Just, wow. She has indeed lost all sense of reality. She really thinks she didn't suck, when she blatantly had no message for anyone to get behind other than being anti-white male. It's amazing.
Just, wow. She has indeed lost all sense of reality. She really thinks she didn't suck, when she blatantly had no message for anyone to get behind other than being anti-white male. It's amazing.
L L wrote:
itbaddude wrote:Why is the Paris Agreement not a scam?
For starters it is a nonbinding agreement. It was not voted by the Senate because it would not pass. What is so good about it and how it benefits the US? Lets hear some facts for once.
First, reducing emissions gives Americans better air to breath and a better climate to live in.
Second, Americans can participate in a growing economy of new energy sources.
There is money to be made in investing in progress.
As opposed sticking with dated technologies that do not have a future.
The US could be one of the biggest beneficiaries of the agreement.
Yes, all the things you mention are great, except for defining what outdated technology is. Nobody wants polluted rivers or air.
But, why do we need the Paris agreement for this. The agreement is unenforceable.
One more thing:
The agreement affect the US and China more than France, Germany and all the other little countries. Why should they dictate the pace at which we should do things?
How would France feel if we make an agreement to outlaw Nuclear Power Plants because they are bad for the environment? Do you think they would agree?
How are poor countries going to pay for all this? Is the US going to be force to pay? Are the Germans going to pay? They don't even commit to their NATO treaty obligations.
Country over Party yo wrote:
Just, wow. She has indeed lost all sense of reality. She really thinks she didn't suck, when she blatantly had no message for anyone to get behind other than being anti-white male. It's amazing.
that's a vacuous thing to say
she had position papers on everything under the sun.
Clinton is an idiot. She had weaponized the mainstream media machine completely against Trump and she complains about the new internet media being weaponized against her.
Passedout wrote:
I don't know a single Trump voter that regrets voting for him. Not one.
Never underestimate the ignorance of voters.
Passedout wrote:The media resistance only perpetuates more hatred toward the Left (and the Right in some instances). They constantly lied and mislead voters lading up to the election, and they've only upper their failed strategy since. The headlines are ludicrous, most of the stories are speculation, and sources of course are anonymous. CNN doesn't report actual news anymore; they're obsessed with Trump, Trump, Trump. Nothing they (media/establishment) do will get gain trust back. "Fake news" indeed.
Can you list specific instances when the MSM lied? Or are you referring to Breitbart?
Anonymous sources? Of course, Deep Throat was anonymous for 3 decades.
"Fake news" is a weak argument.
"Trump, Trump, Trump." He's our president and he's in bed with Putin, so the media is going to focus on him.
Nothing to the Russia connection? Then why has Flynn flipped?
DiscoGary wrote:
Oh, I see.
Trump gets held accountable, but Obama and Hillary never were and won't be.
You know, I seem to remember someone predicting that would happen. Now who was that? Hmmmm.
DG,
Read this -
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/16/trump-claims--falsely--that-clinton-gave-russia-20-of-us-uranium.htmlKnow this - Trump lies about absolutely everything. You can not trust a single thing that that man says.
Know this too - Not hard to predict that Trump would be held accountable for his actions as he is chaos personified. He doesn't understand how government works. He apparently has the attention span of a gnat, and he's absolutely amoral. We have never had a president who was so unqualified and unprepared for this job. Of COURSE we want to hold him accountable...he's a criminal, and he won't last. Tick, tick, tick.
Flagpole wrote:
DiscoGary wrote:Oh, I see.
Trump gets held accountable, but Obama and Hillary never were and won't be.
You know, I seem to remember someone predicting that would happen. Now who was that? Hmmmm.
DG,
Read this -
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/16/trump-claims--falsely--that-clinton-gave-russia-20-of-us-uranium.htmlKnow this - Trump lies about absolutely everything. You can not trust a single thing that that man says.
Know this too - Not hard to predict that Trump would be held accountable for his actions as he is chaos personified. He doesn't understand how government works. He apparently has the attention span of a gnat, and he's absolutely amoral. We have never had a president who was so unqualified and unprepared for this job. Of COURSE we want to hold him accountable...he's a criminal, and he won't last. Tick, tick, tick.
Giant FLAGPOLER-
We love your immature/insecure, "final word" repetition habits to your posts. Just like the "Trump has ZERO chance" thing you did up to Nov 8. It'll make it that much sweater when nothing happens.
I'd see the climate agreement more as something symbolic than enforceable.
I don't foresee sanctions on the US if we aren't perfectly compliant.
And saying that you will not go along with the agreement is symbolic as well.
We are posturing ourselves as the big country who doesn't care about the planet.
The optics are important just as the actions are.
I wonder what would happen if Trump had to testify on anything.
I think he would be more inclined to straight up lie and perjure himself than to take the fifth on anything that would be incriminating.
