Meathead Posted January 22, 2017 Posted January 22, 2017 (edited) The lesson here should be that if a President terrifies you with the prospects of what he might do, than you have vested the Office with too much power, and stripped away too many checks and balances which historically have constrained the men who have held the Office. yes but in this cycle we have made the worst possible mistake: we have given control to only one party and done so with a demagogue at the top it appears painfully obvious to me that the electorate was intending to do what it normally does, split control of govt by electing a president from one party and a congress from the other. thats a good thing, and its just about the only good trait that the electorate as a whole has but a series of events aligned themselves to screw up that intention. the biggest was the cultural demonization of whiteness as the defacto standard of racism, painting trump supporters as 'deplorables' at a time in history when whites who have mostly abandoned their terribly racist past were sick and tired of being called racist when they werent. then was hillarys own moral sin of cheating, conspiring with the dnc to rig the primary, exposed via the one-sided hacking and leaking of that information by the russions to swing the election away from a hyper-qualified person they feared toward a stooge of an idiot they could manipulate. and of course the last minute announcement by comey that he had reopened the email investigation so the proper result that the electorate expected to make happen should have been hillary at the top with both houses under the other party. as it should always be what we have now is a charlatan demagogue with a broken republicanism eager to blank check almost whatever this piece of crap idiot wants to do the ONLY thing the dems have in their arsenal now is the filibuster, and if they use that too much is going to damage their political future so they can only play that card so many times. well that, and the social leverage they will get once ppl realize what an unhinged idiot this man is, but that might take quite a while to become political capital this is the most dangerous political situation i can ever remember in my adult life. i hope we dont seriously regret it. honestly im finding it hard to believe we wont i didn't read all of this, i read the first part about looking for a republican. than just now read that you can't think he's better than her. 1) on the first part... who was your choice as a GOP member? mine was kasich whom i voted for in the primary. once you answer that tell me why you supported that dude over a Dem...because at that time i'll laugh my ass off because you were going to vote dem regardless. and it shows in your typing sorry, not responding if you want to engage me you need to a) read eveything ive typed in a post, 3) remove partisan accusations this goes for everyone btw Edited January 22, 2017 by Meathead
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 22, 2017 Posted January 22, 2017 @ Meathead: How is this the most dangerous political situation of your life, outside of the fact, of course, that an authoritarian executive, forged as a weapon to punish conservatives and libertarians, has been handed to a non-Democrat? A few facts you'll need to reconcile: - Donald Trump is a RINO. He will get resistance from his own party, as was demonstrated in the build up to this election. - The Obama administration enjoyed both a House and Senate majority, and President Obama was a demagogue. - America did not "intend to split control of the government". America has been, in wide swaths, rejecting Democratic policies in the last three election cycles. In addition to federal elections, the Democrats have hemorrhaged so many state level governments that if they desired, Republicans could call a convention and actually begin the process to amend the Constitution. And given how many Democratic vs. Republican seats are up for grabs in the next election cycle, and considering the nomination of up to four SCOTUS seats over the next eight years Republicans are now in position to control policy for the next 20-30 years. America has rejected, whole sale, at every level of government, the agenda of the left. - Hillary Clinton was not in any way qualified for the office of President. She has no accomplishments of note in any of her positions of service. In fact, she proved herself to be dangerously incompetent and corrupt, as well as ineffective, during her time in office. The level of her corruption can most easily be summed up by simply pointing out that the Clinton Global Initiative was shut down by the Clintons after she lost the election.
