-
Posts
5042 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
10
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Everything posted by Meshugger
-
That last picture, dear lord xD
-
*delete* *delete* *delete* https://archive.is/DIUQc She's turning into a caricature of a politician.
-
Do you feel it? A little spark of pure joy kindling in your soul?
-
Was this posted before? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFxFRqNmXKg It would be very damning if true.
-
...or lets say we pick the positives instead, why is she better than Trump?
-
Topical considering what's going on in the background in america The joke in the end xD
-
Tell us more, what is it like living in Russia? http://www.cnbc.com/2016/01/25/worrying-data-raise-russia-recession-odds-economist.html http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2016/01/11/russias-recession-may-stick-around-longer-as-ruble-weakens/#219d8ca0241b http://www.dw.com/en/russias-recession-woes-deepen-amid-oil-slump/a-18990311 I asked about living there. As in social networks, culture, possibility to self-fulfillment, security, access to healthcare, raising a family and such. But instead you're saying that poverty is the best punishment? Ok. I would say that's quite the most frivolous answer one can make. No I'm saying nothing of the sort, the economic reality of Russia is a fault of Putin's failure to diversify the economy This is his fault for not understanding or just not caring about how to sustain an economy outside of commodity exports like oil The economic recession Russia is in effects negatively all aspects of Russian society, so yes once again to make my point " Russia at the moment isn't a good place to be living in because of the economic reality " This is not hard to understand and it isnt the slightest bit frivolous, economic data is never frivolous And this is who Snowden betrayed the USA to and yes it was a mistake and yes he should now continue to live in Russia So even if he makes a lot of friends, raises a family that loves him, and enjoys the local cultural festivities with his family and friends it is a fitting punishment because his standard of living will have propability of being lower than in the US? As in driving a Lada Samara instead of a BMW 730 to his dacha in the country? Sure. Not frivolous at all.
-
Tell us more, what is it like living in Russia? http://www.cnbc.com/2016/01/25/worrying-data-raise-russia-recession-odds-economist.html http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2016/01/11/russias-recession-may-stick-around-longer-as-ruble-weakens/#219d8ca0241b http://www.dw.com/en/russias-recession-woes-deepen-amid-oil-slump/a-18990311 I asked about living there. As in social networks, culture, possibility to self-fulfillment, security, access to healthcare, raising a family and such. But instead you're saying that poverty is the best punishment? Ok. I would say that's quite the most frivolous answer one can make.
-
Tell us more, what is it like living in Russia?
-
I am still have a laugh at Trump being more active and welcoming of Bernie supporters than Hillary.
-
They are already ****posting at each other! Hillary: https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/740973710593654784 Trump's retort: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/741007091947556864 I hope this ride never ends.
-
What do you mean? How? He rarely comments on policies, and even when he does, he's typically extremely vague in a manner that suggests he knows next to nothing about finer details of the subject matter at hand. Hell, even ideas as well known as "making Mexico pay for it" are absolutely absurd and showcase his ignorance of what he can and cannot do. In general though, the issue is that he makes rather bold, empty statements with no methodology explained ("“I will...quickly and decisively bomb the hell out of ISIS, will rebuild our military and make it so strong no one -- and I mean, no one -- will mess with us" or “I would end Obamacare and replace it with something terrific, for far less money for the country and for the people,”) and despite a number of Trump supporters telling me "his policies are spelled out in great detail on his website/if you look," apparently I'm blind because I've failed to locate this great detail. He's also blissfully ignorant (or apathetic) to the effect his manner of speech has on crowds of people. The guy is a walking race riot waiting to happen, whether he intends that to be the case or not. I don't wish to argue if you can hold him personally responsible or not, because frankly I don't care. I don't want an authority figure that seems blissfully unaware to just how many idiots will start beating the **** out of each other if you handle your speeches in a certain style, because regardless of who is at fault or who is to blame, that's a serious problem. I have a swearing habit, and if I were to give a speech to the UN about global climate change, you better believe I have enough common sense to put a cap on it and make my case rather than to swear like a sailor while making sound arguments and then state "you can't blame me for the UN being too shortsighted to look past my constant swearing." No, you're supposed to be a