Are you a literal NPC? First you had trouble counting to two, now you're just copy and pasting your replies. Do you need some time to update before you can type anything new?
Actually i revel in the fact that I'm a normie 85% of the time irl. Its generally only when it comes to american history (especially political history) that I like to flaunt my hipster boner for all the world to see. It works especially well since I'm canadian, so none of my peers even know what im talking about
As far as I can recall, the Bush family has expressed their disdain for Trump many times on the past, and Bush himself also publicy criticized him, so I think there's a solid case for "yes" on this.
Not surprising too, since Trump manages to piss off both liberals and neocons with his actions
I know. Imagine being so dumb you can't enjoy and laugh at the president making some of the most hilariously bad tweets of all time and instead get super angry about it. LOL
I don't see any real reason he shouldn't, he's not going to get the nomination but I'd rather see the Democratic primaries have a varied field like the right last election than end up with a Hillary or Bernie choice and that's it.
Maybe, but thanks again to the primaries he doesn't have to, he'll just get beat there and if he doesn't the left has bigger problems than they thought.
To run for president, each candidate must file two documents with the FEC: a Statement of Organization, which creates a federal campaign committee (such as Obama for America or John McCain 2008), and a Statement of Candidacy, which identifies the person running for office and the office being sought and officially links the candidate to the committee created in the Statement of Organization.
When you hear of people "filing papers with the FEC" to run for president or some other federal office, these are the documents in question.
Once a candidate does so, he or she is a candidate for president in the eyes of the federal government. (Getting on the ballot in individual states is up to the candidate.) From this point forward, the candidate must file regular fundraising/spending disclosure reports and is subject to federal contribution limits.
Only once and the Dems did royally dick the guy. I disagree with every one of his policies but he got a raw deal. Total pussy move to endorse Hillary after though.
Because people have tore up his healthcare plan. It literally doesnt make any sense on paper. Hes saying we should tax the rich to pay for it but American standards of healthcare are insanely high. His plan would cost 30 trillion over 10 years to give everyone health care. The welfare state sucks up all our money along with the military presence we have on the world. We have to get rid of the deficit first. Keep in mind because access to welfare is infinite like 70% of all minorities on average are on welfare. Meaning the average non asian/mayo doesnt contribute to making America money over their lifetime. Demographics of welfare only work IF 30% of the population is on it. We passed that when obama started office, thats why the deficit is so high. There's too many wars and too many people gaming the welfare system. A collapse if nothing is done is inevitable.
His plan would cost 30 trillion over 10 years to give everyone health care.
That's the total cost. Which is less than we spend if we change nothing. Sander's plan is 2 trillion less than with no change.
It costs the government more money, but total healthcare spending falls by a lot because you get a reduction in emergency care, and a virtual elimination of the insurance industry. Insurance is just a useless 20% overhead on the entire system. Medicare has a 2% overhead.
We cover everyone for less money because it makes the system more efficient as one piece instead of four disjointed pieces. And this was a Right-wing study designed to cast it in the most unfavorable light - and it still came out saving money.
God, imagine another couple years of nonstop Sanders spam. Everyone thought the Ron Paul shit in 2012 was bad, but the hilariously obvious Bernie astroturfing really took the cake.
Yeah, that's about right. I think the storyline is pretty funny, but I also yearn for Tropico 4 but more expanded. I think it's a real solid foundation tho.
That's not crazy at all, though. If you have any type of rational political positions, you can already guess if you're going to agree more with Republican or Democratic policies and platforms 23 months from now. It's not like they're going to change very much.
You say that, but then we got Trump and Hillary last time and we were really close to getting Bernie or Cruz. Those are all wildly different people with different policies.
Obviously there's no difference between the two, like how when anti--racists and racists all agree that someone is crappy, it's because they're the same, *not* because one side thinks he's too racist and the other thinks not racist enough.
This is not radically centrist either. Radical centrism rejects the concept of left and right. Rather it only allows for one type of policy, the correct policy.
No you are technically correct there's another word for it but I forget. It's like monopoly but 1 company controls a shitload yet not all of it. Comcast is technically not a monopoly but they control so much there's no other options and they manhandle competitors out.
The tariffs were to talk free trade. We didnt have free trade remember? It was always unfair to us. Theyre talking right now about fair trade with china.
TPP would have created the largest free trade zone in the world and would have also forced China and India in to the agreement. Orange man doesn't understand trade so cancelled US involvement. Orange man also doesn't understand trade tactics nor cares that unilaterally trade liberalization improves quality of life for your own citizens.
NAFTA was functioning fine but orange man doesn't understand comparative advantage so tried to renegotiate, ended up settling for a coupon when he realized he couldn't actually force Canada or Mexico to do stuff because it isn't 1955. Orange man doesn't understand geopolitics or diplomacy.
Orange man thinks trade deficits are bad because he doesn't understand trade or economics. Orange man thinks local production for secondary resources is better than imports because he doesn't understand comparative advantage, trade or economics and doesn't care when his economic advisors tell him he is litteraly making people poorer.
Only idiots give a fuck if we have a domestic steel industry.
How many jobs are lost in, well, literally every other steel-as-a-raw-material production and construction sector due to the higher cost of steel either due to tariffs or due to domestic steel production being inherently more expensive?
hint: a lot more than the 500 workers US steel hired back, and probably the few thousand nationwide
It's just a dumb policy to pursue because in order to keep those jobs, every successive administration would have to keep those tariffs in place. As soon as the tariffs go away, so do the domestic jobs which only exist because of the tariffs, because it is inherently cheaper to produce most steel in other countries and import it, all things being equal.
If my steel making factory closes down then I can't just automatically go and automatically get one of those other jobs. Like a normal person, I don't care about the global or national economy, I care about my job.
Did TPP address the forced technology transfers and intellectual theft that is done on a massive scale by China? Because that is what the US is currently focusing on in trade talks. I agree free trade is ideal and Donald Trump is wrong about the trade deficit but the status quo with China was not free trade. Trump has indicated the end game is free trade but there is no country that has less protectionism than the US (until Trump). Comparative advantage is also good until it isn't. It may be costlier to purchase some good domestically but the benefits to national security and stability of having robust energy, steel, agriculture, etc. industries outweighs the costs.
I get it. I have a Master's in Econ and I know free trade is ideal. The problem with Econ in Academia is that it assumes a perfect world and many people have a dogmatic adherence to theoretical concepts that are difficult or impossible to back with data. Yes it would be nice if all these steel workers and coal miners could just learn to code and start business with the cheaper goods they get from free trade but the reality is that they can't and won't. You can put them on welfare or let them keep breaking their backs in the mines. Either way is going to create an inefficiency in the economy.
The system in the US is already borked because regional providers are essentially locked in, but being able to gauge consumers and provide preferential treatment to anyone who pays a premium just cements the fucked up system further.
