The Gaming Den Forum Index The Gaming Den
Welcome to the Gaming Den.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Google
 Search WWW   Search tgdmb.com 
Trump Thread
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 46, 47, 48, 49, 50  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Gaming Den Forum Index -> MPSIMS
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
RobbyPants
Prince


Joined: 06 Aug 2008
Posts: 4449

PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

The first FBI crime report issued under Trump is missing about 70% of the tables compared to the 2015 report. There's supposedly an interactive way for users to get additional data, but it's still missing a ton compared to last year. My guess is Trump and Sessions don't want people to realize that things aren't as bad as the version they've been selling. It's kind of hard to ramp up the militarized police force and sentencing if people believe crime is going down.


MGuy wrote:

Meanwhile the Left seems to all agree that the Right is bad but if the whispers (and sometimes shouting) from talking progressive heads are to believed the DNC is in the midst of 'restructuring' themselves in a way that is pushing anyone who supported Bernie (at least the ones who hold positions that matter in the party) are being eased out of the top positions. Now I don't keep up with every change at the top that goes on in the party. I am only familiar with very local events. Is there any reason for Lago to be doubting the DNC (as a whole) and their ability to adapt to the current political climate other than what seems to be a cynical move to follow the overton window to the Right?

That happened locally in our county. Sanders supporters were only allowed menial jobs in the party, and there was very much a "sit down and shut up" attitude about the whole thing.




Edit:
Manafort surrenders to FBI after being indicted. Rick Gates, his former deputy, was indicted as well.

Federal Justice statement wrote:
The indictment contains 12 counts: conspiracy against the United States, conspiracy to launder money, unregistered agent of a foreign principal, false and misleading FARA statements, false statements, and seven counts of failure to file reports of foreign bank and financial accounts.


Last edited by RobbyPants on Mon Oct 30, 2017 2:10 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FrankTrollman
Serious Badass


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 27063

PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Kaelik wrote:

That isn't even true. They kicked out people with decades of street cred doing party establishment things because they were to the left and supported Sanders during the Primary, then replaced them with corporate lobbyists who never did anything for the dems.


In a time when we are basically being crushed, the forces of international fascism are ascendent, and people are being hauled off to internment camps in the desert without trial, I would like people to take a few moments of quiet contemplation before they say things that seem like they might possibly be bullshit that they are being fed indirectly by a multimillion dollar pro-fascist propaganda outfit in Moscow. Then, probably just don't say those things.

The butthurt of the Sandernistas every time they want one of their in-club to get a chair and someone else gets it or they want a rules change and other people don't agree is really small bullshit that doesn't matter. The Vanity Fair article is a hack job that makes scurlious accusations backed up by innuendo and bupkiss. It is exactly something that a Russian intelligence operative would write in order to divide the Left and give more power to Trumpists.

Perez swapped the jobs around for 75 people. Some of the people who lost their jobs were Sanders supporters. Some were not. People are always free to complain when they lose their jobs, but elevating this completely normal behavior to a shadowy conspiracy against leftists is literally just shilling for Putin. Fucking stop doing it. The overall makeup of the new cohort is younger and more diverse, making the overall change positive by most sensible liberal measures. The guy kicking up the biggest fuss about how he is being purged for not being loyal enough to Clinton or something is James Zogby. He is seventy two fucking years old! He is being replaced by Stuart Applebaum, who is the head of the Retail, Wholesale, and Department Store Workers Union.

The very idea that the Democratic Party is turning its back on Leftist Working Class Ideology because it is retiring an old dude who is a noted Palestinian Rights advocate and replacing him with an immigrants rights advocate and union leader is insulting. People making that argument are either confused dipshits who aren't paying attention or dishonest actors of one flavor or another.

