Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 258: Imminent Song

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 10
foolm0r0n 01/12/20 11:59:58 AM #103:	In this analogy, both candidates will kill my dog anyways, so fuck their platform. I'll vote for the one who I think is most likely to not be as worse (not based on their words, but history), but I would never for 1 second pretend they are a good candidate or a good choice. 100% of my effort would be focused on dismantling the 2 party system that led to this """choice""" so that it doesn't happen again. How many times does your candidate need to kill your dog before you realize that just picking the one that was served to you (under the guise of "analyzing platforms and picking the lesser evil") is not sustainable? --- _foolmo_ 2 + 2 = 4 <cite>foolm0r0n posted [p:932817929] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>In this analogy, both candidates will kill my dog anyways, so fuck their platform. I'll vote for the one who I think is most likely to not be as worse (not based on their words, but history), but I would never for 1 second pretend they are a good candidate or a good choice. 100% of my effort would be focused on dismantling the 2 party system that led to this """choice""" so that it doesn't happen again. How many times does your candidate need to kill your dog before you realize that just picking the one that was served to you (under the guise of "analyzing platforms and picking the lesser evil") is not sustainable? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
NFUN 01/12/20 12:01:45 PM #104:	foolm0r0n posted... In this analogy, both candidates will kill my dog anyways, so fuck their platform. I'll vote for the one who I think is most likely to not be as worse (not based on their words, but history), but I would never for 1 second pretend they are a good candidate or a good choice. 100% of my effort would be focused on dismantling the 2 party system that led to this """choice""" so that it doesn't happen again. And if I can vote for anti-2 party, I will definitely do that, because that will have the best effect on our lives. How many times does your candidate need to kill your dog before you realize that just picking the one that was served to you (under the guise of "analyzing platforms and picking the lesser evil") is not sustainable? you're bad at analogies too --- Thus is our treaty written; thus is our agreement made. Thought it the arrow of time; memory never fades. What was asked for was given; the price is paid <cite>NFUN posted [p:932817998] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>foolm0r0n posted... </cite> <quote>In this analogy, both candidates will kill my dog anyways, so fuck their platform. I'll vote for the one who I think is most likely to not be as worse (not based on their words, but history), but I would never for 1 second pretend they are a good candidate or a good choice. 100% of my effort would be focused on dismantling the 2 party system that led to this """choice""" so that it doesn't happen again. And if I can vote for anti-2 party, I will definitely do that, because that will have the best effect on our lives. How many times does your candidate need to kill your dog before you realize that just picking the one that was served to you (under the guise of "analyzing platforms and picking the lesser evil") is not sustainable?</quote>you're bad at analogies too </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
foolm0r0n 01/12/20 12:03:35 PM #105:	You're bad at quoting relevant posts when you post nonsense --- _foolmo_ 2 + 2 = 4 <cite>foolm0r0n posted [p:932818062] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>You're bad at quoting relevant posts when you post nonsense </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Jakyl25 01/12/20 12:09:15 PM #106:	Not_an_Owl posted... In 2012, either Obama or Romney was going to win the Presidency. There was no reality in which any other candidate won. They were both hawks. Given that, what was the anti-war voter supposed to do in that election? Denounce both of them and their supporters as bloodsoaked warmongers and refuse to vote? Or analyze both candidates' platforms beyond their approach to military and foreign policy and cast a vote for one of them based on what how that voter thought the rest of their platform would affect their life? I voted 3rd Party --- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DRlKR5nU8AA_v_C?format=jpg&name=large <cite>Jakyl25 posted [p:932818258] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>Not_an_Owl posted...</cite> <quote>In 2012, either Obama or Romney was going to win the Presidency. There was no reality in which any other candidate won. They were both hawks. Given that, what was the anti-war voter supposed to do in that election? Denounce both of them and their supporters as bloodsoaked warmongers and refuse to vote? Or analyze both candidates' platforms beyond their approach to military and foreign policy and cast a vote for one of them based on what how that voter thought the rest of their platform would affect their life? </quote> I voted 3rd Party</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
NFUN 01/12/20 12:21:43 PM #107:	sorry, let me try again foolm0r0n posted... PSA to literally everyone on b8 but especially the dumb people: Don't make analogies. Just don't. You're not good at it and it won't help you. There's a reason the SATs got rid of them. foolm0r0n posted... In this analogy, both candidates will kill my dog anyways, so fuck their platform. I'll vote for the one who I think is most likely to not be as bad (not based on their words, but history), but I would never for 1 second pretend they are a good candidate or a good choice. 100% of my effort would be focused on dismantling the 2 party system that led to this """choice""" so that it doesn't happen again. And if I can vote for anti-2 party, I will definitely do that, because that will have the best effect on our lives. How many times does your candidate need to kill your dog before you realize that just picking the one that was served to you (under the guise of "analyzing platforms and picking the lesser evil") is not sustainable? you're bad at analogies too --- Thus is our treaty written; thus is our agreement made. Thought it the arrow of time; memory never fades. What was asked for was given; the price is paid <cite>NFUN posted [p:932818742] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>sorry, let me try again foolm0r0n posted...