Not my problem, I'm not an American. But your current government removed the band aid from an open wound simply because the monopoly suppliers asked them to.
it’s a cruel world where small businesses like Google, Netflix, and Amazon are brought to heel by de facto government utilities
the propaganda that Google and friends plastered all over Reddit back in 2018 was hilarious, like stories about how websites cost $5/mo each in Portugal
It’s telling that you couldn’t list a single bad thing. Almost as though you just took up the fight for something you had zero understanding of because you were manipulated by companies that (correctly) figured you for a moron
The system in the US is already borked because regional providers are essentially locked in, with the barrier to entry being near-insurmountable. However being able to gouge consumers and provide preferential treatment to anyone who pays a premium just further cements the fucked up system.
Not my problem, I'm not an American. But your current government removed the band aid from an open wound simply because the monopoly suppliers asked them to.
That has nothing to do with monopolies and have increased our speeds due to competition. You could even argue NN increases monopolies because it forces a lack of incentives to improve and allow competition.
Incorrect. Trump and Sanders are close to each other. You've just been led to believe otherwise.
Trump is a right populist and sanders is a left populist.
Trump and Cruz are way closer to each other than the other two, and vice versa. Unless you're one of those "I vote for who I'd like to have a beer with better" types, it's perfectly reasonable to have a super strong idea of whether you're going to vote D or R in the presidential election next year.
If you have any type of rational concept of political positions, you can already guess if you're going to agree more with Republican or Democratic policies and platforms 23 months from now.
Unless you're one of those "anti-war democrat" that lost their shit when Trump announced we were pulling out of Syria, LOL. Let's not pretend this is about "rational positions." Some people hate Trump so much they'd probably vote for Zombie Hitler so long as he ran against Trump as a democrat.
Trump is a shitty president lol... Yeah there's always been a lot of reactionary retards. But pretending there's some sort of mass hysteria rather than just a shitty president seems like a cope for you tbh...
Yeah I’m going to stand behind the winner of my chosen party even if I didn’t vote for them in the primary. Like it or not we have a two party system and right now, not voting/voting third party doesn’t work.
I mean if you give clinton a pass for letting osama live, or pretend he wasnt at war in Iraq, somalia and the Balkans. And also ignore that Obama droned american nationals and started a war in Lybia and joined a war in Syria.
As in they actually decided to do something with bipartisan and UN support rather than let saddam make random threats for the rest of his life? Then yes.
But he did choose to invade a sovereign nation for essentially the same reason as the Iraq war of 2003 (just less effectively). Is passing the buck better?
His Iraq liberation act laid the legal framework for Bush to do his thing.
"In October 1998, removing the Iraqi government became official U.S. foreign policy with enactment of the Iraq Liberation Act. The act provided $97 million for Iraqi "democratic opposition organizations" to "establish a program to support a transition to democracy in Iraq."[66] This legislation contrasted with the terms set out in United Nations Security Council Resolution 687, which focused on weapons and weapons programs and made no mention of regime change.[67] One month after the passage of the Iraq Liberation Act, the US and UK launched a bombardment campaign of Iraq called Operation Desert Fox. The campaign's express rationale was to hamper Saddam Hussein's government's ability to produce chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, but U.S. intelligence personnel also hoped it would help weaken Saddam's grip on power"
they are, by almost every conceivable metric. but the democrats suck a lot, too
a smarter group of people would trounce the republicans in every large election outside of the hick states. but we don't have a smart group of people, we have the dems, who are the embodiment of, "lesser of two evils"
You're going to see a lot of these comments next election cycle. And it's exactly what needed to happen to keep Trump out last time instead of voting 3rd party. I made the same mistake, thinking personal principles were more important when it came to our nation's pride and integrity.
Your individual vote will never matter any way so vote for who you most align with. You shouldn't vote for the lesser evil shit or we are just going to see 2016 repeated over and over again.
OR the libertarians have an actual base that wont vote trump even if they couldnt vote for a 3rd party.
look, vote however you like. but dont come crying when voting with fee fees turned out a disaster isntead of voting with your brain.
in the US 2 party system you have to vote with your brain in the general election. again, vote for bambi in the primaries if you like, but not voting or wasting a vote on a GE is nearly the same as voting for the guy you dont like.
im still amazed that trump won and not even his disastrous presidency is making people get their head out of their asses and realize that reality isnt a disney movie that will cave to you just cause you shout harder. the only reason to vote 3rd party is if they somehow manage to get an actual seat at the table if they get X amount of votes or something similar.
If more people voted for the lesser evil, Hilary may have won. I'd guess there were more Democrats that didn't vote for her than Republicans that didn't vote for Donald.
Well yeah we already know who the GOP pick is and he’s a pretty known quantity. And if he thinks there’s no one on the Dems who’s worse that’s not totally unreasonable
Although if both parties had to do a primary then yeah it’d be stupid to say you’re voting Dem/GOP before we even have a full list of who’s going to be in the primaries.
Said it before, I'll keep saying it; Bernie is far too old and far too left. We have to find a candidate that's more attractive to the ignoramuses in the center so we don't give them a built-in excuse to not vote.
Joe Biden is probably the only democrat who has a chance against Trump, but only because he's like a Bizarro Democrat version of Trump.
O'Rourke couldn't even beat The Zodiac Killer with big democrat donors pissing money all over his face. There's no way in hell Bobby Francis would beat Trump.
O'Rourke couldn't even beat The Zodiac Killer with big democrat donors pissing money all over his face.
This. Beto couldn't beat a historically unpopular incumbent senator in Texas. Millions of Texans broke from voting straight party Republican ticket to vote against Ted Cruz, as evidenced by how many more votes Governor Gregg Abbot received than Ted Cruz.
It affords me a 300 square meter flat in downtown Yekaterinburg, and a top of the line Lada Xray just from posting on reddit all day, so in a word, I’d say it feels отлично.
Bernie Sanders is a multi-millionaire NeoLiberal who refuses to reveal his taxes and overseas investments. He was Rodham's sheepdog in 2016, pied-pipering the Left, so she could jink hard Right with the Warhogs.
Then he delivered the Left to her on a silver shekels platter, and swore obeisance to a known psychopath, someone clearly owned by the Wall Street Mafiya, someone dirty.
This was not just 'bad optics', this was total betrayal of his Leftist base.
It means whatever you think it means. The OP seems to be implying that it's a newspaper of his own state, with in-state editors who represent Vermont somehow, but in actuality the details are much more murky. Not a cut and dry "His homestate doesn't want him!" kind of thing.
So clealry whenever the Detroit Free press runs an editorial about a Michigan politician they're fucked becasue they're owned by Gannett, which operates out of Virginia
It was sold to a longtime Republican and hedge fund manager who's good friends with several Republican senators and has exclusively endorsed Republicans.
i mean, it was. but he faced the only candidate with less integrity than him.
also, if you read my comment instead of getting outraged from the get go, i said "what’s in between your legs is more important than your capacity, integrity, experience, etc ?"
nobody voted for trump exclusively cause he had a dick. but this newspaper is looking for a candidate with the exclusive requirement that it was born with an XX set (zero intentions of getting into the gender vs sex debate). which was my point. its so fucking stupid to put the XX or XY in your list of requirements and specially when its basically the only requirement.
