Far Left Democrats Declare WAR On Moderates Threatening The Democratic Party

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 2:41 pm

Democratic Party FAILING Due To Infighting With Far Left. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is outraged after 26 democrats sided with Republicans on new provisions. She is threatening to add them to a "list" of names to be ousted through "primarying."

This is a far left tactic of putting in unpopular politicians with an extreme minority of voters by exploiting biases in districts. Ocasio-Cortez's district voted nearly 60 points against the progressive Cynthia Nixon in favor of Cuomo who is more moderate showing that she only got elected because people blindly voted Democrat.

This tactic is being wielded against the moderates who seek to unify the country by a fringe faction of the far left. As more Democrats show they are willing to work with the Republican Party to bridge the divide, far leftists are outraged and demand they fall in line or get removed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLgji_iSig4&t=74s

by Original Quill Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:32 pm

Thor wrote:Democratic Party FAILING Due To Infighting With Far Left. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is outraged after 26 democrats sided with Republicans on new provisions. She is threatening to add them to a "list" of names to be ousted through "primarying."

I'm looking forward to that list. This is a time of party realignment, and AOC’s list may give us some idea of what to expect or look for.

Didge wrote:This is a far left tactic of putting in unpopular politicians with an extreme minority of voters by exploiting biases in districts. Ocasio-Cortez's district voted nearly 60 points against the progressive Cynthia Nixon in favor of Cuomo who is more moderate showing that she only got elected because people blindly voted Democrat.

Reality is to be found in reality...the biases are real. Learn who is the real Democrat, and draw the boundaries accordingly. I have no problem with this approach.

Didge wrote:This tactic is being wielded against the moderates who seek to unify the country by a fringe faction of the far left. As more Democrats show they are willing to work with the Republican Party to bridge the divide, far leftists are outraged and demand they fall in line or get removed

I think the OLD WAY is responsible for our contemporary situation, in which the top 1% own 99% of the property and assets of the US. Many in America are upset about this, but don't know where to turn because they don't know how it happened.

It occurred in part because the party didn't move leftward with the population, and now we have these fringe representatives being called 'middle-of-the-roaders'. They are like Oreo cookies, Democrats on the outside, but Republicans on the inside. Typically, they are in it for the money, and deceive their local voters that they are properly reflecting their interests. They are not.

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:37 pm

I did not write anything Quill, so why post my name to things i never said?

The fact you now claim who is a real democrat, which if we based that on history and in the past would be slave holders and against civil rights.
It shos that the view to be democrat has been so wide ranging in history it has been far right and now reaching out to the Far left

This is easily seen in how identity politics is pushing people more further to the right and left and this happened before trump

This is only ever going to lead to more conflict and divide and in no way. Can you make an assertion on what is Democrat, as its been very consistant, until the last decade. Where it has turned for the worse far left

Far Left Democrats Declare WAR On Moderates Threatening The Democratic Party PP-2014-06-12-polarization-0-05

Far Left Democrats Declare WAR On Moderates Threatening The Democratic Party PP-2014-06-12-polarization-0-05

by Original Quill Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:52 pm

Didge wrote:I did not write anything Quill, so why post my name to things i never said?

Well, it's the only way the board has to identify the OP. They are responsible for phrasing it that way.

My only purpose is to relate back to what is said in the OP, regardless of who wrote it.

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:56 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:I did not write anything Quill, so why post my name to things i never said?

Well, it's the only way the board has to identify the OP. They are responsible for phrasing it that way.

My only purpose is to relate back to what is said in the OP.

The way to define is how more extreme the beliefs are based whether right or left

by Original Quill Sat Mar 02, 2019 7:15 pm

Didge wrote:The fact you now claim who is a real democrat, which if we based that on history and in the past would be slave holders and against civil rights.
It shos that the view to be democrat has been so wide ranging in history it has been far right and now reaching out to the Far left

This is easily seen in how identity politics is pushing people more further to the right and left and this happened before trump

This is only ever going to lead to more conflict and divide and in no way. Can you make an assertion on what is Democrat, as its been very consistant, until the last decade. Where it has turned for the worse far left

Your first point is contradicting your second. Yes, historically the variation of parties has been wide-ranging and elusive. But we don’t learn that by survey research data.