</cite> <quote>PSA to literally everyone on b8 but especially the dumb people: Don't make analogies. Just don't. You're not good at it and it won't help you. There's a reason the SATs got rid of them. </quote> foolm0r0n posted...</cite> <quote>In this analogy, both candidates will kill my dog anyways, so fuck their platform. I'll vote for the one who I think is most likely to not be as bad (not based on their words, but history), but I would never for 1 second pretend they are a good candidate or a good choice. 100% of my effort would be focused on dismantling the 2 party system that led to this """choice""" so that it doesn't happen again. And if I can vote for anti-2 party, I will definitely do that, because that will have the best effect on our lives. How many times does your candidate need to kill your dog before you realize that just picking the one that was served to you (under the guise of "analyzing platforms and picking the lesser evil") is not sustainable? </quote> you're bad at analogies too</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Stripperiffic 01/12/20 12:22:11 PM #108:	Not_an_Owl posted... In 2012, either Obama or Romney was going to win the Presidency. There was no reality in which any other candidate won. They were both hawks. Given that, what was the anti-war voter supposed to do in that election? Denounce both of them and their supporters as bloodsoaked warmongers and refuse to vote? Or analyze both candidates' platforms beyond their approach to military and foreign policy and cast a vote for one of them based on what how that voter thought the rest of their platform would affect their life? Yeah, your life is affected outside of a candidates position on war. I don't think it's fair to blame voters, and especially not fair to blame those who enlist in the military, for the decisions made by officials who are in turn funded by the military industrial complex. We should avoid wars where possible, but certainly not at the expense of domestic issues. <cite>Stripperiffic posted [p:932818767] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>Not_an_Owl posted... </cite> <quote>In 2012, either Obama or Romney was going to win the Presidency. There was no reality in which any other candidate won. They were both hawks. Given that, what was the anti-war voter supposed to do in that election? Denounce both of them and their supporters as bloodsoaked warmongers and refuse to vote? Or analyze both candidates' platforms beyond their approach to military and foreign policy and cast a vote for one of them based on what how that voter thought the rest of their platform would affect their life?</quote> Yeah, your life is affected outside of a candidates position on war. I don't think it's fair to blame voters, and especially not fair to blame those who enlist in the military, for the decisions made by officials who are in turn funded by the military industrial complex. We should avoid wars where possible, but certainly not at the expense of domestic issues. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Not_an_Owl 01/12/20 12:27:17 PM #109:	Jakyl25 posted... I voted 3rd Party Ah, the old "whatever everyone else decides is fine by me" approach. --- Besides, marijuana is far more harmful than steroids. - BlitzBomb I headbang to Bruckner. <cite>Not_an_Owl posted [p:932818976] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>Jakyl25 posted... </cite> <quote>I voted 3rd Party</quote>Ah, the old "whatever everyone else decides is fine by me" approach. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Not_an_Owl 01/12/20 12:29:58 PM #110:	foolm0r0n posted... In this analogy, both candidates will kill my dog anyways, so fuck their platform. So literally the only thing you evaluate candidates on is how likely they are to start a war? --- Besides, marijuana is far more harmful than steroids. - BlitzBomb I headbang to Bruckner. <cite>Not_an_Owl posted [p:932819095] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>foolm0r0n posted... </cite> <quote>In this analogy, both candidates will kill my dog anyways, so fuck their platform.</quote>So literally the only thing you evaluate candidates on is how likely they are to start a war? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Reg 01/12/20 1:34:51 PM #111:	Jakyl25 posted... I voted 3rd Party Wait a sec, I thought you said you actually learned from that <cite>Reg posted [p:932821670] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>Jakyl25 posted... </cite> <quote>I voted 3rd Party</quote>Wait a sec, I thought you said you actually learned from that </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik7 01/12/20 2:26:13 PM #112:	https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/trump-tweet-in-farsi-the-most-liked-persian-tweet-in-history-of-twitter Weird --- Xbox Live User Name - Corrik Currently playing: Spider-Man (PS4), Quantum Break (X1) <cite>Corrik7 posted [p:932823811] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/trump-tweet-in-farsi-the-most-liked-persian-tweet-in-history-of-twitter Weird </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LordoftheMorons 01/12/20 2:47:05 PM #113:	Thread https://twitter.com/yair_rosenberg/status/1216379247461326849?s=21 --- Congrats to Advokaiser for winning the CBX Guru Challenge! <cite>LordoftheMorons posted [p:932824660] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>Thread https://twitter.com/yair_rosenberg/status/1216379247461326849?s=21 </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LordoftheMorons 01/12/20 2:50:22 PM #114:	Esper admits that there was no specific evidence of Trumps obviously made up claim of an imminent threat to four US embassies: https://twitter.com/facethenation/status/1216359717607481350?s=21 --- Congrats to Advokaiser for winning the CBX Guru Challenge! <cite>LordoftheMorons posted [p:932824787] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>Esper admits that there was no specific evidence of Trumps obviously made up claim of an imminent threat to four US embassies: https://twitter.com/facethenation/status/1216359717607481350?s=21 </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kinglicious 01/12/20 3:01:38 PM #115:	Suprak the Stud posted... Yeah, plus if the DCCC has the magical ability to gerrymander things so well that even AOC (one of the most recognizable figures in the democratic party who just beat a democratic incumbent anyway) is in trouble, why wouldn't they do it in such a way to eliminate a republican seat? Frank Lutz is a big dummy is the point I'm trying to make here. A few corrections to make here. 1, she didn't exactly beat a democratic incumbent, she primaried him. It wouldn't be a problem now but it's important to note as a big distinction as that's what she's actively doing to others. She's not kicking out Republicans, she's kicking out democrats. 