Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
blotsfan

Trump Regime thread.

Recommended Posts

He is that atypical beta cuck white guy who is talking about poke balls at a riot

Gotta catch em all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Omerta said:

I really think that Clinton is doing Tulsi a favor. Clinton is such a vile, loathsome, lying, piece of shit, cunt that so many people hate her they are going to start saying," Hey, I hate Hillary Clinton, this Gabbard lady has rustled her jimmy, she must be doing something right, let me go check it out." I cannot reiterate enough how much I absolutely hate that woman, and I am not alone. Her own party hates her sorry ass. 

I think this really could swing a lot of people to at least listen to Gabbard, if she does not win, then fine, but her message should be heard. 

Sanders/Gabbard is an unstoppable ticket. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, seanbrock said:

Sanders/Gabbard is an unstoppable ticket. 

Agreed entirely. Sanders/Gabbard/Yang- any combination of the three- is lights out game over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Thanatos said:

Agreed entirely. Gabbard/Yang- any combination of the three- is lights out game over.

Fixed that for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You think Sanders/Gabbard or Sanders/Yang loses to Trump?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am mixed right now. I genuinely think Bernie is in a decline and I don't know if he can bounce back. Even assuming he does though, I don't know if Gabbard pulls enough moderates to offset the large number of Clinton Cultists she offended. Yang, maybe... but he's so practical.. seems like an odd pairing. But ya, maybe I guess. That might be the best way to get a President Yang.. VP, then Bernie dies after like 3 months on the job. Boom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sanders/Gabbard would be unstoppable alright. For Trump.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what angle you're going for witht hat, but I laughed anyway.

EDIT: Also reading many articles saying Hillary is very quietly leaving the dooro open for a 2020 run and that she is still considering it. :suicide:

Edited by DalaiLama4Ever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't make defend Hillary, please. I'm going to here, because that is an absolutely stupid lie that poster is making up, but I don't like it.

Firstly, are we being serious here? Hillary is what, 70 years old? My grandma talks about being a little girl when she was married at the age of 18. Old people don't mean they were literally 5 or 6.

Also relevant, her quote in the interview is:

Quote

“Like in 8th grade, when I wrote to NASA to say that I dreamt of becoming an astronaut,” she continues, “and someone there wrote back: Sorry, little girl, we don’t accept women into the space program.”

8th grade = 13/14. So yeah we wouldn't have had an astronaut in space, but we were ramping up to it. It's not at all unreasonable to think a child who loves the space program would be into it enough to be following the news on it.

Edit: Also, we selected astronauts to go into space in 1959, so the response is even more misleading.

Edited by Thanatos
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure buddy. Hillary wouldn't lie. It's more probable she is telling the truth instead of pandering to a crowd of women.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did I say that anywhere? No. The dude is misleading with his post.

It is entirely *possible* she is telling the truth. This guy is acting like he proved she is lying, when he did not do that at all. If your argument is "hillary is pandering so she's probably lying" that's an entirely different argument from "here is proof she is lying."

Just funny that people get upset at her sending a positive message to girls by trying to nitpick exactly what she means by a little girl, lol.

"There is no fact she sent a letter. She doesn't have it NASA doesn't either." Are you serious bro? It was written in 1960. Yall talk about Trump derangement syndrome, this is Hillary derangement syndrome, lol. TIL that not holding onto a letter you got 60 years ago clearly means that is proof you are lying.

Edited by Thanatos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if the the time lines match up, She's probably lying lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Thanatos said:

Did I say that anywhere? No. The dude is misleading with his post.

It is entirely *possible* she is telling the truth. This guy is acting like he proved she is lying, when he did not do that at all. If your argument is "hillary is pandering so she's probably lying" that's an entirely different argument from "here is proof she is lying."

Just funny that people get upset at her sending a positive message to girls by trying to nitpick exactly what she means by a little girl, lol.

"There is no fact she sent a letter. She doesn't have it NASA doesn't either." Are you serious bro? It was written in 1960. Yall talk about Trump derangement syndrome, this is Hillary derangement syndrome, lol. TIL that not holding onto a letter you got 60 years ago clearly means that is proof you are lying.

I didn't say that. You claim it's possible based on your grandma saying she was a little girl at 18. My great great grandmother has letters from family going back to the great potato famine in Ireland. Using your logic of your grandma using little girl.tonreference someone in their late teens.meams Hillary did, means my grandma keeping letters means Hillary should have.

There is no positive message if it's sent by a liar, especially if it's bullshit.the message is pander, pander, pander, to suit the crowd you're in. Also the message would mean nothing because of who said it. If Trump tells boys about overcoming adversity its a bunk message because it comes from someone who is morally bankrupt and has never overcome adversity.

There is no derangement syndrome. Everyone seems to think their is a higher probability of her lying than telling the truth except you, which is all well and good. But pretending anyone has facts here is dumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernie Sanders has said he will stop prosecuting whistle blowers under the espionage act. (edit: *if elected president*)

+1 Bernie, old chap.

Edited by DalaiLama4Ever
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is touchy for me. It depends on what they blow the whistle on. If they are spoiling black ops missions, they should definitely prosecute. If it is some Edward Snowden shit where it is the government infringing on the constitutional rights of the American everyman, yeah they did a public service.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That tweet is acting like its proof she's lying. It's not. That's all I'm saying. It's Hillary, she's pandering, that's a given. But that tweet is not proof of anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Omerta said:

That is touchy for me. It depends on what they blow the whistle on. If they are spoiling black ops missions, they should definitely prosecute. If it is some Edward Snowden shit where it is the government infringing on the constitutional rights of the American everyman, yeah they did a public service.

Have you flipped on Snowden? Thought at one point you thought he was a traitor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Thanatos said:

Have you flipped on Snowden? Thought at one point you thought he was a traitor.

I didn't know if he was a traitor. I did say, and still maintain the fact that I think some part of him is an idiot. What he did was not nearly as bad as it was first reported to be, however, a couple of years ago when he was acting as surprised as you was at the backlash oh, I couldn't believe it. You expose government corruption on a mass scale, you don't think they're going to come after you? Or you try to be the anti-hero of the population and you don't think the government is going to bite back hard? He just comes off as a whiny prick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Baghdadi is dead. Took his kids too. Trump accurately describes him, and also gave us the salacious details of it all. Glad the guys last moments were full of fear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^the video of that person screaming in imitation agony is one of the most satisfying things to watch. I enjoy it every time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wish he would reconsider running vs Cornyn, but I don't think he could take him after he supported gun buybacks. Not really gonna win with that platform in Texas.

It's between Warren and Bernie at this point, IMO. Biden is going the wrong way and I think the rest are too far behind to catch up enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Thanatos said:

Wish he would reconsider running vs Cornyn, but I don't think he could take him after he supported gun buybacks. Not really gonna win with that platform in Texas.

It's between Warren and Bernie at this point, IMO. Biden is going the wrong way and I think the rest are too far behind to catch up enough.

There have been surprises before in the early states. I think Mayor Pete, Tulsi and Yang could all jump into contention because polls aren't always reliable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Chatbox

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×