You are not logged in. Please register or login.

Re: US Politics Thread

johndivney wrote:
AtariLegend wrote:

The politicians in House of Cards just don't seem real compared to what we've seen on TV every day for the past year or so.

Funny the difference a year makes. Trump isn't really a politician tho. He's a reality tv star running for president.

Re: US Politics Thread

AtariLegend wrote:
johndivney wrote:

It seems a lot depends on that "if".
I'm surprised & shocked to see language like this tbh. & you could probably be more explicit, tho it'd be wiser if you aren't.
I really didn't think things were as bleak, attitudes as dark, as what you're implying. I mean for fucks sake, if the worst does happen & she gets elected it's only four years until they get the chance to remove her peacefully. Four years is fuckin nothing really. You might want to remind people all they need is a little patience.. or maybe four years isn't nothing. We'll see.. if this board's still here in four years - which is more significant actually..

Don't forget the Breibart/infowars types still believe Obama will cancel the election and put them all in FEMA camps.

misterID
 Rep: 475 

Re: US Politics Thread

misterID wrote:
johndivney wrote:
Randall Flagg wrote:
johndivney wrote:

What are you saying here? What are you advocating/suggesting?

I'm not advocating anything. Simply pointing out there are 300+ million guns in this country and a large contingent of loser, white males who were too craven to wear the uniform but fantasize about the revolutionary war. 


If Clinton is unable to break from Obama and continues to refuse to compromise, and passes executive orders as legislative fiats, some angry Americans will respond.


It seems a lot depends on that "if".
I'm surprised & shocked to see language like this tbh. & you could probably be more explicit, tho it'd be wiser if you aren't.
I really didn't think things were as bleak, attitudes as dark, as what you're implying. I mean for fucks sake, if the worst does happen & she gets elected it's only four years until they get the chance to remove her peacefully. Four years is fuckin nothing really. You might want to remind people all they need is a little patience.. or maybe four years isn't nothing. We'll see.. if this board's still here in four years - which is more significant actually..


The apocalyptic armed resistance crazy talk was much, much, much worse with Obama for obvious reasons, but nothing happened. Difference is Trump is egging it on. McCain and Romney never told people to go to polling stations to act as defacto vigilantes, which there are rules against. They also didn't threaten riots if things didn't go their way.

Re: US Politics Thread

johndivney wrote:
misterID wrote:

  They also didn't threaten riots if things didn't go their way.

http://youtu.be/QiPQmGqxaIs

polluxlm
 Rep: 221 

Re: US Politics Thread

polluxlm wrote:

The debate

Trump some weak parts, some strong parts. Hillary weaker than usual, no high points.

From a strategy standpoint I think Trump won because he moved closer to his goal, which is to disprove the notion he is an unhinged sexual predator about to start WWIII. He could certainly have done better on that aspect, but all he needed to do was to make progress and I think he did. After all, the Hillary campaign is setting the bar pretty low for him. I think he gained a few evangelicals and hold your nose republicans tonight, and also eliminated some anti Trump votes.

Hillary on the other hand was still pushing the Trump is Hitler narrative, because she doesn't have any other angles. Either you're on that train already or you're not. Her policy talk is more Obama, more Bush, more establishment. Just more watered down and more corrupt. If you didn't buy that in the past you are definitely not buying it now.

Why did she even show up to this debate? To let the public hear truths about her that the press are currently shielding them from? To have her stand up straight for 90 minutes, which is clearly something she's struggling to do, while being pummeled by a bellicose ceo ? I think she showed up because she definitely fears the race isn't over and she needs the votes. And on that she gained nothing. Who wants to vote for Hillary? She is basically propped up by fear, fear of Trump. Ball is in his court.

Re: US Politics Thread

johndivney wrote:
polluxlm wrote:

The debate

Trump some weak parts, some strong parts. Hillary weaker than usual, no high points.

From a strategy standpoint I think Trump won because he moved closer to his goal, which is to disprove the notion he is an unhinged sexual predator about to start WWIII. He could certainly have done better on that aspect, but all he needed to do was to make progress and I think he did. After all, the Hillary campaign is setting the bar pretty low for him. I think he gained a few evangelicals and hold your nose republicans tonight, and also eliminated some anti Trump votes.

Hillary on the other hand was still pushing the Trump is Hitler narrative, because she doesn't have any other angles. Either you're on that train already or you're not. Her policy talk is more Obama, more Bush, more establishment. Just more watered down and more corrupt. If you didn't buy that in the past you are definitely not buying it now.

Why did she even show up to this debate? To let the public hear truths about her that the press are currently shielding them from? To have her stand up straight for 90 minutes, which is clearly something she's struggling to do, while being pummeled by a bellicose ceo ? I think she showed up because she definitely fears the race isn't over and she needs the votes. And on that she gained nothing. Who wants to vote for Hillary? She is basically propped up by fear, fear of Trump. Ball is in his court.


