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.
Frazzled wrote:
Ghost Ann Richards would literally wipe the floor with the entire Trudeau family tree and laugh while she did it. Of course even Putin would have been scared of Ann Richards-now that was a true Texan.
Now SHE should have been the first female US President.
I bet he could take her.
Peregrine wrote:
*And he may just talk about it and do nothing. It's easy to yell about "put America first" when nothing is at stake, but how long will it be before Trump is making favorable oil deals for his friends and keeping the endless war going to make sure his stock in defense contractors goes up?
Exactly. People who put aside the fact he is a bigot and a moron because e's going to "shake things up" are going to be more disappointed than the progressives when all that Hope and Change never materialized.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/31 23:08:53
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
Gordon Shumway wrote: What, is Ann Richards some sort of Texas Margaret Thatcher for Texans or something? Maybe Minnie Pearl could have been her Secretary of State. She scared people because she was scary. So are zomibies. Doesn't mean they would be good heads of state. I think you are mixing up your Dallas reruns with reality.
She was also a liberal. Here's where you explain that a Texas liberal is different from an actual liberal.
NO.
She is Texas' version of Winston Churchill in the mold of Johnson. You feth with Ann Richards at your peril.
Frazzled wrote:
Ghost Ann Richards would literally wipe the floor with the entire Trudeau family tree and laugh while she did it. Of course even Putin would have been scared of Ann Richards-now that was a true Texan.
Now SHE should have been the first female US President.
I bet he could take her.
Peregrine wrote:
*And he may just talk about it and do nothing. It's easy to yell about "put America first" when nothing is at stake, but how long will it be before Trump is making favorable oil deals for his friends and keeping the endless war going to make sure his stock in defense contractors goes up?
Exactly. People who put aside the fact he is a bigot and a moron because e's going to "shake things up" are going to be more disappointed than the progressives when all that Hope and Change never materialized.
Funny Canadians, bringing a hipster to a gunfight...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/31 23:12:48
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
gorgon wrote: By all accounts, Hillary has a FAR better machine behind her than Trump does. That matters a lot, and perhaps her team is confident that they'll claim victory so long as they don't fumble or throw an interception (to extend the sports metaphor).
Sure, Obama had a great machine and Clinton has inherited it. Meanwhile the Republicans had a digital system that was playing catch up, which Trump has now basically neglected. That will cost Republicans in this election and maybe continue to be a disadvantage in the next couple of election, if the stories are to be believed.
However, Clinton is not Obama. She isn't anywhere near as good on the campaign trail. It wasn't just the machine and the message that got votes out, Obama was also pretty good at being a politician. And remember, in 2008 Obama got 69m votes, in 2012 he got 63m. His reputation declined, and there was no longer the post-Bush, post-Iraq and GFC to push out extra voters... but the vote total dropped by 6 million. Is the difference down to Clinton worth a drop of another 6 million votes on election day? If it is... and if the drop from Romney to Trump is somewhere in the ballpark of 3 million votes then you've got an even race.
Sure, the polls aren't showing that right now. But they are showing a trend towards Trump (or at least a trend away from Clinton). She is still the strong favourite, this race isn't over.
And when it comes to Trump, I think part of his problem in mounting a comeback is that opinions about him are fairly set. He's not some random politician that most of the country hasn't gotten to know by now. And he has a LOT of negatives to overcome. He'll probably "win" these debates, at least as far as our media pathetically covers and judges these things. He might even come off as fairly charming. But how many people will be convinced that's the REAL Trump? Heck, act too nice and it'll backfire on him for being too phony.
Yeah, I think at this point Trump's best way forward isn't by convincing anyone he'll be a good president. The lunatics who believe in Trump are already signed up to the cause. The game for him now should be to convince the remaining Republican holdouts that he won't be too bad, and promise them their beloved Supreme Court picks. Meanwhile he needs to hammer Clinton on Benghazi, emails etc... and maybe even make up a new faux scandal close to the election.
As for the debates... I don't think it's about being nice or being mean. It's about finding a way to reconcile his current approach of blustering, personal aggression with an appearance of being presidential. But it would be the way to appeal not too horrible to much of the population, while also not appearing to have sold out his base.