-Frank
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Grek
Prince


Joined: 11 Jan 2009
Posts: 2609

PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

As a counterpont: Frank is literally accusing everyone who disagrees with his politics of being communist-fascist sleeper agents who are working for the Russians to destroy America. Admittedly, this is a slightly less implausible accusation given that Trump exists and is exactly that. But that doesn't mean that EVERYONE is a communist mutant traitor and that we need to listen to Friend Trollman or be hopelessly mislead.
_________________
Quote:
But more importantly if you elevate jerkishness into a principle, if you try to undermine the rules that keep niceness, community, and civilization going, the defenses against social cancer then your movement will fracture, it will be hugely embarrassing, the atmosphere will become toxic, unpopular people will be thrown to the mob, everyone but the thickest-skinned will bow out, and the people you need to convince will view you with a mixture of terror and loathing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pseudo Stupidity
Knight-Baron


Joined: 02 Sep 2011
Posts: 849

PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

In deep blue MA the Democrats are all centrist status-quo warriors in a very bad way. We're talking about state senators pushing online lottery, fighting against legalizing pot, and fighting against safe injection facilities, that sort of fuck the poor bullshit. They do also actively fight against any incursion from the left at all. We had a candidate (who got all party support) say that we need to turn minorities into productive citizens in the middle of a primary debate and nobody batted an eye. The reason leftists feel like the Democrats hate them is they'll put someone who accidentally racists all over the place into a position of power at all just to spite somebody who wants to change our flat income tax to a progressive one.

Obviously the Democrats suck the least, but after being to small-scale Democratic party events and interacting with plenty of their organizations in MA I hate the party more, not less.
_________________
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)


Last edited by Pseudo Stupidity on Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:33 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 12076

PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Pseudo Stupidity wrote:
In deep blue MA the Democrats are all centrist status-quo warriors in a very bad way. We're talking about state senators pushing online lottery, fighting against legalizing pot, and fighting against safe injection facilities, that sort of fuck the poor bullshit. They do also actively fight against any incursion from the left at all. We had a candidate (who got all party support) say that we need to turn minorities into productive citizens in the middle of a primary debate and nobody batted an eye. The reason leftists feel like the Democrats hate them is they'll put someone who accidentally racists all over the place into a position of power at all just to spite somebody who wants to change our flat income tax to a progressive one.

Obviously the Democrats suck the least, but after being to small-scale Democratic party events and interacting with plenty of their organizations in MA I hate the party more, not less.


New Jersey is much the same. You can be a pro-life, pro-gun, anti-EPA, tax cuts for the rich, be racist against black people but only by calling them urban gang bangers and not by calling for extinction, and be 'skeptical' about trans people (and formerly have advocated for civil unions for gays but not marriage), and really think we need to focus on market solutions to our problems and the democratic party will welcome you with open arms, you will never get to be the actual governor, but state senator is a possibility.

But if you think maybe we should talk about the possibility of single payer and/or nationalizing public utilities, and they will spontaneously form a pitchfork and torches mob to run you out of town.

I mostly forgive them their stupidity because I understand the good motivations that cause it, but it is fun to watch people deny that liberals drive out the left from party infrastructure.
_________________
"DSMatticus" wrote:
Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
RobbyPants
Prince


Joined: 06 Aug 2008
Posts: 4449

PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 3:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Kaelik wrote:

I mostly forgive them their stupidity because I understand the good motivations that cause it, but it is fun to watch people deny that liberals drive out the left from party infrastructure.

I think what's happening is you're acknowledging that it happens some of the time (and it does. My wife had to deal with it, too), and Frank is responding by saying that it doesn't happen 100% of the time, so we should stop letting the Russians win by saying it ever happens.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pseudo Stupidity
Knight-Baron


Joined: 02 Sep 2011
Posts: 849

PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Kaelik wrote:

But if you think maybe we should talk about the possibility of single payer and/or nationalizing public utilities, and they will spontaneously form a pitchfork and torches mob to run you out of town.


I said it was a shame nobody who claimed to be progressive in a local government election was OK with having a safe injection facility pilot program and got yelled at in my own progressive group (which I started to help build a base of volunteers to support better local candidates) because I was shitting on progressives, apparently.

I'm going to get run out of a progressive group I organized for supporting progressive positions. It blows my fucking mind.
_________________
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FrankTrollman
Serious Badass


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 27063

PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Grek wrote:
As a counterpont: Frank is literally accusing everyone who disagrees with his politics of being communist-fascist sleeper agents who are working for the Russians to destroy America. Admittedly, this is a slightly less implausible accusation given that Trump exists and is exactly that. But that doesn't mean that EVERYONE is a communist mutant traitor and that we need to listen to Friend Trollman or be hopelessly mislead.