2, as a result of that it's democrats who hate her more than republicans, who are challenging her more, and who need to be more fearful. So when the state Congress picks people you're gonna get a united front of democrats and republicans that don't like her. 3, the ability to redraw district lines isn't some odd power, it's what happens after the census. She's in trouble there because her district may not be able to matter due to weak numbers. A lot of republican ones won't have that problem. 3, I wasn't basing anything off that guy. I was basing it off an issue that's been known for, and has been established by her specifically, as a problem for about a year now. It's come up again recently as a concern as we cemented our loss of a seat and should come up more often throughout the year. Those are her words. 4, she could indeed try to run elsewhere but at that point it'd be an actual election process, not just a primary. She's not gonna be able to sneak by like that again. --- The King Wang. Listen up Urinal Cake. I already have something that tells me if I'm too drunk when I pee on it: My friends. - Colbert. <cite>Kinglicious posted [p:932825235] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>Suprak the Stud posted... </cite> <quote>Yeah, plus if the DCCC has the magical ability to gerrymander things so well that even AOC (one of the most recognizable figures in the democratic party who just beat a democratic incumbent anyway) is in trouble, why wouldn't they do it in such a way to eliminate a republican seat? Frank Lutz is a big dummy is the point I'm trying to make here.</quote> A few corrections to make here. 1, she didn't exactly beat a democratic incumbent, she primaried him. It wouldn't be a problem now but it's important to note as a big distinction as that's what she's actively doing to others. She's not kicking out Republicans, she's kicking out democrats. 2, as a result of that it's democrats who hate her more than republicans, who are challenging her more, and who need to be more fearful. So when the state Congress picks people you're gonna get a united front of democrats and republicans that don't like her. 3, the ability to redraw district lines isn't some odd power, it's what happens after the census. She's in trouble there because her district may not be able to matter due to weak numbers. A lot of republican ones won't have that problem. 3, I wasn't basing anything off that guy. I was basing it off an issue that's been known for, and has been established by her specifically, as a problem for about a year now. It's come up again recently as a concern as we cemented our loss of a seat and should come up more often throughout the year. Those are her words. 4, she could indeed try to run elsewhere but at that point it'd be an actual election process, not just a primary. She's not gonna be able to sneak by like that again. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Jakyl25 01/12/20 3:22:08 PM #116:	Reg posted... Wait a sec, I thought you said you actually learned from that I learned from it in 2016 Im sorry I cant go back and retroactively apply it to 2012 EDIT: My POTUS voting history is Kerry-Obama-Stein-Stein Was old enough to vote in 2000 but did not --- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DRlKR5nU8AA_v_C?format=jpg&name=large <cite>Jakyl25 posted [p:932826151] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>Reg posted...</cite> <quote> Wait a sec, I thought you said you actually learned from that </quote> I learned from it in 2016 Im sorry I cant go back and retroactively apply it to 2012 EDIT: My POTUS voting history is Kerry-Obama-Stein-Stein Was old enough to vote in 2000 but did not</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Jakyl25 01/12/20 3:36:24 PM #117:	https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1216435180220620807?s=21 He loves the reality show aspect way too much --- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DRlKR5nU8AA_v_C?format=jpg&name=large <cite>Jakyl25 posted [p:932826763] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1216435180220620807?s=21 He loves the reality show aspect way too much</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DoomTheGyarados 01/12/20 3:39:48 PM #118:	I love how little Donald has on Bernie lol --- Sir Chris Doom The Kanto Saga - Animated Series - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hH4wNFCrLM <cite>DoomTheGyarados posted [p:932826969] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>I love how little Donald has on Bernie lol </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Xeybozn 01/12/20 3:44:44 PM #119:	Kinglicious posted... she could indeed try to run elsewhere but at that point it'd be an actual election process, not just a primary. She's not gonna be able to sneak by like that again. If AOC's district is "eliminated", she'd probably end up running in the primary against whichever Dem is currently representing her new district with the winner being a lock to win in the general. Unless the state legislature decides to gerrymander the district for Republicans just to spite AOC, it's not likely she'll lose outside of a primary. --- Congrats to 2019 Guru champ Advokaiser! <cite>Xeybozn posted [p:932827276] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>Kinglicious posted...</cite> <quote>she could indeed try to run elsewhere but at that point it'd be an actual election process, not just a primary. She's not gonna be able to sneak by like that again. </quote> If AOC's district is "eliminated", she'd probably end up running in the primary against whichever Dem is currently representing her new district with the winner being a lock to win in the general. Unless the state legislature decides to gerrymander the district for Republicans just to spite AOC, it's not likely she'll lose outside of a primary.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik7 01/12/20 4:05:27 PM #120:	Kinglicious posted... A few corrections to make here. 1, she didn't exactly beat a democratic incumbent, she primaried him. It wouldn't be a problem now but it's important to note as a big distinction as that's what she's actively doing to others. She's not kicking out Republicans, she's kicking out democrats. 