His clumsy effort at walking back immigration reform suggests that even if such an approach were possible, it may be beyond him.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
A Town Called Malus wrote: Considering that Trump was willing to exploit the murder of a mother whilst she was walking with her baby, I don't think there is room for any doubt as to whether he would exploit a terrorist attack.
Trump would certainly look to exploit anything like that. The first issue is whether he could exploit it effectively. The second issue is whether any kind of attack would be to his advantage.
Trump gained in polls following the terror attacks in France, but those polls were among Republicans in the primary. It was merely consolidating his dominance of the angry, crazy voters. But I suspect among the larger population when events like this happen the appeal for most people isn't to the angry man, but to the steady hand, the person who'll stay calm in a crisis.
It's possible, though far from certain, that if a serious attack occurred the result might be to remind people that politics is actually serious business, and it becomes important to elect serious people to office.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
whembly wrote: Especiallyif the desired legislation wouldn't have had any effect of said event.
Then the issue here is that you disagree with whether their solution will work. That's a political disagreement and it's fine, but it is not what bothered people about Trump's comments, which are problems they don't find in Obama's and Clinton's.
To back to A Town Called Malus' excellent polio analogy, in the wake of a polio outbreak consider two possible responses; "We must do more to stop these outbreaks, such as mandating vaccinations." "I told you this would happen, vote for me."
These things are not similar at all.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jasper76 wrote: I really doubt the debates will have much impact at all beyond TV ratings and late night jokes. And I doubt there are many truly undecided voters at this point, no matter what people might tell pollsters.
If everything has already been decided, how do you explain the constant movement of polling figures. And I don't mean people saying 'I'm undecided" when actually it's pretty clear who they'll end up voting for, I mean Clinton polling 46% in early August, and 42% now?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jasper76 wrote: I'm all about Johnson making the debates. Might as well let Jill Stein in too to complete the Crazy Train. But I doubt either will happen. At one point it looked like Johnson might possibly meet the requirement but the support never materialized.
Johnson's numbers have been good for a third party, but very static. He's spiked at 11% of the vote in mid July, but it lasted about a week. Other than that he's been steadily around 7 to 8%, and never more than a point or two outside of that.
Johnson himself makes a fair point that the 15% requirement to be in the debates is an acceptable threshold, but surveys should include him in the first line of candidates. It's a stretch to claim that's costing him the 7 or 8% he'd need to make the threshold, but out of fairness it should be required.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
djones520 wrote: Yeah, I honestly think most people in America want what the Libertarians are selling, they are either just ignorant of what they stand for, or are scared off by some of their more fringe beliefs.
Johnson has been part of the libertarian party moving to the centre, that's seen the party build a platform that is much closer to something that a decent number of Americans would actually want, and is actually becoming a somewhat coherent, plausible platform that could govern a country. But it is still a work in progress, the Libertarian platform still calls for ridiculous nonsense like getting rid of social security, which has caused Johnson to take the very unusual step of publically disagreeing with the platform of his own party. And there's still some bonkers stuff in there that it's in the party platform, and which Johnson agrees with, like getting rid of income taxes.
But the party is slowly introducing practical realities to its party platform. It's quite fun watching the genuinely crazy libertarians, the old Ron Paul hold outs, decrying Johnson as being just as bad as Clinton and Trump
This message was edited 9 times. Last update was at 2016/09/01 04:30:42
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Trump: we're going to build this wall, and Mexico will pay for it.
Mexican President: We're not paying for it!
Who would have thought that Trump's masterplan could be so easily undone...
Comedy gold.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Who would have thought that Trump's masterplan could be so easily undone...
Comedy gold.
Well technically Trump might be able to change trade deals in a way that results in trade income so that it covers wall + some more. Dunno how well that would sit with other countries if USA starts on their own changing deal tradements by imposing extra taxes or whatever to get more money.
Or even more simple. "give the money or we'll invade". Trump doesn't seem kind of guy to worry about political recursions of invading country blatantly for sake of money. At least Bush did that bit more sneakily
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/09/01 10:04:30
Who would have thought that Trump's masterplan could be so easily undone...
Comedy gold.
Well technically Trump might be able to change trade deals in a way that results in trade income so that it covers wall + some more. Dunno how well that would sit with other countries if USA starts on their own changing deal tradements by imposing extra taxes or whatever to get more money.
