The sociopath won more e.c. votes than the criminal and is now sworn in as president.
Liberals turn into butthurt whiners and conservatives turn into unprincipled apologists. Grab your popcorn, and prepare for mouth-breathers.
The sociopath won more e.c. votes than the criminal and is now sworn in as president.
Liberals turn into butthurt whiners and conservatives turn into unprincipled apologists. Grab your popcorn, and prepare for mouth-breathers.
gary johnson can barely string 4 cogent sentences together. there were a lot of things he really had no clue about in the short time he had in the spotlight. most 20 year old in college are more intelligent than himhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKb2oiJluLkalso, are there any poor libertarians? No, they are all able to criticize or simplify things that have never inhibited their easy liveswake up
Feel the Johnson wrote:
Trump is a loser--no question.
But Hillary is Lady MacBeth, not Mother Theresa.
I'd have proudly voted for a Democrat who was not a bribe taking, alcoholic liar with serious health issues. Sadly, they did not bring one forward for me to vote for. Trump is a lot of things, but he's not on the take. He likely has put people on the take, but I think his first loyalty is to the underemployed steel workers and miners of America--not Goldman Sachs.
Trump is imperfect-but far better than the alternative presented-a smarmy scumbag who can't connect with people or tell the truth about very simple matters.
All this being said, I voted for Gary Johnson. It's tough being smarter than 98 percent of the voters.
Oh please... wrote:I weep for our democracy.
Yes, let's vote for someone to so we can wipe the smiles of a smug, faceless progressive.
What an idiot.
you wrote a lot of very nice stuff in that one, and i genuinely appreciate you putting in the time to thoughtfully compose that post, but where you really went wrong is when you insinuated that ideologies like Islam are more "insane" than Christianity , i had to laugh.have you ever objectively considered the tenets of Christianity? thought about it from a neutral perspective and how absurdly effed up and fantastical it is?it's silly. just plain silly, and equally insane as any other religion and you know it. further, it's built on the same religious garbage as other religions before it and isn't even originalyou'd be equally insane to worship your running shoes as deities who give virgin births to indoor 600m specialists
Spotter of Dumb Dumb wrote:
I've said it before but what is sad about the Dems is that at a time when they should be introspecting, they're looking to shift blame for their own failures, ensuring that the DNC establishment doesn't actually change. From the riots to the physical attacks to the refusal to accept the results, it's not a good look. This election wasn't actually a referendum on Trump, it was a referendum on what passes for the modern representatives of the liberal left in America, the Democratic party.
Democrats, you have completely and utterly lost touch with the common man, whose concerns used to be at the very center of the political left.
They're blaming the loss on everything, from sexism of Bernie supporters to Russia to fake news to everyone who voted against them being stupid. The left finally got an actual populist that talked about actual real issues like trade deals, stopping monopolies and putting term limits on Congress, and what did the DNC do? They crushed him to continue the failed policies of the liberal establishment.
They have abandoned their core principles. What passes for "liberal" today in America has almost nothing to do with classic liberalism (individual rights, freedom of thought/speech...etc). The great liberal tradition that rejects regressive dogmatic ideologies and which is compassionate to the working class stiffs that build the country is now gone. The left-wing movement in this country, at least going back the last 20 years or so, hasn't really been one of left-wing economics or individualistic free thinking, or using government to improve the lives of the working and middle classes. What's passed for left-wing politics in this country is really just identity politics: promising to give various handouts to some identifiable minority group (blacks, women, illegal immigrants, lgbt...etc).
Today that electrician stringing up wires of homes in Wisconsin, that welder putting together steel plates in Pennsylvania, that man fixing an elevator in Ohio, the many men across the country with dirt under their nails from working with their hands....these aren't your people anymore.
Instead you are now the party of the gender studies graduate with manicured nails, lecturing others about the evil racist sexist America, telling the struggling white working class that they hold white privilege and therefore hold an eternal debt to all non-white people based purely on the color of their skin.
The DNC is the the party of those who go absolutely nuts when a Christian baker doesn't want to be forced to bake a cake for a gay wedding, yet instantly jumps in to defend insanely backwards ideologies like Islam when yet another Muslim mass murders innocent homosexuals.
It is the party of collusion with media to mislead the public, of corruption and saying nice empty platitudes that have been filtered through 5 focus groups as to not offend anyone while doing the very opposite of these platitudes.
