Jump to content

US elections 2016 - "Go ahead, throw your vote away"


IheartIheartTesla

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Kinda. Seeing as how he didn't do it at the convention, I didn't think he was going to do it period. I guess Little Reince Priebus's threat got taken serious for some strange reason. 

If Vox is to be believed it's more that he's facing a potential primary challenge. So the same reason everyone else gave up their dignity. 

This is pathetic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

Well, it finally happened. Ted Cruz, the Second to Last Principled Conservative Senator, is endorsing Trump. Or, as Deadspin puts it:

Ted Cruz Planning to Cuck Himself

Is anyone surprised?

HAHAHAHA!

That said, it's really grating to see all these reluctant Trump supporters say that they can justify voting for him because of the Supreme Court. That's not a good reason to justify voting for a racist, misogynistic, know-nothing clown who refuses to say he wont nuke our European allies and who has Bromance with a dictator that's actively hacking our country. 

 

ETA:

So can we nickname him "The Servile Puppy Dog" now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Commodore said:

give everyone around the target immunity, then don't prosecute and close the case; everyone gets away scot free, no need to find a scapegoat

 

There is nothing shady about this /s. 

And all this for some emails on yoga and weddings plans. :dunno:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

What is it?  No wifi.

A reality TV star who is apparently also Trump's director for African-American outreach saying:

“Every critic, every detractor, will have to bow down to President Trump. It’s everyone who’s ever doubted Donald, who ever disagreed, who ever challenged him. It is the ultimate revenge to become the most powerful man in the universe.”  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of Trump's foreign policy people is being investigated for his connections to Putin:

Quote

U.S. intelligence officials are seeking to determine whether an American businessman identified by Donald Trump as one of his foreign policy advisers has opened up private communications with senior Russian officials — including talks about the possible lifting of economic sanctions if the Republican nominee becomes president, according to multiple sources who have been briefed on the issue.

The activities of Trump adviser Carter Page, who has extensive business interests in Russia, have been discussed with senior members of Congress during recent briefings about suspected efforts by Moscow to influence the presidential election, the sources said. After one of those briefings, Senate minority leader Harry Reid wrote FBI Director James Comey, citing reports of meetings between a Trump adviser (a reference to Page) and “high ranking sanctioned individuals” in Moscow over the summer as evidence of “significant and disturbing ties” between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin that needed to be investigated by the bureau.

Some of those briefed were “taken aback” when they learned about Page’s contacts in Moscow, viewing them as a possible back channel to the Russians that could undercut U.S. foreign policy, said a congressional source familiar with the briefings but who asked for anonymity due to the sensitivity of the subject. The source added that U.S. officials in the briefings indicated that intelligence reports about the adviser’s talks with senior Russian officials close to President Vladimir Putin were being “actively monitored and investigated.”

A senior U.S. law enforcement official did not dispute that characterization when asked for comment by Yahoo News. “It’s on our radar screen,” said the official about Page’s contacts with Russian officials. “It’s being looked at.”

https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-s-intel-officials-probe-ties-between-trump-adviser-and-kremlin-175046002.html?soc_src=social-sh&soc_trk=tw

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Kinda. Seeing as how he didn't do it at the convention, I didn't think he was going to do it period. I guess Little Reince Priebus's threat got taken serious for some strange reason. 

It's more that the odds of Cruz benefiting from opposing Trump are now much less than him suffering from it. There is only one scenario under which Cruz benefits: if Trump loses in a blowout (i.e. by 10-15%), Cruz gets a chance to pick up the pieces. If Trump wins, then Cruz comes off as a sore loser for opposing a successful candidate who rightfully won the primary. If Trump loses narrowly, Cruz comes off as a sore loser who helped sabotage his party's campaign (it would also mean that most people aren't really interested in his "principled" opposition). It doesn't look very likely anymore that Trump will lose in blowout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

Not sure 1968 is a particularly good analogy, given that Wallace voters likely had Nixon (rather than Humphrey) as their second choice, and were in any case conveniently located in one part of the country. As it was, that Humphrey came as close as he did, after that convention, was a minor miracle for the Democrats.

Not talking about Wallace at all. I'm talking about the people who sat out on Humphrey and let Nixon take power.