boyst Posted January 22, 2017 Author Posted January 22, 2017 yes but in this cycle we have made the worst possible mistake: we have given control to only one party and done so with a demagogue at the top it appears painfully obvious to me that the electorate was intending to do what it normally does, split control of govt by electing a president from one party and a congress from the other. thats a good thing, and its just about the only good trait that the electorate as a whole has but a series of events aligned themselves to screw up that intention. the biggest was the cultural demonization of whiteness as the defacto standard of racism, painting trump supporters as 'deplorables' at a time in history when whites who have mostly abandoned their terribly racist past were sick and tired of being called racist when they werent. then was hillarys own moral sin of cheating, conspiring with the dnc to rig the primary, exposed via the one-sided hacking and leaking of that information by the russions to swing the election away from a hyper-qualified person they feared toward a stooge of an idiot they could manipulate. and of course the last minute announcement by comey that he had reopened the email investigation so the proper result that the electorate expected to make happen should have been hillary at the top with both houses under the other party. as it should always be what we have now is a charlatan demagogue with a broken republicanism eager to blank check almost whatever this piece of crap idiot wants to do the ONLY thing the dems have in their arsenal now is the filibuster, and if they use that too much is going to damage their political future so they can only play that card so many times. well that, and the social leverage they will get once ppl realize what an unhinged idiot this man is, but that might take quite a while to become political capital this is the most dangerous political situation i can ever remember in my adult life. i hope we dont seriously regret it. honestly im finding it hard to believe we wont sorry, not responding if you want to engage me you need to a) read eveything ive typed in a post, 3) remove partisan accusations this goes for everyone btw no one is going to bother with you because you won't come down from that pedestal you are upon which is so far shoved up your rear that you're not going to change your mind one bit. you already alienated the entire thread with logic that defies most 2nd graders by giving a certainty to an unknown... proclaiming trump to be the worst ever or whatever you said in just his 2nd day. only a fool would do that. and only a bigger fool would give you more time to discuss anyhting. disirregardless, you're 2 minutes of my time as i watch football. and since i have to look at the tv to type and not the screen i can type. if i had to look at the video i'd watch cat vidoes or porn. @ Meathead: How is this the most dangerous political situation of your life, outside of the fact, of course, that an authoritarian executive, forged as a weapon to punish conservatives and libertarians, has been handed to a non-Democrat? A few facts you'll need to reconcile: - Donald Trump is a RINO. He will get resistance from his own party, as was demonstrated in the build up to this election. - The Obama administration enjoyed both a House and Senate majority, and President Obama was a demagogue. - America did not "intend to split control of the government". America has been, in wide swaths, rejecting Democratic policies in the last three election cycles. In addition to federal elections, the Democrats have hemorrhaged so many state level governments that if they desired, Republicans could call a convention and actually begin the process to amend the Constitution. And given how many Democratic vs. Republican seats are up for grabs in the next election cycle, and considering the nomination of up to four SCOTUS seats over the next eight years Republicans are now in position to control policy for the next 20-30 years. America has rejected, whole sale, at every level of government, the agenda of the left. - Hillary Clinton was not in any way qualified for the office of President. She has no accomplishments of note in any of her positions of service. In fact, she proved herself to be dangerously incompetent and corrupt, as well as ineffective, during her time in office. The level of her corruption can most easily be summed up by simply pointing out that the Clinton Global Initiative was shut down by the Clintons after she lost the election. he does not know what rino is. it means repblican in name & orange.
DC Tom Posted January 22, 2017 Posted January 22, 2017 yes but in this cycle we have made the worst possible mistake: we have given control to only one party and done so with a demagogue at the top it appears painfully obvious to me that the electorate was intending to do what it normally does, split control of govt by electing a president from one party and a congress from the other. thats a good thing, and its just about the only good trait that the electorate as a whole has but a series of events aligned themselves to screw up that intention. the biggest was the cultural demonization of whiteness as the defacto standard of racism, painting trump supporters as 'deplorables' at a time in history when whites who have mostly abandoned their terribly racist past were sick and tired of being called racist when they werent. then was hillarys own moral sin of cheating, conspiring with the dnc to rig the primary, exposed via the one-sided hacking and leaking of that information by the russions to swing the election away from a hyper-qualified person they feared toward a stooge of an idiot they could manipulate. and of course the last minute announcement by comey that he had reopened the email investigation so the proper result that the electorate expected to make happen should have been hillary at the top with both houses under the other party. as it should always be what we have now is a charlatan demagogue with a broken republicanism eager to blank check almost whatever this piece of crap idiot wants to do the ONLY thing the dems have in their arsenal now is the filibuster, and if they use that too much is going to damage their political future so they can only play that card so many times. well that, and the social leverage they will get once ppl realize what an unhinged idiot this man is, but that might take quite a while to become political capital this is the most dangerous political situation i can ever remember in my adult life. i hope we dont seriously regret it. honestly im finding it hard to believe we wont Do you even understand how many outright errors you have in this post?
Meathead Posted January 22, 2017 Posted January 22, 2017 well i guess im not going to if you dont specify
DC Tom Posted January 22, 2017 Posted January 22, 2017 well i guess im not going to if you dont specify Yeah...my rhetorical question was meant to instill a sense of curiosity and doubt in you so you'd go do your own research and question your own assumptions, as you certainly wouldn't take my word for it.
