DNC off to a good start

[red321]

15 minutes ago, Lawrence said:

"Source: Camps in talks for Sanders to nominate Clinton"

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/26/politics/source-camps-in-talks-for-sanders-to-nominate-clinton/

LOL. What a complete sellout.

Where the hell is AJ? I want to hear what a true Berner has to say about this treachery.

 

On 7/21/2016 at 9:03 AM, Lawrence said:

I can tell that Cruz has committed political hara kiri just by the way the libs on here have joined in a mass circle jerk over his speech. Even the Cruz supporters at the convention were taunting him and his wife.

 

On 7/20/2016 at 8:07 PM, Lawrence said:

Cruz just flushed his career down the toilet but who cares?

 

Sanders = treacherous sellout for endorsing Hillary

Cruz = committed political hara kari and flushed his career down the toilet

 

bwhahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahaha

[tdawg87]

Clinton is an anagram for nonclit.

Just wanted to bring this up.

[Spirit]

7 minutes ago, Glen said:

I don't actually support Hillary, but as I've said before, given that either she or Trump is going to be president, I'd rather see her appoint the SC justices.  I'm still not voting for her.  I'd wager we have more people voting for Trump than we do for Hillary on this board.  

Who would you rather see win?  No semantics.  I've explained why I'd rather see Hillary win.

 

Is saying, "neither of them" semantics to you?  Because I really don't want either to win.  

 

[mtangelsfan]

Glen, I honestly couldn't say.  For me Trump is a huge question mark.  I know he will do damage, just how much.  I also know what Clinton will do which is the same crap that has been done which I despise except even shadier than ever.

So do I hope the one who could ruin the country now or not or one who will help continue the slow roll to hell?

SCOTUS is what they are.  Even with they had a "conservative" majority they still made some rather liberal decisions.  I haven't like many of their rulings.  So more of the same wont change things for me.

[Glen]

5 minutes ago, Geoff said:

 

Is saying, "neither of them" semantics to you?  Because I really don't want either to win.  

 

Yes.  Because one of them is gonna win.  Which one do you prefer?  I get that most of us here don't want either of them, but of the two you gotta pick one.

[Glen]

1 minute ago, mtangelsfan said:

Glen, I honestly couldn't say.  For me Trump is a huge question mark.  I know he will do damage, just how much.  I also know what Clinton will do which is the same crap that has been done which I despise except even shadier than ever.

So do I hope the one who could ruin the country now or not or one who will help continue the slow roll to hell?

SCOTUS is what they are.  Even with they had a "conservative" majority they still made some rather liberal decisions.  I haven't like many of their rulings.  So more of the same wont change things for me.

 

I'm too lazy to find it but a while ago I read an article about how SC justices fairly often don't work out the way the president nominating them hopes it will.

[Spirit]

Just now, Glen said:

Yes.  Because one of them is gonna win.  Which one do you prefer?  I get that most of us here don't want either of them, but of the two you gotta pick one.

 

Nah ... I don't gotta do anything.  I think they would both be horrible in their own special way.  

 

 

[Jason]

19 minutes ago, red321 said:

 

 

 

Sanders = treacherous sellout for endorsing Hillary

Cruz = committed political hara kari and flushed his career down the toilet

 

bwhahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahaha

Actually Cruz still has more potential years left on his career. This was Bernie's one and only chance at the White House. Cruz is still fairly young while Bernie is approaching Crypt Keeper status. 

[Jason]

25 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

Clinton is an anagram for nonclit.

Just wanted to bring this up.

I have a feeling that thing may be obnoxiously larger than normal

[Lhalo]

43 minutes ago, red321 said:

 

 

 

Sanders = treacherous sellout for endorsing Hillary

Cruz = committed political hara kari and flushed his career down the toilet

 

bwhahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahaha

I must have missed where the RNC colluded to have Cruz lose the race.

[RallyMo]

39 minutes ago, Geoff said:

 

Nah ... I don't gotta do anything.  I think they would both be horrible in their own special way.  

 

 

Right, but that's kind of a cop out when it comes to the question. Both of us (I presume you'll be voting for your hashtag buddy) will be casting a vote for Gary Johnson come election day, but at the end of the day unless a significant and welcome change occurs it's evident that either Trump or Clinton will be end up being our next President.

While it's truly easy to say that one thinks that they would both be horrible in their own special way, it's certainly possible to pick which one you feel has the potential to the least amount of damage. As far as I'm concerned, Trump has the greatest potential for calamity. He's constantly saying shit that is troubling and truly not all that distanced from slippery slope to an extremely disconcerting future rife w/ censorship and blanket mistreatment of large groups of people. On the other hand, if one dismisses it as "he couldn't possibly actually think like that and act upon it," exactly what is the guy going to do? He's quite a liar, as well. Clinton, on the other hand, is seemingly bought and paid for and extension of what we've already been going through for 36 or more years now. She's also apparently not all that well disciplined in areas where it counts re: information security. She's quite a liar.