Or even more simple. "give the money or we'll invade". Trump doesn't seem kind of guy to worry about political recursions of invading country blatantly for sake of money. At least Bush did that bit more sneakily
I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure that if Trump tried to change trade deals, the other side would have to agree, Canda would have to agree if it were NAFTA related, and maybe even Congress or the Senate would have to agree.
Trump really hasn't thought this one through
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Who would have thought that Trump's masterplan could be so easily undone...
Comedy gold.
Well technically Trump might be able to change trade deals in a way that results in trade income so that it covers wall + some more. Dunno how well that would sit with other countries if USA starts on their own changing deal tradements by imposing extra taxes or whatever to get more money.
Or even more simple. "give the money or we'll invade". Trump doesn't seem kind of guy to worry about political recursions of invading country blatantly for sake of money. At least Bush did that bit more sneakily
I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure that if Trump tried to change trade deals, the other side would have to agree, Canda would have to agree if it were NAFTA related, and maybe even Congress or the Senate would have to agree.
Trump really hasn't thought this one through
Well he might think he can put in on his own extra tax for mexicans. You want to sell us you pay something per item.
But yeah he's nuts if he thinks he can build something at the expense of mexicans short of invading and robbing the money from them.
Who would have thought that Trump's masterplan could be so easily undone...
Comedy gold.
Well technically Trump might be able to change trade deals in a way that results in trade income so that it covers wall + some more. Dunno how well that would sit with other countries if USA starts on their own changing deal tradements by imposing extra taxes or whatever to get more money.
Or even more simple. "give the money or we'll invade". Trump doesn't seem kind of guy to worry about political recursions of invading country blatantly for sake of money. At least Bush did that bit more sneakily
I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure that if Trump tried to change trade deals, the other side would have to agree, Canda would have to agree if it were NAFTA related, and maybe even Congress or the Senate would have to agree.
Trump really hasn't thought this one through
Well he might think he can put in on his own extra tax for mexicans. You want to sell us you pay something per item.
But yeah he's nuts if he thinks he can build something at the expense of mexicans short of invading and robbing the money from them.
The easiest, simplest means is to tax remittance to Mexico.
However, it's a really stupid idea as it'll likely start a trade war.
Whembly, I don't know if you've ever been to the North of England, but its a really nice area, beautiful scenery, and of course, Hadrian's Wall is there.
Now, Hadrian's Wall is a very impressive feat of engineering, and it has a fascinating history behind it.
It took the Romans a lot of years, and a lot of money to build this, with the best technology available at the time. The terrain in that part of the world is difficult, and even with slave labour and no Health and Safety, it still cost a lot of money...
When you visit that wall, you're reminded of that. From the West Coast of England, to the East Coast, where the wall runs, is one hell of a distance, but its nothing compared to America's border with Mexico
Even if Trump gave the go ahead, even if Mexico agreed to pay, the time, the cost, the terrain to overcome...
It would cost billions, take years...and you could still fly over it or go round by boat
It's so impractical as to be a non-starter...
The Channel Tunnel between Britain and France cost a jaw dropping amount of cash, but it paid for itself becuase the trade that goes back and forth is huge.
How is a giant wall going to pay for itself, or help trade?
I still can't believe this idea is being seriously entertained.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
jmurph wrote: The Chinese have a really super wall. It's fantastic- really. A great wall.
Which again, took decades to build, and didn't stop the Mongols from getting over it because they bribed the gatekeeper
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mozzyfuzzy wrote: You just have to wait several hundred years for the tourism to come and look at your wall. Trump is playing an exceedingly long investment game.
The way things are going, the only tourists in hundreds of years time, will be grandma cockroach and her brood, or anti-biotic resistant, terminator zombies, that also cause climate change
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/09/01 14:43:12
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Whembly, I don't know if you've ever been to the North of England, but its a really nice area, beautiful scenery, and of course, Hadrian's Wall is there.
Now, Hadrian's Wall is a very impressive feat of engineering, and it has a fascinating history behind it.
It took the Romans a lot of years, and a lot of money to build this, with the best technology available at the time. The terrain in that part of the world is difficult, and even with slave labour and no Health and Safety, it still cost a lot of money...
When you visit that wall, you're reminded of that. From the West Coast of England, to the East Coast, where the wall runs, is one hell of a distance, but its nothing compared to America's border with Mexico
Even if Trump gave the go ahead, even if Mexico agreed to pay, the time, the cost, the terrain to overcome...