Um. That's what happened? Hillary Clinton led the charge on intervention in Libya. Thanks to that intervention, there are now open air slave markets in Libya. I am sorry that this sounds like "Alex Jones tier crazy bullshit" to you, but without Hillary you don't get the intervention in Libya, without the intervention in Libya you don't get the fall of Gaddafi, and without the fall of Gaddafi you don't get the open air slave markets.
I'm arguing that without considering the actual election, Trump was chosen in the primary. Because he met the critera, capacity (companies outside real-estate went backrupt) integrity (he's dirty), experience (never held any office)
Considering that until relatively recently women faced enormous barriers to getting a higher education, reaching the heights of political and corporate power, and raising their socioeconomic status ... what's in between your legs has always mattered; it's different now because the femoids are benefiting from it, and that triggers you.
"Life" in this "society" being, at best, an utter bore and no aspect of "society" being at all relevant to women, there remains to civic-minded, responsible, thrill-seeking females only to overthrow the government, eliminate the money system, institute complete automation, and eliminate the male sex.
Do you believe like this article about another article claims that the nominee needs to be a woman? Is the an important or superficial quality we need in a Democratic presidential candidate?
Is the fact that Bernie shows up on national news shows and makes statements a benefit to the candidate or no.
They're actually going to find a way to lose to trump. I don't think a party who's sole platform was intentionally losing could be this bad at winning elections.
Bernie will run and they will find an old Access Hollywood tape then say he has zero chance at winning. then when he does win, they will say Russia helped him win and then spend the next 4 years investigating false claims and try to indict small groups of internet trolls to seem legitimate.
Why would the MOST POPULAR POLITICIAN in the country not run? Poll after poll shows he beats trump by the highest margin of all other nominees.
Is this the newspaper that childishly kept repeating that Hillary was a better candidate, despite polls showing sanders beating him by double digits... and she only beat trump by single digits?
Nonsense . Illogical, not based on science. Go
Home.
TBH Russia probably would back Bernie because he has the spine of a slug and would literally have the most limp-wristed American foreign policy of all time. The difference between him and Trump is either have an embarrassing, cowardly, ineffective Senator who is too afraid to use any form of hard power or an emotionally driven egotistical ass who flip-flops to much to have any sort of consistent application of power and if I was lil Vlady I'd definitely take the first one.
Were gonna bomb Syria into having human rights or die be disappointed trying
And yeah, Russia could have preferred Trump or Sanders to the competition in each of their own party, both at the time were very beneficial to Russia's long-term goals unless you somehow think they would prefer Bernie to Hillary. Also, depending on where DJ stops flopping at he may give Syria to them as well.
I'd say neocurious more than anything. For example, we have a commitment to the Kurds to make sure they aren't decimated by Assad, ISIS or the Turks because we told them we would and therefore we owe them that. It's also important that we contain the influence of illiberal powers in the region such as Russia and Iran.
Nevertheless in situations like Venezuela I'm unconvinced that the situation is at the point that we should do anything militarily because even though it would be a human rights issue at this point we still have to decide if it's worth the trouble. Its one of those things where if its broken when you're done you're left with the entire mess, even if it was broken before you got there. It makes me genuinely sad that people are going to continue suffering and dying there, however I just don't know if it's best for us to get involved.
If that makes me the crazy warmongerer than I'm not particularly bothered by it.
On a separate note, I will say I was a little harsh on Sanders. He isn't terrible when it comes to certain aspects of foreign policy but I don't see him having the backbone to competently exercise hard power.
272 comments
1 DarqWolff 2019-01-07
What's Bernie Sanders' strategy going to be without me astroturfing on reddit for him for free?
1 SnapshillBot 2019-01-07
Are you a literal NPC? First you had trouble counting to two, now you're just copy and pasting your replies. Do you need some time to update before you can type anything new?
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
1 ToTheNintieth 2019-01-07
Hey, I remember this one
1 Ennui2778 2019-01-07
Soy. Not even once.
1 raebake 2019-01-07
They wouldn't be happy unless it was an actual propaganda arm.
1 cheers_grills 2019-01-07
Implying it isn't already.
1 Sarge_Ward 2019-01-07
To be fair that was actually entirely true when the Iraq War started in 2003.
1 rhyme-ocerus 2019-01-07
You're such a weird nerd
1 Sarge_Ward 2019-01-07
I would never deny that.
1 Dramaste 2019-01-07
1 Sarge_Ward 2019-01-07
Actually i revel in the fact that I'm a normie 85% of the time irl. Its generally only when it comes to american history (especially political history) that I like to flaunt my hipster boner for all the world to see. It works especially well since I'm canadian, so none of my peers even know what im talking about
1 Dramaste 2019-01-07
1 Sarge_Ward 2019-01-07
This but unironically.
1 Sir_Panache 2019-01-07
I do the same with WW2 and guns, dw
1 Wheretheflowersgrow 2019-01-07
Don't bother, Reddit is all for Bush and the destabilization of the middle east now.
1 Ganbazuroi 2019-01-07
They unironically love Bush because he's against Brumb now lel
1 shallowm 2019-01-07
Is Bush against Trump?
1 Ganbazuroi 2019-01-07
Yup, he shaked the republicans and got the ball from the neocons' hands, plus, he shattered Jeb's chances at winning the primary.
1 shallowm 2019-01-07
Is he openly against Trump now though?
1 Ganbazuroi 2019-01-07
As far as I can recall, the Bush family has expressed their disdain for Trump many times on the past, and Bush himself also publicy criticized him, so I think there's a solid case for "yes" on this.
Not surprising too, since Trump manages to piss off both liberals and neocons with his actions
1 Dildokin 2019-01-07
The left was helping him meme when the neoconservatards were reeing about him in the primaries, if anything, they're the original anti bloomf
1 ImHereAtLast 2019-01-07
I’m sure this is how you’d feel if you were a communist.
1 throwaway-familyhelp 2019-01-07
I mean, part of it is true. For the most part the mainstream dems and repubs don't differ on big picture policy that much.
1 ineed750bucks 2019-01-07
Because most people aren't deranged tankies, yes.
1 aqouta 2019-01-07
If they said conservative sure, but they said republican.
1 serialflamingo 2019-01-07
Communists would correctly realise that the media doesn't serve either party and that both parties are beholden to the ruling class
1 LightUmbra 2019-01-07
True communists would voice their opinion and then gulag themselves for dissent.
1 10IphonesIcarlyyyyyy 2019-01-07
They’re unflinchingly pro-war and pro-establishment, the only problem they have with Blumpf is reeeee mean tweets
1 Neon_needles 2019-01-07
I know. Imagine being so dumb you can't enjoy and laugh at the president making some of the most hilariously bad tweets of all time and instead get super angry about it. LOL
1 Dramaste 2019-01-07
1 Kellere31 2019-01-07
and👏🏾that's👏🏾a👏🏾good👏🏾thing
1 mcslibbin 2019-01-07
i think a lot of people are upset that Trump is retarded
1 MehmedIIDidNoWrong 2019-01-07
How do you even get to this point where you believe this
1 massinvader 2019-01-07
its not the soy speaking. its the communism lol
1 FineLow 2019-01-07
I do love a good conspiracy.
1 leparsdon 2019-01-07
I wish Sanders wouldn't run. This is getting really tiring and it's 6 days into 2019
1 here_for_news1 2019-01-07
I don't see any real reason he shouldn't, he's not going to get the nomination but I'd rather see the Democratic primaries have a varied field like the right last election than end up with a Hillary or Bernie choice and that's it.
1 leparsdon 2019-01-07
True, but it's like damn, he's run how many times and still hasn't cinched it? Really he is damn near 80, just step aside and let someone else run.
1 here_for_news1 2019-01-07
Maybe, but thanks again to the primaries he doesn't have to, he'll just get beat there and if he doesn't the left has bigger problems than they thought.
1 shitpersonality 2019-01-07
one time, sweaty
1 leparsdon 2019-01-07
I didn't realize he ever won the nomination for president from the DNC
1 shitpersonality 2019-01-07
Thanks for sharing!
1 leparsdon 2019-01-07
He didn't so...2016 doesnt count cause he didn't win
1 shitpersonality 2019-01-07
you are a special little kid
1 leparsdon 2019-01-07
He didnt win a nomination though. He was never on a ballot for president
1 normiemaxxing 2019-01-07
Is that right?
1 shitpersonality 2019-01-07
1 leparsdon 2019-01-07
I never said he wasnt a candidate. I'm saying he never won the nomination....
1 shitpersonality 2019-01-07
It's a complete non-sequitur.
ONE TIME.
1 leparsdon 2019-01-07
😕
1 wiking85 2019-01-07
Once
1 Fletch71011 2019-01-07
Only once and the Dems did royally dick the guy. I disagree with every one of his policies but he got a raw deal. Total pussy move to endorse Hillary after though.
1 leparsdon 2019-01-07
When was this, I don't remember that
1 GeauxHouston22 2019-01-07
19 dickety 2
1 StopEditingTitles 2019-01-07
Because people have tore up his healthcare plan. It literally doesnt make any sense on paper. Hes saying we should tax the rich to pay for it but American standards of healthcare are insanely high. His plan would cost 30 trillion over 10 years to give everyone health care. The welfare state sucks up all our money along with the military presence we have on the world. We have to get rid of the deficit first. Keep in mind because access to welfare is infinite like 70% of all minorities on average are on welfare. Meaning the average non asian/mayo doesnt contribute to making America money over their lifetime. Demographics of welfare only work IF 30% of the population is on it. We passed that when obama started office, thats why the deficit is so high. There's too many wars and too many people gaming the welfare system. A collapse if nothing is done is inevitable.
1 moddestmouse 2019-01-07
This reminded me to check my Facebook
1 StopEditingTitles 2019-01-07
Why even have one when reddit is facebook now
1 LightUmbra 2019-01-07
K
1 the_marx 2019-01-07
this is like a compendium of facile right-wing may-mays.
1 2561-2685-0682-521 2019-01-07
just send fat people to fat camps and problem solved. I don't see any hard problems
1 retarded4bustin 2019-01-07
Nice real objective source-backed facts grandpa.
1 LuxuriousBottleCap 2019-01-07
That's the total cost. Which is less than we spend if we change nothing. Sander's plan is 2 trillion less than with no change.
It costs the government more money, but total healthcare spending falls by a lot because you get a reduction in emergency care, and a virtual elimination of the insurance industry. Insurance is just a useless 20% overhead on the entire system. Medicare has a 2% overhead.
https://www.thenation.com/article/thanks-koch-brothers-proof-single-payer-saves-money/
We cover everyone for less money because it makes the system more efficient as one piece instead of four disjointed pieces. And this was a Right-wing study designed to cast it in the most unfavorable light - and it still came out saving money.
1 RobertSpringer 2019-01-07
So how are you going to fund it. Because increasing taxes on the rich and corporations isn't enough
1 NoChickswithDicks 2019-01-07
Sure, but you're a normal person expressing an opinion.
No reporter, let alone an entire paper's editorial team, should be doing this.
1 leparsdon 2019-01-07
Perhaps
1 EasySchmitty 2019-01-07
God, imagine another couple years of nonstop Sanders spam. Everyone thought the Ron Paul shit in 2012 was bad, but the hilariously obvious Bernie astroturfing really took the cake.
1 leparsdon 2019-01-07
Yea I'm already over all of it
1 NoChickswithDicks 2019-01-07
There is no way it's appropriate or professional for a paper to ask a politician not to run.
1 NoChickswithDicks 2019-01-07
There is no way it's appropriate or professional for a paper to ask a politician not to run.
1 rnjbond 2019-01-07
Bernie running would be good for dramacoin
1 ab_ra_ca_dabba 2019-01-07
We already have AOC.
1 VapeOnYourNape 2019-01-07
Only boomers and zoomers can legally be president.
1 ab_ra_ca_dabba 2019-01-07
Fek. Forgot that.
1 jubbergun 2019-01-07
I'm GenX and I could have run in the 2008 election.
1 VapeOnYourNape 2019-01-07
Shut up boomer
1 jubbergun 2019-01-07
Get off my lawn, faggot.
1 VapeOnYourNape 2019-01-07
Why don’t you become president and make me
1 jubbergun 2019-01-07
You'd like that, wouldn't you?
1 ineed750bucks 2019-01-07
I sure would, el presidente
1 RealJackAnchor 2019-01-07
And just like that, I want to play Tropico again.
1 Jimbo_B_Beterson 2019-01-07
Who the fuck thought those modern banks in Tropico 4 fit in at all?
1 RealJackAnchor 2019-01-07
I haven't played 4, how is it? I've heard it's both terrible and the best one in the series. Pretty mixed reaction there.
1 Jimbo_B_Beterson 2019-01-07
Yeah, that's about right. I think the storyline is pretty funny, but I also yearn for Tropico 4 but more expanded. I think it's a real solid foundation tho.
1 RealJackAnchor 2019-01-07
You know if any of these games have mods?
1 Jimbo_B_Beterson 2019-01-07
Nope
1 preserved_fish 2019-01-07
Bernie is Silent Gen. I.e. really fucking ancient.
1 VapeOnYourNape 2019-01-07
Right, the only way Bernie will ever be president is through a protracted people’s war.
1 preserved_fish 2019-01-07
The real question is whether the Long Trail can withstand all the bombing while still conveying material to Bennington and points south.
1 20171245 2019-01-07
dies just after launching missiles at Palestine
1 sadderreborn 2019-01-07
I think you mean at israel sweaty
A lil jfk 2.0 action
1 Fletch71011 2019-01-07
Top fucking comment. NPC meme might be real after all.
