Jump to content

US Politics

Rich

By Rich
in General Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 27.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • The Unknown Poster

    3792

  • bustamente

    2906

  • Tracker

    2853

  • Wanna-B-Fanboy

    2412

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

do or die
do or die

At this point, in trying to get any kind of a "win" the Republican "leadership"  Trump, Pence, O'Connell along with the ole Tea baggers like Rand Paul.....are pretty busy at work.   Belittling, t

Mark F
Mark F

"I worked 4 months in New York (medicine hat)  in a lab (strip club) and we were forbidden to share anything to media (hookers)and weren't allowed to speak with non-family  (johns)  about the  sc

HardCoreBlue
HardCoreBlue

Unfortunate about the suicide. We do though need a lot more of this declining hush money to expose bad behaviours. Makes no difference to me who these people who do bad things support politi

kelownabomberfan Grand Master

kelownabomberfan

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Goalie said:

 

But WTF is the relevance in talking Hillary Clinton.. Shes not the one ******* Americans in the ass daily. 

yes she was denied the chance to do just that, thanks to Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Florida, all states that were "supposed" to just vote the way they were told.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kelownabomberfan Grand Master

kelownabomberfan

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Who gives a ****. Its irrelevant. Typical tho.. Talk about Hillary.. Even tho she has nothing to do with the current clown. 

I think Mark was well within the bounds of this forum to bring it up.  Not sure why this is irrelevant at all, but feel free to bring it up with Mark via PM.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kelownabomberfan Grand Master

kelownabomberfan

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

So... She won the popular vote... yet is more unpopular than trump?

 

You lost me.

I thought you just said that Hillary was irrelevant.  You lost me.

In terms of popularity, ok, great, she's more popular.  She's the most popular loser.  Awesome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wanna-B-Fanboy Grand Master

Wanna-B-Fanboy

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

I thought you just said that Hillary was irrelevant.  You lost me.

In terms of popularity, ok, great, she's more popular.  She's the most popular loser.  Awesome.

No. I'm not your huckleberry. That was someone else you are trying picking a fight with today.

Edited by wanna-b-fanboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Unknown Poster Newbie

The Unknown Poster

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Popular = more ppl voted for her. She won the popular vote. There is no yeah but... Its not yeah but.

 Its she ******* did. 

But WTF is the relevance in talking Hillary Clinton.. Shes not the one ******* Americans in the ass daily. 

Math isn’t some people’s strong suit 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Unknown Poster Newbie

The Unknown Poster

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, kelownabomberfan said:

Once again, you broke my irony meter.  You owe $12.

my cheerios and my computer screen both are taking a major beating today.

Ok, let's look at the conversation again.  You openly asked why Zontar is "allowed to post" or some such language.  Even though he doesn't break any rules here, and is generally respectful.  So then why wouldn't he be allowed to post?  Because he says things that you disagree with?  I ask the question, and used the term "free speech' which I know is a trigger for some, and am hit with a lecture about hate speech, which isn't applicable to the discussion at all, but "thanks".  So it's pretty logical to assume that you, or some here, feel that what Zontar says is "hate speech", even though it isn't.  He's just saying things that you disagree with.  I disagree with a lot of things he says too.  But he is allowed to say it.  He's not breaking any rules of the forum.  Once you start censoring people, or even calling for it, just because you disagree with them, you do enter the world of the absurd.  And it's just not a place anyone should even be considering, because we are supposed to be a free country.

Truth Czar is going to have to put in for OT.  But Ill play along because I dont think you have earned to right to insult and belittle people and maliciously obscure narratives.

You brought up free speech.  I CLEARLY (and repeatedly) explained that I dont think people should be able to blatantly post falsehoods as if they are facts.  Its akin to arguing that Laine sucks because he's only 5'6" and cant score.  No one would put up with that repeatedly.

But, to be fair, when you dont understand a post I make, you are welcome to politely ask for clarification.  As for the rest of the quote, again, you belittle and insult which really exposes that even you think your position is weak sauce.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Unknown Poster Newbie

The Unknown Poster

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, Mark H. said:

You can’t possibly not understand the point of my original post. There were plenty of luke warm Trump supporters who voted for him, because they didn’t want to just stay home. That’s not even up for debate, it’s a fact.  

You really think I totally understood your point and wasted my time asking you to clarify?  Thats tin foil hate stuff.  I asked because I didnt understand (I know, I know, difficult to believe I dont always understand everything lol) and I was legitimately curious about the point you were trying to make.

If someone was luke warm on Trump, why wouldnt they vote for him?  Thats not really the same thing as being anti-Hilary.  Often times people vote for their party over the candidate.  Again, Im not sure what your point was....were you trying to argue that Hilary ran a bad campaign or was not universally loved?  I mean, sure.  So?  She was far more popular than Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wideleft Grand Master

Wideleft

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

Fair enough, but I also think punching Communists in the face is totally acceptable.  Where do we draw the punching in the face line?   And who is a "Nazi" anymore?  The term seems to have lost a lot of meaning these days, as everyone is a Nazi....

These are the words of someone who seems overly defensive about their position.  I never jump to that hyperbole, but there are plenty of admitted nazis and neo-nazi's to go around.

North America[edit]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Unknown Poster Newbie

The Unknown Poster

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, do or die said:

Lots of broad brush stroking, here....

Its really getting ridiculous.  The 2% trying to derail the thread (ie. get it locked) while the 98% just want a place to talk about the historically crazy US political landscape.  As if there isnt plenty of news to discuss lately...

Since I would never want to be accused of going off-topic, I see that Captain Economy has managed to sink the stock market today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Unknown Poster Newbie

The Unknown Poster

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Wideleft said:

These are the words of someone who seems overly defensive about their position.  I never jump to that hyperbole, but there are plenty of admitted nazis and neo-nazi's to go around.

North America[edit]

Good lord if people are actively questioning whether we should have an issue with Nazi's....yikes.  I guess it explains the objection to calling a large chunk of Trump's supporters white nationalists.  Whats that expression about protesting too much?  Explains a lot.  Many very fine people to go around I guess...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wideleft Grand Master

Wideleft

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

 

Since when does the NDP run consistent surpluses.  Look, you want to stick your head in the sand, be my guest.  Is there a "socialism for dummies" book?  That sounds kind of redundant.

So you are saying that right now, the Left and the Right are both being inherently dishonest, and so therefore free speech should be abolished?  Is that your takeaway?  If so, I agree with the first part, but disagree with the second.

LOL - here we go again.  

Mark answered the first point quite properly - no sand required.  You just have to look at the historic deficits that Republicans and Conservatives have piled up to know that deficit financing isn't necessarily what "the left" automatically does.  To say otherwise is dishonest.

As for honesty in politics, I am paraphrasing what Orwell said.  I truly do think that there are honest politicians who are in public service for all the right reasons and to think otherwise is too cynical a viewpoint for me to stay interested in politics.  The cause/result you suggest is too puzzling for me to ponder or reply to because it's kind of insane.

Question about free speech:  Do you support the right of someone to walk up to a person of colour and call them the n-word?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wanna-B-Fanboy Grand Master

Wanna-B-Fanboy

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Wideleft said:

Mark answered the first point quite properly - no sand required.  You just have to look at the historic deficits that Republicans and Conservatives have piled up to know that deficit financing isn't necessarily what "the left" automatically does.  To say otherwise is dishonest.

As for honesty in politics, I am paraphrasing what Orwell said.  I truly do think that there are honest politicians who are in public service for all the right reasons and to think otherwise is too cynical a viewpoint for me to stay interested in politics.  The cause/result you suggest is too puzzling for me to ponder or reply to because it's kind of insane.

Question about free speech:  Do you support the right of someone to walk up to a person of colour and call them the n-word?

I just can't like this post enough.... We need more vote buttons!

Thanks for posting this.

Edited by wanna-b-fanboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wideleft Grand Master

Wideleft

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, do or die said:

Ok, in the interests of fairness, here is a reason to vote for Trump...

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/13/donald-trump-red-sox-1317856

 

Or it's the 10,001st reason not to as he's just trying to distract people from the real issues.

I do appreciate your attempt to lighten things up around here, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kelownabomberfan Grand Master

kelownabomberfan

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

Funny... You are technically correct yet nobody refers to it as the 2015 election. Everyone refers to it as the 2016 election. 

I'll stick to 2016 so there is no confusion. 

Actually I was talking about the Canadian election.  I assume you were being deliberately obtuse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kelownabomberfan Grand Master

kelownabomberfan

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Wideleft said:

 

Question about free speech:  Do you support the right of someone to walk up to a person of colour and call them the n-word?

is the person using the N word also a person of colour?  And why use such an extreme example?  Talk about missing the entire point.  On purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

×
×
  • Create New...