What is something you agree with the "other side" about?

[glenn1]

Other than don't fall for the bullshit & don't stay at home there wasn't a whole lot to be learned by Democrats.

I mean, Trumpsters, they mad, right? They'll have reason to stay that way so long as they keep voting GOP. They'll get plenty of trickle down from that knife wound in their back...

You only missed the biggest point, the non-establishment candidate wins ever since the Great Recesion. If Dems run a “let’s return to life as in was in a 1950 commercial for the Teamsters Union” paradigm they’ll lose again. Obama and Trump both ran on a basic premise of a brand new political paradigm akin to the a Reagan revolution or New Deal. Neither has delivered on it. Hillary Clinton, John McCain, and Al Gore were all deeply establishment candidates and it doomed them all. It will doom the 2020 candidate if they attempt to run on a “more of what Obama did” platform also.

 

[glenn1]

Other than don't fall for the bullshit & don't stay at home there wasn't a whole lot to be learned by Democrats.

I mean, Trumpsters, they mad, right? They'll have reason to stay that way so long as they keep voting GOP. They'll get plenty of trickle down from that knife wound in their back...

You only missed the biggest point, the non-establishment candidate wins ever since the Great Recesion. If Dems run a “let’s return to life as in was in a 1950 commercial for the Teamsters Union” paradigm they’ll lose again. Obama and Trump both ran on a basic premise of a brand new political paradigm akin to the a Reagan revolution or New Deal. Neither has delivered on it. Hillary Clinton, John McCain, and Al Gore were all deeply establishment candidates and it doomed them all. It will doom the 2020 candidate if they attempt to run on a “more of what Obama did” platform also.

 

[Josephus312]

Since Trump and the supporting congress of his is the "other side" I can't think of a single thing.

It's all downhill for everyone but the 1% who are living it up like it was the roaring 20's.

 

[glenn1]

Of course not, you flaming fa@@ot.

That's sarcasm for anybody who wants to contrive the usual right wing faux outrage.

Since evidently it's OK now to use homophobic terms in this forum I'll start addressing you that way but will be sure to add the sarcasm tag. @Jhhnn the flaming fa@@ot (sarcasm).

 

[ivwshane]

Since evidently it's OK now to use homophobic terms in this forum I'll start addressing you that way but will be sure to add the sarcasm tag. @Jhhnn the flaming fa@@ot (sarcasm).

Oh you are so, so very concerned!

 

[glenn1]

Oh you are so, so very concerned!

Report me then. You flaming fa@@got (sarcasm).

 

[Jhhnn]

You only missed the biggest point, the non-establishment candidate wins ever since the Great Recesion. If Dems run a “let’s return to life as in was in a 1950 commercial for the Teamsters Union” paradigm they’ll lose again. Obama and Trump both ran on a basic premise of a brand new political paradigm akin to the a Reagan revolution or New Deal. Neither has delivered on it. Hillary Clinton, John McCain, and Al Gore were all deeply establishment candidates and it doomed them all. It will doom the 2020 candidate if they attempt to run on a “more of what Obama did” platform also.

Heh. The 2016 election was the result of a lot of pent up frustration exploited by a great con artist & his Russian psyops friends. It had all the characteristics of a witch burning or a lynching with Hillary as the target. They were drunk on rage. People were just nutty enough from it for Trump to squeak by via the electoral college.

It's like Michael Moore said- a lot of Trump voters did it just to scream Fuck You! at the system. It felt great, I'm sure. It probably won't feel so great to a lot of his voters by the time 2020 comes around. I suspect a lot of people will show their displeasure come November by taking it out on the GOP.

 

[MrPickins]

I'm in agreeance here. If a man doesn't want it (and they aren't married) - he should be able to sign on the dotted line along with her signing it saying she takes full custody and full responsibility. No child support payment will be made because it was solely her decisions to have the child. Obviously this has to be done within a reasonable timeframe and not late in the pregnancy.

That’s where I said it opened up a can of worms. If the woman is fine with it I’m pretty sure she can just take custody with no child support right now. If the woman doesn’t want to have an abortion the guy can’t simply say well I don’t want it abort or I’m not payin squat though.

Child support is for the child's benefit, not the parents. Whether or not the parents wanted children is irrelevant.

Report me then. You flaming fa@@got (sarcasm).

I'm not sure you understand sarcasm.

 

[Jhhnn]

I'm not sure you understand sarcasm.

He seems to have taken my remark personally.