1 raebake 2019-01-07
That's not crazy at all, though. If you have any type of rational political positions, you can already guess if you're going to agree more with Republican or Democratic policies and platforms 23 months from now. It's not like they're going to change very much.
1 Fletch71011 2019-01-07
You say that, but then we got Trump and Hillary last time and we were really close to getting Bernie or Cruz. Those are all wildly different people with different policies.
1 York_Phoenix 2019-01-07
Found the Vernon Supreme voter!
1 froibo 2019-01-07
Where's my damn pony?
1 Dramatictuna 2019-01-07
That's Vermin* Supreme, ya dunce.
TFW no rubber boot emoticon 😭😭😭
1 Sevenvolts 2019-01-07
While vastly different, Cruz and Trump are still far closer ideologically to eachother than they are to Sanders or Clinton, and vice versa.
1 rnjbond 2019-01-07
Trump and Sanders are both against free trade and hate Amazon.
Horseshoe
1 robotronica 2019-01-07
Obviously there's no difference between the two, like how when anti--racists and racists all agree that someone is crappy, it's because they're the same, *not* because one side thinks he's too racist and the other thinks not racist enough.
​
​
1 Lindseyisagirlsname 2019-01-07
Good and bad things are the same and all bad things are equally bad! All answers lie directly in the middle!
1 TheRootinTootinPutin 2019-01-07
this but wholly unironically
1 sadderreborn 2019-01-07
Ok Lindsey.
1 YetAnotherUsedName 2019-01-07
But then isn't the middle the same too? Is there some kind of middle-middle?
1 istural 2019-01-07
This is not radically centrist either. Radical centrism rejects the concept of left and right. Rather it only allows for one type of policy, the correct policy.
1 GeauxHouston22 2019-01-07
https://twitter.com/dril/status/473265809079693312?lang=en
1 StopEditingTitles 2019-01-07
Trump is against monopolies not free trade. Amazon is far too large.
1 froibo 2019-01-07
Being large isn't necessarily a monopoly numb nuts.
1 StopEditingTitles 2019-01-07
No you are technically correct there's another word for it but I forget. It's like monopoly but 1 company controls a shitload yet not all of it. Comcast is technically not a monopoly but they control so much there's no other options and they manhandle competitors out.
1 _Suprememe_ 2019-01-07
American ISPs are more like a cartel. There are a few big nationwide players but they tend to stay out of each others territory.
1 istural 2019-01-07
High barrier of entry. Telecom companies have this because infrastructure is so expensive to get setup.
1 the_marx 2019-01-07
Oligopoly?
1 StopEditingTitles 2019-01-07
Yes thank you
1 duckraul2 2019-01-07
"Tariff Man" is for free trade?
Trump is now the trust-busting reincarnation of Teddy Roosevelt?
1 StopEditingTitles 2019-01-07
The tariffs were to talk free trade. We didnt have free trade remember? It was always unfair to us. Theyre talking right now about fair trade with china.
1 Liamdev 2019-01-07
TPP would have created the largest free trade zone in the world and would have also forced China and India in to the agreement. Orange man doesn't understand trade so cancelled US involvement. Orange man also doesn't understand trade tactics nor cares that unilaterally trade liberalization improves quality of life for your own citizens.
NAFTA was functioning fine but orange man doesn't understand comparative advantage so tried to renegotiate, ended up settling for a coupon when he realized he couldn't actually force Canada or Mexico to do stuff because it isn't 1955. Orange man doesn't understand geopolitics or diplomacy.
Orange man thinks trade deficits are bad because he doesn't understand trade or economics. Orange man thinks local production for secondary resources is better than imports because he doesn't understand comparative advantage, trade or economics and doesn't care when his economic advisors tell him he is litteraly making people poorer.
Only idiots give a fuck if we have a domestic steel industry.
1 9SidedPolygon 2019-01-07
Probably people employed in that domestic steel industry do too.
1 duckraul2 2019-01-07
How many jobs are lost in, well, literally every other steel-as-a-raw-material production and construction sector due to the higher cost of steel either due to tariffs or due to domestic steel production being inherently more expensive?
hint: a lot more than the 500 workers US steel hired back, and probably the few thousand nationwide
40 years ago it took upwards of 10 man-hours per finished ton of steel to produce, today it's under 2 man-hours (some companies sub 1 man-hour) due to technology and increasing use of recycled steel. So while US gross steel production iirc has fallen about 30% since the 70s, the man-hours (read: jobs) required to produce that steel has fallen to over 20% of the 1970's requirement.
It's just a dumb policy to pursue because in order to keep those jobs, every successive administration would have to keep those tariffs in place. As soon as the tariffs go away, so do the domestic jobs which only exist because of the tariffs, because it is inherently cheaper to produce most steel in other countries and import it, all things being equal.
1 9SidedPolygon 2019-01-07
If my steel making factory closes down then I can't just automatically go and automatically get one of those other jobs. Like a normal person, I don't care about the global or national economy, I care about my job.
1 e-guy 2019-01-07
so idiots, yes.
1 FluidLingonberry 2019-01-07
Did TPP address the forced technology transfers and intellectual theft that is done on a massive scale by China? Because that is what the US is currently focusing on in trade talks. I agree free trade is ideal and Donald Trump is wrong about the trade deficit but the status quo with China was not free trade. Trump has indicated the end game is free trade but there is no country that has less protectionism than the US (until Trump). Comparative advantage is also good until it isn't. It may be costlier to purchase some good domestically but the benefits to national security and stability of having robust energy, steel, agriculture, etc. industries outweighs the costs.
I get it. I have a Master's in Econ and I know free trade is ideal. The problem with Econ in Academia is that it assumes a perfect world and many people have a dogmatic adherence to theoretical concepts that are difficult or impossible to back with data. Yes it would be nice if all these steel workers and coal miners could just learn to code and start business with the cheaper goods they get from free trade but the reality is that they can't and won't. You can put them on welfare or let them keep breaking their backs in the mines. Either way is going to create an inefficiency in the economy.
1 Tell_them_to_shrug 2019-01-07
Imagine being raised to believe that a shitty service economy is sustainable.
Ever wondered why wages aren’t going up anymore?
1 UmmahSultan 2019-01-07
LMAO blaming Trump for being against TPP when all of the candidates in 2016 were anti-TPP. This is the future you voted for.
1 ComedicSans 2019-01-07
And yet his government abolished net neutrality. 😂 😂 😂
1 Tell_them_to_shrug 2019-01-07
Monopoly talk aside, if you take net neutrality seriously, you’re an absolute fucking moron.
1 ComedicSans 2019-01-07
"When you ignore the main and, indeed, only topic of conversation..." Lmao.
1 Tell_them_to_shrug 2019-01-07
Actually I set it aside because it was the absolute dumbest fucking thing you said.
But okay, I’ll embarrass you on this. How was net neutrality good for competition?