I'm saying that there is absolutely no reason for you to know or care who is co-chair of the DNC Resolutions Committee. Before this conversation, you probably didn't even know that the DNC had a committee called "the Resolutions Committee" and you still don't know what it fucking does or who the past members have been or why anyone's talking about it.

I submit that the only possible reason for people to act as if they have a horse in the race of who is co-chairing the DNC Resolutions Committee and act as if there is some sort of discussable scandal about who was and was not selected for that honor is that they are trying to drive a wedge between people who might support the Democratic Party and the Democratic Party.

It simply beggars belief at this point that people are continuing to act shocked every time a non-scandal about the Democratic Party procedural motions gets whispered about in hushed tones all over the internet. Get a fucking clue. We are under sustained assault by fascist propaganda designed to alienate groups of potential leftists from each other and from meaningful electoral action. If you don't get that this is a problem, you fucking are the problem.

Stop acting like credulous idiots. Stop trying to figure out why you should be offended by the risotto recipes of Democratic Party consultants. Stop giving these bullshit non-scandals the benefit of the doubt. It's. All. Bullshit. And the people peddling it are literal Nazis who are fucking laughing at you. In Russian.

-Frank
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DSMatticus
Prince


Joined: 14 Apr 2011
Posts: 4941

PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 11:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

The fight between the progressive wing and the current DNC apapratus has almost fuck-all to do with Russian propaganda and everything to do with the rich old white guy trying to take over the party; Bernie Sanders. We got to see that particular game for exactly what it was during the Perez vs Ellison DNC chair circus. Both of those men have fairly substantial progressive credentials, but Sanders went on the media circuit insinuating Perez was a corporate whore (as a Sanders do) and Ellison was the future because... Perez backed Clinton and Ellison backed Sanders. The progressive wing is barking because Sanders says bark, and Sanders is saying bark because he is trying to purge non-loyalists and take over the party.

Maybe he's so goddamn narcissistic that he thinks literally only he can carry the progressive movement on his shoulders. Maybe he's just another shitweasel who sees power and drools. Maybe one day there will be some creepy Jill Stein-esque revelation of inappropriate ties to Russia and his divisiveness will suddenly click. I don't know. But Sanders, and not Putin, is currently the principle source of chaos among the leftwing. He has used his darling status with progressives to define "loyalty to Sanders" as the principle test of one's progressive cred, and it's burning the party to the ground.

I'm sure Putin is very happy about that, and I'm sure Putin's twitter botnets signalboost stupid shit related to it, but in the end you are hearing about it because Sanders is a powerful political figure with access to his own megaphone and he doesn't want people who didn't support him in positions of authority within the DNC. Some of the people who didn't support him are centrists, and Sanders fucking hates those guys. Some of the people who didn't support him are progressives, and Sanders fucking hates those guys too.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
EightWave
NPC


Joined: 23 Sep 2017
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 2:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

That is just more buy-in to exactly the conspiracy theory Frank is calling bullshit on. Of course there's a power struggle between Bernie and Not-Bernie backers, because that's what a power struggle is. Plus, Bernie's campaign was more progressive than Hillary's in literally every way, so I don't know why you can't understand how the overlap between Bernie backers and uncompromising progressives in the party is a fucking circle. This isn't fighting and compromising over the party platform, this is fighting over who gets to set the party platform. If you want the party to fight for single payer health care, you don't want Perez in a leadership position because he didn't back the single payer healthcare candidate. Maybe he did it because he's a corporate whore, or because he believed Hillary was a lock to win, or because she dangled a VP nomination in front of him. No matter the reason he did it, he still did it. If Hillary had won then Perez could run for DNC chair waving a big fat dick, but Hillary lost so I don't know what kind of pull you think Perez should have with the progressive wing? Ellison's not a perfect candidate, either, but at least he didn't explicitly betray them when it came time to pick a horse.