355a5128f723edfc65cd98d70c0f02c0e7fbb677acecf38c7937cd48b896b332.jpg

James
 Rep: 664 

Re: US Politics Thread

James wrote:
mitchejw wrote:
johndivney wrote:
Randall Flagg wrote:

Americans will do something if our President continues to legislate with their pen.


What are you saying here? What are you advocating/suggesting?

Yes, I agree...I'm not even sure what this means in the first place.

Is this a dig on executive orders? Because again I would say that I couldn't hear anyone complaining when GW signed his executive orders.

This whole charade has been one  hypocrisy after another a row.

Please explain, the Clintons are horrible corrupt people so you nominate Trump someone who's even more horrible and more corrupt and more sexist.

It just really seems like there are certain people who are allowed to get away with things in Randall flags world and certain people who are not allowed.



Horse shit....there were many complaining about Bush's executive orders. I hate this partisan shit where if someone brings up a point, we gotta get in the opposite dig as if it means something. POliticians love people like you.....its what fuels the status quo. They also laugh at you. Its funny how you can excuse everything Obama did through executive order by simply mentioning Bush. One reason why this country is in the pickle its in.

If I remember correctly, while Flagg voted for Bush(twice), he certainly had some issues with him. Flagg was never the type to swallow everything red and scoff at everything blue.

   

What are you saying here? What are you advocating/suggesting?

A certain amount of Americans are finally starting to wake up. They see the corruption on both sides and how they basically hold hands while the sheep fight each other in the trenches. The dems basically admitted their primaries are rigged for starters. On the other side we've got a lunatic who basically hijacked the party and we're headed into a Clinton presidency. If you think people are pissed now, wait until her presidency actually starts and everyone sees her sucking the usual corporate tit.

The tragedy of this election is it deserved a real outsider coming in and shaking things up. Maybe we weren't ready for that yet. I have a feeling we'll be ready in four years.

The next one wont be an orange clown.

Re: US Politics Thread

johndivney wrote:
James Lofton wrote:



   

What are you saying here? What are you advocating/suggesting?

A certain amount of Americans are finally starting to wake up. They see the corruption on both sides and how they basically hold hands while the sheep fight each other in the trenches. 

Maybe we weren't ready for that yet. I have a feeling we'll be ready in four years.
The next one wont be an orange clown.


I don't think that's what, or who, Randall was talking about.

On yer 2nd point - you'll not be ready in four years. The disenfranchised, disenchanted, will be divided and conquered, marginalised again. Unless they find another clown to rally & herd behind.

You had Bernie. He was the guy. Definitely weren't ready for him. Never will be. The loonies are too easily lead astray, too hard to educate.

This is all assuming Trump doesn't win of course. Maybe Trump really is the guy & means everything he says & polluxlm is a prophet of truth/doom..

James
 Rep: 664 

Re: US Politics Thread

James wrote:

Hillary on the other hand was still pushing the Trump is Hitler narrative, because she doesn't have any other angles. Either you're on that train already or you're not. Her policy talk is more Obama, more Bush, more establishment. Just more watered down and more corrupt. If you didn't buy that in the past you are definitely not buying it now.

She's a neocon through and through. Take away Obamcare, he was basically a 3rd and 4th Bush term. Now we've got a 5th and 6th on tap.

Dems spent 8 years loving a bunch of shit they said they hated under Bush. Get ready for more of the same.

Flagg gets some shit here but I love the guy. Someone like mitch acts like he hates everything Obama which isn't even close to the truth. Flagg actually supported Obama on a variety of issues. Why? Because he was continuing Bush policies. He didn't pretend to hate it all of a sudden just because of the (D) next to his name.

Re: US Politics Thread

AtariLegend wrote:
johndivney wrote:
James Lofton wrote:



   

What are you saying here? What are you advocating/suggesting?

A certain amount of Americans are finally starting to wake up. They see the corruption on both sides and how they basically hold hands while the sheep fight each other in the trenches. 

Maybe we weren't ready for that yet. I have a feeling we'll be ready in four years.
The next one wont be an orange clown.


I don't think that's what, or who, Randall was talking about.

On yer 2nd point - you'll not be ready in four years. The disenfranchised, disenchanted, will be divided and conquered, marginalised again. Unless they find another clown to rally & herd behind.

You had Bernie. He was the guy. Definitely weren't ready for him. Never will be. The loonies are too easily lead astray, too hard to educate.

This is all assuming Trump doesn't win of course. Maybe Trump really is the guy & means everything he says & polluxlm is a prophet of truth/doom..

If you ever watch question time johnny, skip the start of it tonight. The brexiters love Trump.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB