I mean it's not weird and indicative of a mental illness like moving a coaster across a table like Donald "Hitler" Trump did!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mintjewlips
Printable View
I mean it's not weird and indicative of a mental illness like moving a coaster across a table like Donald "Hitler" Trump did!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mintjewlips
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mintjewlips
surely you can fixate on something other than the singular greatest moment of this entire community?
because for someone hell bent on fitting in, you seem to be taking an unnatural degree of pleasure in pretending our serious "it was all down hill from there" moment was something other than amazing.
ok or you can sit there for 10 minutes trying to come up with a 'diss' or something, thats fine too, go with god.
WATCH OUT FOR THESE GUYS
I just got back from a road trip and I had what alcoholics call a moment of clarity. I'd just like to remind everyone, Trump's infinitely better than Hillary, umm yea. TPP still doa, Obamacare stands, gas still $2 ish, Sessions backed off weed, war doesn't seem imminent, defense spending is suspect tho.
Under Hillary we'd have the TPP for sure and we'd be have Neocons cramming war foir Israel(maybe even ww3) down our throat with full media support and a media who wouldn't report Hillary's right wing policy.
If N Korea gets out of hand would you want a good or bad relationship w Russia and China? I think impeachment should be postponed, Pence is the nut low. Trump vs the Koch's is great, remember Trump's never held public office so his first 60 days should be rough. Pretty sure Trump will do something else outrageous and Ill regret posting this but w/e.
Anyhow since Russia has friends in high places it's rumored Russia sabotaged some munitions depot in Ukraine.
There's also a fear porn version that ponders a small tactical nuke fizzled away around 2:20 ish, I'm skeptical.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ox3EL9caJrU
Drone view, they should of flew it super close haha.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNjeMgIMxEk
Back on the Trump train fps?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-gl...-idUSKBN16X135
Dollar hits four-month low as Trump trade deflates
is reuters fake news as well now? i lose track. because either reuters is fake news or one fat white n-word named sonatine was right about trump tanking the economy.
Yea and Reuters says bitcoin ISN'T donkdown, but i guess you have selective reading.
Joe Biden said three days ago that he regrets not running for President.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mn96Jcnb11U
He went as far to say that he "researched a lot" on Hillary Clinton, and thinks he could have won, despite a "tough primary".
He also thinks he would have beaten Trump, had he been the nominee.
I'm not so sure.
First off, Biden would have been 74 upon taking office. Sure, Trump is no youngster himself, but the age thing still may have hurt him.
Second, Biden's biggest weakness has always been his mouth. While Trump also got himself into plenty of hot water with stupid things uttered on the campaign trail (and as President), Biden's propensity to utter dumb/ill-advised words could have been used by the Trump campaign to erase their own candidate's weakness in that way. At the same time, Biden comes off like a calculated, career politician, while Trump still would have had his "outsider/straight shooter" appeal. So Biden might have had some of Trump's same weaknesses, while lacking some of Trump's strengths.
On the plus side for Biden, he was moderately popular as a VP, avoided any kind of real scandal during those 8 years, and appeals to many working class people, especially in Pennsylvania. There's a fair chance that Biden would have carried some of the blue collar states where Trump upset Hillary (Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin), though it should be noted that Pennsylvania alone wouldn't have delivered the election.
One thing largely forgotten about Biden was Obama's trepidation about him. Obama was never thrilled with Biden as his VP choice, but felt he was necessary to score the older, working class vote. It turned out that Obama's 2008 campaign was so dominant that he could have won with virtually any VP. But he didn't know that at the time he selected Biden. At one point in the summer of 2008, just as Obama was picking up steam, Biden said something stupid which Republicans used against them (I forgot what it was). Someone overheard Obama yelling frustratedly, "We keep making these gains, and then Biden says stupid shit and we lose it all back." Indeed, when Obama picked up a near-insurmountable lead in the polls early September 2008, he shut Biden down. Biden was not allowed to speak in public for the final 8 weeks of the campaign. Interestingly, when McCain also somewhat shut down his polarizing VP candidate Sarah Palin, the media jumped all over that, but they were silent about Biden.
Obviously it is hard to say if Biden would have beaten Trump, but I think it is safe to assume he would have fared better than Hillary did. Thankfully for America, the DNC rigged the nomination for the most unlikable person possible and consequently got trounced at the polls. L O L
Whenever I'm having a bad day I just remember that Trump is president and there's nothing his faggot sjw opposition can do except cry about it. Feels good, man.
(1) Biden connected with working-class folks in the Rust Belt. And is from a Scranton, PA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
(2) Biden's son Beau was a legitimate war hero, which would have helped him peel away some support by military and vets for Trump.
(3) Biden didn't have his name so highly attached to NAFTA and the WTO like Hillary.
(4) Biden is not a woman nor a rabid SJW like Hillary.
(5) Biden was for a more measured approach to Iraq and Afghanistan than Hawkish Hillary, another factor to close the distance between Iraq War-critical Trump.
