yfk12
Degenerate who belongs on a cross
There's a ton of evidence about Trump being involved with Russia.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42493918
Gun Control
- Thread starter Throatpunch
- Start date
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42493918
GonZo_626
Well Shit!
Hahahaha, that's not even real evidence for the most part. Most of it is circumstantial, which is why they have not moved forward with charges against most. All they have gotten is some campaign financing, and some tax evasion type shit, with a little untruthfulness on forms. Nowhere big enough (yet) to impeach. Hell if they cant impeach when the have the jizzed up dress you think they can impeach on that. Plus it brought up the fully debunked Steele document (democrat paid for collusion there). If they looked at the Dems just as closely I am sure some would be charged there for the same type of shit. Mueller is playing what cards he has very close, or he does not have enough to actually pull off anything more then campaign finance violations (paying porn stars to shut up). Hell to me at this point it is time to put up or shut up, but I bet the keep playing it up until the next election and nothing really substantial will come from it.
yfk12
Degenerate who belongs on a cross
At this point, much of the Steele Dossier has been proven true. None of it has been proven false.
Also, the GOP happily waited for years during the investigations into Benghazi and Hillary's emails, and the Mueller investigation has already yielded far more results than both of those combined.
The length at which some people go to defend Trump, always baffles me. Because I am 100% certain they would never ever let that fly with either Obama or Hillary, particularly if she won the presidency and we had the same situation with Russia and her beeing the focus of the investigation.
I am just saying we should be better than that. But hey! It's your nation. You want that wall? Go and get it, and see where it leads to. I am just trying to stick with the facts - if possible. For example that Trump is not honest here, or at the very least clueless, which is really a problem when you consider that some people say the wall could easily cost more than 70 billion dollars. And maybe more than 200 million per year if you also want to maintain it. And all of that while it's completly open if the wall covering the whole US border would be even effective in fighting crime, smuggling and illegal immigration. At this point, I would even argue it might be cheaper to just anex Mexico and be done with it ...
Populism is for it self is not inherently bad, but at some point we HAVE to stop sometimes and say, hey? Isn't that actually going to damage us? Someone could go and make a vote if Russia should be attacked with nuclear missiles during thecold war and if the majority would go for it, let us do it? Would that be a whise policy? I think not. See Brexit as another example where poulism, missinformation and this whole "FUCK MIGRANTS!" can lead you to. The so called solution can be often worse than migration alone. Germany had to learn this the hard way from 1939 - 45. And it seems we're still making the same mistakes again in some areas ...
The qestion is, are you interested in real solutions or just simplifying topics? THis also goes for the gun-debate we're having right now, since again what we see is that a lot of anti-gun people simplify the topic and I am pretty sure you would not agree to their 'fallacies' either. Yeah, I am for gun controll, in some parts, but I also often stop people when they spread bullshit about guns or engage in fallacies. And why? Because outright BANNING guns, will fix nothing.
Again, some issues we're talking about, are very complex and if we want to improve the situation, than we have to also talk about complex solutions.
I am just saying we should be better than that. But hey! It's your nation. You want that wall? Go and get it, and see where it leads to. I am just trying to stick with the facts - if possible. For example that Trump is not honest here, or at the very least clueless, which is really a problem when you consider that some people say the wall could easily cost more than 70 billion dollars. And maybe more than 200 million per year if you also want to maintain it. And all of that while it's completly open if the wall covering the whole US border would be even effective in fighting crime, smuggling and illegal immigration. At this point, I would even argue it might be cheaper to just anex Mexico and be done with it ...
Populism is for it self is not inherently bad, but at some point we HAVE to stop sometimes and say, hey? Isn't that actually going to damage us? Someone could go and make a vote if Russia should be attacked with nuclear missiles during thecold war and if the majority would go for it, let us do it? Would that be a whise policy? I think not. See Brexit as another example where poulism, missinformation and this whole "FUCK MIGRANTS!" can lead you to. The so called solution can be often worse than migration alone. Germany had to learn this the hard way from 1939 - 45. And it seems we're still making the same mistakes again in some areas ...
The qestion is, are you interested in real solutions or just simplifying topics? THis also goes for the gun-debate we're having right now, since again what we see is that a lot of anti-gun people simplify the topic and I am pretty sure you would not agree to their 'fallacies' either. Yeah, I am for gun controll, in some parts, but I also often stop people when they spread bullshit about guns or engage in fallacies. And why? Because outright BANNING guns, will fix nothing.
Again, some issues we're talking about, are very complex and if we want to improve the situation, than we have to also talk about complex solutions.
TheGM
The voice of reason
Nah, the name of the game is beating the other guy. knocking them out of the race but sending someone to jail would set a precedent and none of them want that. Well at the federal level anyway. My state has sent 3 governors to prison in like the last 20 years.