Jeremy's calling wrote:
We love your immature/insecure, "final word" repetition habits to your posts. Just like the "Trump has ZERO chance" thing you did up to Nov 8. It'll make it that much sweater when nothing happens.
"Sweeter" is something that is more sweet than something else. "Sweater" is either a piece of clothing that you wear in cold weather to keep you warm or a person who sweats.
Country over Party yo wrote:
Just, wow. She has indeed lost all sense of reality. She really thinks she didn't suck, when she blatantly had no message for anyone to get behind other than being anti-white male. It's amazing.
Clinton is indeed pathetic. And she was a horrible candidate.
BUT the election ended almost 7 months ago. So, seriously, who gives a shit?
Trumpettes are NOT Americans!
Flagpole wrote:
. . .
Know this - Trump lies about absolutely everything. You can not trust a single thing that that man says.
Know this too - Not hard to predict that Trump would be held accountable for his actions as he is chaos personified. He doesn't understand how government works. He apparently has the attention span of a gnat, and he's absolutely amoral. We have never had a president who was so unqualified and unprepared for this job. Of COURSE we want to hold him accountable...he's a criminal, and he won't last. Tick, tick, tick.
Hey, enough with the insults already! I'll have you know that we have been known to maintain our focus for upwards of 17 seconds while zeroing in on our next victim.
You compare that so-called POTUS to us one more time and we may just zero in on you!
Wait Wait What? wrote:
BUT the election ended almost 7 months ago. So, seriously, who gives a shit?
This^ is important.
So much chaos, amateurism, so much pissing off the rest of the world, and likely treason coming from the White House that no one should look back to the stupid election. We have an American crisis on our hands, and his name is Donald Trump.
Wait Wait What? wrote:
Country over Party yo wrote:Just, wow. She has indeed lost all sense of reality. She really thinks she didn't suck, when she blatantly had no message for anyone to get behind other than being anti-white male. It's amazing.
Clinton is indeed pathetic. And she was a horrible candidate.
BUT the election ended almost 7 months ago. So, seriously, who gives a shit?
horrible candidates do not win the popular vote by millions of votes. Horrible candidates lose the popular vote by millions.
Any rational voting scheme and she would be prez and the world wouldn't be in this mess.
Anyway,
Ossoff is up to a new high in the betting odds 65 cents to win. This is a big one - if hte Dems can't pull this one off they are in trouble. And if they do, the Repubs may start abandoning Trump.
Clinton is
Irrelevant.
Putin's influence and
TRumps immaturity are of great concern
eric a blair wrote:
Wait Wait What? wrote:Clinton is indeed pathetic. And she was a horrible candidate.
BUT the election ended almost 7 months ago. So, seriously, who gives a shit?
horrible candidates do not win the popular vote by millions of votes. Horrible candidates lose the popular vote by millions.
Any rational voting scheme and she would be prez and the world wouldn't be in this mess.
. . .
Actually, they do.
Clinton received 5% fewer votes than Obama had 8 years earlier when there were 6% fewer potential voters. That is, 11% fewer people (relative to voting age population) voted for Clinton on her first try than voted for Obama on his.
11% !!!!
That is when a swing of 2 - 3 % is very significant and often is enough to change the outcome of an election.
Clinton lost to the worst Republican candidate in history!
Clinton completely disappeared mid-race when the Dumpster was down and allowed him to get back in the race.
Clinton's message was . . . ??? Ummm . . I'm not Trump?
Her vision was "Oh look, I have lots of white papers." ?!?
HORRIBLE!!!
Oh, and I seem to remember a certain someone on these boards who endlessly touted the brilliance of the electoral college voting system (which has apparently now morphed into "not a rational voting scheme").
Wait Wait What? wrote:
eric a blair wrote:horrible candidates do not win the popular vote by millions of votes. Horrible candidates lose the popular vote by millions.
Any rational voting scheme and she would be prez and the world wouldn't be in this mess.
. . .
Actually, they do.
Clinton received 5% fewer votes than Obama had 8 years earlier when there were 6% fewer potential voters. That is, 11% fewer people (relative to voting age population) voted for Clinton on her first try than voted for Obama on his.
11% !!!!
That is when a swing of 2 - 3 % is very significant and often is enough to change the outcome of an election..
not according to Wikipedia
by that source
Obama: 65.91 million votes
HRC: 65.85 million votes
There may be something to the argument that the US voting population is up a little since 2012, but not a lot. Seems more like 3% than the 6% you claim.
provide your numbers or reconsider your conclusions.
ack never mind - I see you are going off 2008 numbers. My bad.
Well you have a point there - clearly HRC did not get the AA vote like Obama did.
Which is understandable - doesn't make her a horrible candidate - it makes her white.
I got shingles wrote:
Clinton is
Irrelevant.
Putin's influence and
TRumps immaturity are of great concern
THIS is correct!