It is the party of Black Lives Matter, the oppression Olympics, of 20 different gender pronouns, virtue signalling and all the noxious ideas like "social justice" that claim that all difference in outcome must be due to some etheral discrimination, and that places the collectivist forced equality of outcome over the rights of an individual.
It is the party of the elitist air of moral superiority, of ivory tower attitudes holding contempt and instantly discounting the views of regular people that don't hold a degree studying Critical Theory or the works of Juddith Butler.
And what has this disconnect lead to? The following:
Republicans have won a majority in the House of Representatives, with 238 seats.
Republicans have won the majority in the Senate.
Republicans now hold 33 Governorships, with a gain of three seats on November 8.
Republicans control a record 68 of 98 state legislative chambers.
Republicans now hold more total state legislature seats, well over 4,100 of the 7,383, than they have since 1920
A former reality TV star with no government experience whatsoever won the White House.
President Trump will have one Supreme Court vacancy to fill immediately and could potentially add at least two more justices before his first term is finished.
The GOP now controls all levels of our government, it is the most powerful it has been in over 80 years according to Real Clear Politics and Washington Post.
Come the midterms in 2018, the electorate map looks really good for the GOP and they could easily win enough seats to pass the threshold needed for them to start changing the Constitution.
And it wasn't because of Trump's brilliance or the Republicans, but because of YOUR failures.
You could have prevented this. You could have kicked out the out of touch elitists and candidates that can't connect with the average person, you could have listened to the common man instead you treated them like utter garbage, with the insufferable arrogance of guilt tripping and shaming everyone who disagrees with your identity politics nonsense.
You can get mad at me and continue down this path if you want.
But you made this bed for yourself. And god damn do you deserve to now sleep in it.
has everyone who said turnout was low because the people have jobs now saying that actually turnout was the highest greatest turnout ever? if not, get with the times!
I am an idiot, crackers!
macdaddy wrote:
OLD SMTC SOB wrote:They have been arriving all week, must be taking lots of PTO and sick days. And people don't work weekends???
Considering we were specifically talking about yesterday's inauguration vs. today's women's march, I'm not sure what "arriving all week" has to do with anything - work on that reading comprehension. If anything, those who attended the inauguration were the ones taking days off...
More so, how can they be taking sick days or PTO when you claim they're all unemployed? Which one is it - are we unemployed or do we have jobs and took PTO? Take a side so I can provide facts to show you that you're a moron versus just having to attack your poor reading comprehension and debating skills.
You idiot, you think all those women were just living in the DC area? They have been traveling to and congregating there all week, prior to Friday, so they could make fools of themselves on the weekend, like you.
nice argument... wrote:
OLD SMTC SOB wrote:Can you summarize just exactly how he is a "loser"? If a billionaire and the newly elected POTUS is a "loser", what does that make you?
... you see, by his/her definition, being a billionaire and a president may not make one a 'winner' --- other items of ones persona could in fact nullify those positive items and actually make one a 'loser'. Further, by his/her definition, you can actually not be a 'loser' and thus be a 'winner' even if you are not a billionaire and the president.
Shocking news isn't it?
Well by that definition, people should all aspire to be that much of a loser. Tell me...............given JFK's "persona" what would you consider him, now that we know what we know about his sordid history with women and how he disrespected his wife? How about his brother, Teddy and his "car accident, and other such personal issues, IE alcoholism and womanizing? What about Billy boy Clinton (need I say more)? And his corrupt, power hungry wife who tried to destroy the women that Billy boy brutalized? Its always been interesting to me that the lefties will harass to no end someone who disagrees with their progressing agenda but gives the likes of Clinton and his enabling wife a pass. Where were these women and celebs protesting when it came to light that Billy boy was using Monica as his personal humidor? Nowhere, except SILENT. Hypocrisy at its most extreme.
OLD SMTC SOB wrote:
nice argument... wrote:... you see, by his/her definition, being a billionaire and a president may not make one a 'winner' --- other items of ones persona could in fact nullify those positive items and actually make one a 'loser'. Further, by his/her definition, you can actually not be a 'loser' and thus be a 'winner' even if you are not a billionaire and the president.
Shocking news isn't it?