boyst Posted January 22, 2017 Author Posted January 22, 2017 well i guess im not going to if you dont specify this is why PPP has a bad name. you come to this place and be retarded and don't own it. i say more stupid **** in this forum than anyone. but i am laughed at, mocked and called an idiot. i seldom make a point further than what my finger can grab up my nose. but when you came here and everyone called you out on being wrong you simply back down and say things like "pass" or deflect from your own statements when pressed. how can anyone engage you in a conversation when you do this? they can't. they can't because you can't. because you're not educated or intelligent enough to stand behind your words. this should be telling to you as a person who has likely based your opinon on your own nonsense. this nonsense --- this nonsense can't be disputed because you won't. you don't provide examples or a retort to support your message. you won't be objective to discuss. you instead get the **** kicked out of you - rightfully - because you are too stupid to stay out of a discussion you do not belong in. tl,dr; basically, you're an uninformed voter and an idiot. Yeah...my rhetorical question was meant to instill a sense of curiosity and doubt in you so you'd go do your own research and question your own assumptions, as you certainly wouldn't take my word for it. just call him an idiot and be done with it this post automatically submitted by boyst-bot build .04BAC
Meathead Posted January 23, 2017 Posted January 23, 2017 (edited) Yeah...my rhetorical question was meant to instill a sense of curiosity and doubt in you so you'd go do your own research and question your own assumptions, as you certainly wouldn't take my word for it. for someone who has displayed some pretty sharp tendencies this was a very weak response i again offer you the chance to specify what errors in judgment or perspective you think i have made in that post Edited January 23, 2017 by Meathead
DC Tom Posted January 23, 2017 Posted January 23, 2017 for someone who has displayed some pretty sharp tendencies this was a very weak response i again offer you the chance to specify what errors in judgment or perspective you think i have made in that post It was an honest response. I considered giving you chapter and verse, but decided you'd get more out of the exercise if I didn't spoon-feed it to you.
boyst Posted January 23, 2017 Author Posted January 23, 2017 (edited) for someone who has displayed some pretty sharp tendencies this was a very weak response i again offer you the chance to specify what errors in judgment or perspective you think i have made in that post Me, you suck. i mean, seriously. oh my Me, you don't get it. and i can imagine a man sitting behind his computer that out of touch with what is going on yet uncomfortable because of a lack of confidence realizing he's in over his head and sold a load of bull **** he never had. you exclaimed something. when pressed you caouldn't back it. this was your big chance to really show someone you knew something to maybe change their mind about how wrong they were. and you folded worse than cam newton in a super bowl Edited January 23, 2017 by Boyst62
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 23, 2017 Posted January 23, 2017 pass Again, this is why you aren't worth discussing anything with. You aren't looking for discussion, you're looking for a soap box. You ask others to concede your assumptions, rather then enter into dialogue. That approach is mostly useless, and won't win others to your position.
Just Jack Posted January 23, 2017 Posted January 23, 2017 tl,dr; basically, you're an uninformed voter and an idiot. But he's not a voter, he mentioned in an earlier post he didn't bother voting because he didn't like the choices.
boyst Posted January 23, 2017 Author Posted January 23, 2017 But he's not a voter, he mentioned in an earlier post he didn't bother voting because he didn't like the choices. that makes me sad because he's so passionate. i truly hate the idea of voting for X becaiuse you dislike Y... but come on... if you're XY you should have a pair, if not grow a pair.
Meathead Posted January 23, 2017 Posted January 23, 2017 Yeah...my rhetorical question was meant to instill a sense of curiosity and doubt in you so you'd go do your own research and question your own assumptions, as you certainly wouldn't take my word for it. Sorry bro, I like you but that's horseshit. I read the paragraph that you quoted to see if there was anything in there that I might have misstated and there just isn't. I I'm completely comfortable with what I said, I thought a lot about those issues and I believe I have a mature perspective on them, and I could provide detailed commentary on several different topics referencing what I was addressing in that post Honestly this feels like one of those instances where you said something off the cuff and then realize later you had no substance and you're trying to cover for yourself. And frankly it comes off as thoroughly condescending , which doesn't seem consistent with the rest of your posting but it is what it is. If you ever want to try again and tell me what it was that you think I didn't know or made a mistake I'll be willing to work with you on it
IDBillzFan Posted January 23, 2017 Posted January 23, 2017 She has the most participation trophies... And a vagina. Participation trophies and a vagina. And this ashtray. And that's all she thought she needed.
Greg F Posted January 23, 2017 Posted January 23, 2017 i again offer you the chance to specify what errors in judgment or perspective you think i have made in that post How about claiming Hillary was "a hyper-qualified person".
Greg F Posted January 23, 2017 Posted January 23, 2017 If you want to see the real crowd picture: http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/01/politics/trump-inauguration-gigapixel/ Zoom to the back and you will see the areas that are not occupied in the press photo are largely filled. Pan and zoom back to the podium and you will see Trump speaking. How embarrassing for pasta joe to have fallen for the media propaganda.
KD in CA Posted January 23, 2017 Posted January 23, 2017 How about claiming Hillary was "a hyper-qualified person". Well, she does (allegedly) have a vagina. What other qualifications did you want?
Meathead Posted January 23, 2017 Posted January 23, 2017 How about claiming Hillary was "a hyper-qualified person". theres nobody in the history of america that has a broader range of education, intelligence, and direct experience for the job of the presidency i expect her enormous hubris would have stood a good chance to damage or even destroy her presidency, but she would have had the biggest head start on the job of anybody who ever ran for the office i dont know how anybody with a rational mind can dispute that, but i realize many of you will anyway
Recommended Posts