Specifically, this:

http://www.vox.com/2016/9/21/12987108/sanders-clinton-nixon-humphrey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Tijgy said:

 

And this is actually the reason why freedom of expression of opinion matters a lot. If you socially shame people directly by calling those people a racist, they indeed go to a place where they can express their opinions freely and where they feel safe.

If you would allow them to speak, engage in debate, not call them deplorable and irredeemable and show rationally why they are wrong, you would actually ensure they see they are wrong and chance their opinions. 

IMO you should always have respect for people and their right to express their opinion so long it does not directly advocate harm against other people. You should however condemn the content of their opinions, when those opinions are racist, ...

No, it's the opposite. Giving these people free reign to air their shit in public just convinces them and others that it's totally acceptable to have and share these views. This is one of the dangers of Trump and the way he and his supporters have been normalised.

Left to their own devices in their closed circles, these groups fester but they don't matter. Shitheads like the "alt-right" are just a bunch of idiots on the internet except when they are giving platforms to harass people via Twitter's abhorrently shitty moderation policy or, say, when a guy who espouses alot of their views runs for President and the media ignores what he says and does.

Basically, Stormfront ain't doing nothing on it's own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DanteGabriel said:

Well, it finally happened. Ted Cruz, the Second to Last Principled Conservative Senator, is endorsing Trump. Or, as Deadspin puts it:

Ted Cruz Planning to Cuck Himself

Is anyone surprised?

I am, only in that I figured Cruz had more strategic sense. His performance at the RNC made enemies, sure, but it had the potential to set him up for 2020. Cruz could have been the guy saying that he was the lone voice in the wilderness, blah blah. However, now he's sacrificing any advantage he might have gotten from his convention stunt, leaving him with...what? Does he think Trump will reward him? Christie's been on the Trump train for months, and The Donald treats even him like a dog. Please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Kinda. Seeing as how he didn't do it at the convention, I didn't think he was going to do it period. I guess Little Reince Priebus's threat got taken serious for some strange reason. 

Best bet is that his reelection prospects in 2 years are looking REALLY REALLY bad in his internal data. Kasich was threatened but given his popularity in Ohio, I think he'll just tell them to go fuck themselves. He won his state in the primary after all. Cruz on the other hand, lost his to Trump as I remember, so he's in some trouble.

During the convention the GOP looked alot more divided so I bet his flipping Trump off seemed like a good move. Now that the party is pulling together, at least to the public, and Trump likely having many supporters in his home state, he's probably looking at his numbers and realising he needs to play ball now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Castel said:

If Vox is to be believed it's more that he's facing a potential primary challenge. So the same reason everyone else gave up their dignity. 

This is pathetic. 

McCain endorsed Bush after Bush implied his adopted daughter was his illegitimate half-black baby. Saying his dad killed JFK is pretty fucking tame for what a GOPer will forgive to keep their seat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

One of Trump's foreign policy people is being investigated for his connections to Putin:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-s-intel-officials-probe-ties-between-trump-adviser-and-kremlin-175046002.html?soc_src=social-sh&soc_trk=tw

Geez, I wonder why the Russians are trying to help Trump win the election:

Quote

U.S. intelligence officials are seeking to determine whether an American businessman identified by Donald Trump as one of his foreign policy advisers has opened up private communications with senior Russian officials — including talks about the possible lifting of economic sanctions if the Republican nominee becomes president, according to multiple sources who have been briefed on the issue.

Oh right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cruz beat Trump in Texas by a substantially larger margin than Kasich beat Trump in Ohio. However, Kasich did not directly reject Trump before a national audience so he did not have anything riding on Trump's campaign.

Regarding the insults: these are an American tradition. For example, all the way back in 1800:

Quote

 

Things got ugly fast. Jefferson's camp accused President Adams of having a "hideous hermaphroditical character, which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman."

In return, Adams' men called Vice President Jefferson "a mean-spirited, low-lived fellow, the son of a half-breed Indian squaw, sired by a Virginia mulatto father."

 

And those two were actually friends before the election and (eventually) after it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:


How else can they be convinced of their irrationality?

What about our irrationality? We are religious and many people think we are irrational. Can we be convinced to eschew religion and God by their rational arguments? In my case no, since I see my faith as being rational.

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...