2, as a result of that it's democrats who hate her more than republicans, who are challenging her more, and who need to be more fearful. So when the state Congress picks people you're gonna get a united front of democrats and republicans that don't like her. 3, the ability to redraw district lines isn't some odd power, it's what happens after the census. She's in trouble there because her district may not be able to matter due to weak numbers. A lot of republican ones won't have that problem. 3, I wasn't basing anything off that guy. I was basing it off an issue that's been known for, and has been established by her specifically, as a problem for about a year now. It's come up again recently as a concern as we cemented our loss of a seat and should come up more often throughout the year. Those are her words. 4, she could indeed try to run elsewhere but at that point it'd be an actual election process, not just a primary. She's not gonna be able to sneak by like that again. Dems have made it pretty known they are gonna eliminate a republican seat by merging upstate New York districts where the population has mostly diminished. Dems hate AOC, but they arent gonna eliminate her district because she will just take another Dems seat. That said, she may be looking to take a senator seat before long with her popularity. I believe... Gillebrand and... Schumer are the Sens in that state? Right? Might be a tough task, but who knows. --- Xbox Live User Name - Corrik Currently playing: Spider-Man (PS4), Quantum Break (X1) <cite>Corrik7 posted [p:932828396] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>Kinglicious posted... </cite> <quote>A few corrections to make here. 1, she didn't exactly beat a democratic incumbent, she primaried him. It wouldn't be a problem now but it's important to note as a big distinction as that's what she's actively doing to others. She's not kicking out Republicans, she's kicking out democrats. 2, as a result of that it's democrats who hate her more than republicans, who are challenging her more, and who need to be more fearful. So when the state Congress picks people you're gonna get a united front of democrats and republicans that don't like her. 3, the ability to redraw district lines isn't some odd power, it's what happens after the census. She's in trouble there because her district may not be able to matter due to weak numbers. A lot of republican ones won't have that problem. 3, I wasn't basing anything off that guy. I was basing it off an issue that's been known for, and has been established by her specifically, as a problem for about a year now. It's come up again recently as a concern as we cemented our loss of a seat and should come up more often throughout the year. Those are her words. 4, she could indeed try to run elsewhere but at that point it'd be an actual election process, not just a primary. She's not gonna be able to sneak by like that again.</quote>Dems have made it pretty known they are gonna eliminate a republican seat by merging upstate New York districts where the population has mostly diminished. Dems hate AOC, but they arent gonna eliminate her district because she will just take another Dems seat. That said, she may be looking to take a senator seat before long with her popularity. I believe... Gillebrand and... Schumer are the Sens in that state? Right? Might be a tough task, but who knows. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Reg 01/12/20 4:19:00 PM #121:	Jakyl25 posted... I learned from it in 2016 Im sorry I cant go back and retroactively apply it to 2012 EDIT: My POTUS voting history is Kerry-Obama-Stein-Stein Was old enough to vote in 2000 but did not oh, missed the 'd' on the end of 'vote' there and missed that you were talking about the actual election instead of a hypothetical mb mb <cite>Reg posted [p:932829126] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>Jakyl25 posted... </cite> <quote>I learned from it in 2016 Im sorry I cant go back and retroactively apply it to 2012 EDIT: My POTUS voting history is Kerry-Obama-Stein-Stein Was old enough to vote in 2000 but did not</quote>oh, missed the 'd' on the end of 'vote' there and missed that you were talking about the actual election instead of a hypothetical mb mb </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChaosTonyV4 01/12/20 4:19:23 PM #122:	Kinglicious posted... A few corrections to make here. 1, she didn't exactly beat a democratic incumbent, she primaried him. It wouldn't be a problem now but it's important to note as a big distinction as that's what she's actively doing to others. She's not kicking out Republicans, she's kicking out democrats. 2, as a result of that it's democrats who hate her more than republicans, who are challenging her more, and who need to be more fearful. So when the state Congress picks people you're gonna get a united front of democrats and republicans that don't like her. 3, the ability to redraw district lines isn't some odd power, it's what happens after the census. She's in trouble there because her district may not be able to matter due to weak numbers. A lot of republican ones won't have that problem. 3, I wasn't basing anything off that guy. I was basing it off an issue that's been known for, and has been established by her specifically, as a problem for about a year now. It's come up again recently as a concern as we cemented our loss of a seat and should come up more often throughout the year. Those are her words. 4, she could indeed try to run elsewhere but at that point it'd be an actual election process, not just a primary. She's not gonna be able to sneak by like that again. 1: She beat a Democratic incumbent in a primary. Your big distinction is meaningless at best, otherwise its plain wrong. 2: Under no circumstances do Democrats hate AOC more than the GOP, as much as they may be irritated, there are people on the right who pick at everything she says to an extent on par with Dems and Trump. It would not be extreme to say there are many with AOC Derangement Syndrome, to use a phrase. 