Now That Trump's President... (not any more!)

  On 3/2/2016 at 3:03 AM, Nebraska said:

 

  On 3/2/2016 at 2:41 AM, auxien said:

Naw Bernie was doomed from the start.

 

can you explain why? is it because he wants to give free healthcare to all united states citizens, to break apart wallstreet because 6 banks control 60% of the united states GPD or is it because he didn't get about $10 million for speeches?

 

 

 

  On 3/2/2016 at 3:16 AM, LimpyLoo said:

Because a self-described 'socialist' is gonna have a hard time winning a general election in 2016 America

 

The word 'socialist' is still an insult most places

(I'm still pulling for him, of course)

 

^ pretty much. I saw a TX GOP voter guide mailer and it went in detail about how terrible Clinton was and after Sanders it simply said "he is a self-described socialist, there is nothing else to be said." Yet Trump has a flippant reactionary populist "platform" and a history of insulting and disparaging the same voters who support him now and he's leading the Republican primaries.

 

Hilary is interesting because Bernie's supporters are seemingly more public, especially here in Austin. Yet they were 50/50 locally and she won Texas. I know people who support her pragmatically but far fewer who were actively touting her over Sanders.

 

And she's loathed by the GOP. Hated. They dismissed Sanders and some even respected him for being honest and baggage free, but nonetheless he was always easier to defeat in their minds. Maybe she's good with independents? I'm not a swing state so I will most likely vote for a Green party candidate or Gary Johnson if he's the libertarian elect. I don't like Clinton but she is a much, much easier pill to swallow. It'd infuriate many of relatives if I vote for her, more so than my casual apologizing/ superficial support for Obama. I have no idea if they'll get behind Trump though. People forget a lot of very conservative voters still don't like him, even if they thought he was "interesting."

  On 3/2/2016 at 12:21 AM, LimpyLoo said:

 

  On 3/1/2016 at 11:05 PM, chenGOD said:

fucking this is amazing:

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/03/01/nation-of-islams-louis-farrakhan-praises-trump-for-standing-up-to-jews/

Trump is like a Rorschach test

 

 

I always forget Farrakhan is still alive.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2iln8-0AxE

lol me too, my first thought in response to that post was "he's still exists?"

"...But I like what I'm looking at" is such a weird phrase.

it doesn't really look that bad for bernie, does it? he's got 4-5/11 and he'll have much better results in the north if he keeps it up.

  On 3/2/2016 at 12:21 AM, LimpyLoo said:

 

  On 3/1/2016 at 11:05 PM, chenGOD said:

fucking this is amazing:

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/03/01/nation-of-islams-louis-farrakhan-praises-trump-for-standing-up-to-jews/

Trump is like a Rorschach test

Yeah holy shit. His cult of personality is growing like kudzu.

  On 3/2/2016 at 4:52 AM, eugene said:

it doesn't really look that bad for bernie, does it? he's got 4-5/11 and he'll have much better results in the north if he keeps it up.

I'm kind of retarded about politics but from under my rock I could picture him getting ahead. There is plenty of time for the rhetoric to devolve and I have a feeling Trump is going to fall on his sword sooner or later. Although he does seem to have a supernatural sense of what he can get away with.

  On 3/2/2016 at 4:52 AM, eugene said:

it doesn't really look that bad for bernie, does it? he's got 4-5/11 and he'll have much better results in the north if he keeps it up.

Not sure whether those numbers mean state won. Thing is, the number of delegates is the one you should like at. As it is a better representation of population size. As far as I can tell, Clinton far outwon Sanders in this department. Sanders winning Vermont, for example, is nice but simply won't cut it. Winning Vermont is of a different order than winning Texas.

states won generate media headlines and buzz, media is especially important for sanders because he's more unknown.

Well, if you need hope, why not believe that? Sure. It's more likely it's not enough, however.

 

Also, if headlines and buzz matter, Trump has already won the next two presidential elections.