If you want a radical change in the party platform you also need a radical change in the party leadership. This is fucking obvious. It's happened to both parties multiple times, most recently with the Regan revolution when a bunch of supply-side economists and Evangelicals invented the tax cuts/pro-guns/anti-abortion platform out of whole cloth. The NRA did it in 1977 and transformed from a social club for hunters into one of the most powerful lobbying groups in the country. If you think infighting over leadership is the same thing as burning the house down you're a goddamn moron.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FrankTrollman
Serious Badass


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 27063

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 6:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

EighthWave wrote:
Plus, Bernie's campaign was more progressive than Hillary's in literally every way, so I don't know why you can't understand how the overlap between Bernie backers and uncompromising progressives in the party is a fucking circle.


Actually no. On most issues, the differences between Hillary and Bernie were more tactical than ideological. Bernie would talk in vague terms about aspirational goals, while Hillary would talk in specific terms about immediate executive actions that could be taken to address specific issues. On most major liberal issues, they both broadly supported the majority position in the Democratic Party, because they are politicians and that is what they do. They both supported gay marriage now that it is the Liberal consensus that "civil unions" or "no soup for you" is not acceptable. They both supported the Fight For 15 now that this has real traction among left-leaning workers. And so on.

On some issues, Bernie made more overt lefty pronouncements than what Hillary would go for. He wanted to go all-in on Single Payer, while Hillary wanted to do more incrementalism towards Universal Coverage. But Hillary's positions on the Environment and black people were more progressive than Bernie's. His position was mostly that the rights of blacks and Mexicans could mostly be ignored because a rising tide in working class status would lift all boats. And while it is true that improving the status of workers generally would also help black and brown people, they also have specific problems with being harrassed and beaten by police that white workers do not share. And Hillary staked out more extensive plans to address these issues and that is why she got more than three quarters of the African American vote in the primary.

The idea that Sanders support is a litmus test for left wing ideology is bullshit. Sanders is perfectly within his rights to peddle it, because of course he wants to get his supporters into various committees and shit. But the only reason you're even hearing about these back room slap fights is that Russian twitter trolls are feeding you bullshit in the hopes that mushrooms of disgust with leftwing political organizations will grow within you.

-Frank
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
EightWave
NPC


Joined: 23 Sep 2017
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 10:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Quote:
Actually no.
Yeah, that was incorrect hyperbole on my part. Bernie did run on the concept of being more progressive, though. Even if sometimes it seemed "more progressive" boiled down to "Like Hillary's plan, but also a lollypop"
Quote:
The idea that Sanders support is a litmus test for left wing ideology is bullshit.
I meant that Sanders supporters are left wing ideologues (or at least consider themselves to be), not that supporting Sanders is a requirement for being a left wing ideologue. The result is that of course it's going to look like progressives are trying to purge Hillary supporters because there's a vocal contingent of Bernie bros who can be easily mobilized against them just by bringing up that fact.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MGuy
Prince


Joined: 21 Jul 2009
Posts: 3417
Location: Indiana

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 10:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

I really don't think that russian trolls are the source of all our woes. Forgive me for being skeptical that an operation being funded pennies to the DNC's hundreds of dollars is really all that effective at shifting public opinion. I can believe that they certainly aren't helping but to blame so many people being more upset just because of them is a bit too much. I don't imagine they've discovered the internet secret and can then propagate a message with more impact than the Left's own heavily funded political machine. I believe that more people are watching the DNC because of Sander's run last year and the narrative surrounding it. I also believe that Clinton won the black vote more off of the back of the Clinton name than for the differences in policy with Sanders. Before Sanders got involved Clinton was a lot like JEB. People just 'assumed' she was next in line after Obama and no other 'real' choice was going to be on the table. Once Sander's campaign got out there and people found out who he even was younger whites and nonwhites warmed up to him very quickly. I think there's something to say about how a previously little known independent could get so much traction in a party that seemed all too ready to let Hillary be its savior against whomever (probably JEB) the right was going to pit against her.