1 ComedicSans 2019-01-07
The system in the US is already borked because regional providers are essentially locked in, but being able to gauge consumers and provide preferential treatment to anyone who pays a premium just cements the fucked up system further.
Not my problem, I'm not an American. But your current government removed the band aid from an open wound simply because the monopoly suppliers asked them to.
1 Tell_them_to_shrug 2019-01-07
Quick, tell me all the bad things that have happened because net neutrality was repealed.
1 ComedicSans 2019-01-07
I'm sure the massive monopolies asked for it to be repealed because of altruism and happy bunnies 😊 😊 😊
1 Tell_them_to_shrug 2019-01-07
it’s a cruel world where small businesses like Google, Netflix, and Amazon are brought to heel by de facto government utilities
the propaganda that Google and friends plastered all over Reddit back in 2018 was hilarious, like stories about how websites cost $5/mo each in Portugal
It’s telling that you couldn’t list a single bad thing. Almost as though you just took up the fight for something you had zero understanding of because you were manipulated by companies that (correctly) figured you for a moron
1 ComedicSans 2019-01-07
I'm not seriousposting on /r/drama because I'm not a fucking mongoloid.
1 Tell_them_to_shrug 2019-01-07
1 ComedicSans 2019-01-07
I didn't start an argument, you fucking 'tard. Where are you?
1 Tell_them_to_shrug 2019-01-07
lol 2funny5me shitposting
1 ComedicSans 2019-01-07
Got you to sperg out, but not in a funny way, unfortunately. Your pure autism isn't worth much if you have no flair for the creative.
1 Tell_them_to_shrug 2019-01-07
Post more laughing emojis, little guy. That’ll convince people that you’re not the milker and not the milkee.
1 ComedicSans 2019-01-07
Boring.
1 Tell_them_to_shrug 2019-01-07
said the mad little guy, having failed to either win the argument or say anything interesting
1 ComedicSans 2019-01-07
I get that you have terminal autism, but the wishful diagnosis of "anger" is just a little sad. Try harder.
1 Tell_them_to_shrug 2019-01-07
1 ComedicSans 2019-01-07
Boring three times in a row, you're out.
1 StopEditingTitles 2019-01-07
That has nothing to do with monopolies and have increased our speeds due to competition. You could even argue NN increases monopolies because it forces a lack of incentives to improve and allow competition.
1 ComedicSans 2019-01-07
Seriouspost to me more about Daddy's policies 😍 😍 😍
1 Sea_Safe 2019-01-07
Incorrect. Trump and Sanders are close to each other. You've just been led to believe otherwise. Trump is a right populist and sanders is a left populist.
1 allsidessam 2019-01-07
From a policy and governing standpoint they are vastly different.
1 JamesRobotoMD 2019-01-07
Just because they both appeal to low functioning, unemployed losers doesn't mean they are at all similar on a policy level.
1 raebake 2019-01-07
Trump and Cruz are way closer to each other than the other two, and vice versa. Unless you're one of those "I vote for who I'd like to have a beer with better" types, it's perfectly reasonable to have a super strong idea of whether you're going to vote D or R in the presidential election next year.
1 Pablopubes 2019-01-07
Truly brave
1 jubbergun 2019-01-07
Unless you're one of those "anti-war democrat" that lost their shit when Trump announced we were pulling out of Syria, LOL. Let's not pretend this is about "rational positions." Some people hate Trump so much they'd probably vote for Zombie Hitler so long as he ran against Trump as a democrat.
1 Lindseyisagirlsname 2019-01-07
Trump is a shitty president lol... Yeah there's always been a lot of reactionary retards. But pretending there's some sort of mass hysteria rather than just a shitty president seems like a cope for you tbh...
1 KingWayneX 2019-01-07
Wow, BTFO
1 tathrowaway666 2019-01-07
That’s a flaming hot take famalam
1 Lindseyisagirlsname 2019-01-07
like 3 twitter rad-fems said that? Yeah ok
1 tathrowaway666 2019-01-07
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/01/20/chris_matthews_trumps_inauguration_speech_had_hitlerian_background_to_it.html
From Chris Matthews. Unknown radfem. It is the inauguration so I guess you got me there. They’ve just been doing it since day one of his tenure.
1 Lindseyisagirlsname 2019-01-07
realclearpolitics. lol.
He was talking about the nationalistic tone of the speech but hey nuance is lost on someone who reads realclearpolitics unironically...
1 tathrowaway666 2019-01-07
Yeah no way that could be the work of google or anything. Galaxy brain on your head there.
It doesn’t matter what he was referring to you fucking brainlet he still is comparing him to hitler.
1 Lindseyisagirlsname 2019-01-07
Your comment history shows you sticking up for fox news plenty in the past as well, shill.
​
On the nationalism front to get elected it's an apt comparison. They both sure know/knew how to rile up dumbshits aka "the base"
1 tathrowaway666 2019-01-07
Ooh damn you really got me by going through my comment history. Really stuck it to the cons!!
Way to post on some comment from 15 days ago you fucking dweeb.
Unbeatable formula you have there, bud.
1 Lindseyisagirlsname 2019-01-07
Well when you tried to distance yourself from your initial source i had to confirm your shill status... Which was easy before even turning to page 2
1 tathrowaway666 2019-01-07
Lmao cope harder bud. Only the assblasted go through weeks of post history and comment on two week old posts.
1 Dildokin 2019-01-07
lmao, fucking inbred
1 Lindseyisagirlsname 2019-01-07
You dont like to see the type of retards you are dealing with? To each their own. chud.
1 Dildokin 2019-01-07
oof
1 rockidol 2019-01-07
Everyone gets compared to Hitler by someone on the internet. Everyone.
1 tathrowaway666 2019-01-07
Yes and it’s all retarded and unhinged
1 mcslibbin 2019-01-07
congratulations, you've caught up with the rest of us from 2010
1 tathrowaway666 2019-01-07
Wait are rage comics no longer popular?? 😣😣😤😒
1 MEDICARE_FOR_ALL 2019-01-07
There's a difference between being "anti-war" and being "anti-leave your allies to die".
Please inform yourself.
1 ScatmanDosh 2019-01-07
This is exactly the behaviour that got Trump elected. Write in your vote dumbass, together we can get a radical centrist elected
1 canering 2019-01-07
Yeah I’m going to stand behind the winner of my chosen party even if I didn’t vote for them in the primary. Like it or not we have a two party system and right now, not voting/voting third party doesn’t work.
1 heavenlytoaster 2019-01-07
And looking at the last election, you're saying voting does work?
1 Wheretheflowersgrow 2019-01-07
But isn't the track record of the republicans much worse than the democrats especially in the last 30 years?
1 burnitdownsyndrome 2019-01-07
lol
1 Wheretheflowersgrow 2019-01-07
Wars started. Don't get me wrong I'm not as anti Trump as most.