Yet you resort to survey research data, which builds upon it's own unsubstantiated assumptions. It also predicted that Hillary Clinton would win by a wide range. And so she did by 3-million votes, but the United States is not a democracy. So Trump is now president.

Survey research purports to follow voters and voter trends. But it also borrows from past assumptions and associations, which have misled us into a Trump presidency. (Where did your charts get their assumptions as to what is “liberal” and what is “conservative”, especially in the past, if not from unsubstantiated assumption?) Even if you don’t understand the fallacy of polls, you can tell it doesn’t work because Hillary didn’t become president.

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 7:24 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:The fact you now claim who is a real democrat, which if we based that on history and in the past would be slave holders and against civil rights.
It shos that the view to be democrat has been so wide ranging in history it has been far right and now reaching out to the Far left

This is easily seen in how identity politics is pushing people more further to the right and left and this happened before trump

This is only ever going to lead to more conflict and divide and in no way. Can you make an assertion on what is Democrat, as its been very consistant, until the last decade. Where it has turned for the worse far left

Your first point is contradicting your second. Yes, historically the variation of parties has been wide-ranging and elusive. But we don’t learn that by survey research data.

Yet you resort to survey research data, which builds upon it's own unsubstantiated assumptions. It also predicted that Hillary Clinton would win by a wide range. And so she did by 3-million votes, but the United States is not a democracy. So Trump is now president.

Survey research purports to follow voters and voter trends. But it also borrows from past assumptions and associations, which have misled us into a Trump presidency. (Where did your charts get their assumptions as to what is “liberal” and what is “conservative”, especially in the past, if not from unsubstantiated assumption?) Even if you don’t understand the fallacy of polls, you can tell it doesn’t work because Hillary didn’t become president.

Sorry the above is basically gibberish, when standard democrat values move further left and Republican further right

They fall into other categories and become less democratic or Republican mate

Show me these polls, which i asked before of you

I will be back later

All the best Quill

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 7:26 pm

not sure which is better

labour tearing themesleves apart or the democrats tearing themselevs apart

cant wait for trump 2020

by Original Quill Sat Mar 02, 2019 9:05 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:not sure which is better

labour tearing themesleves apart or the democrats tearing themselevs apart

cant wait for trump 2020

Waffle.

........................

Hey, AOC, you go girl. You have my permission...at least to pursue it. I'm just a consumer who wants to see what you come up with.

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 9:18 pm

Original Quill wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:not sure which is better

labour tearing themesleves apart or the democrats tearing themselevs apart

cant wait for trump 2020

Waffle.

........................

Hey, AOC, you go girl. You have my permission...at least to pursue it. I'm just a consumer who wants to see what you come up with.

Quill

When trump wins in 2020 Can we expect the same level of outrage hysteria that we saw when he won the first time round

Because that shit was fucking funny.

by Original Quill Sat Mar 02, 2019 10:13 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Waffle.

........................

Hey, AOC, you go girl. You have my permission...at least to pursue it. I'm just a consumer who wants to see what you come up with.

Quill

When trump wins in 2020 Can we expect the same level of outrage hysteria that we saw when he won the first time round

Because that shit was fucking funny.

You are in pain, Russ. I understand. You have to deny, and pretend to be unaffected. You can cry on our shoulders, sweet bunny. Twisted Evil

by Guest Sat Mar 02, 2019 10:47 pm

Original Quill wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

Quill

When trump wins in 2020 Can we expect the same level of outrage hysteria that we saw when he won the first time round

Because that shit was fucking funny.

You are in pain, Russ. I understand. You have to deny, and pretend to be unaffected. You can cry on our shoulders, sweet bunny.

by veya_victaous Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:22 am

this is the problem with political parties particularly in a 2 party system.

One would have thought the party would have learned it's lesson regarding listening to the people on candidate selection after being punished for insisting on Hillary.... it is these people that are the reason there is currently a Trump Presidency.

Although House seats etc get a lot less focus and people do just tend to vote by Party instead of candidate. Rolling Eyes

by Original Quill Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:46 am

veya_victaous wrote:this is the problem with political parties particularly in a 2 party system.

One would have thought the party would have learned it's lesson regarding listening to the people on candidate selection after being punished for insisting on Hillary.... it is these people that are the reason there is currently a Trump Presidency.

Although House seats etc get a lot less focus and people do just tend to vote by Party instead of candidate.

