Im voting for Hillary
- Thread starter teamquestnorth
- Start date
Hahahahahha
The wager has been made. Let's bump the important thread again with some interesting perspective.
Someone like you cut my foreskin off before I discovered my hands. THATS why they insist on lube.
@Galt you better recognize. .
It rears its ugly head.Someone like you cut my foreskin off before I discovered my hands. THATS why they insist on lube.
what your windsock/anteater?
Haven't jacked for weeks, saving up a monster load for one of the khmer hookers on wongwian 20. Thanks for asking.
Please wear a jimmy you windsocks carry the HIVs (under your foreskins)
I don't wear condoms. And everyone knows white men don't get aids. Privilege yo.
Youre claiming to be white now? good luck with that.
Apparently you can make up all sorts of shit these days. Tomorrow I am going to be a cat.
Most of these posters have weak logic that leads to a weak conclusion. This one, actually has none.The wager has been made. Let's bump the important thread again with some interesting perspective.
It seems to me that the culture of either being a nuthugger or a hater (which is both negative) is very prevalent even in politics in your part of the woods, and that carries over even into this board. I worry for ya.
I'm voting for Winnie the Pooh
Nobody in America bothers to argue things that matter. It only matters if they have a friendly smile or not. I thought the conclusion spoke for itself -- Hillary takes money from countries that actively stifle women's rights, then turns around and acts like some kind of champion for women, just because she's a woman. She's a filthy panderer who will do and say anything to get elected. It's all a cycle of bullshit, which is why Trump is resonating so deeply.
I'm not trying to defend Hillary, I think I once said here she is the candidate I fear mostly. But this poster is crap.
Yes she takes money from these countries (I wonder where this money comes from though, directly out of their official budget?!). Lets just assume it is so, which would be a little weird though. And sure, these countries are not paramount in handling women. There is still no connection to the conclusion. I'm not saying its the opposite, its just that this poster has no logical connection.
There is nothing that shows me that this money makes her ignore anything anywhere.
Or what does the poster want to tell me? That she should not take the money? Why not? Would that help the women there? That's a naive stance. To take it the other way around: for all I know she takes the money from them and then uses it to fight these issues.
So to me, this poster just wants to shit on her, insinuating bad things, but doesn't prove anything, it doesn't even show a connection.
And please, as if Trump is not inside the cycle of bullshit, he plays the bullshit-fiddle hard, even Bernie is. You guys just hug his nuts so bad. :>
They resonate because they are different, that's all.
Wait. What? You can't just say that latter part and assume. That is naive. There is no evidence that she has done anything to support the rights of women in those countries. Until she does, the burden is on her. She's supposed to be a leader. She leads nothing.
Donald Trump, however, is a natural leader. He wouldn't be the head of a multi-billion dollar country if not. What part of that doesn't make sense? I still have trouble understanding the disconnect...
Ehm yeah, that was exactly my point. Both extremes are naive. Just wanted to say I can claim the same thing the other way around and provide nothing to back it up, and its equally ridiculous.
Or I can make a poster that says how Trump contributed to Hillary and he wants to fuck his daughter, so by superduperlogic, Hillary is fine with incest. Cool, isn't it?
And if there is evidence she does nothing, or even hinders the rights of women in these countries because of bribes, the poster does not provide it.
Some questions: What would you expect her to do in Oman and SA in her position? What even can she do? In what way does the money prevent that? Is having a business-connection in the first place always a bad thing?
These things are all just assumed here, and people who do not like her will eat it up.
And is these guys actually donating money to a Christian woman in power, perhaps even meeting her and talking to her not totally against these laws they take so serious? Maybe a little subversion is already taking place just by that? (Far fetched I know, but not further fetched than the poster's conclusion).
You meant company right?
Either way, hug away. To me, he seems like a clown, maybe he just plays that because that is what works in your system, I don't know.
