|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Jul 31, 2019 10:28:53 GMT -5
I don't think, really, anyone knows how it really started. It's literally gutter politics and there's all kinds of crap like this simmering below the surface. But it never reached the national scene until clinton supporters perpetuated it during the primary. Really... snopes does good work on some things. But, when politics is involved it is indisputable of its liberal bias. Reality has a liberal bias. Plus Snopes did the digging to prove it originated elsewhere. You can look at the evidence presented, no bias interposing itself. |
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Jul 31, 2019 10:30:24 GMT -5
 I'm starting to like this chick.... Furthermore, I find it interesting that the two topics which were not discussed tonight were the Mueller Report and impeachment. Hmmmm....I wonder why.... Seeing as both topics have nothing to do with what they will do if they become President and will be irrelevant if so, there isn't much wondering required. Overall the debates seem a bit too crowded. Warren might slowly push Sanders out, which I approve. As for the others, I doubt they will still be there when the field narrows, but who knows. Buttegieg might go through based on his peculiar resume. |
|
|
|
Post by Least censored on the planet! on Jul 31, 2019 10:37:10 GMT -5
Anyone watched last night's debate? Here's my brief review of the debate: Sanders – Old man yelling is growing boring and annoying. Warren – No major flubs, so good performance, even though her plans don’t exist in the realm of reality. O’Rourke – Hopeless. Buttigieg – Smooth and polished, but too boring for rageoholic Democrats this year. Klobuchar – Forgettable. Bullock and Hickenlooper – Would have made good Democrat candidates in the 1990s. Delaney – He seems like a designated driver trying to corral the drunks in his car. Ryan – Like the other second-tier white guys, good performance but not enough. Williamson – I think she could be this year’s Trump: laughed at by the elites but appreciated by those who find the debate to be predictable and stale. She doesn’t talk policy at all, except for in the vaguest terms, but she has an appeal to those who respond viscerally to her leftist-populist anti-establishment message. Seriously, she'll confront the "dark psychic forces" with a gusto!! Still not voting for any of them whemb? |
|
|
|
Post by whemblycthulhu on Jul 31, 2019 10:37:36 GMT -5
I'm starting to like this chick.... Furthermore, I find it interesting that the two topics which were not discussed tonight were the Mueller Report and impeachment. Hmmmm....I wonder why.... Seeing as both topics have nothing to do with what they will do if they become President and will be irrelevant if so, there isn't much wondering required. Overall the debates seem a bit too crowded. Warren might slowly push Sanders out, which I approve. As for the others, I doubt they will still be there when the field narrows, but who knows. Buttegieg might go through based on his peculiar resume. Warren and Biden really didn't go after each other last night. I suspect they're keeping their powder dry until the field is winnowed down a bit. Bettegieg seems like a savvy politician and I think he'll stay in the national spotlight if he doesn't win (ie, run for House or Senate... or maybe get his own CNN show). |
|
|
|
Post by whemblycthulhu on Jul 31, 2019 10:39:03 GMT -5
Anyone watched last night's debate? Here's my brief review of the debate: Sanders – Old man yelling is growing boring and annoying. Warren – No major flubs, so good performance, even though her plans don’t exist in the realm of reality. O’Rourke – Hopeless. Buttigieg – Smooth and polished, but too boring for rageoholic Democrats this year. Klobuchar – Forgettable. Bullock and Hickenlooper – Would have made good Democrat candidates in the 1990s. Delaney – He seems like a designated driver trying to corral the drunks in his car. Ryan – Like the other second-tier white guys, good performance but not enough. Williamson – I think she could be this year’s Trump: laughed at by the elites but appreciated by those who find the debate to be predictable and stale. She doesn’t talk policy at all, except for in the vaguest terms, but she has an appeal to those who respond viscerally to her leftist-populist anti-establishment message. Seriously, she'll confront the "dark psychic forces" with a gusto!! Still not voting for any of them whemb? No. Yang, Delaney or Buttigieg might win me over. But the others? Fuck no. |
|
|
|
Post by Emblematic Wolfblade on Jul 31, 2019 10:44:09 GMT -5
Remember, whem supports concentration camps over the evil socialist healthcare. Of course they're not gonna win him over, none of them are cruel enough for his liking.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Jul 31, 2019 10:48:06 GMT -5