3: You missed the point, that if Dems have control over redistricting, theyre not going to intentionally give up one of their most popular congresswomen when they could just ice out a Republican. Your original statement was that Dems would eliminate her district, with the implication being they would target her, and were saying if they have the ability to target anyone, its not going to be her. 4: You realize after she won her primary she won a real election, right? Sneak by what? What are you saying here? --- Phantom Dust. "I'll just wait for time to prove me right again." - Vlado <cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted [p:932829157] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>Kinglicious posted... </cite> <quote>A few corrections to make here. 1, she didn't exactly beat a democratic incumbent, she primaried him. It wouldn't be a problem now but it's important to note as a big distinction as that's what she's actively doing to others. She's not kicking out Republicans, she's kicking out democrats. 2, as a result of that it's democrats who hate her more than republicans, who are challenging her more, and who need to be more fearful. So when the state Congress picks people you're gonna get a united front of democrats and republicans that don't like her. 3, the ability to redraw district lines isn't some odd power, it's what happens after the census. She's in trouble there because her district may not be able to matter due to weak numbers. A lot of republican ones won't have that problem. 3, I wasn't basing anything off that guy. I was basing it off an issue that's been known for, and has been established by her specifically, as a problem for about a year now. It's come up again recently as a concern as we cemented our loss of a seat and should come up more often throughout the year. Those are her words. 4, she could indeed try to run elsewhere but at that point it'd be an actual election process, not just a primary. She's not gonna be able to sneak by like that again.</quote> 1: She beat a Democratic incumbent in a primary. Your big distinction is meaningless at best, otherwise its plain wrong. 2: Under no circumstances do Democrats hate AOC more than the GOP, as much as they may be irritated, there are people on the right who pick at everything she says to an extent on par with Dems and Trump. It would not be extreme to say there are many with AOC Derangement Syndrome, to use a phrase. 3: You missed the point, that if Dems have control over redistricting, theyre not going to intentionally give up one of their most popular congresswomen when they could just ice out a Republican. Your original statement was that Dems would eliminate her district, with the implication being they would target her, and were saying if they have the ability to target anyone, its not going to be her. 4: You realize after she won her primary she won a real election, right? Sneak by what? What are you saying here? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik7 01/12/20 4:19:57 PM #123:	New poll has Sanders ahead in Iowa by 3 points. And Biden ahead in Wisconsin, South Carolina, and Nevada. Buttgieg, Biden, and then Sanders in NH. --- Xbox Live User Name - Corrik Currently playing: Spider-Man (PS4), Quantum Break (X1) <cite>Corrik7 posted [p:932829211] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>New poll has Sanders ahead in Iowa by 3 points. And Biden ahead in Wisconsin, South Carolina, and Nevada. Buttgieg, Biden, and then Sanders in NH. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
foolm0r0n 01/12/20 5:02:48 PM #124:	NFUN posted... you're bad at analogies too Maybe 3rd times the charm? --- _foolmo_ 2 + 2 = 4 <cite>foolm0r0n posted [p:932831437] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>NFUN posted... </cite> <quote>you're bad at analogies too</quote>Maybe 3rd times the charm? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik7 01/12/20 5:10:12 PM #125:	https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/31/goldman-sachs-is-saying-the-economy-is-nearly-recession-proof.html --- Xbox Live User Name - Corrik Currently playing: Spider-Man (PS4), Quantum Break (X1) <cite>Corrik7 posted [p:932831783] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/31/goldman-sachs-is-saying-the-economy-is-nearly-recession-proof.html </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 01/12/20 5:11:20 PM #126:	Corrik7 posted... https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/31/goldman-sachs-is-saying-the-economy-is-nearly-recession-proof.html Time to sell everything? --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:932831847] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>Corrik7 posted... </cite> <quote>https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/31/goldman-sachs-is-saying-the-economy-is-nearly-recession-proof.html</quote> Time to sell everything? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Grimlyn 01/12/20 5:12:24 PM #127:	lmao she didn't beat him she primaried him what --- https://gmun.moe/ffcc GuessMyUserName's account's very own account! <cite>Grimlyn posted [p:932831901] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>lmao she didn't beat him she primaried him what </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
foolm0r0n 01/12/20 5:14:09 PM #128:	Not_an_Owl posted... So literally the only thing you evaluate candidates on is how likely they are to start a war? It's like 85% of my evaluation yeah. I don't think everyone needs to be that high, but it should be at least 50% or else you really just don't understand how much war affects your favorite other issues. But my point in that particular post is that I'm not gonna sit here and pretend that lifelong warmonger liars have any sort of platform that I can reasonably analyze and make a decision on. Even the most braindead utilitarian would agree that using false info in your evaluation is not gonna get you to the right answer. You can vote for them, but with heavy doubt and despair, after all other options are exhausted. Again, it just seems like you're defending eager Hillary supporters. Sorry, I'm never gonna admit they aren't pro-war. And that's not a high horse at all. Pick a better candidate. --- _foolmo_ 2 + 2 = 4 <cite>foolm0r0n posted [p:932831987] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>Not_an_Owl posted... </cite> <quote>So literally the only thing you evaluate candidates on is how likely they are to start a war?</quote>It's like 85% of my evaluation yeah. I don't think everyone needs to be that high, but it should be at least 50% or else you really just don't understand how much war affects your favorite other issues. But my point in that particular post is that I'm not gonna sit here and pretend that lifelong warmonger liars have any sort of platform that I can reasonably analyze and make a decision on. Even the most braindead utilitarian would agree that using false info in your evaluation is not gonna get you to the right answer. You can vote for them, but with heavy doubt and despair, after all other options are exhausted. Again, it just seems like you're defending eager Hillary supporters. Sorry, I'm never gonna admit they aren't pro-war. And that's not a high horse at all. Pick a better candidate. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Suprak the Stud 01/12/20 5:15:17 PM #129:	ChaosTonyV4 posted... 1: She beat a Democratic incumbent in a primary. Your big distinction is meaningless at best, otherwise its plain wrong. 2: Under no circumstances do Democrats hate AOC more than the GOP, as much as they may be irritated, there are people on the right who pick at everything she says to an extent on par with Dems and Trump. It would not be extreme to say there are many with AOC Derangement Syndrome, to use a phrase. 3: You missed the point, that if Dems have control over redistricting, theyre not going to intentionally give up one of their most popular congresswomen when they could just ice out a Republican. Your original statement was that Dems would eliminate her district, with the implication being they would target her, and were saying if they have the ability to target anyone, its not going to be her. 4: You realize after she won her primary she won a real election, right? Sneak by what? What are you saying here? ^ My point wasn't so much that redistricting was "magic" - I was being facetious. It was that her district doesn't just disappear. It would be incorporated into another district, and she's already BEATEN a powerful, recognizable dem to get the seat she has now. Which congressperson is going to go "oh yeah put in me coach I can beat her" when they just saw the beatdown she gave to the 4th most powerful dem in the house. PLUS say they could gerrymander things so well that she was in trouble somehow. It split her base oh so perfectly and it was actually a tough matchup for her. THEN the dems would use that power to cut out a republican. You know, from the part of the state that is losing population? Not from her district which is growing every year. And yeah the idea moderate dems hate her more than republicans when every republican with a talk show dedicates hours to her weekly is hilarious. --- Moops? "I thought you were making up diseases? That's spontaneous dental hydroplosion." <cite>Suprak the Stud posted [p:932832038] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>ChaosTonyV4 posted... </cite> <quote>1: She beat a Democratic incumbent in a primary. Your big distinction is meaningless at best, otherwise its plain wrong. 2: Under no circumstances do Democrats hate AOC more than the GOP, as much as they may be irritated, there are people on the right who pick at everything she says to an extent on par with Dems and Trump. It would not be extreme to say there are many with AOC Derangement Syndrome, to use a phrase. 3: You missed the point, that if Dems have control over redistricting, theyre not going to intentionally give up one of their most popular congresswomen when they could just ice out a Republican. Your original statement was that Dems would eliminate her district, with the implication being they would target her, and were saying if they have the ability to target anyone, its not going to be her. 4: You realize after she won her primary she won a real election, right? Sneak by what? What are you saying here?</quote> ^ My point wasn't so much that redistricting was "magic" - I was being facetious. It was that her district doesn't just disappear. It would be incorporated into another district, and she's already BEATEN a powerful, recognizable dem to get the seat she has now. Which congressperson is going to go "oh yeah put in me coach I can beat her" when they just saw the beatdown she gave to the 4th most powerful dem in the house. PLUS say they could gerrymander things so well that she was in trouble somehow. It split her base oh so perfectly and it was actually a tough matchup for her. THEN the dems would use that power to cut out a republican. You know, from the part of the state that is losing population? Not from her district which is growing every year. And yeah the idea moderate dems hate her more than republicans when every republican with a talk show dedicates hours to her weekly is hilarious. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
foolm0r0n 01/12/20 5:17:18 PM #130:	DoomTheGyarados posted... I love how little Donald has on Bernie lol He's gonna take him as VP for reelection --- _foolmo_ 2 + 2 = 4 <cite>foolm0r0n posted [p:932832139] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>DoomTheGyarados posted... </cite> <quote>I love how little Donald has on Bernie lol</quote>He's gonna take him as VP for reelection </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Suprak the Stud 01/12/20 5:17:37 PM #131:	And yes I didn't mean she took him out to an alley and beat him with a club. "Beat him" pretty clearly meant "got more votes than he did (in the primary)" but I thought that could be assumed. --- Moops? "I thought you were making up diseases? That's spontaneous dental hydroplosion." <cite>Suprak the Stud posted [p:932832153] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>And yes I didn't mean she took him out to an alley and beat him with a club. "Beat him" pretty clearly meant "got more votes than he did (in the primary)" but I thought that could be assumed. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik7 01/12/20 5:30:51 PM #132:	red sox 777 posted... Time to sell everything? I think that reliably confirms Hillary isn't running for president. --- Xbox Live User Name - Corrik Currently playing: Spider-Man (PS4), Quantum Break (X1) <cite>Corrik7 posted [p:932832778] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>red sox 777 posted... </cite> <quote>Time to sell everything?</quote>I think that reliably confirms Hillary isn't running for president. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