leader; be concious of your speech habits and general tone and the effect it can have on people. Overall most of his campaign has been spent pointed at other people telling them how much they suck, but where he fails is that his attacks don't sound akin to "Hillary wants to do A,B and C and that's stupid. If I were president we'd do X, Y, and Z instead because Reasons 1, 2 and 3," but rather it's "Hillary is a pinhead." He's done little to make a case for his own campaign and has spent the bulk of his time on TV just ranting about why other people's campaigns are flawed. That may be so, but at some point you have to state why yours is better. I am not trying argue that much, i was more interested in your POV. My impression of him is of a different matter. I see that he gambled on treating the whole election cycle as a joke and treated everyone around it as such, which caused all his opponents collapse as they were completely unprepared for such barrage that he wrought and of course it didn't help that they were way more loonier or simply mentally weak to handle his psychological warfare. He knows how the media works and uses it to his advantage completely, as can be seen about the "leaked" tape by his unknown "publicist". It has paid off, and he doesn't even need to talk about the finer points at all, as those are not why people like him to begin with. Bear in mind, i do not think that the same tactic would've worked with people like Biden or Webb, as they can handle that kind of banter with a laugh and strike back the same in a jovial manner. Sanders is a bit of wild card there, as i think he would've come off as unhinged against Trump (in a positive way) as he would not be shackled by the gentlemanny niceness which is expected to exist when you debate your fellow peers or elderly women. Anyway, based on his speeches about America First, the border, anti-TPP and anti-globalism, i would say that he runs in paleo-conservative principles with like-minded people like Pat Buchanan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism). While people like Pat have written books and talked alot in detail on what they believe in, they haven't had much to say in the national elections. Here i think, based on my own speculation, that Trump has understood this and simply just focuses on keeping a good show instead, as that is what a disillusioned constituence usually likes more.
-
What do you mean? How?
-
I don't know how you guys do it in Texas, but how how difficult can it be with going to a polling station, show ID, get a paper ballot, write down the number of your candidate in a booth, drop it in the box and exit? In other news, Trump gets support from Roseanne Barr? http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2016/06/08/roseanne-barr-trump-hes-saying-order-law-matters/
-
Nationwide results/margin of victory 2008 -Obama 18,107,587; 1828 1/2 pledged delegates -Clinton 18,045,829; 1726 1/2 pledged delegates 2016 -Clinton 15,571,643; 2184 pledged delegates -Sanders 11,888,779; 1804 pledged delegates Looks to me that the margins of victory numbers are pretty self-evident. And these don't include superdelegates. Half of a delegate? Are they superpositioned schrödinger's delegates among the democratic party? Who's playing Asuka in this allegory?
-
empty like your dreams I think that my dreams (beauty, truth, solace) are more of your nightmares, but i c wat u did thar, touché. I would rather recommend going nightswimming under the full moon in a clear sky at the beach at Galveston, but each to each own.
-
A more detailed map of the democratic primary results:
-
A friendly reminder that Hillary won in California with the following figures: 2016 - Clinton 1.8 million votes - Sanders 1.4 million votes 2008 - Clinton 2.6 million votes - Obama 2.1 million votes
-
^I never took you for a Nietzschean. How's the nihilism today?
-
Trump agreeing with Sanders on foreign trade deals (TPP, etc) are bad for the US and will work to abolish them or renegotiate them. Not a bad try to persuade recently dissapointed Sanders-voters.
-
KP is right in a material sense between the left and the right. There is no one on the right outright denying private property. Property gives us indirectly wealth, power and the opportunity to fill our base needs, like sleeping, eating and procreating. But as we all know, life is much more than that. We human beings crave meaning, beauty and consolation, and i think conservative people like Edmund Burke of old and Roger Scruton of new answers those questions better than anyone from the left: http://www.chivalrynow.net/articles2/burke.htm http://www.roger-scruton.com/articles/8-art-and-music.html?start=8 A small example if I may:
-
Ross Perot got 18,9% of the popular vote, 19,7 million to be more exactly, and got none of the delegates in 1992. Clinton won that year.
-
I am looking forward to Hillary's humiliating defeat in November.
-
Relevant considering the upcoming election.
-
Government and big business are not two separate entities who exist on different planes of existence. Rather both excert power in different areas, and the doors between them are quite open. To focus one or the other is a division tactic only serving those who are in power.