Jump to content

[RESULTS ARE FINAL] 2016 Election for President of the United States | Donald Trump Victory


cr47t

Recommended Posts

What? Y'all HAVE called him out on his a****** nature. 

 

That's not the point Cow Cow was making. 

 

You said to us 'Stop speaking for people you barely understand' then CowCow points out you do the same for Hillary voters. 

 

Us calling out Trump for being an arse is irrelevant to that. The point is you also generalise the viewpoints of those not supporting Trump to fit your narrative, which makes calling people out for it kinda silly. 

 

Because there are many reasons that both sides have to support or dislike either or both candidates. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Guys, I don't agree with a lot of what White has said and I don't know if I could vote for Trump, but what seems to be happening is that he's doing backflips trying to support his candidate and find information about both candidates and issues and the response has been "Nah, that's silly, you're silly."

 

To be honest I'm not sure which candidate I find worse.  Trump's an jabroni but I'm still not entirely convinced he'd be measurably worse for the country. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it's perfectly understandable. Plenty of obviously-awful and corrupt presidential candidates were elected solely due to how bad the opposition was.

 

Examples:

Bush.

Grant.

Nixon had a shady record before the Watergate scandal and was re-elected.

 

Hell, some are viewed as good presidents despite obvious corruption and scandals, such as Ronald Reagan, whose administration is arguably responsible for everything bad that has happened to America since then.

 

The lesser of two evils is how American politics has always worked. There is no decay. It doesn't reflect poorly on us at all, especially when the alternative is an equally-corrupt homunculus who says awful things on a regular basis.

 

The primaries are what reflected poorly on us. We could've had Bernie Sanders up against... uh... who's the closest thing to a not-awful Republican...

Rand Paul?

 

I'll go with Rand Paul. Even a pseudo-libertarian's views line up at least 30% with my own.

 

We could've had Rand Paul against Bernie Sanders.

 

Instead we picked two Batman supervillains.

 

f***.

Pretty much this, I really wanted Rand to win, 80% of my views matched his, and I thought he had a chance considering his father of Ron Paul originally endorsed him and that man had gained a significant following during 2008 and 2012. Even then the odds were stacked against him in that clown show of a primary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, I don't agree with a lot of what White has said and I don't know if I could vote for Trump, but what seems to be happening is that he's doing backflips trying to support his candidate and find information about both candidates and issues and the response has been "Nah, that's silly, you're silly."

 

To be honest I'm not sure which candidate I find worse. Trump's an jabroni but I'm still not entirely convinced he'd be measurably worse for the country.

What backflips though, it's not a backflip if I agree with him

 

In other words, not that it means much, but ISIS endorsed HRC today and urged every muslim to vote for her

I lied

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Source, please.

http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/isis-leader-calls-for-american-muslim-voters-to-support-hillary-clinton/

 

That's not the point Cow Cow was making.

 

You said to us 'Stop speaking for people you barely understand' then CowCow points out you do the same for Hillary voters.

 

Us calling out Trump for being an arse is irrelevant to that. The point is you also generalise the viewpoints of those not supporting Trump to fit your narrative, which makes calling people out for it kinda silly.

 

Because there are many reasons that both sides have to support or dislike either or both candidates.

I have two idiot parents and a sibling voting for HRC. I understand all too well.

 

In fact my sister is the only one in this family who realizes the issues at stake and I'm going to be eternally grateful show open my eyes to the witch HRC is

 

Either you're moon-eyed about the "progress" made in the Obama years or Trump is incredibly unpalatable for a range of issue going from his method of communication to his policies.

 

I get why y'all think HRC is good or better than Trump. I simply reject it for myself. All Obama has done is made it more dangerous for a minority such as myself to break free of the mold he has cast for us.

 

Case in pt, look at what they're doing to peter Thiel atm.

 

I'm saying Jesse is out of touch as funk. First the whole America doesn't care about HRC's emails. Wrong. Then rationalizing supporting HRC based on the current status quo. Sure. That's valid, but 2/3s of Americans think the country is heading in the wrong direction. So you're in a minority when you say you like things as are and want to vote such

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2/3's of America think that the US is heading in the wrong direction, but Obama has like a 55% approval rating last I checked. 