NFUN 01/12/20 5:35:07 PM #133:	foolm0r0n posted... Maybe 3rd times the charm? no i nailed it that time --- Thus is our treaty written; thus is our agreement made. Thought it the arrow of time; memory never fades. What was asked for was given; the price is paid <cite>NFUN posted [p:932833001] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>foolm0r0n posted...</cite> <quote> Maybe 3rd times the charm? </quote> no i nailed it that time</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Not_an_Owl 01/12/20 5:35:10 PM #134:	foolm0r0n posted... Again, it just seems like you're defending eager Hillary supporters. I'm not really trying to defend anyone. Anyway, it's pretty clear no positions are going to change so I'll be dropping this argument now. --- Besides, marijuana is far more harmful than steroids. - BlitzBomb I headbang to Bruckner. <cite>Not_an_Owl posted [p:932833005] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>foolm0r0n posted... </cite> <quote>Again, it just seems like you're defending eager Hillary supporters.</quote>I'm not really trying to defend anyone. Anyway, it's pretty clear no positions are going to change so I'll be dropping this argument now. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LordoftheMorons 01/12/20 7:48:17 PM #135:	https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/justice-dept-winds-down-clinton-related-inquiry-once-championed-by-trump-it- found-nothing-of-consequence/2020/01/09/ca83932e-32f9-11ea-a053-dc6d944ba776_story.html (remove space) Hillary comnpletely exonerated from the bullshit Clinton Foundation conspiracy theories ~~Also jfc wapo, get your links under control~~ --- Congrats to Advokaiser for winning the CBX Guru Challenge! <cite>LordoftheMorons posted [p:932839037] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/justice-dept-winds-down-clinton-related-inquiry-once-championed-by-trump-it- found-nothing-of-consequence/2020/01/09/ca83932e-32f9-11ea-a053-dc6d944ba776_story.html (remove space) Hillary comnpletely exonerated from the bullshit Clinton Foundation conspiracy theories Also jfc wapo, get your links under control </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red13n 01/12/20 8:18:39 PM #136:	but...her emails... --- "First thing that crosses my mind: I didn't get any GameFAQs Karma yesterday." Math Murderer after getting his appendix removed. <cite>red13n posted [p:932840368] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>but...her emails... </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 01/12/20 8:35:06 PM #137:	I want to hear the witnesses publicly testify. Let the Senate decide her fate! --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:932841053] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>I want to hear the witnesses publicly testify. Let the Senate decide her fate! </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik7 01/12/20 9:01:09 PM #138:	LordoftheMorons posted... https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/justice-dept-winds-down-clinton-related-inquiry-once-championed-by-trump-it- found-nothing-of-consequence/2020/01/09/ca83932e-32f9-11ea-a053-dc6d944ba776_story.html (remove space) Hillary comnpletely exonerated from the bullshit Clinton Foundation conspiracy theories ~~Also jfc wapo, get your links under control~~ Obviously they found nothing figuring she destroyed all the evidence. Lol --- Xbox Live User Name - Corrik Currently playing: Spider-Man (PS4), Quantum Break (X1) <cite>Corrik7 posted [p:932842173] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>LordoftheMorons posted... </cite> <quote>https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/justice-dept-winds-down-clinton-related-inquiry-once-championed-by-trump-it- found-nothing-of-consequence/2020/01/09/ca83932e-32f9-11ea-a053-dc6d944ba776_story.html (remove space) Hillary comnpletely exonerated from the bullshit Clinton Foundation conspiracy theories Also jfc wapo, get your links under control</quote>Obviously they found nothing figuring she destroyed all the evidence. Lol </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LordoftheMorons 01/12/20 10:24:44 PM #139:	https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1216545807396167683?s=21 --- Congrats to Advokaiser for winning the CBX Guru Challenge! <cite>LordoftheMorons posted [p:932846106] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1216545807396167683?s=21 </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
foolm0r0n 01/12/20 10:39:43 PM #140:	I literally went by the white house today in shorts and flip flops Also we got snow already like a week ago Intern must have mis-scheduled the tweet, or they are really testing out their 1984 powers (judging by the replies it's working) --- _foolmo_ 2 + 2 = 4 <cite>foolm0r0n posted [p:932846661] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>I literally went by the white house today in shorts and flip flops Also we got snow already like a week ago Intern must have mis-scheduled the tweet, or they are really testing out their 1984 powers (judging by the replies it's working) </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Jakyl25 01/12/20 10:45:21 PM #141:	Trump got his first cocaine shipment of 2020 --- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DRlKR5nU8AA_v_C?format=jpg&name=large <cite>Jakyl25 posted [p:932846873] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>Trump got his first cocaine shipment of 2020</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 01/12/20 10:47:24 PM #142:	If saying up is down will keep Hillary and the Dems out, then up is down! --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:932846944] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>If saying up is down will keep Hillary and the Dems out, then up is down! </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Grimlyn 01/13/20 11:44:33 AM #143:	Booker's out https://twitter.com/CoryBooker/status/1216751780345864193 --- https://gmun.moe/ffcc GuessMyUserName's account's very own account! <cite>Grimlyn posted [p:932865192] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>Booker's out https://twitter.com/CoryBooker/status/1216751780345864193 </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChaosTonyV4 01/13/20 1:15:51 PM #144:	lmfao, sources say Bernie told Warren (to her face) that a woman cant win. Ill take things that never happened for $1000. https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/13/politics/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-meeting/index.html --- Phantom Dust. "I'll just wait for time to prove me right again." - Vlado <cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted [p:932869100] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>lmfao, sources say Bernie told Warren (to her face) that a woman cant win. Ill take things that never happened for $1000. https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/13/politics/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-meeting/index.html </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