It would cost billions, take years...and you could still fly over it or go round by boat
It's so impractical as to be a non-starter...
The Channel Tunnel between Britain and France cost a jaw dropping amount of cash, but it paid for itself becuase the trade that goes back and forth is huge.
How is a giant wall going to pay for itself, or help trade?
I still can't believe this idea is being seriously entertained.
We build fething aircraft carriers, skyscrapers, complex bridge system.... We have the engineering know-how and budget to build a barrier if we desire. However... this 'wall' ain't the most expensive part. That'll be the increased manpower to monitor all ports-of-entry, ICE staff to investigate expired visas, and to implement a vigorous e-verify system for employment.
The thing that makes this 'hard' is simply political will.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: Whembly, I don't know if you've ever been to the North of England, but its a really nice area, beautiful scenery, and of course, Hadrian's Wall is there.
Now, Hadrian's Wall is a very impressive feat of engineering, and it has a fascinating history behind it.
It took the Romans a lot of years, and a lot of money to build this, with the best technology available at the time. The terrain in that part of the world is difficult, and even with slave labour and no Health and Safety, it still cost a lot of money...
When you visit that wall, you're reminded of that. From the West Coast of England, to the East Coast, where the wall runs, is one hell of a distance, but its nothing compared to America's border with Mexico
Even if Trump gave the go ahead, even if Mexico agreed to pay, the time, the cost, the terrain to overcome...
It would cost billions, take years...and you could still fly over it or go round by boat
It's so impractical as to be a non-starter...
The Channel Tunnel between Britain and France cost a jaw dropping amount of cash, but it paid for itself becuase the trade that goes back and forth is huge.
How is a giant wall going to pay for itself, or help trade?
I still can't believe this idea is being seriously entertained.
I don't see what the issue is. Let the rad filled mutie apocalypse of New Mexico show us the way.
One Forbidden Zone, coming up.
What we really have to watch for is a Canadian sneak attack. No one expects the Canadian Inquisition.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/09/01 14:59:28
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
whembly wrote: We build fething aircraft carriers, skyscrapers, complex bridge system.... We have the engineering know-how and budget to build a barrier if we desire. However... this 'wall' ain't the most expensive part. That'll be the increased manpower to monitor all ports-of-entry, ICE staff to investigate expired visas, and to implement a vigorous e-verify system for employment.
The thing that makes this 'hard' is simply political will.
The issue with the wall isn't 'hard'. The issue is 'stupid'. You are right that it is more than possible to build the wall, given US engineering capability. The real reason is the same reason that no-one has built a 40 storey skyscraper in downtown Leiper's Fork, Tennessee. It would have a cost way in excess of any benefit.
Increasing the physical barrier along the border will cost billions. And once it's built, as you say, you still need a massive increase in surveillance tech, and staff to continue to monitor the wall. And that would be on top of any additional customs officials along legal points of entry. Once you have that kind of investment in manpower, the actual physical barrier isn't even doing anything.
And all that expense would be aimed at solving the issue of illegal Mexican migration, when the number of illegal Mexican immigrants in the US has dropped by 140,000 in the last five years. Meanwhile the number of Chinese and Indian people overstaying work visas is growing, and there's not a word said about it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/09/02 03:55:04
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
whembly wrote: We build fething aircraft carriers, skyscrapers, complex bridge system.... We have the engineering know-how and budget to build a barrier if we desire. However... this 'wall' ain't the most expensive part. That'll be the increased manpower to monitor all ports-of-entry, ICE staff to investigate expired visas, and to implement a vigorous e-verify system for employment.
The thing that makes this 'hard' is simply political will.
No, the wall is in fact one of the expensive parts. I don't think you understand just how huge a project a border wall is from a civil engineering perspective. According to this estimate (see the original engineer's article for more details) the border wall would cost around $17 billion in raw materials alone. IOW, more than five Nimitz-class aircraft carriers worth in raw materials, on top of the absolutely massive labor costs! Before we even consider the ongoing costs of maintaining and overseeing the wall it would be one of the biggest and most expensive civil engineering projects in history. Presenting it as a case of "if we just had the political willpower" is incredibly ignorant of the reality of the situation at best, and really dishonest at worst.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
whembly wrote: We build fething aircraft carriers, skyscrapers, complex bridge system.... We have the engineering know-how and budget to build a barrier if we desire. However... this 'wall' ain't the most expensive part. That'll be the increased manpower to monitor all ports-of-entry, ICE staff to investigate expired visas, and to implement a vigorous e-verify system for employment.
