Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
..does he still think he has to fire someone every week ?
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
You can have Piers Morgan back if you like -- no charge.
We'll even pay for the air fare.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
Trump started to change his team a month or two back with a view to properly competing in the main event and hired a new chief strategist. This must be another step in the same direction.
I think that's roughly the same thing you said at the beginning of the Primaries.
I'll submit that I was wrong here... but, there were 16 candidates in the primary and Trump was successful in sucking up the oxygen in the Primary room. In the General... yeah, no chance at all.
.. Most people thought Trump wouldn't make it this far didn't they ?
That's the sentiment I generally recall when the primaries started.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
I have seen 0 evidence that Trump can flip Ohio, Florida, or Penn. Without those states, it is Romney vs. Obama all over again, but the names are changed to Trump/Hillary.
Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing
I'll submit that I was wrong here... but, there were 16 candidates in the primary and Trump was successful in sucking up the oxygen in the Primary room. In the General... yeah, no chance at all.
He's only ~6 points behind Hillary, and he beat Cruz with a lesser margin.
Reagan. So much Reagan. To the point that Ted Cruz painted himself as a Reaganaut 30 years after The Gipper last took office. That's pathetic. It is 2016, it is not 1985.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
dogma wrote: To the point that Ted Cruz painted himself as a Reaganaut 30 years after The Gipper last took office. That's pathetic. It is 2016, it is not 1985.
You say that like selling arms to Iran, supporting gun control, and supplying religious fundamentalists in Afghanistan doesn't have the same cachet it once did.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/06/20 16:17:23
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
You say that like selling arms to Iran, supporting gun control, and supplying religious fundamentalists in Afghanistan doesn't have the same cachet it once did.
Times change, but the Mississippi Reagan runs eternal.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
I'll submit that I was wrong here... but, there were 16 candidates in the primary and Trump was successful in sucking up the oxygen in the Primary room. In the General... yeah, no chance at all.
He's only ~6 points behind Hillary, and he beat Cruz with a lesser margin.
Seems like you're engaging in wishful thinking.
He has 30 people on the ground THIRTY. HRC/NDC has well over 300.
Reagan. So much Reagan. To the point that Ted Cruz painted himself as a Reaganaut 30 years after The Gipper last took office. That's pathetic. It is 2016, it is not 1985.
he's not the 'conservative' choice. He's a GOP candidate... yes. But conservative?
Nah.
Like I said. The GOP will continue their slow and purposeful march into "crazy racist uncle" territory claiming that Hillary wouldn't be in the White House if they only ran a "true" conservative, so they will run someone to the right of Cruz in 2020.
he's not the 'conservative' choice. He's a GOP candidate... yes. But conservative?
Nah.
Like I said. The GOP will continue their slow and purposeful march into "crazy racist uncle" territory claiming that Hillary wouldn't be in the White House if they only ran a "true" conservative, so they will run someone to the right of Cruz in 2020.
and promptly lose because everyone hates cruz including republicans
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/06/20 17:18:33
he's not the 'conservative' choice. He's a GOP candidate... yes. But conservative?
Nah.
Like I said. The GOP will continue their slow and purposeful march into "crazy racist uncle" territory claiming that Hillary wouldn't be in the White House if they only ran a "true" conservative, so they will run someone to the right of Cruz in 2020.
he's not the 'conservative' choice. He's a GOP candidate... yes. But conservative?
Nah.
Like I said. The GOP will continue their slow and purposeful march into "crazy racist uncle" territory claiming that Hillary wouldn't be in the White House if they only ran a "true" conservative, so they will run someone to the right of Cruz in 2020.
he's not the 'conservative' choice. He's a GOP candidate... yes. But conservative?
Nah.
What constitutes "conservative"?
You know what I mean, so please don't be insulting.
GOP <> "conservative"
Democrats <> "lefties"
It's not an absolute with respect to the parties. Sure, they're both moving further apart over the last few years, but it's lazy to label one party "Da Lefties" and the other "Dur Righties of dere".
So, to head off a bit from what I think it means 'to be a conservative' here's the basic principles imo:
Spoiler:
As a philosophy, conservatism is about caution. We tend to be leery of HUGE big sweeping (do something!!!) that promises to change complex systems. We tend to think that society has evolved in a certain way based on a multitudes of unknowable examples of trial and error. We think it’s the height of folly and hubris to accept that a few self-appointed experts can order things better than the collective wisdom of free people, whom are simply attempting to maximize their personal liberty and happiness.
What conservative philosophy does not demand... is the unthinking perpetuation of big government programs because “that’s what’s always been done.”
Essentially, conservatisms directly opposes to practices of statisms.
While conservative philosophy provides a cautionary note when faced with upsetting long held positions, it is not the perpetual defense of the status-quo. So, try to recognize the dangers and potential costs of any change... and furthermore, discern how important this objective is, and in turn effectively communicate these positions and act accordingly.
“Conservative” in the American political sense tends to mean a vision for government that is more modest in terms of size and scope than establishment GOP (or, 'GOPe' for short) and their close relatives, Democrats and liberals. This doesn't necessary mean we want a tiny governmental footprint at the expense of rational programs. Only that, let's review the current state for appropriateness and use these guiding principles in the future. Succinctly stated, conservatives want something a bit closer to the constitutional limits placed on the federal government at the founding.