(6) Biden doesn't have a megarich-and-political connected foundation that Trump could attack.
(7) Biden had a reputation as honest/a straight shooter, something Hillary was sorely lacking.
(8) Biden didn't have a "Benghazi", email scandal, nor would have had the DNC documented as tilting the Dem primary field in his favor.
(9) Biden wasn't a co-architect of Bill Clinton's tough-on-crime legislation during the 1990s, in which Hillary is documented railing against urban "super-predators", nor campaigned viciously against Obama in 2008, both of which turned off a lot of Blacks from supporting Hillary this past election.
All of these factors probably would have helped Biden peel enough support away from Trump and motivate more Progressives to come out to vote for him versis Hillary.
Verdict: Biden most likely would have won with a small but solid Electoral College victory.
This is how amazingly broken the republican party is at the moment;
http://www.al.com/news/huntsville/in...ill_to_re.html
Freedom Caucus member Mo Brooks just filed a one sentence bill that repeals Obamacare. Thats all it does.
So not only does it do nothing but yank health care from American citizens, it also fails to address the main purpose of the original repeal bill; to create the requisite budget resources to enact tax reform.
That's what's good in the streets for the right wing these days.
lol at jace out here on pfa just pounding away
http://i.imgur.com/qF4l7mv.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by lol wow
honestly well played old boy
In this instance it is fake news. This writer has no idea what the fuck he is talking about.Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
To be fair, that repeal bill did pass the House over a dozen times and even passed the Senate a couple times.Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
The new Gallup approval numbers have Trump down to 36%. Barely 2 months in, he's already lower than Obama or Bill Clinton ever got during their 8 years in office. He's also lower than Gerald Ford, who was appointed, not elected.
Now he's heading to take on Ronald Reagan (35%), George HW Bush (29%), George W Bush (25%), and the Big Dog, Richard Nixon (24%), who was actually above 60% before Watergate.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/116677/pr...cs-trends.aspx
I think Biden wins the election and it wouldn't have been particularly close. Of course this is a moot argument because Biden was told by the DNC not to run and if he did he would have got similar (but not as extensive) treatment from the DNC to fix it for Hillary.Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly(1) Biden connected with working-class folks in the Rust Belt. And is from a Scranton, PA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
(2) Biden's son Beau was a legitimate war hero, which would have helped him peel away some support by military and vets for Trump.
(3) Biden didn't have his name so highly attached to NAFTA and the WTO like Hillary.
(4) Biden is not a woman nor a rabid SJW like Hillary.
(5) Biden was for a more measured approach to Iraq and Afghanistan than Hawkish Hillary, another factor to close the distance between Iraq War-critical Trump.
(6) Biden doesn't have a megarich-and-political connected foundation that Trump could attack.
(7) Biden had a reputation as honest/a straight shooter, something Hillary was sorely lacking.
(8) Biden didn't have a "Benghazi", email scandal, nor would have had the DNC documented as tilting the Dem primary field in his favor.
(9) Biden wasn't a co-architect of Bill Clinton's tough-on-crime legislation during the 1990s, in which Hillary is documented railing against urban "super-predators", nor campaigned viciously against Obama in 2008, both of which turned off a lot of Blacks from supporting Hillary this past election.
All of these factors probably would have helped Biden peel enough support away from Trump and motivate more Progressives to come out to vote for him versis Hillary.
Verdict: Biden most likely would have won with a small but solid Electoral College victory.
i think that given how many votes she got despite how 'lizardy' hillary came off, biden would have won.
bidens had a lot of scary senior moments but probably 20% of trump's votes were for "someone other than hillary".
It's amazing that all these elected officials of both parties are over 70. You can be really fit and sharp over 70, but no one is what they were at 50. When I pick a surgeon, I'm going with someone 40-55. Experienced, yet young enough to be up on all the latest shit.
You don't want the really young dude. You don't want the old dude. This rule holds true with all the truly important jobs. That we're still dealing with Trump, McCain, Pelosi, Bernie, Biden, Hillary as our go to crew is seriously problematic.
These are the people you keep on speed dial for when you run into some hairy shit and they'll give you a solid 2 hours of wisdom as long as you catch them before 3PM. Rare is the individual cut out for a high pressure demanding gig at that age.
He abstained but his cosponsorship should come as no surprise. He's against government regulation, even the kind that protects consumers.Quote:
Originally Posted by FPS_Russia
Education Shifts to the States
"The hard-learned lesson of the civil rights community over decades has shown that a strong federal role is crucial to protecting the interests of underserved students," The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, a coalition of advocacy groups, wrote to members of Congress. "Now, more than ever, access to a quality education makes the difference between economic self-sufficiency and the grip of poverty."
In crafting the new legislation, lawmakers from both chambers threaded the smallest of needles to settle on a new accountability system that satiated the Republican demands for a limited federal role and the Democrats' insistence that civil rights and equal access to education remain at the heart of the law.