 

Which means you can infer the opposition is not solely due to people disliking the policies of the current leadership and instead Congress. Because Congress is filled with obstructionist bastards and they have like 11-16% approval rate currently. So you can infer that not all who think America is going in the wrong direction think it's because of Obama, but because of the collapse of Congress's will to actually do there job. 

 

It's not as simple as saying 'Oh most America's don't like the status quo, blame it all on the administrative branch'. The legislative branch is a universally despised and broken system currently, it's a guess to say people who take issue with the current direction of the US blame it as much (And more likely more than) Obama and whatever policies he enacted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, right, I forgot, there's no democrats in Congress

 

I didn't say Republican or Democrat. I said 'obstructionist bastards'. 

 

Partisanship is an issue both sides of the isle share in Congress right now and both are to blame for. I would assign more of the blame to the Republicans because they have a Majority, but I'm aware it's an issue both sides currently have. 

 

It's 85% of the voting population who disprove of congress - It's an issue that everyone shares. That congress just doesn't get sheet done like it should do. I would be far more inclined to assign some of the dissatisfaction with the current state of the US to something 85% hate than something less than 50% hate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

"WNDR assumes however all responsibility for the satirical nature of its articles and for the fictional nature of their content. All characters appearing in the articles in this website — even those based on real people — are entirely fictional and any resemblance between them and any persons, living, dead, or undead is purely a miracle."

 

Do you actually look at the garbage you post, or are you just talking out of your ass purely because you like to read your own posts?  Let me guess, you're against fact checking too, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"WNDR assumes however all responsibility for the satirical nature of its articles and for the fictional nature of their content. All characters appearing in the articles in this website — even those based on real people — are entirely fictional and any resemblance between them and any persons, living, dead, or undead is purely a miracle."

 

Do you actually look at the garbage you post, or are you just talking out of your ass purely because you like to read your own posts? Let me guess, you're against fact checking too, right?

The former, misread an article of her supporting ISIS

 

I'm glad you caught that, I should have read it closely first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By backflips I just mean you're putting a lot of effort into discussing politics, which is good.

Probs not healthy, clearly I'm losing it as evidenced by me not checking source history. 

 

Idk what to think, there's clear money transaction to SA and other foreign agents with the explicit knowledge of them supporting ISIS. But I'm a terrible messenger. Someone like Hina would be better at this.

 

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article108627627.html

 

Good on the dems for condemning it right way, still domestic terrorism 

 

proxy.jpg?t=HBg-aHR0cDovL21ndHZ3bmNuLmZp

 

Cu6yutGXEAUCyWl.jpg

 

Screen-Shot-2016-10-16-at-1.58.10-PM.png

Speaking of mental black flips, not sure how you reconcile that with HRC

 

And this is unsurprising

 

proxy.jpg?t=HBiwAWh0dHA6Ly9hNTcuZm94bmV3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure that's the real one -- last time I saw a tweet by him it just said "Bernie Sanders" for the name and had his campaign-styled Bernie word as the avi.

https://www.facebook.com/senatorsanders/

 

Gonna go out on a limb and call this real, but maybe there was a disclosure somewhere before that its a parody acct

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probs not healthy, clearly I'm losing it as evidenced by me not checking source history. 

 

Idk what to think, there's clear money transaction to SA and other foreign agents with the explicit knowledge of them supporting ISIS. But I'm a terrible messenger. Someone like Hina would be better at this.

 

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article108627627.html

 

Good on the dems for condemning it right way, still domestic terrorism 

 

proxy.jpg?t=HBg-aHR0cDovL21ndHZ3bmNuLmZp

 

Cu6yutGXEAUCyWl.jpg

 

Screen-Shot-2016-10-16-at-1.58.10-PM.png

That doesn't mean she's supporting ISIS. It could mean any number of things. Whether a good idea or not, Saudi Arabia is considered our ally, and there was likely political pressure to support them as a result, regardless of who they may or may not have ties to. It sucks either way, though.

 

Also, if that's a real quote from Bernie, he's wrong. The opposite is happening. We've been controlled by special interests for a long time now and are finally starting to move away from that, as evidenced by how well Bernie did in the primaries. I guess Trump technically counts too given how a lot of people view him, but he still represents special interests from himself and his businesses.

