The Political Discussion Thread

[Annoyed]

and the "when they go low we go high" bull**** is what finished her

The point is the Democrats handed the election to Trump. Yes, it was also because of smart usage of the rules both parties played under; Strategic use of the EC is a perfectly valid tactic.

But the bottom line remains, and I've pointed this out many times, if the the DNC and the party leadership had told Shrillary what to go do with herself and ran Sanders, the Dems would have the White Hoiuse at this time. But they were stupid.

When Shrillary suddenly sat down and shut up during the 2008 pre-primary season you can bet your bottom dollar that she had a deal. "I'll sit down to allow the first black nominee, but you will run me in 2016." And she has been in politics long enough to know where the bodies are buried. So the DNC chose to run her, instead of Sanders, who was a clear favorite in the early primaries, until it became clear that the DNC was gonna stack the deck.

[jelgate]

Repeating it does not make your conspiracy theory more true.

Trump got lucky with the election. Find time in 30 years my state went red

[SoulReaver]

Trump got lucky with the election. Find time in 30 years my state went red

niet! not luck

he had help from the reds (the hammer & sickle reds I mean)

[Annoyed]

niet! not luck

he had help from the reds (the hammer & sickle reds I mean)

There has never been one shred of evidence that the Russian altered the vote count by one vote.

Sure, they used propaganda via social media, but they and we have been doing the exact same thing for decades. You never heard of propaganda bombs? The only difference is the media, not the actual act of using propaganda to sway opinion.

[SoulReaver]

because you expect a corrupt government to facilitate an investigation into its own corruption?

There has never been one shred of evidence that the Russian altered the vote count by one vote.

despite all the intel agencies saying they did?
despite the ruskies (headed by the world's wealthiest person) having the means motive & opportunity?

Sure, they used propaganda via social media,

and Facebook helped

[jelgate]

Guess, I'm selling more fertilizer today

[Coco Pops]

that POS is the reason I'm not too keen on King Don's impeachment (unless they can impeach him too):

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/10/p...ion/index.html

Mike two-Pence the christian who values Life™ so much he wants to deprive newborns of healthcare if their parents cant afford it
the Family Values© christian who supports a thrice-married adulterer & self-confessed predator who cheated on his wife with a pornstar

or would that be a chrislamist?
he'd fit right in ISIS/Alqaeda ranks it'd only take replacing 'Jesus' with 'Mahomet'
lol

That is what I keep telling people but they disagree verbosely

[Falcon Horus]

Seems about right...
https://images.dailykos.com/images/5...png?1525363891

x 100

or would that be a chrislamist?
he'd fit right in ISIS/Alqaeda ranks it'd only take replacing 'Jesus' with 'Mahomet'

Not necessarily have to replace Jesus. He's also part of the Islamic faith.

And I see nothing has changed in here... still the same old, same old.
Love the awards, Carter. Congrats Annoyed on earning them fair and square.

[Annoyed]

And I see nothing has changed in here... still the same old, same old.
Love the awards, Carter. Congrats Annoyed on earning them fair and square.

They don't bother me a bit. In fact, they are actually useful. They demonstrate the truth of something that I've long known, that the left resorts to insults at the drop of a hat. They're supposed to be so tolerant of everybody, don't ya know.

[Gatefan1976]

They don't bother me a bit. In fact, they are actually useful. They demonstrate the truth of something that I've long known, that the left resorts to insults at the drop of a hat. They're supposed to be so tolerant of everybody, don't ya know.

You do realise it's not an insult if it is true, right?

[Gatefan1976]

Gee, "international standards" are a crock to begin with, but find me a country that's held to more biased and unfair standards than Israel and you will get your hard-earned cookie.

What did Obama do? Let me recall. Flat-out lied that the guarantees given to Israel by his predecessor to Ariel Sharon were never given because he found them inconvenient for the policies he wanted to establish. (Even the biggest Obama fans among the Israeli Left at the time observed that he could at least have been honest and announced a change of policy, but he chose to just lie). Prevented the FBI from cooperating with Israel in order to establish whether or not the Israeli soldier Hadar Goldin kidnapped by Hamas was still alive at the time of his capture. Lied once more, presenting the push for "1967 borders" as longstanding US policy which it never was; in fact the relevant UN resolutions were specifically drafted to not use such language and not call for return to the precise 1967 lines. Financed a - failed - campaign to unseat a democratically elected Prime Minister of an allied country. Got Israel to agree to a time-limited settlement freeze that was not meant to include Jerusalem, then threw a colossal hissy fit over approval of a construction project in Jerusalem, then another colossal hissy fit that the freeze was ended when the time ran out. Lie on top of betrayal on top of lie on top of betrayal, and that's just where Israel was concerned. Walked back every single promise he gave to the East European allies, thus eventually enabling the rise of Russia and the annexation of Crimea (about which he did precisely nothing). Created conditions for the rise of Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt to power, undermining another allied government. Acted as a lawyer for Iran, to much displeasure of European allies, and pretty much brokered the most lucrative terms possible for America's longtime enemy during the so-called Iran nuclear deal, up to and including plane-loads of cash. Consistently portrayed Bashar Assad as a reasonable guy - to quote John Kerry, "an essential player in bringing peace and stability to the region", and took it so far as backtracking on his solemn promise to not tolerate chemical weapons attacks on civilians. The list goes on. And on. And on.

Sorry, what have you done for me lately?
You want me to care about what the US has done for you, or what they lied to you about, so I ask again, What have you done for me lately?
Nothing?
Why should I care?
Australia FIRST
America FIRST
Israel FIRST
Iran FIRST
Russia FIRST
Do you get the point yet?

[Womble]

Sorry, what have you done for me lately?
You want me to care about what the US has done for you, or what they lied to you about, so I ask again, What have you done for me lately?
Nothing?
Why should I care?

I don't actually know. Why DO you care?

All I did was point out that breaking promises and reneging on deals was something Obama was pretty big on, not Trump. You asked for specifics, you got them. NOW you are asking why you should care? You shouldn't. But here you are, caring all over the thread for fourteen thousand pages...

[SoulReaver]

a couple of Trump promises:
"drain the swamp" (he's filling it)
fight Establishment" (but the disillusionment of his blue-collar followers will be fun to watch)

the left resorts to insults at the drop of a hat

King Don sets the example

[Annoyed]

Sorry, what have you done for me lately?
You want me to care about what the US has done for you, or what they lied to you about, so I ask again, What have you done for me lately?
Nothing?
Why should I care?
Australia FIRST
America FIRST
Israel FIRST
Iran FIRST
Russia FIRST
Do you get the point yet?

That is actually quite correct. Everyone should look out for their own interests first, last and always. For the simple reason that no one else will.

[jelgate]

You do realise it's not an insult if it is true, right?

You might ruin his paradigm. It's easier to dismiss something as insults when logical fallacies are revealed.