peanuts.

Also, Texas says hi.
01-24-2017 , 08:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by locknopair
this post is extremely tilting. before you accuse people of "really bad science and misinformation," i would strongly recommend finding new sources for your own information.

the first sentence of my post clearly mentioned standing rock, which to anyone even remotely informed on the matter would equate with the dakota access pipeline. plus you also seem to be very confused about some second pipeline which was never even mentioned at any point in my post.
Keystone is not DAPL. Perhaps I misunderstand your post, and if so I apologize, but you seemed to be confusing the two.

Reading the posts before yours I think I have misunderstood. My apologies.

I have worked, and still do, on environmental issues around pipelines for more than a decade. I know what I'm taking about.
01-24-2017 , 08:36 PM
For those who were wondering about younger Kellyanne, there's this clip. See if you can make it through the whole thing.

01-24-2017 , 08:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BroadwaySushy
California has the highest number of illegal immigrants, so do the math.
You are making the claim, you do the ****ing math and show your work.
01-24-2017 , 08:37 PM
It is pretty funny, at least, that even someone just trying to troll would come in and act like California was basically 50/50 and almost voted for Trump before illegal immigrants entered the picture lol
01-24-2017 , 08:38 PM
Surprising tweet from Elon Musk.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elon Musk
@TheEconomist This may sound surprising coming from me, but I agree with The Economist. Rex Tillerson has the potential to be an excellent Sec of State.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 24, 2017
01-24-2017 , 08:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eurodp
You are a total idiot. I voted for Clinton in the general and posted on here and on FB and spoke to plenty to vote for her. So for you to say I deserve Trump....kindly go **** yourself! I also never said rigged but unprecedented levels of support for a candidate before even the first primary.
No, actually the only idiocy here is from you reverting to childish insults. You banging away at the keyboard and flushing any responsibility down the toilet months later. That's real grown up.

You guys helped set the tone for the general election. I'm sure Karl Rove was laughing somewhere in private watching it. If you can't hang up the gloves and actually take a look at your own self in the mirror (and to spell it out for you since you obviously personalize everything I'm not specifically talking about you but your entire camp) and realize that Trump is in office partially because the tar and feathering that went on during the primary and after the primary.... you truly deserve Trump no matter if you voted against him.

If Booker somehow gets himself on the ticket in 4 years we will see the same **** over again.
01-24-2017 , 08:42 PM
Yeah no need to lay any blame on Clinton, the Clinton campaign, the DNC, or the democratic establishment, amirite Paul D?

Damn those Bernie supporting liberals! They are responsible for democrats losing control of the the House, Senate, Presidency, and state legislations!!!!

GMAFB. "Look in the mirror!!" lol. However did the democrats get smashed with the staunch party defenders and great minds like Paul D? Hmmmmmmmmmmm no idea. Must be Jill Stein!
01-24-2017 , 08:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
OMG I couldn't have imagined that anyone would have thought that.

No one posting it thinks that's what happened.

LOL.

It's just that she looks like she hates him and can't stand his face. He was just smiling at her, which apparently depresses the hell out of her.
The very first time I watched it, I thought that she looked shattered by something he'd said. On subsequent watches I was like "ok no, she just hates her life".
01-24-2017 , 08:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
Keystone is not DAPL. Perhaps I misunderstand your post, and if so I apologize, but you seemed to be confusing the two.

Reading the posts before yours I think I have misunderstood. My apologies.

I have worked, and still do, on environmental issues around pipelines for more than a decade. I know what I'm taking about.
you seem to think that i believe that keystone == dapl. i never mentioned keystone at any point, ever.
01-24-2017 , 08:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
He really isn't, though. I asked him about the crowd stuff from over the weekend and he was clearly too embarrassed to give his real thoughts on any of it. He's just a troll who comes in for cheap laughs and leaves before having to actually defend anything Trump does.
why do you think there is a difference? trolls and trump supporters are often one in the same.
01-24-2017 , 08:58 PM
So yeah that Dakota access **** is gonna get bloody.
01-24-2017 , 08:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul D
If Booker somehow gets himself on the ticket in 4 years we will see the same **** over again.
Maybe the right strategy is to *gasp* not coronate terrible, flawed candidates to begin with. If we had a bigger field with Biden, Warren, etc, maybe a better candidate emerges.

LOL at trying to blame BernieBros for pointing out Hillary's weaknesses, as if those things would have never come up in the GE anyway. Hillary was a ****ty candidate. A contentious primary didn't hurt Obama at all in 08.

And an even larger LOL at any liberals who didn't vote for Hillary anyway, considering her opponent. Both extremes here are bad.

      
m