The thing that makes this 'hard' is simply political will.
No, the wall is in fact one of the expensive parts. I don't think you understand just how huge a project a border wall is from a civil engineering perspective. According to this estimate (see the original engineer's article for more details) the border wall would cost around $17 billion in raw materials alone. IOW, more than five Nimitz-class aircraft carriers worth in raw materials, on top of the absolutely massive labor costs! Before we even consider the ongoing costs of maintaining and overseeing the wall it would be one of the biggest and most expensive civil engineering projects in history. Presenting it as a case of "if we just had the political willpower" is incredibly ignorant of the reality of the situation at best, and really dishonest at worst.
And unlike the Romans when they built Hadrian's wall, you can't rely on slave labour to cut costs.
HRC should be all over this plan like a bad rash. I cannot beleive that this idea was being entertained for more than a nano-second!
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
whembly wrote: We build fething aircraft carriers, skyscrapers, complex bridge system.... We have the engineering know-how and budget to build a barrier if we desire. However... this 'wall' ain't the most expensive part. That'll be the increased manpower to monitor all ports-of-entry, ICE staff to investigate expired visas, and to implement a vigorous e-verify system for employment.
The thing that makes this 'hard' is simply political will.
No, the wall is in fact one of the expensive parts. I don't think you understand just how huge a project a border wall is from a civil engineering perspective. According to this estimate (see the original engineer's article for more details) the border wall would cost around $17 billion in raw materials alone. IOW, more than five Nimitz-class aircraft carriers worth in raw materials, on top of the absolutely massive labor costs! Before we even consider the ongoing costs of maintaining and overseeing the wall it would be one of the biggest and most expensive civil engineering projects in history. Presenting it as a case of "if we just had the political willpower" is incredibly ignorant of the reality of the situation at best, and really dishonest at worst.
Thats nothing to the multitrillion budget of the US.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Frazzled wrote: Thats nothing to the multitrillion budget of the US.
Oh really? So if the military wanted a dozen new aircraft carriers it would be "that's nothing" and wouldn't be a massive expense with no hope of ever happening?
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
Frazzled wrote: Thats nothing to the multitrillion budget of the US.
Oh really? So if the military wanted a dozen new aircraft carriers it would be "that's nothing" and wouldn't be a massive expense with no hope of ever happening?
Correct. If the US wanted, the US could build it in a year. Arguments about cost are irrelevant.
Just send the bill to sanctuary cities.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Or simply stated... if everyone's Hitler... no one is Hitler. Then, what happens if Hitler truly is reincarnated?
<crickets>
I certainly think both parties can learn from this. There's a lot of the "all people who think differently are evil" stuff going around. As evidence by the "all conservatives are racist" stuff, or anything written by Ann Coulter. Both parties need to squash this gak before it gets out of hand, and people start getting physically attacked for their political views.
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
Or simply stated... if everyone's Hitler... no one is Hitler. Then, what happens if Hitler truly is reincarnated?
<crickets>
I certainly think both parties can learn from this. There's a lot of the "all people who think differently are evil" stuff going around. As evidence by the "all conservatives are racist" stuff, or anything written by Ann Coulter. Both parties need to squash this gak before it gets out of hand, and people start getting physically attacked for their political views.
Happened several times at Trump rallies already...with Trump egging them on.
Or simply stated... if everyone's Hitler... no one is Hitler. Then, what happens if Hitler truly is reincarnated?
<crickets>
I certainly think both parties can learn from this. There's a lot of the "all people who think differently are evil" stuff going around. As evidence by the "all conservatives are racist" stuff, or anything written by Ann Coulter. Both parties need to squash this gak before it gets out of hand, and people start getting physically attacked for their political views.
Too late.
Trump supporters have been attacked at multiple locations. Inversely some Trump protesters have been attacked. We are returned to the 1800s. Politics is now a full contact sport.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
It seem more like being a Trump supporter is a full contact sport than politics in general. That isn't to say that politics isn't getting nasty it is just that it seems that Trump attracts those prone to (stupid) violence even more than usual.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
Just the herds of mongols.