A more limited role for the feds in education. Well fucking finally. Arkansas and Kansas will now show everyone how it should be done. What could be less important for a federal politician? They've got bigger fish to fry obv.
https://www.usnews.com/news/the-repo...ower-to-states
What would be the price of a gallon of gas under Hillary? I'd say add 75 cents to the current price.
When W threw the Americans under the bus for his Saudi donors they had FOX News repeating non stop "It's not the president who decides it's the market". Obama debunked that bullshit.
Oh and Chelsea won some lifetime achievement award, LOL! Don't even try it Chelsea, we're not voting for you.
Pretty hard to keep track of what is said. Late Night (Meyers) has the funniest Trump material overall IMO. Problem being it's true
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7UduuBfnrE
Dick Cheney states Putin directly tried to influence American Presidential Election.
http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecur...-be-act-of-war
“Another aspect of Mr. Putin’s conduct is the issue that is now very much in the headlines at home, and that has to do with cyber warfare, cyberattack on the United States — the fact that he took his capabilities in the cyber area and used it to try to influence our election,” Cheney said.
“There’s no question there was a very serious effort made by Mr. [Vladimir] Putin and his government, his organization, to interfere in major ways with our basic fundamental democratic processes,” Cheney said Monday during a speech at the Economic Times’ Global Business Summit 2017 in New Delhi.
“In some quarters, that would be considered an act of war. I think it’s a kind of conduct and activity we will see going forward. We know he’s attempted it previously in other states in the Baltics,” Cheney said, according to video of the remarks.
“I would not underestimate the weight that we Americans assign to the Russian attempts to interfere with our internal political processes,” Cheney said.
Is it fake news if you see Cheney say this and much more with your own eyes? Cheney begins ~ 7:45, Putin comments begin ~14:00, Putin effect on election ~15:45 Cheney ends ~27:00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zjavv6DepKs
100% of the people that loved him here before the election still love him.. some even moreQuote:
Originally Posted by DirtyB
Hmmm?!?!?;?
Believing a candidate's election promises is always a leap of faith. Trump supporters took that gamble despite evidence strongly suggesting it was all talk. Nothing has changed. When exposed, there are no explanations just newer lies.Quote:
Originally Posted by thesparten100% of the people that loved him here before the election still love him.. some even moreQuote:
Originally Posted by DirtyB
Hmmm?!?!?;?
Quote:
Originally Posted by thesparten100% of the people that loved him here before the election still love him.. some even moreQuote:
Originally Posted by DirtyB
Hmmm?!?!?;?
Death is usually the only cure for militant obstinate stupidity
So son in law and White House Innovations Director Kushner met with Sergey Gorkov, CEO of Russia's state-owned Vnesheconombank in December 2016. Gorkov is a graduate of the FSB Academy, think of a CIA Academy.
Putin first revamped Vnesheconombank, known as Russia's bank for Development and Foreign Economic Affairs, in 2007. The Russian leader turned it into "a pillar of his Kremlin-driven economy at the height of the oil boom" and took "personal control over key lending decisions," according to Bloomberg, which characterized it as "the bank that financed Vladimir Putin’s grandest ambitions."
Between 2012 and 2014, Vnesheconombank was used as cover for Russian spy Evgeny Buryakov as he attempted to recruit New York City residents as intelligence sources for Moscow, according to the Department of Justice. Before that, Buryakov used Vnesheconombank as a cover to spy and recruit assets in South Africa.
http://www.businessinsider.com/jared...o-putin-2017-3
medical research,infastructure and community development are on the chopping block to pay for the wall. I thought Mexico was paying?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/
I also thought he wanted a huge bump in infrastructure spending. Another lie I guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by big dick
It was many times, and it's going to be proven.Quote:
Originally Posted by Deal
Chalk
Sorry but 'yes' is probably easy money. People are going to stack on 'no' because emotions but its unlikely that the right wing can afford the embarrassment of Trump being frog marched out of office.
On a related note, Trumpanomics is in full swing, with a fresh push to get more coal out of the ground.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKBN16Z2AT
Punch line: we have enough coal out of the ground to last us until 2034, and no one else is buying it because lol of course they arent, it's not the 70's anymore.
So really what we have is trump providing a glibly retarded take on Reaganomics by way of welfare, where capital 'trickles down' from coal company subsidies to their workers, allowing the stocks to stay afloat and their corporate taskmasters to bank boat money bonuses.
so after doing more reading on this, it looks like that unless trump throws major incentives the democrats' way (maybe a massive trillion dollar infrastructure deal), there is a 0.0% chance that the wall gets funded.
i thought that congress could allocate money for funding the wall in the budget and pass it under reconciliation with 50 votes, but it looks like the dems can actually filibuster any appropriations that includes funding for the wall.
there obv won't be any democrats that support this and half of the republicans would vote it down too, which means the wall won't get funded.
i don't care either way about it, just noting it's not going to happen.