1 burnitdownsyndrome 2019-01-07
well sure, but I don't know why that's your go-to metric in this thread
1 sequestration 2019-01-07
Maybe because it's a massive one?
Wars have long lasting and deep impacts, and they are used as a tool of greed and control.
1 burnitdownsyndrome 2019-01-07
what the fuck does that have to do with Vermont, Bernie, the NPC meme, Trump, or the 2020 primary/general elections?
1 NoSeriousPosting 2019-01-07
who cares
1 KingWayneX 2019-01-07
I mean if you give clinton a pass for letting osama live, or pretend he wasnt at war in Iraq, somalia and the Balkans. And also ignore that Obama droned american nationals and started a war in Lybia and joined a war in Syria.
1 Wheretheflowersgrow 2019-01-07
At war in Iraq?
1 KingWayneX 2019-01-07
Operation desert fox
1 Wheretheflowersgrow 2019-01-07
Wasn't that old man Bush?
1 KingWayneX 2019-01-07
That was desert storm
1 Wheretheflowersgrow 2019-01-07
Had to look it up, only like 6 cruise missiles were launched, isnt that my point, that the republicans are way worse?
1 KingWayneX 2019-01-07
As in they actually decided to do something with bipartisan and UN support rather than let saddam make random threats for the rest of his life? Then yes.
But he did choose to invade a sovereign nation for essentially the same reason as the Iraq war of 2003 (just less effectively). Is passing the buck better?
His Iraq liberation act laid the legal framework for Bush to do his thing.
"In October 1998, removing the Iraqi government became official U.S. foreign policy with enactment of the Iraq Liberation Act. The act provided $97 million for Iraqi "democratic opposition organizations" to "establish a program to support a transition to democracy in Iraq."[66] This legislation contrasted with the terms set out in United Nations Security Council Resolution 687, which focused on weapons and weapons programs and made no mention of regime change.[67] One month after the passage of the Iraq Liberation Act, the US and UK launched a bombardment campaign of Iraq called Operation Desert Fox. The campaign's express rationale was to hamper Saddam Hussein's government's ability to produce chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, but U.S. intelligence personnel also hoped it would help weaken Saddam's grip on power"
1 LongPostBot 2019-01-07
Wow, you must be a JP fan
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 KingWayneX 2019-01-07
Ill have you know my room is filthy
1 GeauxHouston22 2019-01-07
they are, by almost every conceivable metric. but the democrats suck a lot, too
a smarter group of people would trounce the republicans in every large election outside of the hick states. but we don't have a smart group of people, we have the dems, who are the embodiment of, "lesser of two evils"
1 MuggyFuzzball 2019-01-07
You're going to see a lot of these comments next election cycle. And it's exactly what needed to happen to keep Trump out last time instead of voting 3rd party. I made the same mistake, thinking personal principles were more important when it came to our nation's pride and integrity.
1 Fletch71011 2019-01-07
Your individual vote will never matter any way so vote for who you most align with. You shouldn't vote for the lesser evil shit or we are just going to see 2016 repeated over and over again.
1 I_love_garlic_salt 2019-01-07
Voting for dreams and feelings is exactly how the democrats lost key states and trump won.
Vote with your heart in the primaries, but use your brain in the general.
1 MetaFactoryFactory 2019-01-07
imagine voting in primary elections like some kind of weirdo polisci freak
1 xthek 2019-01-07
More people voted Libertarian than Green, so if anything third parties probably hurt Trump more...
1 I_love_garlic_salt 2019-01-07
OR the libertarians have an actual base that wont vote trump even if they couldnt vote for a 3rd party.
look, vote however you like. but dont come crying when voting with fee fees turned out a disaster isntead of voting with your brain.
in the US 2 party system you have to vote with your brain in the general election. again, vote for bambi in the primaries if you like, but not voting or wasting a vote on a GE is nearly the same as voting for the guy you dont like.
im still amazed that trump won and not even his disastrous presidency is making people get their head out of their asses and realize that reality isnt a disney movie that will cave to you just cause you shout harder. the only reason to vote 3rd party is if they somehow manage to get an actual seat at the table if they get X amount of votes or something similar.
1 alot_the_murdered 2019-01-07
If more people voted for the lesser evil, Hilary may have won. I'd guess there were more Democrats that didn't vote for her than Republicans that didn't vote for Donald.
1 Sea_Safe 2019-01-07
🤮
go back to /r/politics
1 MuggyFuzzball 2019-01-07
Honestly had no idea what sub I was in. Just on my front page. I don't intentionally visit any specific sub
1 Pukalo_Reincarnate 2019-01-07
It's real.
1 HatSimulatorOfficial 2019-01-07
cons do this same thing. As does anyone else with a political leaning.
1 froibo 2019-01-07
Trump chose to support a conservative pedophile to the end instead of demanding him to step out of the race.
1 XhotwheelsloverX 2019-01-07
"Lol reps are so dumb they only vote for whatever has an R beside it"
1 rockidol 2019-01-07
Well yeah we already know who the GOP pick is and he’s a pretty known quantity. And if he thinks there’s no one on the Dems who’s worse that’s not totally unreasonable
Although if both parties had to do a primary then yeah it’d be stupid to say you’re voting Dem/GOP before we even have a full list of who’s going to be in the primaries.
1 FelineExpress 2019-01-07
Said it before, I'll keep saying it; Bernie is far too old and far too left. We have to find a candidate that's more attractive to the ignoramuses in the center so we don't give them a built-in excuse to not vote.
1 AlieNNeytioN 2019-01-07
Good ol "gotta touch em all" joe
1 preserved_fish 2019-01-07
Groping was eliminated as a disqualifier in 2016.
1 Ridicatlthrowaway 2019-01-07
Only if you’re smart enough not to give the soys the satisfaction of you caring. See Al franken
1 VapeOnYourNape 2019-01-07
You can’t really go further to the right than HRC.
I mean, she’s going to run again this time on an anti immigration platform. So I guess she could go further to the right.
1 Invalid_Target_ID 2019-01-07
Fuck Joe Biden, and Bernie 2.0
1 grilledsandwhich 2019-01-07
Go with manchin then
1 Ennui2778 2019-01-07
This but unironically.
1 jubbergun 2019-01-07
Joe Biden is probably the only democrat who has a chance against Trump, but only because he's like a Bizarro Democrat version of Trump.
O'Rourke couldn't even beat The Zodiac Killer with big democrat donors pissing money all over his face. There's no way in hell Bobby Francis would beat Trump.
1 Nebor 2019-01-07
This. Beto couldn't beat a historically unpopular incumbent senator in Texas. Millions of Texans broke from voting straight party Republican ticket to vote against Ted Cruz, as evidenced by how many more votes Governor Gregg Abbot received than Ted Cruz.
1 the_marx 2019-01-07
What a specious analysis... Texas is a Republican stronghold.
1 Nebor 2019-01-07
That’s the only kind I get paid to make sweaty.
1 the_marx 2019-01-07
Yes, I could tell that you're a paid shill. How does it feel spreading propaganda for Putin, troll?