So, you are predicting Trump again next round?

by Guest Sun Mar 03, 2019 2:59 am

Original Quill wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:this is the problem with political parties particularly in a 2 party system.

One would have thought the party would have learned it's lesson regarding listening to the people on candidate selection after being punished for insisting on Hillary.... it is these people that are the reason there is currently a Trump Presidency.

Although House seats etc get a lot less focus and people do just tend to vote by Party instead of candidate.

So, you are predicting Trump again next round?

Clinton's "deplorable" comment probably swung it for trump

The Democrats have not learned their lesson

The smollet incident, the nick sandmann incident all cheered on by the same media that peddled the deplorable incident, same old same old.

You Democrats never trumps are making the same noises, saying trumps never gonna win.

Clinton was the very best hope you had to beat him and he trounced her, who you gonna throw in the ring this time???

Bernie the socialist?? Red cortez??

Good luck

by veya_victaous Sun Mar 03, 2019 7:03 am

Original Quill wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:this is the problem with political parties particularly in a 2 party system.

One would have thought the party would have learned it's lesson regarding listening to the people on candidate selection after being punished for insisting on Hillary.... it is these people that are the reason there is currently a Trump Presidency.

Although House seats etc get a lot less focus and people do just tend to vote by Party instead of candidate.

So, you are predicting Trump again next round?

don't know, I wouldn't be honestly surprised. it should have been impossible for a man like Trump to win a first term.

but here we are... the democrats somehow managed to find an even less desirable candidate. And they just had a black man as President and they we're seemingly the more popular party going in, so cut the bullshit it about it being because she was a women.. it's because she is even more of a corporate sell out than Trump Rolling Eyes

Democrats need a non-Career Politician, the party heads are naval gazing and lost sight of the electorate Far Left Democrats Declare WAR On Moderates Threatening The Democratic Party 202592697

Far Left Democrats Declare WAR On Moderates Threatening The Democratic Party 202592697

by Guest Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:40 pm

veya_victaous wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

So, you are predicting Trump again next round?

don't know, I wouldn't be honestly surprised. it should have been impossible for a man like Trump to win a first term.

but here we are... the democrats somehow managed to find an even less desirable candidate. And they just had a black man as President and they we're seemingly the more popular party going in, so cut the bullshit it about it being because she was a women.. it's because she is even more of a corporate sell out than Trump

Democrats need a non-Career Politician, the party heads are naval gazing and lost sight of the electorate

Lost sight of the electorate??

Why was it ever otherwise??

by Maddog Sun Mar 03, 2019 3:58 pm

veya_victaous wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

So, you are predicting Trump again next round?

don't know, I wouldn't be honestly surprised. it should have been impossible for a man like Trump to win a first term.

but here we are... the democrats somehow managed to find an even less desirable candidate. And they just had a black man as President and they we're seemingly the more popular party going in, so cut the bullshit it about it being because she was a women.. it's because she is even more of a corporate sell out than Trump

Democrats need a non-Career Politician, the party heads are naval gazing and lost sight of the electorate

Watch Beto from Texas. I would put my money on him. Not a lot of money mind you, but a more than I would put on anyone else.

He supports Medicare for all, more gun regulations but has disavowed socialism. He's good looking and makes the girls giddy. He's the Mathew McGonaghey of politics. And I may have spelled Mathew's name wrong.

by Original Quill Sun Mar 03, 2019 6:05 pm

Matthew McConaughey.

Beto is too young, and lacks that northeast Kennedy sophistication that recovers from one's youth.

Disavowing socialism only works in the south. And he's still got to face opposition from the old, white men of the right. He's fine for El Paso, but he won't make it at the next level.

by Maddog Sun Mar 03, 2019 6:09 pm

Original Quill wrote:Matthew McConaughey.

Beto is too young, and lacks that northeast Kennedy sophistication that recovers from one's youth.

Disavowing socialism only works in the south. And he's still got to face opposition from the old, white men of the right. He's fine for El Paso, but he won't make it at the next level.

Folks want someone young.

He's plenty old enough with about the same experience as Obama had.

by Maddog Sun Mar 03, 2019 6:14 pm

Beto would be 48 when sworn in. Older than Kennedy, Clinton or Obama.

Meanwhile, the socialist running would be what, 77 or so?

by Guest Sun Mar 03, 2019 6:16 pm

Just gotta say that as an outsider I think the Democrats have damaged themselves too badly.