Well by that definition, people should all aspire to be that much of a loser. Tell me...............given JFK's "persona" what would you consider him, now that we know what we know about his sordid history with women and how he disrespected his wife? How about his brother, Teddy and his "car accident, and other such personal issues, IE alcoholism and womanizing? What about Billy boy Clinton (need I say more)? And his corrupt, power hungry wife who tried to destroy the women that Billy boy brutalized? Its always been interesting to me that the lefties will harass to no end someone who disagrees with their progressing agenda but gives the likes of Clinton and his enabling wife a pass. Where were these women and celebs protesting when it came to light that Billy boy was using Monica as his personal humidor? Nowhere, except SILENT. Hypocrisy at its most extreme.
Sorry, for those pinheads that have nothing better to do then scan a post for grammatical errors, I meant to put two " around car accident and I also meant to say progressive not progressing. There may be some more in there but those are the two I say right off the bat when I re-read it.
OLD SMTC SOB wrote:
OLD SMTC SOB wrote:Well by that definition, people should all aspire to be that much of a loser. Tell me...............given JFK's "persona" what would you consider him, now that we know what we know about his sordid history with women and how he disrespected his wife? How about his brother, Teddy and his "car accident, and other such personal issues, IE alcoholism and womanizing? What about Billy boy Clinton (need I say more)? And his corrupt, power hungry wife who tried to destroy the women that Billy boy brutalized? Its always been interesting to me that the lefties will harass to no end someone who disagrees with their progressing agenda but gives the likes of Clinton and his enabling wife a pass. Where were these women and celebs protesting when it came to light that Billy boy was using Monica as his personal humidor? Nowhere, except SILENT. Hypocrisy at its most extreme.
Sorry, for those pinheads that have nothing better to do then scan a post for grammatical errors, I meant to put two " around car accident and I also meant to say progressive not progressing. There may be some more in there but those are the two I say right off the bat when I re-read it.
DAMN what a loser, SAW, not say. Need more coffee.
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
Democrats seem to be pretending it wasn't their fault they lost ALL the way down the ballot AND there are mid-term elections coming soon. And they seem to pretend there is no gerrymandering epidemic.
Lots of trouble ahead. I hope these marchers vote in the mid-terms.
Except the gerrymandering has been so effective and rural/urban voting divide so large, that even if voting occurred in record numbers, Republicans probably would still hold the majority in Congress.
If Democrats really want to make a difference, stop with the celebrity endorsements, focus on the common man and put them on the stage, and get out in the rural areas more with Freedom Riders type activism or something.
OLD SMTC SOB wrote:
nice argument... wrote:... you see, by his/her definition, being a billionaire and a president may not make one a 'winner' --- other items of ones persona could in fact nullify those positive items and actually make one a 'loser'. Further, by his/her definition, you can actually not be a 'loser' and thus be a 'winner' even if you are not a billionaire and the president.
Shocking news isn't it?
Well by that definition, people should all aspire to be that much of a loser. Tell me...............given JFK's "persona" what would you consider him, now that we know what we know about his sordid history with women and how he disrespected his wife? How about his brother, Teddy and his "car accident, and other such personal issues, IE alcoholism and womanizing? What about Billy boy Clinton (need I say more)? And his corrupt, power hungry wife who tried to destroy the women that Billy boy brutalized? Its always been interesting to me that the lefties will harass to no end someone who disagrees with their progressing agenda but gives the likes of Clinton and his enabling wife a pass. Where were these women and celebs protesting when it came to light that Billy boy was using Monica as his personal humidor? Nowhere, except SILENT. Hypocrisy at its most extreme.
Well, at least you are two for two on bad arguments. All of your examples are very nice but really have nothing to do with the first post commented on. Shall we now try to rate everyone on a scale of 'loser to winner' based on someone's (yours) opinion to make you feel better?
OLD SMTC SOB wrote:
You idiot, you think all those women were just living in the DC area? They have been traveling to and congregating there all week, prior to Friday, so they could make fools of themselves on the weekend, like you.
I'm still confused by your argument. One congregation is on Friday, one is on Saturday, but those who attended the one on Saturday are the lazy, unemployed ones.
I mean... you keep saying they've been "traveling all week". Someone could have easily left work @ 5 on Friday, drive 6-8 hours (from Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, West Virginia, Virginia, the Carolinas, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and about 6 other states), got a hotel around midnight and woke up with a great nights rest in time for the parade. That's just straight-up geographical fact.
Very few people are driving further than that when those around Chicago, NY and other big cities could just March there.
Those who went to the inauguration had no other option but to come to D.C. Maybe there was a viewing party in Alabama or something, but who knows. Nonetheless, it was on a Friday.. safe to say that anyone who went to the inauguration is either unemployed or took time off. Thoughts on this? No other way to explain that.
