Don't you dare abstain if Bernie loses the nomination, motherfucker, Supreme Court seats are up for grabs!BryanM wrote:The guy who wants to turn us into Super Canada or nobody.who would you all be voting for come November?
That won't happen without another Civil War lol. Here's in the eyes of a foreigner what the average US citizen gives the impression to feel about the 'Canadian way';BryanM wrote:Super Canada
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
You know, honestly our congress and the media don't reflect real america. If they did, Bernie would be polling at 10% right now instead of 2 points behind Clinton with months until most states vote.Xyga wrote:That won't happen without another Civil War lol. Here's in the eyes of a foreigner what the average US citizen gives the impression to feel about the 'Canadian way';BryanM wrote:Super Canada
eh, I can't vote for fear. always something to be afraid of. republicans, democrats, isis, crazy neighbor with too many guns, russia, iran, north korea, anthrax, nukes. whatever it is, don't stop being afraid.Don't you dare abstain if Bernie loses the nomination, motherfucker, Supreme Court seats are up for grabs!
I am reminded of a quote by Winston Churchill regarding possibly making a temporary, icky alliance with bad man Joseph Stalin during WWII:BryanM wrote:eh, I can't vote for fear. always something to be afraid of. republicans, democrats, isis, crazy neighbor with too many guns, russia, iran, north korea, anthrax, nukes. whatever it is, don't stop being afraid.
neoliberals never had my vote to begin with. if they want to bring back slavery and turn this place into a slaughter house, so be it. if they just care more, that's democracy.
(if it eases your soul any, I reside in the great state of oklahoma currently. my right to vote outside the primary is made of toilet paper)
If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favourable reference to the devil in the House of Commons.
I've wrestled with this before, but I've come to the conclusion that I would rather see Trump president than her. After an entire year of thought, become very committed to it.BryanM wrote:and Clinton is far worse than he is
I've also wrestled with this, but I think I'd do the same. She might not hate the gays but hot damn is she basically the worst.BryanM wrote:I've wrestled with this before, but I've come to the conclusion that I would rather see Trump president than her. After an entire year of thought, become very committed to it.
Maybe it would have been a coin flip before all this started, but her campaign has completely and utterly convinced me that she must never ever ever win.
I've got plenty of qualms about Hillary, but off the cuff I'm having trouble thinking of a policy area where she would do worse than Trump has promised to...perhaps I'm missing something major?BryanM wrote:I've wrestled with this before, but I've come to the conclusion that I would rather see Trump president than her.
In the 2000 election, Al Gore had an image problem. People thought he came across as stiff and boring. Image consultants were hired, among which if you'll recall was a woman whose job was to teach him how to act like more of an "Alpha Male." It certainly had an effect, he came across as less of a stiff and more of an asshole. Meanwhile, his opponent George Bush jr. was marketed as "the candidate you'd rather drink a beer and watch football with" and when Gore said in debates that the numbers in Bush's promises didn't add up, Bush replied, "Ahh! You're just using fuzzy math!"trap15 wrote:I've also wrestled with this, but I think I'd do the same. She might not hate the gays but hot damn is she basically the worst.BryanM wrote:I've wrestled with this before, but I've come to the conclusion that I would rather see Trump president than her. After an entire year of thought, become very committed to it.
Maybe it would have been a coin flip before all this started, but her campaign has completely and utterly convinced me that she must never ever ever win.
RegalSin wrote:New PowerPuff Girls. They all have evil pornstart eyelashes.
Indeed. Although I hope people figure out how lame the current congress has been and we can take out the fucking trash.drunkninja24 wrote: I'm currently for Sanders myself, but frankly any Democrat is miles ahead of the GOP at this point.
RegalSin wrote:New PowerPuff Girls. They all have evil pornstart eyelashes.
Yeah that would be nice too. I've been itching to out an idiotic incumbent senator in my state for years, maybe people will finally get a clue. We'll see.GaijinPunch wrote:Indeed. Although I hope people figure out how lame the current congress has been and we can take out the fucking trash.drunkninja24 wrote: I'm currently for Sanders myself, but frankly any Democrat is miles ahead of the GOP at this point.
I suppose seeing the Iraq war as the moral equivalent of dropping two nuclear bombs on Los Angeles doesn't have me overly enthused about the next disaster war she wants to drop on us (Iran+Syria). Nor am I enthusiastic about the next economic crash happening under a democrat so everyone can go "see see liberalism doesn't work" and then we end up electing Literal Hitler instead of Soft Hitler. The primary difference between her and a Jeb Bush is he'll repeal Obamacare, put huge dickbags on the supreme court, cut the safety net, and make his giveaways to billionaires completely transparent instead of opaque.drunkninja24 wrote:I really don't understand how someone could possibly say they'd rather have Trump (or any R for that matter) in if Hillary gets the nomination.
You'd think they'd have learned something after John Kerry. Her current flailing, where she tries every dirty trick every which way, makes her look like a completely insane person in the age of the internet.He came across as a stiff because he was reading from a script and unlike the God Emperor Ronald Regan, he wasn't trained as an actor.
