My next list is going to be about you MLM. :finger:

Funnily enough, a lot of that list could just as easily apply to the Clintons. Other than the point about Steve Bannon perhaps, though he might have found a way to sneak into the White House even without Trump. :wave:

On another note, I'm not too happy about this, even if I think they should be investing in new technology to actually counter environmental damage with their current budget instead of bloating their operations payroll.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...al-monitoring/

Be specific. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 can not be pinned on either Bill or Hillary, so your comeback is ridiculously pathetic.

Bill left the office with a huge surplus and the blue collar folks were doing great.

The Budget and Deficit Under Clinton - FactCheck.org

Good lord man, you get lamer and lamer by the week with your defenses of Trump.

Well I wanted Bernie. Too bad he'll die too soon.

Lol, quit pathetically deflecting everything back to Trump when the only viable candidate we really had (Bernie) was screwed over by your beloved DNC. We haven't had a great president in decades. 2 and 4 and above certainly do apply to them (13 specifically to Bill and a few others moreso to Hillary). Jesus man, lay off the Kool-Aid.

2 specifically doesn't really apply. It might be your personal opinion but both of them had experience in the political arena by actually holding down jobs as either Governors or Senators.

lol @ the Trump supporters staying quiet. What's wrong? Did the man you voted for not turn out the way you wanted? Who's surprised, really.

Look up the phrase blind ignorance.

2 and 4? The Clinton's were the first family of Arkansas for 8 years prior to the presidency.

Strike ONE.

13? Bill Clinton didn't hate women or look down on them. He actually loved them a bit too much.

Strike TWO.

You really need to take Trump's "member" out of your mouth. Your ability to enunciate in a sensible manner is being greatly hindered by it.

Strike THREE.

True (arguable), but what about these chestnuts? Every single one of them would be been standard issue with a Clinton presidency.

Is cognitive dissonance like this typical of liberals? Sheesh. As far as 13 goes, he and Donald Trump are peas in a pod.

Ehhhhh, I mean, yeah, it's true. But... yall make it sound like we are in a 3rd world country not enjoying the luxuries of living in an economic power house right now.

I guess Chula thinks it's okay to cheat on your wife. I mean, it's not the same as accusing reporters of being on their period when they say **** you don't like but I get where he's coming from.

Let's see some examples of Clinton publically putting down and insultingly berating women based on their looks, demeanor, or statements.

Just because they both love pussy (and what hetero man doesn't) don't make them the same.

Ant swings and misses for the........

seriously, I'm losing count.

Is complete and total NAH NAH NAH NAH NAH ignorance typical of Trump conservatives?

Name 5 presidents who didn't? Kennedy probably holding the world record.

Name 5 presidents who called a female dissenter a "fat pig".

Nah, he just defended Trump from Chula's hyperbolic rants and you guys assumed he supported Trump because you'r not open enough to think out side of the box of identity politics so when somebody who doesn't think in your boxes says **** out side of your boxes it does not compute with you.

I guess you just aren't punk rock enough to break the rules and standards people want to box your thoughts into.



And I've gotten the impression of him being a Bernie supporter long ago with a previous discussion where I actually discussed things with him rather than the ****ty "my side is better" discussion yall like to partake in because you can't take the emotional blow to your ego in admitting that you could be wrong.

List out the hyperbole. Be specific.

You wanna toss it out? Back it the **** up.

You gonna read my whole comment or do you just like being outraged?

Right. Everything we talk about in this thread is pretty much 1st world problem stuff...but at the same time, people (especially Chula) need to remember that Donald Trump's presidency wasn't created in a vacuum. A BIG part of it is the result of a hypocritical dissonance where Obama says Hillary is the most qualified person for the presidency, but eight years before says "she'll say anything and do nothing". Which one is it Barack? :D

But hey, get a serious Libertarian candidate up to bat in 2020 and maybe we could say goodbye to both stupid parties forever. The likelihood of the public electing another Trump or Hillary Clinton-esque shill would go down considerably.

Has anyone ever told you that you are the paragon of irony? You have yet to hit the ball even once...which is quite a shame. :rofl:

I'm sure Frown or someone else could dive a little deeper for you, but let's just say "Bill Clinton" and "rape allegations" have quite a history together.

No, you just have a short memory. I'm an amazing creature capable of all kinds of miracles, but I can't fix that for you.

How big of a deal you made about the "grab her by the pussy line" how every single thing that happens gets the label 'unprecidented' how every news story you say "Trump is finnished now!'

I mean, you've been saying Trump is finnished now or done or on his way out since long before he was elected. Over things that hardly make a difference.

Oh, and lets' not forget him not wanting to attend that stupid ****ing dinner that you made a deal out of.

Oh, and all these god damned polls. The polls say Trumps approval rating is going down. Down down down down down. Okay, cool, Chula. And what's changed since when you first started saying that? Is he still president? It's just hyperbole, blowing the meaning and impact of things out of proportion in a way that you would never do with Clinton and would probably defend.

I do. I just feel as though this fits very well under it.

3 is debatable, sure She might have had some but not to the extent that Trump does.