I also don't believe the line that Sanders only made vague promises. He just didn't spend most of his time explaining the details over and over every time he spoke and gave speeches because that doesn't sell. He condensed what he stood for into easily memorable and repeatable phrases and kept to only a few talking points because that's the smart way to get a message to stick (which should be obvious). Sanders came out of the gate with no real policy for police brutality (didn't know what to do with BLM either) or anything because he was still spouting things from the OWS movement. Clinton did have him on that, foreign policy, and a bunch of other things but I don't believe that won her any significant advantage over Sanders among working class or poor people. Also, while Clinton and Sanders do vote the same on most things, Sanders and Clinton also have a record people can go look at and criticize (which seems to be a thing that a lot of Hillary supporters then and now seem to have trouble digesting). Sanders hands down 'looks' better than she does as an early adopter of a good deal of progressive ideas as well as being a progressive in general. Whether it's because he can be seen standing up for things that Clinton (and even Obama) didn't in the past, because Hillary was being attacked by the right well before she started to run, or because she has no charisma, whatever you want to pin it on he comes out better. Clinton had a more successful career but that career made her look too establishment. Centrists happened to be the enemy for 'more' people this time around and I think Obama also used the same rhetoric on her during their primary fight as well.

Sanders is clearly popular and he is popular because he is actively preaching the things people really want to hear. Whether or not the stuff he talks about would work out when faced with opposition both from the right and center or if he can give all the details as to how things are supposed to work the fact is he doesn't 'sound' like he cares about stepping on the toes of the establishment. This image is furthered by the leaked emails, it's believed by people on the right, and it shows in that he and his ilk are being ushered away from the top positions. The primaries cost the DNC its image in the eyes of the public and I believe as people continually stop trusting the media that backs them it will only get worse. It really doesn't matter whether the open secret of their dislike turned into actual action (I really don't know but there's nothing provable so whatever) during the primary last year, it is a narrative that works because on the other side you had Trump who also was a bane to the establishment and 'he' won.

So right now Sanders is seen as someone who does not stop his rhetoric for the perceived centrist/corporate owned/elite left and wants to change up the system by installing his own, less corporate backed team members. Is this a good thing? I don't know but it really 'has' to be what Lago hoped for considering that he mentioned 'letting' the Right take over government so that the Left could get its ass in gear (of course he can correct me if I'm wrong). The reason people are picking up on the inner turmoil within the DNC is because more people actually care to some degree about what's going on. I think it is a good thing that people are paying more attention to what's going on. With the DNC's image being poisoned it's going to be real hard for those people to be convinced by the DNC that the DNC is on the level.

The DNC of course is fighting back against take over and so people are figuring out how antidemocratic the establishment is in reality. If people are even partially as disgusted as I have been over how the DNC operates then 'of course' the more come to understand it the more people are going to be upset about it. You really wouldn't even need to lie about it in order to ruffle people's feathers. Despite my distaste for the system we use to decide on our country's leaders I do understand that it is better to side with the Dems because letting the alternative win is worse. The problem comes in when you consider that, for a lot of people, sticking with people who don't 'seem' to have your best interest in mind just because they are not as bad as the opposition is not a hopeful message.

Considering what happened in last year's election, what happened in the Brexit and I'll even go as far as guessing what is happening with Spain is a lot of people are languishing in an economic system that is making the rich richer and being told by a number of people who should be standing up for them that they need to suck it up for now while they 'work on it'. The narrative matters and while I do believe a lot of people from Bernie's camp did switch over to Hillary's enough people did not find the Hillary narrative palatable enough to roll out of bed to vote her in or they preferred voting their conscious. I know I felt the same way about Hillary and the only reason I put in my token vote (which didn't mean anything because IN is a red state that sure as fuck wasn't turning Blue again for 'Killary') was because I really 'really' didn't want Trump to win. I think the DNC could really clear up this mess just by letting the process be more democratic and allowing the progressives get a leg up in the party.

I mean really if they can stand to pick up more seats and public trust by letting the independents believe they've won them over I really don't see the harm.
_________________
The first rule of Fatclub. Don't Talk about Fatclub..
I've always thought it best to never hit a lady, but be sure to beat a bitch. -TOZ
MGuy wrote:
Finally a thread about fighters!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
Voss
Prince


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 3740

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 5:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

I think the big harm for Dems is currently they basically don't exist.