So, of the two that the general public will likely vote for, who do you see as causing more harm than the other when everything is weighed out?

[RallyMo]

21 minutes ago, Lawrence said:

I must have missed where the RNC colluded to have Cruz lose the race.

Absolutely. They couldn't figure out how to do something coordinated to save their lives if the situation called for it.

[Spirit]

5 minutes ago, RallyMo said:

Right, but that's kind of a cop out when it comes to the question. Both of us (I presume you'll be voting for your hashtag buddy) will be casting a vote for Gary Johnson come election day, but at the end of the day unless a significant and welcome change occurs it's evident that either Trump or Clinton will be end up being our next President.

While it's truly easy to say that one thinks that they would both be horrible in their own special way, it's certainly possible to pick which one you feel has the potential to the least amount of damage. As far as I'm concerned, Trump has the greatest potential for calamity. He's constantly saying shit that is troubling and truly not all that distanced from slippery slope to an extremely disconcerting future rife w/ censorship and blanket mistreatment of large groups of people. On the other hand, if one dismisses it as "he couldn't possibly actually think like that and act upon it," exactly what is the guy going to do? He's quite a liar, as well. Clinton, on the other hand, is seemingly bought and paid for and extension of what we've already been going through for 36 or more years now. She's also apparently not all that well disciplined in areas where it counts re: information security. She's quite a liar.

So, of the two that the general public will likely vote for, who do you see as causing more harm than the other when everything is weighed out?

 

Picking between two terminal illnesses is a false choice.  One might kill you quicker and more painfully than the other I guess, but both will kill you. 

Between Trump and Clinton, which one is that?  I have a pretty good idea of what Clinton would do, because there's a track record horrible decisions.  I have no idea what Trump would do because there's only a track record of horrible rhetoric.  So who would cause the most harm?  Who the knows?  But either terminal illness will kill you.

 

 

 

[Glen]

So Trump then. Got it.

[the dude abides]

2 hours ago, Lou said:

Melania plagiarism rewrites 

 

"Lou, I served with Arthur Fonzarelli, I knew Arthur Fonzarelli, Arthur Fonzarelli was a friend of mine. Lou, you are no Arthur Fonzarelli."

-Melania Trump

[Spirit]

Ha!

 

no

 

 

 

[Jason]

If you lean right of center it's Trump. If left of center, Clinton. It's not that difficult

[Spirit]

Ok, you want an answer?  Here's my answer.  If it's not Johnson I want it to be Jill Stein. 

 

 

 

[the dude abides]

1 minute ago, Geoff said:

Ok, you want an answer?  Here's my answer.  If it's not Johnson I want it to be Jill Stein. 

 

I WANT THE TRUTH!

[Blarg]

You guys are the pussification of American politics. Choose a lying bitch or a lying asshole but make the choice.

I pick the asshole because we haven't had a flamboyant dick in the White House since Teddy Roosevelt and the most memorable things he did was create The Square Deal, carve up most of the northwest calling it the National Forrest and began construction of the Panama Canal. He didn't get us into a war, like most people feared, he actually brokered a peace in the Russo/Japanese conflict. He didn't crash the economy and he wasn't a Wall Street sellout. Not that I think Donald is going to be a good president but he won't be a nation killer by waging whatever fight corporations want to instill greater profits. That includes continuing the Middle East war and creating new areas of conflict, creating more enemies than allies.

 

[RallyMo]

2 minutes ago, Geoff said:

Ok, you want an answer?  Here's my answer.  If it's not Johnson I want it to be Jill Stein and if it's not Stein I don't care how I die. 

 

 

 

Fixed in an effort to combine your feelings

[Spirit]

4 minutes ago, RallyMo said:

Fixed in an effort to combine your feelings

 

Now you're getting it.

 

[mtangelsfan]

9 minutes ago, Blarg said:

You guys are the pussification of American politics. Choose a lying bitch or a lying asshole but make the choice.

I pick the asshole because we haven't had a flamboyant dick in the White House since Teddy Roosevelt and the most memorable things he did was create The Square Deal, carve up most of the northwest calling it the National Forrest and began construction of the Panama Canal. He didn't get us into a war, like most people feared, he actually brokered a peace in the Russo/Japanese conflict. He didn't crash the economy and he wasn't a Wall Street sellout. Not that I think Donald is going to be a good president but he won't be a nation killer by waging whatever fight corporations want to instill greater profits. That includes continuing the Middle East war and creating new areas of conflict, creating more enemies than allies.

 

Ludicrous!  The way I see it you people are the reason this country is in the shape its in.  No balls to do the right thing so you kiss ass with someone who is despicable.  You just want the current system to keep going.

[Blarg]

So you choose to vote irrelevant protest votes that are ignored.

Gallant.

[Glen]

Comparing Trump to Roosevelt is like comparing me to Mike Trout.