4. This one doesn't apply in the slightest unless you consider Russia our ally.

5. This one happens with all presidents regardless of the party especially when the East has such beef with Western civilization.

6. This is true of both sides it's just the left is a bit more deceptive about it and put on a bigger front like they are helping. They toss more crumbs than what the current administration is doing.

7. This isn't true.

8. Neither is this one although I feel like all of the old fogeys that get picked for Supreme Court are Christians.

9. Sure that can be said for anyone that you dislike so it's a personal taste kind of thing.

10. This one specifically doesn't fit both of them.

11. This is true. It's their jobs to be that way.

12. I'm not sure how this applies to Bill or Hillary. Maybe you can fill me in on that one.

Yeah, adults, sure. Pretend all you want that you are "adults" "discussing" things. Looks a lot like a bunch of children arguing over who gets the last slice of pizza to me.

I think you might have quoted me when I was still mid-edit. This was the final one:

4. was in reference to Israel, Tibet, etc.

My reference to 7. is that Hillary Clinton has flip flopped on environmental issues in the past and supported TPP which has a noted track record of being anti-environmental. Just because she never said global warming was a Chinese hoax doesn't mean she's that much better on those issues. Bernie would have been better than her in this area.

My point on 12. is based on stuff she's said (African-American children 'superpredators') plus her and Bill's history during his first few years dealing with certain pieces of legislation back in the 90's, which you can read about more in detail here. https://www.thenation.com/article/hi...peoples-votes/

.

What I don't get is why you guys even come in here to post if you're just going to insult anybody who disagrees with you. Or are you just looking for people to validate your own opinion so you can pat each other on the backs and stimulate your fragile egos? Or perhaps you just get off on bickering with people. The point of discussing is to learn and understand why people have this position and with that understanding it's supposed to bring people together and compromise. It's not to loop yourself into stereotypes and hurl insults at one another furthering the disconnect. Like, you guys come in here and tell anybody that doesn't agree that they are delusional or stupid or bigoted or don't know **** like that's supposed make them think, "oh, he's right!" when all it does is built resentment. And to what end? To make yourself feel bigger because you insulted the other person better? Get the **** out of here. You're wasting your time pretending to be discussing things like rational and mature adults. And the ****ed up thing is, both Trump and Hillary wanted that. They want you to hate each others guts because it makes it that much easier to control you and get your votes when you think the other side is the devil. If you weren't so busy actively getting the other side to resent you so they vote against you we probably wouldn't have had Trump. And trust me, I actually TALKED with Trump supporters to gain a better understanding on how anybody could support him. And they always told me it's because they are sick of the hyperbole and the slander from Hilary supporters.

Remember that time I proved you wrong and proved it's harder for people to illegally immigrate to Canada and all you could do is insult me then rant about how you study this or some stupid **** nobody cared about.

Yeah, pretend all you want. Fake ass punk rocker.

This is why I generally ignore politics unless I want to be childish and throw shade on people. The more you learn about politics, the dumber you get, cause you'll develop opinions, then take sides, then start yelling, and pretty soon you're just in it for the dopamine hits from arguing. It almost never fails, no matter how smart the person is, and it's the catch 22 that will always leave the world ****ed. So I stay dumb and keep my brain.

I completely underestimated the idiocracy of American voters.

Hardly make a difference? The dude is 60 days in and is embroiled in ridiculous amounts of debate, and possible serious scandal.

That stupid ****ing dinner is a Washington/Presidential institution. Just because he's a scared little boy over the whole thing doesn't negate that.

You are 100% right. My creadance with polls has forever been damaged. That being said, how about you post a current link to a positive story relating to Trump's presidency?

I'll wait right here.

All the people who like having discussions and addressing ideas rarely post in here. Its enjoyable when they do.

Even I'm bored of the infighting. There's drama and then there's just tedious, cyclical, shouting matches.

#winning

#makeamericagreatagain

Normally I'd just let people do it, and ignore and just post my stupid one liners or what ever but I think I'm on a man period today. But, like a very manly man period.

Edit: and it also really annoys me because for the most part I lean towards their ideas politically.

A colon?

Well, yeah, you get opinions from the more facts you know. But the point of discussing is to share the information and gain it. Like, to educate them and yourself. You can't go in thinking you know everything. It's not an easy thing to do. To actually discuss politics rationally. Or anything with passion in it. But god damn I just get so sick of seeing people that don't even try. Because it's so much easier just to talk ****.

Anal bleeding. Like I'm butthurt or something.

Some people can handle it, but I had to deprogram from that **** years ago and don't really give a **** about getting back into it as anything more than an occasional hobby. It's simply not worth the high blood pressure.

This thread being the shiny beacon gathering those people.

Nah, this right here proves my point. It's the epitome of it actually. Because his positions are not outlandish. They just clash with your ego.

If I could understand that he'd be a Bernie supporter this whole time despite having a FEW ideals that could be perceived as conservative at first glance until you actually take the time to talk with him then so could have you if you actually cared about discussing politics and not talking ****.

Edit: Trust me, we had our argument because I thought he was saying something he wasn't and it made me think he was what you claimed he was until I got a better understanding of him not being the one I thought he was.