'Tis why you always see me harping about how the 10th amendment is turned upside down from it's intent and how top-heaving the Federal Government has become.
he's not the 'conservative' choice. He's a GOP candidate... yes. But conservative?
Nah.
Like I said. The GOP will continue their slow and purposeful march into "crazy racist uncle" territory claiming that Hillary wouldn't be in the White House if they only ran a "true" conservative, so they will run someone to the right of Cruz in 2020.
At this point... any 'not-Trump' would be better.
So if the GOP nominated Clinton...?
I don't think it's possible for them to nominate Clinton, as he's already served two terms. But it would be the battle of the century if they could!
Easy E wrote: I think he meant at the R convention they should just nominate Hillary and be done with it.
Yeah, that's what I meant, but oh MAN, if a Clinton vs. Clinton election was possible...
They could nominate Chelsea Clinton, she's 36 now so she meets the age requirement.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/06/20 23:32:39
"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me." - Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks
We think it’s the height of folly and hubris to accept that a few self-appointed experts can order things better than the collective wisdom of free people, whom are simply attempting to maximize their personal liberty and happiness.
'Tis why you always see me harping about how the 10th amendment is turned upside down from it's intent and how top-heaving the Federal Government has become.
We think it’s the height of folly and hubris to accept that a few self-appointed experts can order things better than the collective wisdom of free people, whom are simply attempting to maximize their personal liberty and happiness.
Sounds more libertarianism.
Actually sounds more like a fantasy. It's the height of folly and hubris to pretend the prisoner's dilemna doesn't exist.
We think it’s the height of folly and hubris to accept that a few self-appointed experts can order things better than the collective wisdom of free people, whom are simply attempting to maximize their personal liberty and happiness.
'Tis why you always see me harping about how the 10th amendment is turned upside down from it's intent and how top-heaving the Federal Government has become.
Says the Rubio fanboi.
Rubio is anti 10th amendment? I'm sure you can provide justifications for that retort...
Could you guys stop flirting and just answer the questions you pose to one another? Calling each other out is cute and all, but just assume he is being genuine and go with it.
Far-left activists aren’t going away quietly — or with a pleasant aroma.
Cheri Honkala, head of Poor People’s Economic Human Rights Campaign, is organizing the world’s largest ‘fart-in’ to be held on July 28 at Philadelphia’s Wells Fargo Center during Hillary Clinton’s anticipated Democratic nomination acceptance speech.
“We will be holding a massive bean supper for Bernie Sanders delegates on American Street in my Kensington neighborhood on the afternoon of July 28,” Honkala says, TruthDig reports.
“We are setting up a Clintonville there, modeled on the Hoovervilles of the 1930s where the poor and unemployed built shanty towns. The Sanders delegates, their bellies full of beans, will be able to return to the Wells Fargo Center and greet the rhetorical flatulence of Hillary Clinton with the real thing.”
Activists have invited Bernie Sanders to join their bean supper, which Honkala has dubbed “Beans for Hillary.”
“Any remaining beans will be served to the homeless, although we will, of course, be urging Sanders delegates to eat as much as possible,” she says.
Leftist author Chris Hedges will be offering a “nondemoniational” prayer at the dinner.
“I am happy to bless a meal that will be put to such effective political use,” Hedges says, according to TruthDig.
The “fart-in” ironically has its roots with the activist movement leader then-Hillary Rodham sidled up to in the 1960s: Saul Alinsky.
He promoted a “flatulent blitzkrieg” as a way to offend the elites of Rochester, New York.
He explained in a 1972 interview with Playboy magazine:
Another idea I had that almost came to fruition was directed at the Rochester Philharmonic, which was the establishment’s — and Kodak’s — cultural jewel. I suggested we pick a night when the music would be relatively quiet and buy 100 seats.
The 100 blacks scheduled to attend the concert would then be treated to a preshow banquet in the community consisting of nothing but huge portions of baked beans. Can you imagine the inevitable consequences within the symphony hall?
The concert would be over before the first movement — another Freudian slip — and Rochester would be immortalized as the site of the world’s first fart-in.
When questioned about the level of maturity of such a stunt, Alinsky defended it, saying:
First of all, the fart-in would be completely outside the city fathers’ experience. Demonstrations, confrontations and picketings they’d learned to cope with, but never in their wildest dreams could they envision a flatulent blitzkrieg on their sacred symphony orchestra. It would throw them into complete disarray.
Second, the action would make a mockery of the law, because although you could be arrested for throwing a stink bomb, there’s no law on the books against natural bodily functions. Can you imagine a guy being tried in court on charges of first-degree farting? The cops would be paralyzed.
Third, when the news got around, everybody who heard it would break out laughing, and the Rochester Philharmonic and the establishment it represents would be rendered totally ridiculous.
A fourth benefit of the tactic is that it’s psychically as well as physically satisfying to the participants. What oppressed person doesn’t want, literally or figuratively, to gak on his oppressors? Here was the closest chance they’d have.
“Such tactics aren’t just cute; they can be useful in driving your opponent up the wall,” Alinsky said. “Very often the most ridiculous tactic can prove the most effective.”
~1.5k
