******Official politics thread ******

[Patriam1066]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't think these people sent Trump to Washington to take their opiates away. Do I hate drug addicts? No. But I do question their motives and integrity, and I think it's a bad sign when substance abuse correlates so highly with support for a candidate. And before you blame it on poverty, would you extend the same courtesy to inner-city crackheads? Pills are a suburban and rural drug.

I question the motives of people who burn down Berkeley when confronted with speech they disagree with. You're entitled To your opinion

PS: I call myself a libertarian largely because of the drug issue. I want neither suburban whites nor inner city blacks going to prison for making mistakes. Being a drug addict doesn't make a person evil. I'd rather see everyone at Citigroup in prison personally

[Lune]

Originally Posted by bigjerry [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I doubted (reasonable), but I never made definitive calls (unwarranted egotism) and wound up so humiliated that I announced my retirement (gay). You were posting election night about how loud the mariachi music was going to be.

"10 moves ahead"

You have a fair point, but there was a lot more justification to make definitive calls about Clinton than about Trump, which was why the election was such a shock and upset to so many people, even analysts and talking heads who claimed to know what they were talking about. Leading up to it, of course I'm going to milk my confidence in a Clinton win and use unambiguous language to trigger and demoralize Trump supporters, in the same way a presidential candidate will say "when I am elected".

It was basically me and Jarnauga and about twenty Trump supporters on the forum at the time and I knew things were going to be insufferable for a while.

I don't think you can make the case for my being myopic because I failed to predict a Trump win when that was par for the course in politics at the time.

Originally Posted by Patriam1066 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I question the motives of people who burn down Berkeley when confronted with speech they disagree with. You're entitled To your opinion

PS: I call myself a libertarian largely because of the drug issue. I want neither suburban whites nor inner city blacks going to prison for making mistakes. Being a drug addict doesn't make a person evil. I'd rather see everyone at Citigroup in prison personally

Agree entirely.

[AzzarTheGod]

did u make a political calculation re; sanders tho

the true facts are sanders wasnt going to pass any socialist reforms, but he was going to begin mainstream discussion on cleaning up shadow economics, hedge funds, and wallstreet. He was going to change the dinner table conversation on corruption. These organizations siphon money out of an economy permanently.

This was more priority, nationalist, and protectionist, than anything Trump will likely accomplish, because as mentioned, manufacturing is a dead issue and a distraction.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by AzzarTheGod [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

did u make a political calculation re; sanders tho

the true facts are sanders wasnt going to pass any socialist reforms, but he was going to begin mainstream discussion on cleaning up shadow economics, hedge funds, and wallstreet. He was going to change the dinner table conversation on corruption. These organizations siphon money out of an economy permanently.

This was more priority, nationalist, and protectionist, than anything Trump will likely accomplish, because as mentioned, manufacturing is a dead issue and a distraction.

What happened to Sanders was probably the worst part of the election for me, even worse than Trump eventually winning. I continue to support him and people like him for precisely that reason: advocacy.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Angushjalmur [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Sanders was 100% in on it.

That's quite the extraordinary claim, would love to see some extraordinary evidence on that.

Obligatory video of Sanders unwaveringly fighting the takeover by the elite 30 years before our wider culture even knew it was a problem.

[Patriam1066]

Originally Posted by AzzarTheGod [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

did u make a political calculation re; sanders tho

the true facts are sanders wasnt going to pass any socialist reforms, but he was going to begin mainstream discussion on cleaning up shadow economics, hedge funds, and wallstreet. He was going to change the dinner table conversation on corruption. These organizations siphon money out of an economy permanently.

This was more priority, nationalist, and protectionist, than anything Trump will likely accomplish, because as mentioned, manufacturing is a dead issue and a distraction.

Manufacturing is a dead issue but subsidizing china and a national minimum income aren't. We'll never take care of Americans if we're constantly importing 1.5 million people per year when there's no labor demand. We have to make rational decisions even if they offend cry babies at Berkeley and the women's march

[AzzarTheGod]

Sanders had to play ball. That doesn't mean he was in on it. He knew the rules and hes an old man, his heart can't afford not to play ball.

Its just not possible from a health standpoint. Anything else analysis-wise is garbage. He's simply not healthy enough to go against the grain, especially not a Clinton.

[bigjerry]

Originally Posted by AzzarTheGod [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

did u make a political calculation re; sanders tho

the true facts are sanders wasnt going to pass any socialist reforms, but he was going to begin mainstream discussion on cleaning up shadow economics, hedge funds, and wallstreet. He was going to change the dinner table conversation on corruption. These organizations siphon money out of an economy permanently.

This was more priority, nationalist, and protectionist, than anything Trump will likely accomplish, because as mentioned, manufacturing is a dead issue and a distraction.

this is 1 hunnid naive and backwards

Americans do not give a FUCK about corruption and will never, until it deservingly washes their brains into storm drains. Americans largely do not have dinner table conversations. Gibs are the only thing Bernstein would have achieved.

[AzzarTheGod]

Originally Posted by bigjerry [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

this is 1 hunnid naive and backwards

Americans do not give a FUCK about corruption. Americans largely do not have dinner table conversations.

its just a metaphor. we'll see what Trump does for the economy, if his policies work, great. I am apolitical on the issues. Its whatever works and I know the damage that wallstreet is causing with 7 trillion in assets exchanging hands among hedge funds alone every day.

Thats a 7 trillion unrealized loss of money, every single day globally. Just because they make that money back in unrealized gains, doesn't mean anything, it never hits the hands of the 1% and it never hits anyone who is interested in creating jobs. That is still incredibly unstable activity and its also where the top 0.1% take money and instead of investing into the country they invest into a hedge fund, a shadow economy. The las vegas roulette table, so they can compete in gambling with their rich friends to make such and such a billion.

Sanders was spot on.

[mickmoranis]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You have a fair point, but there was a lot more justification to make definitive calls about Clinton than about Trump, which was why the election was such a shock and upset to so many people, even analysts and talking heads who claimed to know what they were talking about. Leading up to it, of course I'm going to milk my confidence in a Clinton win and use unambiguous language to trigger and demoralize Trump supporters

this is why the dems lost tbh

the dem party and media are on teh same side for the most part. Its not a conspiracy, its just reality. most people who want a faggy job in media are democrats is all...

What's funny to me is that on one hand you say, the election was a shock because the media said he was going to lose

on the other hand you say of course we're going to milk my confidence in a clinton win to demoralize trump supporters.

aka, of course the media lefties are going to [insert the above lune text here]

the difference is, fart smelling globalists think all the media is NEWS and TRUE and realist hard working conservatives knew it wasnt and isnt and like they know global warming is a hoax and so is everything else leftys believe in.... cus fat liberal art lesibans run the media.