As of right now:

 

Looks like America is going to get Trump'd

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2016/03/02/chris-christies-wordless-screaming/

Currently headed to Bernie rally 100ft from my apt.

  On 3/2/2016 at 3:03 AM, Nebraska said:

 

  On 3/2/2016 at 2:41 AM, auxien said:

Naw Bernie was doomed from the start.

can you explain why? is it because he wants to give free healthcare to all united states citizens, to break apart wallstreet because 6 banks control 60% of the united states GPD or is it because he didn't get about $10 million for speeches?

Others have already mentioned some reasons that are on the mark. To me, simply the word socialism is enough to bar him from any chance in a two-party election. There's just too much of the country that has a knee-jerk reaction to the word. If we somehow ended up in a three-party election for president, things become much more interesting...however, everything is currently rigged against that, hence why we've had decades of slow change. The two parties did everything they could after the '92 cycle with Perot to quietly ensure they would stay in control, thereby limiting so many more interesting, (and I'd argue necessary) ideas to grow within the politics of the Federal Government.

https://youtu.be/4EOZACdHAgA

  On 3/2/2016 at 4:32 PM, auxien said:

Others have already mentioned some reasons that are on the mark. To me, simply the word socialism is enough to bar him from any chance in a two-party election. There's just too much of the country that has a knee-jerk reaction to the word. If we somehow ended up in a three-party election for president, things become much more interesting...however, everything is currently rigged against that, hence why we've had decades of slow change. The two parties did everything they could after the '92 cycle with Perot to quietly ensure they would stay in control, thereby limiting so many more interesting, (and I'd argue necessary) ideas to grow within the politics of the Federal Government.

 

according to this article by cenk uygar- bernie supposedly still won super tuesday because clinton only won the states she was supposed to and has used up all her ammo whilst he's got a $40 million war chest to spend on the northern states.

 

if this is true, it could mean clinton just bought herself some more time- but i still hear (see) a lot of people defecting to her camp

  On 3/2/2016 at 4:19 PM, caze said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2016/03/02/chris-christies-wordless-screaming/

He's screaming because the drumpf didn't use any lube while he reamed Christie.

lol

Drumpf is the entry sound

 

 

  On 3/2/2016 at 5:39 PM, ambermonk said:

lol

 

Drumpf is the exit sound

Fixt.

Gaping Christie.

 

sent using magic space waves

Oh yes you'll never guess who's running.

"Why vote for the lesser evil?"

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/mar/01/could-cthulhu-trump-other-super-tuesday-contenders-hp-lovecraft

  On 3/2/2016 at 5:29 PM, Nebraska said:

 

  On 3/2/2016 at 4:32 PM, auxien said:

Others have already mentioned some reasons that are on the mark. To me, simply the word socialism is enough to bar him from any chance in a two-party election. There's just too much of the country that has a knee-jerk reaction to the word. If we somehow ended up in a three-party election for president, things become much more interesting...however, everything is currently rigged against that, hence why we've had decades of slow change. The two parties did everything they could after the '92 cycle with Perot to quietly ensure they would stay in control, thereby limiting so many more interesting, (and I'd argue necessary) ideas to grow within the politics of the Federal Government.

according to this article by cenk uygar- bernie supposedly still won super tuesday because clinton only won the states she was supposed to and has used up all her ammo whilst he's got a $40 million war chest to spend on the northern states.

 

if this is true, it could mean clinton just bought herself some more time- but i still hear (see) a lot of people defecting to her camp

That article is fucking silly. Sorry, it's just an opinion piece, and not one based in much reality that isn't distorted.

 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/hillary-clintons-got-this/ For a quick, honest breakdown of why Clinton has this nearly secured. Sure, an upset could happen, but it's even less likely today than it was yesterday. I like Sanders, I'd vote for him before that power-hungry Clinton (I'm a firm believer that she has done most things for power and money, first and foremost), but his chances are dwindling exponentially at this point.

 

sent using magic space waves

Drumpf is actually Cthulhu wearing a Trump costume. He will reveal his true form if he wins November 8th.