 

[cytg111]

I voted for a candidate to burn the place down.

So a full blown anarchist? If you really boil it down, what else is it?
Your miscalculation is that you probably thought you were going to build something better after the fact, like a phoenix rising from the ashes! right?
What is actually happening is the vultures circling above waiting the the carcass that is the US to stop moving enough for them to have their fill *cough*putin*cough*.
There is a alot of anti EU rethoric here as well and its just so bloody stupid, and again by large part fuelled by interests and $$ out of the Kremlin.
Dont you see you are getting played? For all that you have?

 

[realibrad]

He seems to have taken my remark personally.

Tell me, if you were to use the N word instead of a homophobic slur, would it be okay because you ended your statement with sarcasm?

 

[cytg111]

Tell me, if you were to use the N word instead of a homophobic slur, would it be okay because you ended your statement with sarcasm?

Likely not.
On another subject all together, you seem to be carrying your own cross up that mountain as well, you sure you wanna do that?
This may go over your head(s) altogether but try and get the gist of this :

So is Jhnnn and Indus good? I think so. So its legal for him to do it. Not for you. Get it?
(the funny thing about it is that it only works "funny" because there be real bigots around.. otherwise it would have no play)

 

[realibrad]

Likely not.
On another subject all together, you seem to be carrying your own cross up that mountain as well, you sure you wanna do that?
This may go over your head(s) altogether but try and get the gist of this :

So is Jhnnn and Indus good? I think so. So its legal for him to do it. Not for you. Get it?
(the funny thing about it is that it only works "funny" because there be real bigots around.. otherwise it would have no play)

Youtube is blocked.

I also have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Jhhnn]

Likely not.
On another subject all together, you seem to be carrying your own cross up that mountain as well, you sure you wanna do that?
This may go over your head(s) altogether but try and get the gist of this :

So is Jhnnn and Indus good? I think so. So its legal for him to do it. Not for you. Get it?
(the funny thing about it is that it only works "funny" because there be real bigots around.. otherwise it would have no play)

They just hate getting pegged.

 

[hal2kilo]

He seems to have taken my remark personally.

Same hypocrisy that caused another poster to change his posting name. The PC police according to conservatives don't allow these sarcastic jests.

 

[glenn1]

Same hypocrisy that caused another poster to change his posting name. The PC police according to conservatives don't allow these sarcastic jests.

Sorry you'll have to speak up louder I can't hear you over the flaming fa@@ot @Jhhnn (sarcasm).

Your attempt to play moderator has not ended well for you.

Perknose
Forum Director

 

[Cerb]

Says the guy who thinks the left is way more totalitarian than the right.

And? At the current time, they are, IMV. When I was younger, that was less so, and it was mostly the righties wanting to tell others how they should live. I would love nothing more than to see the kind of prominent left media that was common when I was growing up, with left advocates for freedom of speech and travel being in the MSM. There were even public lefties that questioned gun control (sheeple control) back then. The sensational 24 hour news cycle has drowned them out, in favor of divisiveness, and constant emotional appeals.

 

[HomerJS]

Sadly enough before Trump I could easily ramble these off. Now, not so much. Still thinking.

 

[dank69]

Child support is for the child's benefit, not the parents. Whether or not the parents wanted children is irrelevant.



I'm not sure you understand sarcasm.

Not sure? Totally sure.

 

[Perknose]

Of course not, you flaming fa@@ot.

That's sarcasm for anybody who wants to contrive the usual right wing faux outrage.

The sarcastic use of this forum-censored word had engendered some controversy and some ad hoc and ill-considered attempts to act as a moderator in open forum.

I have spoken with the OP and he has agreed not to contravene our censor filter again. BUT . . . I will not criminalize a poster for contravening a rule meant to address homophobia for, perhaps clumsily, posting in support of ANTI-homophobia. That is NOT what our rule was meant to do.

And I would like to remind each and every one of you that the only legitimate venue for questioning a moderator decision is Moderator Discussions and not ever in open forum . . . for reasons I can only hope you understand.

Perknose
Forum Director

 

[zinfamous]

I mean, Trumpsters, they mad, right? They'll have reason to stay that way so long as they keep voting GOP. They'll get plenty of trickle down from that knife wound in their back...

Oh, that's good.

 

[Viper1j]

What people say or what people do.

I dont adhere to the republicans social agenda, and they're certainly not fiscally responsible. So nothing anymore.

What he said.