The average American cannot be impressed with the hysterical autistic screeching that has been coming out of the Liberal supporters of the democrat party, not to mention the low level civil war initiated by the antifa foot soldier of the democrat party.

By refusing to accept trumps election and then acting in the disgraceful way they have, I predict most Americans won't want anything to do with the democrat party.

Who would want anything to do with a political party that is unwilling to accept democracy??

Quill as much as I love rubbing your nose in trump shit, I genuinely believe that he will win in 2020 because the dems have not only been making the same mistakes they made the first time round, but have in many cases doubled down on it.

There has been zero introspective analysis or any kind of attempt to understand what went wrong and find a way to fix it, quite the opposite has happened.

Democrats have closed ranks and once again blamed and attacked the very voters they rely on for election.

It didn't work for Clinton and it won't work for who ever takes on trump

by Original Quill Sun Mar 03, 2019 6:22 pm

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:Matthew McConaughey.

Beto is too young, and lacks that northeast Kennedy sophistication that recovers from one's youth.

Disavowing socialism only works in the south. And he's still got to face opposition from the old, white men of the right. He's fine for El Paso, but he won't make it at the next level.

Folks want someone young.

He's plenty old enough with about the same experience as Obama had.

Folks are tired of inexperience. Dr. Obama (1961) is eleven years older, was an experienced organizer, and he was also a graduate of Harvard Law School and taught Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago. No comparison.

by Original Quill Sun Mar 03, 2019 6:36 pm

smelly-b wrote:There has been zero introspective analysis or any kind of attempt to understand what went wrong and find a way to fix it, quite the opposite has happened.

To the contrary, all of the criminal justice and intelligence services have thoroughly studied the matter and come to the conclusion that the Russians instated Trump. By count, he lost by 3-million votes, and only by the rigging of the electoral votes of Wisconsin, Ohio and Pennsylvania did he win.

Only Trump--quite naturally--refuses to accept that. That's your "zero introspective analysis".

I don't have any more respect than you do, for a nation that allows an organized crime family to take over the executive branch, and a foreign power to infect the legislative branch of the government.

Thus my imperative that the nation must be broken up, and the good pieces abandon the bad ones.

by Guest Sun Mar 03, 2019 6:50 pm

Original Quill wrote:
smelly-b wrote:There has been zero introspective analysis or any kind of attempt to understand what went wrong and find a way to fix it, quite the opposite has happened.

To the contrary, all of the criminal justice and intelligence services have thoroughly studied the matter and come to the conclusion that the Russians instated Trump. By count, he lost by 3-million votes, and only by the rigging of the electoral votes of Wisconsin, Ohio and Pennsylvania did he win.

Only Trump--quite naturally--refuses to accept that. That's your "zero introspective analysis".

I don't have any more respect than you do, for a nation that allows an organized crime family to take over the executive branch, and a foreign power to infect the legislative branch of the government.

Thus my imperative that the nation must be broken up, and the good pieces abandon the bad ones.

Case in point.

by Guest Sun Mar 03, 2019 6:51 pm

More of that doubling down on past mistakes

https://mol.im/a/6764443

by Original Quill Sun Mar 03, 2019 7:06 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

To the contrary, all of the criminal justice and intelligence services have thoroughly studied the matter and come to the conclusion that the Russians instated Trump. By count, he lost by 3-million votes, and only by the rigging of the electoral votes of Wisconsin, Ohio and Pennsylvania did he win.

Only Trump--quite naturally--refuses to accept that. That's your "zero introspective analysis".

I don't have any more respect than you do, for a nation that allows an organized crime family to take over the executive branch, and a foreign power to infect the legislative branch of the government.

Thus my imperative that the nation must be broken up, and the good pieces abandon the bad ones.

Case in point.

Do you have a plan to put Humpty-Dumpty back together again? Because I haven't heard one that will fly yet.

All I have heard is, my way or the highway! And with two sides the gap only gets wider. So, let's hear it.

by Maddog Sun Mar 03, 2019 8:18 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:

Folks want someone young.

He's plenty old enough with about the same experience as Obama had.

Folks are tired of inexperience. Dr. Obama (1961) is eleven years older, was an experienced organizer, and he was also a graduate of Harvard Law School and taught Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago. No comparison.

He wasn't older at the time he was elected.