HeroDelTiempo17 01/13/20 1:18:06 PM #145:	The entire Bernie/Warren "fight" (it's really too tepid to be called that but everyone is spinning it as one) going on right now is exhausting and pointless and I hate that it's gonna come up at the debates tomorrow. --- DPOblivion was far more determined than me. <cite>HeroDelTiempo17 posted [p:932869213] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>The entire Bernie/Warren "fight" (it's really too tepid to be called that but everyone is spinning it as one) going on right now is exhausting and pointless and I hate that it's gonna come up at the debates tomorrow. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 01/13/20 1:31:38 PM #146:	ChaosTonyV4 posted... lmfao, sources say Bernie told Warren (to her face) that a woman cant win. Ill take things that never happened for $1000. https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/13/politics/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-meeting/index.html The DNC probably made that up. Normally I would blame Trump, who most benefits from hurting Bernie, but any attack by Trump would be more skillfully executed than that. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:932869738] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>ChaosTonyV4 posted... </cite> <quote>lmfao, sources say Bernie told Warren (to her face) that a woman cant win. Ill take things that never happened for $1000. https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/13/politics/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-meeting/index.html</quote> The DNC probably made that up. Normally I would blame Trump, who most benefits from hurting Bernie, but any attack by Trump would be more skillfully executed than that. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LordoftheMorons 01/13/20 1:37:12 PM #147:	ChaosTonyV4 posted... lmfao, sources say Bernie told Warren (to her face) that a woman cant win. Ill take things that never happened for $1000. https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/13/politics/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-meeting/index.html Four sources apparently, so unless Warren was lying to these people in private for some reason it probably did happen. --- Congrats to Advokaiser for winning the CBX Guru Challenge! <cite>LordoftheMorons posted [p:932869974] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>ChaosTonyV4 posted... </cite> <quote>lmfao, sources say Bernie told Warren (to her face) that a woman cant win. Ill take things that never happened for $1000. https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/13/politics/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-meeting/index.html</quote>Four sources apparently, so unless Warren was lying to these people in private for some reason it probably did happen. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 01/13/20 1:40:01 PM #148:	LordoftheMorons posted... Four sources apparently, so unless Warren was lying to these people in private for some reason it probably did happen. It could be 40 sources and the most reasonable explanation would still be that the DNC, or someone who doesn't want Bernie to win, paid them to lie. Put it this way - if a million people announce that they personally saw Hillary commit treason, what's the most likely explanation? That the sources were paid by Russia, right? --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:932870090] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>LordoftheMorons posted... </cite> <quote>Four sources apparently, so unless Warren was lying to these people in private for some reason it probably did happen.</quote> It could be 40 sources and the most reasonable explanation would still be that the DNC, or someone who doesn't want Bernie to win, paid them to lie. Put it this way - if a million people announce that they personally saw Hillary commit treason, what's the most likely explanation? That the sources were paid by Russia, right? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChaosTonyV4 01/13/20 1:43:52 PM #149:	LordoftheMorons posted... Four sources apparently, so unless Warren was lying to these people in private for some reason it probably did happen. You are incredible. --- Phantom Dust. "I'll just wait for time to prove me right again." - Vlado <cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted [p:932870240] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>LordoftheMorons posted... </cite> <quote>Four sources apparently, so unless Warren was lying to these people in private for some reason it probably did happen.</quote> You are incredible. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 01/13/20 1:47:28 PM #150:	I hope that one of these days LOTM will wake up and realize the problem with his approach of believing witnesses without considering context. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:932870387] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>I hope that one of these days LOTM will wake up and realize the problem with his approach of believing witnesses without considering context. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChaosTonyV4 01/13/20 1:50:01 PM #151:	Its incomprehensible. Why would Bernie, the guy who campaigned more for a woman than any other person in 2016, say to his friends face that she could never win because shes a woman? Literally why would anyone say that? --- Phantom Dust. "I'll just wait for time to prove me right again." - Vlado <cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted [p:932870488] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>Its incomprehensible. Why would Bernie, the guy who campaigned more for a woman than any other person in 2016, say to his friends face that she could never win because shes a woman? Literally why would anyone say that? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LordoftheMorons 01/13/20 1:56:26 PM #152:	Because hes trying to justify why it should be him instead of her to the point that she should just get behind him when there isnt a really strong case to be made? --- Congrats to Advokaiser for winning the CBX Guru Challenge! <cite>LordoftheMorons posted [p:932870772] in Politics C... [t:78321545]...</cite> <quote>Because hes trying to justify why it should be him instead of her to the point that she should just get behind him when there isnt a really strong case to be made? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 10

Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 258: Imminent Song (+) Yeah! (+)

Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 258: Imminent Song