Going by Trump's rhetoric up to this point, I find it hard to believe that he'd be any less belligerent than Hillary, to say the very least...and if you want to bring up the Iraq war thing, hasn't Trump continually insisted that he was vocally opposed to it in real time, and that there are loads of articles and whatnot that prove it, even though nobody's been able to find a single one? Hil screwed up royally by supporting it, but at least she's admitted it.BryanM wrote:I suppose seeing the Iraq war as the moral equivalent of dropping two nuclear bombs on Los Angeles doesn't have me overly enthused about the next disaster war she wants to drop on us (Iran+Syria).
You're going to hear that kind of trash no matter what the circumstances; the conservative leadership still refuses to concede that either Bush's economic policies or the excesses of Wall Street in particular had anything whatsoever to do with the Recession (totally the Fed's fault for not lowering interest rates enough...of course, that still hasn't stopped us from screeching that it's "debasing the dollar" when they've done it in more recent years). And feel free to try to bring up how Reagan's high-end tax cuts gutted the Social Security trust fund and created the Big Bad Deficit as we know it. The real problem continues to be the fact that most liberals, much to their discredit once again, have utterly refused to push back.Nor am I enthusiastic about the next economic crash happening under a democrat so everyone can go "see see liberalism doesn't work" and then we end up electing Literal Hitler instead of Soft Hitler.
You and I both know that nothing remotely like this will ever happen, especially when the latter is proposing ten times the tax cuts for the rich that W did, and only says he'll pay for it by eliminating "waste" - and for conservatives, guess what's first on that list?As I've said many times before, if it's Hillary vs Trump and he runs on Single Payer, he'll win the election and we'll be powerless to stop the bronze god.
BulletMagnet wrote:You and I both know that nothing remotely like this will ever happen
hahahahahabut at least she's admitted it.
Not Silicon Valley, but parts of the US where public schools aren't a complete joke.GaijinPunch wrote:Where do the majority of them hail from? More specifically, where do the high level managers and execs (EG, the decision makers) hail from?
It's hard to get much worse than Silicon Valley in this regard lol. It's become such a financial tar pit that people become too poor to ever leave and just take up camp in one of the various homeless communities.Congrats: you've just described every urban area of the United States - I can name at least one that I've lived in notably worse than Silicon Valley but I'd assume more than half fit the bill.
What has this done to adversely affect Silicon Valley's dominance in this arena? Even Silicon Valley needs more than just programmers. The social media bubble is showing signs of leakage and the fallout is going to be much worse now that the local economy runs on clicking sponsored content instead of, you know, actually designing things that matter.When has moving to cheaper areas never been a trend? Silicon Valley specifically has been shipping programmers to farms in places like Austin for upwards of a decade.
BryanM wrote:I've wrestled with this before, but I've come to the conclusion that I would rather see Trump president than her. After an entire year of thought, become very committed to it.
Maybe it would have been a coin flip before all this started, but her campaign has completely and utterly convinced me that she must never ever ever win.
Glad to see others coming around. Buckle up, we're in for a hell of a year.trap15 wrote:I've also wrestled with this, but I think I'd do the same. She might not hate the gays but hot damn is she basically the worst.
You can throw a rock and get worse. LA, Chicago, New York, Atlanta, Dallas, Miami... etc...It's hard to get much worse than Silicon Valley in this regard lol. It's become such a financial tar pit that people become too poor to ever leave and just take up camp in one of the various homeless communities.
RegalSin wrote:New PowerPuff Girls. They all have evil pornstart eyelashes.
Every US city at one time or another has or will expand beyond it's capacity, get expensive, and force the poor people to move. Austin is like 3x what it was 15 years ago. You think it was built to handle that type of growth? All I hear are my friends moaning about it. Denver is another that is now "crazy expensive", with many businesses that were once staples of the landscape forced to shut. Those two have likely do not had the average salaries adjusted as well as the valley has. The only unaffordable part of the area is San Fran proper. The surrounding areas, save a few ritzy parts, are only expensive - not ludicrous.quash wrote:The difference is that none of those areas have had their cost of living exponentially increase to the point of being far and away the most expensive area in the nation to live in. SV still has the public infrastructure of the pre-90's era in most areas. The only exceptions are often times funded by local taxpayers/donors, which are still limited by the shitty standards imposed by the state, anyways.
That's a simple bubble. Hawaii 10 years ago was worse. 2 million bucks for a pile of shit. I rented... and even that was shit value. There are still people living in the valley that don't have huge paying jobs. They're everywhere, actually.Detroit, Chicago, etc. are surely worse in terms of infrastructure, but they also don't overvalue the ever-loving shit out of their property, drive up the cost of food, fuel, etc. You can be poor and feasibly work your way out of those types of places. In SV? Good luck.
RegalSin wrote:New PowerPuff Girls. They all have evil pornstart eyelashes.
Your google results aren't impressive considering those three are copy-pastes of the same article with the wording slightly altered.quash wrote:http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/b ... nce-abroad
http://www.mintpressnews.com/bernie-san ... ce/208066/
http://theantimedia.org/lord-of-the-rin ... y-clinton/
These are just the three that caught my eye on the first page of search results.
Do I really need to explain the difference between voting "yea" to Afghanistan and "nay" to Iraq 2: Electric Boogaloo?quash wrote:Your own team is calling foul.
My support for Trump will consist of passive aggressive posts on the internet and sitting at home hoping a meteorite hits the continent and puts us all out of our misery.Mischief Maker wrote:So you're instead going to throw your support