Shall we make a wager on the Democratic nominee?

by Guest Sun Mar 03, 2019 8:43 pm

Original Quill wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

Case in point.

Do you have a plan to put Humpty-Dumpty back together again? Because I haven't heard one that will fly yet.

All I have heard is, my way or the highway! And with two sides the gap only gets wider. So, let's hear it.

two parts

trump just keeps ding what he has been doing and building on his successes, america likes a strong leader and trump is that, his approval ratings prove that,he doesnt need to alter his game plan too much

you and democrats like you are the second part of the plan

trump would never have won without clintons deplorable comment, in my opinion that was the moment she lost.

and i keep saying it, you guys havent learned from your mistakes, youre making the same one over and over again, you cannot win voters over to your cause by calling them "deplorables", i dont understand why you cant understand that

but your side keeps doing it, you need to reach out to trump voters not push them away, but in order to do that YOU need to walk back, youre the ones who need to take the steps, and thats not going to happen.

you just keep doing what youre doing and trumps gonna win in 2020.

by Guest Mon Mar 04, 2019 3:32 am

by Guest Mon Mar 04, 2019 3:34 am

smelly-bandit wrote:

the absolute and complete fuckingmadness of the typical democrat

i suspect the dude trying to "oust the regime"is quill

by Guest Mon Mar 04, 2019 3:40 am

smelly-bandit wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

the absolute and complete fuckingmadness of the typical democrat

i suspect the dude trying to "oust the regime"is quill

wrong

i found quill

he is defo the dude with the "free the bear" sign

i was also there, im the guy with this sign ------------------> lol!

by Guest Mon Mar 04, 2019 3:43 am

by Original Quill Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:15 am

smelly b wrote:trump just keeps ding what he has been doing and building on his successes, america likes a strong leader and trump is that, his approval ratings prove that,he doesnt need to alter his game plan too much

Unemployment is rising as a result of Trump's failures of economic policy. And Dr. Obama's program was doing so well.

by Original Quill Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:17 am

smelly b wrote:but your side keeps doing it, you need to reach out to trump voters not push them away, but in order to do that YOU need to walk back, youre the ones who need to take the steps, and thats not going to happen.

They will soon be in jail...hmmm, Guantanamo sounds nice.

by Guest Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:47 am

Original Quill wrote:
smelly b wrote:but your side keeps doing it, you need to reach out to trump voters not push them away, but in order to do that YOU need to walk back, youre the ones who need to take the steps, and thats not going to happen.

They will soon be in jail...hmmm, Guantanamo sounds nice.

have i read that right??? did you just say trump voters are going to rounded up and sent to Guantanamo ??

is that the democrats final solution to the deplorable problem??

by nicko Mon Mar 04, 2019 6:42 am

Quill, just out of interest ,why do you keep referring to Obama as "Dr" , what is he a Dr of ?

by veya_victaous Mon Mar 04, 2019 9:21 am

Maddog wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

So, you are predicting Trump again next round?

don't know, I wouldn't be honestly surprised. it should have been impossible for a man like Trump to win a first term.

but here we are... the democrats somehow managed to find an even less desirable candidate. And they just had a black man as President and they we're seemingly the more popular party going in, so cut the bullshit it about it being because she was a women.. it's because she is even more of a corporate sell out than Trump

Democrats need a non-Career Politician, the party heads are naval gazing and lost sight of the electorate
Watch Beto from Texas. I would put my money on him. Not a lot of money mind you, but a more than I would put on anyone else.

He supports Medicare for all, more gun regulations but has disavowed socialism. He's good looking and makes the girls giddy. He's the Mathew McGonaghey of politics. And I may have spelled Mathew's name wrong.

he sounds like an improvement. I hope we see someone like him that really has a shot against Trump.

Sounds like he could sway a lot of the southern and Midwest states over a New Yorker like Trump, and presuming he could maintain the traditional democrat vote..... I'd say he is a very good strategic option.

by veya_victaous Mon Mar 04, 2019 9:47 am

Original Quill wrote:Matthew McConaughey.

Beto is too young, and lacks that northeast Kennedy sophistication that recovers from one's youth.

Disavowing socialism only works in the south. And he's still got to face opposition from the old, white men of the right. He's fine for El Paso, but he won't make it at the next level.

You've got to consider that the democrats best chance of wining the next election it to run a candidate that is not really your preference.