Sure, registered democrats will vote democratic in the next election, but as far as the national media and the general public are concerned, there isn't anyone being primed as the next big thing or even vaguely middling thing that might run for election at some point.

Instead of showing off rising stars, they're grubbing in the clubhouse closets for dirt, which is going to hurt every election while the Big Orange Idiot still captures the majority of media attention just for breathing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tussock
Prince


Joined: 07 Nov 2009
Posts: 2538
Location: Here

PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 7:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Quote:
I really don't think that russian trolls are the source of all our woes.


So, um, just, you know, at the last election, that thing where the media was full of innuendo about HRC's stolen emails and how the FBI was going to check them because statutory duty, and so "obviously" all that stuff the Repubs had said for the last few years about her emails being criminal in some vague way despite being found innocent all the time, ...

That was, at least in part, done by Russian trolls, the stealing of a distribution of the emails part. Who had some contacts with people in the Trump campaign, on the grounds that those people were the US version of the same, racist, sexist, and nationalist internet trolls and their rich backers. That swung the vote, that perfectly timed release and FBI response and Repub followup, HRC dropped by enough points to lose all those new swing states and thus the election for president.

The reason you have Trump, is, according to a lot of very serious people, because of Russian internet trolls, and their conspiracy with Trump's US internet trolls (and a good few very rich people too). Who have at least tacit state acceptance of their doing so, and apparently a good few contacts within the state, and not even because Putin gives a shit about US politics or Trump, but because he didn't want HRC being the POTUS and so neither did his internet troll supporters, and people in the Russian government are at least OK with this.

Like, I've done the sceptical thing on this, Trump trolls and Putin trolls totally had a bit of a chat about the best timing for the release of that stuff, and had coordinated political campaigns ready to go without time for a Democrat response that could work, accusations with even weak evidence within a week of the vote are political death. People are being are being charged with criminal conspiracies about this, and it's totally the reason you're in trouble. Trump is very bad for the US.


That you also hear internal Democrat communications that are still all anti-HRC, that's totally from the same people, both Russian and US racist, sexist, nationalist internet trolls, who are funded by very rich people and basically have whatever budget they need, and a bit of extremely expensive AI-modelling for social sciences to make the most of their very limited actual evidence of anything being wrong with the democratic party, because there really isn't.

I mean, yes, some rich folks will have more say than you in the Democrat party, because that is how money works. But really, your problems are not the new council of whatever the fuck for the party that isn't running any branch government right now.
_________________
news://rec.games.frp.dnd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
MGuy
Prince


Joined: 21 Jul 2009
Posts: 3417
Location: Indiana

PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 7:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Tussock... 3 things. 1) please read past the first sentence of something that you're going to respond to and 2 what you're describing is collusion between more then Russian trolls on the internet who take up spaces on social media. So even if you wanted to boil down just what I was talking about in that one sentence you not only trip over your own dick but ignore the 3rd part which is that the country was already primed such that a small percentage of people made the difference between more of the same and almost literal orange Hitler.
_________________
The first rule of Fatclub. Don't Talk about Fatclub..
I've always thought it best to never hit a lady, but be sure to beat a bitch. -TOZ
MGuy wrote:
Finally a thread about fighters!


Last edited by MGuy on Thu Nov 02, 2017 10:55 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 12076

PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 10:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Extra Tussock is wrong thing:

Tussock doesn't actually know shit about the emails stuff. Clinton's emails that were investigated by the FBI and that the FBI reported about are 100% unrelated to Russia in every way.

Literally all of that happened because of Benghazi hearings into email hearings into FBI investigation without Russia being involved.

Russia did the other email stuff.

Certainly it didn't help that the media deliberately blurred the two stories into one to confuse people, but when you say things like:

"that thing where the media was full of innuendo about HRC's stolen emails and how the FBI was going to check them because statutory duty"

is really two completely different things. The FBI statutorily checked HRC's non stolen emails that people weren't even saying were stolen.