And it is circumstantial evidence. He also had failed projects, some ridiculous ideas, and there are voices out there that he did plenty dirty deeds and that a lot is more more illusion than reality.
Plus, a position on the top of a big conglomerate does not automatically make me trust a person. That would be naive as well.
A more important question is, why the fuck are they donating to her in the first place? Out of the kindness of their hearts? Surely there is meant to be political kickback. We as a country have been meddling in the affairs of others and completely neglecting ourselves. Money in politics is a big problem right now. There is no accountability, only speculation. It's exactly what we're doing right now.
Trump is re-writing American politics, whether we like it or not (you'll like it, give it time). And it's about time someone tried to change things up. Bernie would have done it too, but in a totally different way. I don't know about you calling him a bullshitter. He's literally the only one in this race who's campaigned with honor and integrity. Too bad nobody gave him the time of day until it was too late.
And I don't think it's fair to generalize me as a "typical American", or even to categorize me with other guys on the forum. I don't know any of these guys any better than I do you. We're only doing this to have some fun. If you want to debate specific points, I'm always game. Everyone stands to learn when we share ideas.
Germany.
My guess would be that they already have an established connection to her circle, and if she were to get into office the positives they have currently will continue, like lucrative trade and support in military issues. Just a guess though.
Doubt it. But we will see. What I am concerned with (which would be foreign affairs for you), is him trying to strongarm everybody. Will a 'meaner' America improve things for the world? Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...........................
You are already bitchy enough for most tastes imho.
Agreed.
Well, I didn't try to say he is on the same level as the others, just that he is in the same circle. Everybody is. I would have liked to see him up there though, he seemed to be the least corrupt and most reasonable from what I can tell.
I see a couple guys (you included) posting memes, hugging Trump's nuts non-selectively, while hating on everybody else, and being excited about it all the time. A circus is the picture I get. So yeah. I know you are not dumb, that's not the issue.
Fredudian slip is strong with this one...
Calling Hillary a panderer yet going full throttle for Trump ... lol:
It's like "Oh remember all that shit I said before I got the nomination? Well I won, so now everything's negotiable. Thanks for the votes though, suckers!"
Last edited:
Oh and, I have the feeling that big part of what makes Trump's success is, that he is not an established guy there, and that the media is not very fond of him, and everybody is just fed up with the current system.
Seems like a typical 'anti-establishment'-movement. I'm just not sure if this is a good dude to back for that.
Like, why are you not able to have a real change at the grassroots-level? Do you agree with the assessment, that if Trump would not be in the primary-circus, and ran as independent from the get-go, he would have never gained the momentum he has now? If yes, then why do you think that is? It does not make him a better or worse candidate. Just a lot of the circus would be missing.
So will you vote because of the circus, again? It just seems dumb.
Seems like a typical 'anti-establishment'-movement. I'm just not sure if this is a good dude to back for that.
Like, why are you not able to have a real change at the grassroots-level? Do you agree with the assessment, that if Trump would not be in the primary-circus, and ran as independent from the get-go, he would have never gained the momentum he has now? If yes, then why do you think that is? It does not make him a better or worse candidate. Just a lot of the circus would be missing.
So will you vote because of the circus, again? It just seems dumb.
Mean is a bit of a misnomer. The media may portray him as "the big meanie", but you have to look deeper than that. What position of his in particular qualify him as such? Why doesn't anybody talk about potential improved relations with Russia? Or him wanting to broker the ultimate deal, peace between Israel and Palestine? That doesn't seem very mean to me. It's ambitious as fuck, borderline foolish, but why not shoot for the stars? This is where the new sense of America patriotism comes from. But it's being mislabeled as racism, misogyny, etc.
It's easy to hate on everybody else -- they're all a joke. I had tons of skepticism about Trump when this election started. I'm sure if you were to look back at my posts around that time it would be apparent. But that's the fun of American politics. It's the greatest show on earth.
- Jan 14, 2015
- 12,562
- 16,994