You (and ben and Lurker) are clearly "Democrats 'til I die" voters and considering the opposition is Trump... I don't think the Democrats could field a candidate you wouldn't vote for.
To Win they have to Field a Candidate that can take votes/seats that would normally go to the republicans (the South and Midwest).

Lets face it You'd vote for Beto, in a Beto Versus Trump election.... If Beto can also Win Maddogs vote .... that's a winner baby cheers

You and Maddog are very far apart on the political spectrum anyone that can cover that is in with a really good shot... and to be honest I don't care who as long as they can beat Trump Cool

by Original Quill Mon Mar 04, 2019 6:58 pm

Veya wrote:You (and ben and Lurker) are clearly "Democrats 'til I die" voters and considering the opposition is Trump... I don't think the Democrats could field a candidate you wouldn't vote for.

Not necessarily. I often vote for myself, in the belief that if I don't like either candidate, I don't want to give away my authority.

Yes, abstaining is voting. In fact, there are two choices in voting. Do you like the array? And which among those offered, do you choose? If you don't like the array (question #1) that's a voting choice as well. (Trump narrowly lost because of many, many voting on the question #1).

By voting for myself, there's the off-chance that everyone else might agree with me, and I'll get my wish.

by veya_victaous Tue Mar 05, 2019 9:26 am

Original Quill wrote:
Veya wrote:You (and ben and Lurker) are clearly "Democrats 'til I die" voters and considering the opposition is Trump... I don't think the Democrats could field a candidate you wouldn't vote for.

Not necessarily. I often vote for myself, in the belief that if I don't like either candidate, I don't want to give away my authority.

Yes, abstaining is voting. In fact, there are two choices in voting. Do you like the array? And which among those offered, do you choose? If you don't like the array (question #1) that's a voting choice as well. (Trump narrowly lost because of many, many voting on the question #1).

By voting for myself, there's the off-chance that everyone else might agree with me, and I'll get my wish.

You'd really Risk another 4 years of Trump? pale

by Guest Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:25 am

veya_victaous wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Not necessarily. I often vote for myself, in the belief that if I don't like either candidate, I don't want to give away my authority.

Yes, abstaining is voting. In fact, there are two choices in voting. Do you like the array? And which among those offered, do you choose? If you don't like the array (question #1) that's a voting choice as well. (Trump narrowly lost because of many, many voting on the question #1).

By voting for myself, there's the off-chance that everyone else might agree with me, and I'll get my wish.

You'd really Risk another 4 years of Trump?

no risk at all sonny jim

its a dead cert

by Guest Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:28 am

smelly-bandit wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:

You'd really Risk another 4 years of Trump?

no risk at all sonny jim

its a dead cert

no one is laughing now are they??

well thats not true, there is a shit load of laughter only its not coming from you guys its directed at you guys

watch

by Guest Fri Mar 08, 2019 11:41 am

https://mol.im/a/6784437

The god emperor is untouchable

by Original Quill Mon Apr 01, 2019 12:06 am

nicko wrote:Quill, just out of interest ,why do you keep referring to Obama as "Dr" , what is he a Dr of ?

He has a doctor of laws from Harvard University.

by Original Quill Mon Apr 01, 2019 12:16 am

veya_victaous wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Not necessarily. I often vote for myself, in the belief that if I don't like either candidate, I don't want to give away my authority.

Yes, abstaining is voting. In fact, there are two choices in voting. Do you like the array? And which among those offered, do you choose? If you don't like the array (question #1) that's a voting choice as well. (Trump narrowly lost because of many, many voting on the question #1).

By voting for myself, there's the off-chance that everyone else might agree with me, and I'll get my wish.

You'd really Risk another 4 years of Trump?

Trump's not my problem. I am a consumer in politics, and I am fickle. If I don't see a candidate up there to my liking, I vote for myself.

And I'm not a dedicated Democrat...frankly, Dems are a bunch of snowflakes, afraid of their own shadows. They take refuge behind the mundane and trite. The only thing they've got going for them is the want to make the world a better place. Republicans operate on self-interest alone. You can't build a city of glory on me, me, me, me, etc. If we could teach Dems to kick ass like Republics do, the world would be a better place.

If I wasn't caught up in the Pacific States of America, I'd be teaching Republic tactics to Dem politicians. There'd be quite a few more bodies on the plains.

by Sponsored content