Donald Trump

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

"

Xavderion wrote:

The west (namely NATO) wants war with Russia, of course there will be anti-western hysteria.

You really believe that, don´t you ? If Russia would invade the Baltic states tomorrow, the NATO would not be able to defend them, that has to be changed (RAND study: http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1253.html. Russia is a (nuclear) superpower, only idiots would want a war with Russia or believe what you wrote.

He frequents and buys into /pol a little too hard lol

Mfw Trump retweets Barry after Hillary's "basket of deplorables" remark. 5D subatomic pre-singularity Ninja Gaiden.

"

Xavderion wrote:

5D subatomic pre-singularity Ninja Gaiden.

Dude.

It's a clever retweet. Nothing more. It's impressive, but it's not that fucking impressive.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

DalaiLama wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

@Jojas: There are people like that, sure. Lots of them. But I think the main reason for Trump's popularity is that he's a troll candidate. I think a lot of people see this and genuinely want it. The general dissatisfaction with government has reached such heights that the Jesse Ventura effect is at play on a national level.

Bernie's popularity was/is the same thing. If Bernie had made the ticket instead of Hillary, it would have been a resounding shout out to the status quo government barnacles that the people were sick and tired of the existing politics.

So now instead of choosing between two misfits that would let the voters thumb their noses at D.C., we have a clown and a woman whose foreign policy has been proven to be more dangerous than aerosolized ebola virus.

Well, although it's obvious where my bias is, I think the "status quo is fine" people make up a good chunk of the nation. Basically, it was a somewhat balanced strategic call: fight fire with fire, or fight it with ice.

I think the Democrat's biggest fault is that they didn't legitimately get the public's feedback on the issue. By rigging things so Hilary was nominated over Bernie, they ignored the testing phase where they actually see how their candidates fare among voters. Faith in the H, instead of social science.

Hilary might still have won in an unbiased process, though. Methodology is one thing, findings are another.

Basically the people don't like this hybrid system. Political party members get to influence the presidential nomination. Would Political party members go ball deep to trust the people if they are willing to vote for trump? Political party don't trust the people and the people don't trust their government. You can't talk about faith when you don't believe.

"

Xavderion wrote:

5D subatomic pre-singularity Ninja Gaiden.

I laughed

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Xavderion wrote:

5D subatomic pre-singularity Ninja Gaiden.

Dude.

It's a clever retweet. Nothing more. It's impressive, but it's not that fucking impressive.

Aye - the second I saw the headline (of the original story of the 'basket of deplorables') I thought of Romney's 47%. It would be disgraceful if Conway et al didn't think of it.

"

innervation wrote:

Aye - the second I saw the headline (of the original story of the 'basket of deplorables') I thought of Romney's 47%. It would be disgraceful if Conway et al didn't think of it.

But only as a political maneuver. Romney did "write them off", while Hillary just disparaged them. You can criticize that, but in the end it's a false equivalency.

It amuses me some people would vote Trump just to burn down everything. Honestly, I don't think it's worth it. Last Emperor worst Emperor.

Question: Is it true that half of Trump supporters are deplorable? I mean, I'd rather not jump to conclussions, many of them are reasonable here although buy into health conspiracy theories like morons (but Trump supporters in reddit are outright fascists). I have polls like this (see page two), that show it may be true, but the statistics may be bad or biased themselves (I have limited knowledge, so I can judge really gross errors and no more than that).

It makes me laugh how the roles of the easily triggered and the anti PC have inverted, so rather that discuss the facts, people talk about being offended. Remember, SJWs are not the only ones with those properties (no matter how many would pretend otherwise).



It's not fun to discuss Trump as a serious candidate anymore. It bring stupidity and despair to people.

The United States Constitution was written with the assumption that deplorable people constituted a large enough portion of the population that deplorable people elected into office and granted the power of government was a serious threat to liberty. In a way the document is an idealistic expression of a profound cynicism.

Personally, I think a majority of pretty much every group of humans - past, present, and future - consists of deplorable people. Average people suck.

I agree with Nero that the SJW mentality is bipartisan. It's not even hidden that well; Bill O'Reilly is a self-proclaimed "culture warrior," wonder what that means.

The phrase "anti-racist is code for anti-white" is not always false. Of course, it sometimes is false.

"

Jojas wrote:

"

innervation wrote:

Aye - the second I saw the headline (of the original story of the 'basket of deplorables') I thought of Romney's 47%. It would be disgraceful if Conway et al didn't think of it.

But only as a political maneuver. Romney did "write them off", while Hillary just disparaged them. You can criticize that, but in the end it's a false equivalency.

I wasn't addressing equivalency. I wasn't criticizing anything but the conclusion that Trump is a ninja warrior for tweeting a comp to Romney. It's an obvious connection that even I made within seconds, therefore, he's not a genius to have done what he did.