Also this: "the stealing of a distribution of the emails part" "that perfectly timed release and FBI response" ect.
_________________
"DSMatticus" wrote:
Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Blicero
Duke


Joined: 07 May 2009
Posts: 1007

PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 9:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

This is probably the best evidence I have seen that the Clinton campaign did have a genuinely nefarious relationship with the DNC during the primary.
_________________
Out beyond the hull, mucoid strings of non-baryonic matter streamed past like Christ's blood in the firmament.


Last edited by Blicero on Thu Nov 02, 2017 9:36 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
OgreBattle
King


Joined: 03 Sep 2011
Posts: 5074

PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 9:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Clinton's pro Israel, Bernie's anti Israel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FrankTrollman
Serious Badass


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 27063

PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 10:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

OgreBattle wrote:
Clinton's pro Israel, Bernie's anti Israel


He's so anti-Israel that he votes to send them money and weapons every time it comes up and signed a letter condemning the UN for saying critical things about Israel's handling of its Arab population.

There are no anti-Israel politicians in the United States.

-Frank
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Voss
Prince


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 3740

PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 12:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Blicero wrote:
This is probably the best evidence I have seen that the Clinton campaign did have a genuinely nefarious relationship with the DNC during the primary.


You've got low standards of evidence.

The author has a fairly absurd bias, a choppy as hell way of making quotes add up to what he wants to say, and a single (woefully sourced) testimonial from someone with an axe to grind (and a book to sell).

Its particularly interesting that she made all these discoveries three months before her own 'ethical lapse' caused her to leak debate questions to Hillary. She couldn't have been that horrified.

It also profoundly fails at connecting the accusations of funding and closed door agreements to the opening statement that "the primary was rigged."

It would be interesting to see evidence of it, but this isn't it. This is a PR campaign for a book dressed up as an accusation.


Last edited by Voss on Fri Nov 03, 2017 12:05 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 12076

PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 1:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Yeah. The only thing that Donna Braizille had to say that wasn't reported a year ago was "and then all the Victory Fund Money went to Hillary Clinton personally"

A) False.
B) Super Mega Illegal like literally just stealing money Clinton would be in jail (I'm going to guess not that one).
C) An exaggeration of something already reported a year ago and/or that she was paid back for the loan she apparently loaned to the DNC, or a combination there of, and not at all impressive or dangerous or per se indicative of rigging.

So basically:

Donna Braizille wants you to buy her book in the hope that it will reveal the actual info missing from this article that would demonstrate any actual rigging, or even present any evidence that wasn't reported months ago.
_________________
"DSMatticus" wrote:
Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Omegonthesane
Duke


Joined: 26 Sep 2009
Posts: 1985

PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 7:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

When I saw that post I honestly expected the link to be a Rickroll.
_________________
FrankTrollman wrote:
And if there are any weeds that grow better in barren soil than laziness and ignorance, I don't know what they are (and don't care enough to find out).
Kaelik wrote:
Because powerful men get away with terrible shit, and even the public domain ones get ignored, and then, when the floodgates open, it turns out there was a goddam flood behind it.
FrankTrollman wrote:
As far as death and human misery goes, Tobacco is basically World War II grinding on forever with no real sign of stopping in our life times. Death camps and nuclear bombs and stuff are certainly dramatic, but public health crises are always and forever bigger than wars on the global scale.


Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Josh_Kablack
Prince


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 4980
Location: Online. duh

PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

So is the tax plan designed to fail or is it an attempt to score points by angering the "special interests" (such as those people with mortgages, student loan debt substantial medical expenses, significant state/local taxes) to rally the base ?
_________________
Johnson - Hanks 2020
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Chamomile
Prince


Joined: 03 May 2011
Posts: 3846

PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

My understanding is that tax cuts for the rich are the goal of Republican policy, an end unto themselves, but I'm not particularly familiar with the details of the tax plan except that it includes tax cuts for the rich and that this is not doing it any favors in terms of popular appeal.
_________________
I have a blog
Also a Discord channel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Gaming Den Forum Index -> MPSIMS All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 46, 47, 48, 49, 50  Next
Page 47 of 50

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group