Lastly, just because this has been a politically charged debate, I find it funny that you would say those who went to this march are unemployed, welfare recipient liberals. Super interesting that those who attend a women's march would be classified as liberals, don't you think? Women's rights = liberal movement? Hmm...
Wait, let's stop and ask two questions:
1) which of the apocalyptic predictions that Republicans made for President Obama's tenure have come true?
(some examples: the dollar would lose all its value, interest rates would skyrocket, the budget deficit would skyrocket, the unemployment rate would skyrocket, the health care law would increase the # of uninsured markedly and increase health care costs, etc., all of which have been false)
2) by what criteria would a Trump presidency be a success?
Oversimplication
jjjjjj wrote:
by what criteria would a Trump presidency be a success?
He ran as a law & order candidate. US crime rates are half what they were 25 years ago; if the downward trend continues or even accelerates on his watch, I'd say that's a success.
He also ran as a jobs candidate. Jobs in the private sector increased for 70+ straight months under BHO; if that upward trend continues or even accelerates on DJT's watch, I'd say that's a success.
Yeah, I know that a sitting President doesn't have a whole lot to do with either of those things. But if those trends had gone the opposite way under Obama, you *know* we'd be giving him the blame; so I figure we should treat Trump the same way.
I didn't vote for that SOB Obama, but fair's fair.
In one day Trump got more fat women out walking than Michelle Obama did in 8 years.
Boom!
Quality women too! wrote:
https://mobile.twitter.com/StefanMolyneux/status/822937236459098113/photo/1https://mobile.twitter.com/StefanMolyneux/status/822977332738723841/photo/1https://mobile.twitter.com/StefanMolyneux/status/822980208210956288/photo/1
The left is committing suicide.
This thread is the "Donald J Trump Inauguration Thread", but the left wants to double down on what lost the election for them. To formulate an effective response, you have to understand the situation and craft a workable plan that will lead towards your goal. Instead, these circus freaks on the Left are showing that they are immature and dangerous children, not to be trusted with anything important, especially the government.
- You want to end gerrymandering? Great. Me too. Push for it. But remember that gerrymandered results favor the establishment and are only a lagging indicator of the basic direction of the electorate. And Trump is not yet the beneficiary of that. He's after the status quo and has been opposed by the establishment of both parties and most of the entrenched monied interests in the world.
- You are offended by Trump's alleged treatment of women? If you tolerated Bill Clinton's history of sexual assault and Hillary's history of attacking his accusers, you are simply a hypocrite not to be taken seriously.
- You think that Trump will try to take too much power for the Executive Branch? And you supported Obama? Trump will quickly undo much of Obama's legacy precisely because Obama usurped powers that should have been the legislature's. He was unwilling or unable to work through the republican system of government. Trump has already started untangling the undemocratic mess of the last 8 years while you bloviate about Hitler.
- You are unhappy that US is not taking enough immigrants? Push for legislation that will increase the number of legal immigrants, which is already at a number around 1 million per year. But that's not the way you and Obama want it done. You support ignoring existing law by declaring "Sanctuary" and proclaiming new rules like "Dreamers" that contradict Congress. Your disdain for a free people making their own rules and laws became clear to those who voted against your candidate.
Instead of being sidetracked by minutia like the size of the crowds being held up from entering the mall by the security forces, listen to Trump's Inaugural Speech. It was a very aggressive attack on the status quo. He made it in a setting that in the past has lent itself to fluffy rhetoric that was meant as much to hide their real plans as reveal their intentions, most of which revolved around protecting the lucrative business as usual..... and getting reelected.
So many of you LetsRun lefty geniuses scoffed and laughed at Trump. "He'll have to withdraw." "He doesn't even want to be President." "He'll be out of the Republican race by the end of summer." "He's unable to get the votes of women, or Hispanics, or blacks, or etc." "He'll lose in a landslide so big the Republican Party will be destroyed." "His campaign is amateurish and unable to run an effective campaign." "His transition is in chaos. " And the stupidest distraction of all: "The Russians won it for him."
You can continue to underestimate him and make yourself look like jackasses, but all that fury and noise will only further strengthen his position.
You don't have to dance every time Soros plays the music.
This is just wishful thinking for your own personal persuasion. IMO, things will get better with the improved economy. My concern is the environment, we don't want a smog filled particulate atmosphere from burning coal everywhere. But there has to be balance.