Because the Green Party are bunch of annoying wimps and the Libertarians are fucking weirdos. But in all seriousness every time there is 3rd party candidate they split the vote with their ideological equivalent and the other guy wins. The last Major 3rd party candidate was Ross Perot and he was able to take a nice big chunk of voters from both but he took more from Bush The First and that is how Bill Clinton was elected. Or occasionally you get silly shit like the Democrats running 2 candidates at the same time and splitting the vote of their own party.
GonZo_626
Well Shit!
Uggghhh, yes some of his staff met with some Russians, nobody can prove anything else out of those meetings, and yes as a business man he started to do a deal to build a hotel in Russia. Everything else including getting peed on by hookers, well that's what the Dems got for the money they spent...
Ok ignore the points I was trying to make and say that I am not offering any opinions, good effect. You know like there may be another way besides just let everyone in, like help them while they are still in there own country.
Jesus you would think that countries with like 5 parties are a bad thing or voting for more parties that closer align with your own ideas is a horrible idea with that logic, and look how it is ending up with huge amounts of polarization. You know you used to have more parties right? Anyways pussies or weirdos probably were better then what you have.
BigGuyCIA
Yer fond of me Lobster!
The U.S. political hemisphere needs more parties. Two party system only leads to us or them politicking with no room in-between i.e. the 2016 election.
Perhaps social media can help generate more influence and viewers for Independent, central parties.
Perhaps social media can help generate more influence and viewers for Independent, central parties.
Did I say, let everyone in?
TheGM
The voice of reason
You seem to be implying I'm defending the practice. I'm merely stating the reasoning to how and why. Nobody wants to associate with the Green Party because they come off as a bunch of pretentious assholes who seem to relish nominating charisma blackholes as their candidates. People blamed them(among other reasons) for costing Al Gore the election. Libertarians are just fucking weird. they don't talk like normal people and they are adamant that you know they are libertarian and must expound the the virtues of Libertarianism at all times. much like Communists or Vegans but without the smell and better dressed. And the end of the day America is a country of winners and they want to vote for the winner, not waste their ticket on a loser who can't carry a waste paper basket let alone a state. Because at the end of the day is it about winning not having an effective government or anything.
BigGuyCIA
Yer fond of me Lobster!
Blaming the Green Party for your candidate losing is like blaming Bernie voters for Hillary losing. The mistake was assuming those Green voters were just going to go, "oh well I might as well vote Gore" rather than just not vote at all, which is basically what a shit load of Bernie voters did.
I think people need to realize they need to put forth candidates American's can see themselves getting a beer with, or in this case a craft beer because millenials. Bush had that quality as did Obama. The current Green/Ind parties need some serious rework rather than putting forth a bunch of uptight kooks in suits.
I think people need to realize they need to put forth candidates American's can see themselves getting a beer with, or in this case a craft beer because millenials. Bush had that quality as did Obama. The current Green/Ind parties need some serious rework rather than putting forth a bunch of uptight kooks in suits.
The running Libertarian joke is that we’re gonna write in Stone Cold Steve Austin
BigGuyCIA
Yer fond of me Lobster!
I'll write in the Undertaker come next election.
MutantScalper
Dogmeat
What is the Catholic church known for? Wide scale mass rape of US kids. What is the NRA known for? Enabling wide scale massacres of US kids. And GOP is in cahoots with both of them. Have fun with all that, yanks.
Mutie I love you but I can never tell if you’re being sarcastic or actually this misinformed on what goes on in the US.
Some people seriously suggest Oprah or Tom Hanks to run as president for the Democrats. And I am thinking to my self. This is what the presidency has become ... a fucking reality TV show. A well educated canditate, with an expertise, maybe even a scientist, that's literate and level-headed simply isn't going to win ellections anymore I guess.
BigGuyCIA
Yer fond of me Lobster!
You mean occupy wallstreet was not real?
This kind of protest I am afraid, will never change anything because the people do not want actuall change, they want to preserve their lifestyle, in other words, they want wealth.
It's like with the environment. Everyone agrees that we have to protect it, but no one wants to give up his car for it. But this is what we would have to do for example, if we're really serious about protecting the environment, we would have to waste a lot less resources, using the bicycle, eating less meat, lowering our consumption. There can be no unlimited economic growth on a planet with limited resources and space. But when ever I tell people this, they look at me like I am a lunatic.
Seriously it always reminds me to an obese person that wan'ts to be thin and muscular, but with a diet where he can eat everything he wants and as much he wants and without doing any sport.
Fair enough Crni.
yfk12
Degenerate who belongs on a cross
Theoretically, there can be unlimited economic growth, as long as it's also accompanied by scientific development, specifically in the field of renewable energy.