Seeing as both topics have nothing to do with what they will do if they become President and will be irrelevant if so, there isn't much wondering required. Overall the debates seem a bit too crowded. Warren might slowly push Sanders out, which I approve. As for the others, I doubt they will still be there when the field narrows, but who knows. Buttegieg might go through based on his peculiar resume. Warren and Biden really didn't go after each other last night. I suspect they're keeping their powder dry until the field is winnowed down a bit. Bettegieg seems like a savvy politician and I think he'll stay in the national spotlight if he doesn't win (ie, run for House or Senate... or maybe get his own CNN show). You mean Sanders instead of Biden? Biden wasn't up yesterday. More regarding poll numbers, Sanders seems to be slowly sinking against Warren, but going after her will only hurt him probably. Buttigieg has a good chance at another time perhaps, maybe a chance at a VP slot depending on the nominee. He has time, although that is probably what Biden thought the first time he tried... |
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Jul 31, 2019 10:51:21 GMT -5
Remember, whem supports concentration camps over the evil socialist healthcare. Of course they're not gonna win him over, none of them are cruel enough for his liking. Really, the hold your nose and vote blue moment passed in 2016. If the generalized you didn't think it was worth voting against Trump then, then why would you have changed your mind now? |
|
|
|
Post by whemblycthulhu on Jul 31, 2019 10:51:52 GMT -5
Warren and Biden really didn't go after each other last night. I suspect they're keeping their powder dry until the field is winnowed down a bit. Bettegieg seems like a savvy politician and I think he'll stay in the national spotlight if he doesn't win (ie, run for House or Senate... or maybe get his own CNN show). You mean Sanders instead of Biden? Biden wasn't up yesterday. More regarding poll numbers, Sanders seems to be slowly sinking against Warren, but going after her will only hurt him probably. Buttigieg has a good chance at another time perhaps, maybe a chance at a VP slot depending on the nominee. He has time, although that is probably what Biden thought the first time he tried... Yup Sanders. *sigh* too many damned candidates! Agreed on both points. |
|
|
|
Post by Least censored on the planet! on Jul 31, 2019 11:13:27 GMT -5
Yang, Delaney or Buttigieg might win me over. But the others? Fuck no. Why them and not the others, and what kind of things would make them win you over? |
|
|
|
Post by whemblycthulhu on Jul 31, 2019 11:29:21 GMT -5
Yang, Delaney or Buttigieg might win me over. But the others? Fuck no. Why them and not the others, and what kind of things would make them win you over? I'll add Tulsi Gabbard as a possibility (dangerously naive foreign policy wise, but seems rational domestically). As for the others? Here's a perfect encapsulation:  |
|
|
|
Post by Least censored on the planet! on Jul 31, 2019 11:31:57 GMT -5
You managed to answer to neither why those and not the others, nor to what they need to do/change to make you vote for them.
Also your opinions on foreign policy are, well... bully nation + large amount of ignorance?
|
|
|
|
Post by whemblycthulhu on Jul 31, 2019 11:36:32 GMT -5
You managed to answer to neither why those and not the others, nor to what they need to do/change to make you vote for them. If they are sane politicians who respects individual rights (among them 2nd amendment) and won't push radical changes, I'll consider them for my vote. However, since I live in Missouri, the state will handily go to Trump. Bigly. So what I do will merely submit a "protest" vote, or continue to calvin ball this and vote Trump to punish Democrats. Because. Fuck Democrats and the environment that led to the Kavanaugh embarrassments and the Convington Kids. Said by a dangerously naive advocate.... |
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Jul 31, 2019 11:37:33 GMT -5
Dangerously naive foreign policy wise? Didn't you vote for the man that basically went "Syria who?" in 2016?
|
|
CommieCanUCK
Ye Olde King of OT
The poster formerly known as feeder
Posts: 979
|
Post by CommieCanUCK on Jul 31, 2019 11:42:59 GMT -5
I find is amusing and depressing in equal amounts that you champion the Convington Kids as a reason to support Trump because fuck Dems, but your Orange Daddy explicitly calling for violence against the Central Park Five isn't enough to make you go fuck GOP.
Depressingly amusing.
Edit: oh, yeah. "What's a Leppo?" Comedy gold from the biggest joke party on the scene.
|
|