 

People are 'waking up.' A large portion of the country voted against what they perceive to be special interests in picking Trump and almost picking Bernie. Even a portion of the super-gullible and degenerate religious right of America can see there's a problem somewhere. We're making progress.

 

I just happen to think they picked the wrong candidate in Trump. But as much as I hate to admit it, he was really at least the second or third best option among Republicans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That doesn't mean she's supporting ISIS. It could mean any number of things. Whether a good idea or not, Saudi Arabia is considered our ally, and there was likely political pressure to support them as a result, regardless of who they may or may not have ties to. It sucks either way, though.

And how about accepting money back from them?

 

It goes beyond that too though, Clinton took the lead role in organizing the so-called “Friends of Syria” (aka Al Qaeda/ISIS) to back the CIA-led insurgency for regime change in Syria. 

 

Don't you think the American Public had the right to know we're helping defend a nation that is actively conspiring against us? Why is SA considered our ally?

 

As for the rest, I think you're right there. I see Bernie's ideas as infeasible and frankly scary, you see Trump as a self-interested conman. Both both were a pretty strong rebuke to the establishment. The fact that media's trust rating is in the single digits shows that "we" might be winning after all.

 

That statement from Bernie seems a pretty apt description of HRC and her media cartel from my eyes

 

Edit:

 

1476656770838.png

 

This could be bad. Those are encryption keys

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't you think the American Public had the right to know we're helping defend a nation that is actively conspiring against us? Why is SA considered our ally?

You know, as much as I dislike SA and much of what they have been doing, they're probably the only stable country in the Middle East by now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, as much as I dislike SA and much of what they have been doing, they're probably the only stable country in the Middle East by now.

That'd honestly be Israel or Iran

 

SA only looks stable because 1) They're working with the enemy in the area 2) They're not taking any refugees from the area 3) They're using us to defend themselves. 

 

If the US stops bankrolling the Saudis, then you'll see their "stability" 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That doesn't mean she's supporting ISIS. It could mean any number of things. Whether a good idea or not, Saudi Arabia is considered our ally, and there was likely political pressure to support them as a result, regardless of who they may or may not have ties to. It sucks either way, though.

 

Also, if that's a real quote from Bernie, he's wrong. The opposite is happening. We've been controlled by special interests for a long time now and are finally starting to move away from that, as evidenced by how well Bernie did in the primaries. I guess Trump technically counts too given how a lot of people view him, but he still represents special interests from himself and his businesses.

 

People are 'waking up.' A large portion of the country voted against what they perceive to be special interests in picking Trump and almost picking Bernie. Even a portion of the super-gullible and degenerate religious right of America can see there's a problem somewhere. We're making progress.

 

I just happen to think they picked the wrong candidate in Trump. But as much as I hate to admit it, he was really at least the second or third best option among Republicans.

So what excuse do you have for supporting crime and cheating? Both are indefensible but the red herrings and CowCow are good subjects.

 

Also earlier corruption and crime does not excuse present corruption and crime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what excuse do you have for supporting crime and cheating? Both are indefensible but the red herrings and CowCow are good subjects.

 

Also earlier corruption and crime does not excuse present corruption and crime.

My excuse is that both are criminals and cheaters, but I believe one of them will seriously harm the country if elected, and the other will continue the gradual path to improvement that the previous administration set us on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firetrucks outside embassy according to brits, a confirmation or denial would be nice

 

They dropped PodestaEmails10 that doesn't mean much though. No update from Wikileaks on Assange's condition. Reportedly 10 other WL people were also cut off from their internet 

 

 

This is honestly disturbing. Those protesters in the primary? They were all plants. They were trained to agitate Trump supporters. Sickening display from the HRC camp

 

Cu_fhB1VIAEa3e4.jpg

 

Bought and sold 

 

Cu_ao3tUsAAKd4N.jpg

 

She lied, this was 2 days after Combetta used bleachbits, if that's not Obstruction of Justice, Idk what is

 

BTW, half of Iowa (and wisconsin) are racist? Go funk yourself HRC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...