1 Nebor 2019-01-07
It affords me a 300 square meter flat in downtown Yekaterinburg, and a top of the line Lada Xray just from posting on reddit all day, so in a word, I’d say it feels отлично.
1 GeauxHouston22 2019-01-07
I'm from texas and the coservatives and church-goers down here love ted cruz. don't get fooled by reddit and twitter, that dude has a huge following
1 MuggyFuzzball 2019-01-07
You said it before and look, hes still alive... he would have been just fine, so i suppose you were wrong then. What's to say you aren't wrong again?
1 slaytina44 2019-01-07
People had a problem with grab em by the pussy but you'd be fine with this creep as president??? LOL
1 _Mellex_ 2019-01-07
I wouldn't mind seeing the VOX article after this compilation hits national news lol
1 slaytina44 2019-01-07
if thats what he does in front of the camera I shudder at the thought of what he gets up to behind closed doors....
1 shallowm 2019-01-07
404, lrn2link
1 TrailerParkBride 2019-01-07
1 hi_0 2019-01-07
Literally sounds like it was written by some kind of comment buzzword generator
1 sequestration 2019-01-07
This sounds shill bot generated.
1 MEDICARE_FOR_ALL 2019-01-07
There is no center.
Tell me what polices you support, bullshit pandering to the "center" is not how America accomplishes anything great.
1 Van-Diemen 2019-01-07
Clinton wasn't polarising, she was just insufferably established and clearly groomed from the beginning to be president.
A lot of people seemed to want her to fail for that reason alone.
1 Aiwatcher 2019-01-07
This "Vermont news paper" was recently sold to a company in Maine, so take this with heavy salt.
1 RobertSpringer 2019-01-07
So?
1 Aiwatcher 2019-01-07
It means whatever you think it means. The OP seems to be implying that it's a newspaper of his own state, with in-state editors who represent Vermont somehow, but in actuality the details are much more murky. Not a cut and dry "His homestate doesn't want him!" kind of thing.
1 RobertSpringer 2019-01-07
So clealry whenever the Detroit Free press runs an editorial about a Michigan politician they're fucked becasue they're owned by Gannett, which operates out of Virginia
1 GeauxHouston22 2019-01-07
it's clear that you understand. I'm surprised, but impressed
1 3610572843728 2019-01-07
It was sold to a longtime Republican and hedge fund manager who's good friends with several Republican senators and has exclusively endorsed Republicans.
1 throwittomebro 2019-01-07
Mainers and Vermonters are completely different.
1 Deal_with_it_nerd 2019-01-07
How different can those maplecels really be?
1 LobotomistCircu 2019-01-07
NH, VT, and ME are all pretty similar in that they're jam-packed with far left mayos.
And by jam-packed I mean spread out as far as possible because nobody fucking lives in this frozen shithole part of the country
1 itsCaffeine 2019-01-07
I hope he runs so my stocks in dramacoin go up
1 captainpiggies 2019-01-07
Hope someone tells Hillary the same thing tbh.
1 Quietus42 2019-01-07
Please no Hillary, no Bernie, no Biden.
1 ineed750bucks 2019-01-07
Yes to all cause it's good for dramacoin
1 Dramaste 2019-01-07
Geriatric Death Match
1 froibo 2019-01-07
Who's left?
1 Quietus42 2019-01-07
Warren please.
1 FrankVillain 2019-01-07
1 lucajones88 2019-01-07
the nominee needs to be a woman
This is how America gets 4 more years of Trump lmao
Since when did having a vagina become the only thing you need to be a breath of fresh air in politics?
1 I_love_garlic_salt 2019-01-07
Exactly. Since when what’s in between your legs is more important than your capacity, integrity, experience, etc ?
1 throwaway-familyhelp 2019-01-07
When intersectionality hit the mainstream.
The theory is men are in power because the Patriarchy. It couldn't be because gasp woman willingly vote for and want men as their representatives.
1 I_love_garlic_salt 2019-01-07
those folks are crazy and its sad that its a very vocal minority so they get their stupid ass way in a lot of things.
1 alot_the_murdered 2019-01-07
It's funnier when you realize that more women vote than men.
1 1029384756-mk2 2019-01-07
No, you don't get it, women are stupid and brainwashed, so they don't know what they actually want, that's why they vote for men.
They need the enlightened proggressives to show them them the true way of how wrong they are by voting this way.
1 GunOfSod 2019-01-07
In $CURRENT_YEAR we call that "internalised toxic masculinity"
1 froibo 2019-01-07
How can you say that with a straight face when Trump is in office?
1 I_love_garlic_salt 2019-01-07
because trump didnt win for having a dick.
trump won because hilldawg was an awful candidate and he actually campaigned in key states.
i fail to see how is this related at all with trump winning.
1 froibo 2019-01-07
Capacity, integrity, and experience were clearly not criteria.
1 I_love_garlic_salt 2019-01-07
i mean, it was. but he faced the only candidate with less integrity than him.
also, if you read my comment instead of getting outraged from the get go, i said "what’s in between your legs is more important than your capacity, integrity, experience, etc ?"
nobody voted for trump exclusively cause he had a dick. but this newspaper is looking for a candidate with the exclusive requirement that it was born with an XX set (zero intentions of getting into the gender vs sex debate). which was my point. its so fucking stupid to put the XX or XY in your list of requirements and specially when its basically the only requirement.
1 froibo 2019-01-07
Capacity, integrity, and experience were clearly not criteria.
1 9SidedPolygon 2019-01-07
Hillary Clinton created open air slave markets in Libya.
1 Karmaisforsuckers 2019-01-07
Youre just proving him right when you have to resort to alex jones tier crazy bullshit
1 9SidedPolygon 2019-01-07
Um. That's what happened? Hillary Clinton led the charge on intervention in Libya. Thanks to that intervention, there are now open air slave markets in Libya. I am sorry that this sounds like "Alex Jones tier crazy bullshit" to you, but without Hillary you don't get the intervention in Libya, without the intervention in Libya you don't get the fall of Gaddafi, and without the fall of Gaddafi you don't get the open air slave markets.
1 ComedicSans 2019-01-07
Fentanyl. Not even once.
1 I_love_garlic_salt 2019-01-07
again, they were criteria but the opponent had more baggage than my fiance for a 2 day trip.
and again, if they werent its stupid as fuck. so my original point still stands. dont see what you're trying to argue here honestly.
1 froibo 2019-01-07
I'm arguing that without considering the actual election, Trump was chosen in the primary. Because he met the critera, capacity (companies outside real-estate went backrupt) integrity (he's dirty), experience (never held any office)
1 SHOUTY_USERNAME 2019-01-07
mummy defence force assemble!
1 the_marx 2019-01-07
Considering that until relatively recently women faced enormous barriers to getting a higher education, reaching the heights of political and corporate power, and raising their socioeconomic status ... what's in between your legs has always mattered; it's different now because the femoids are benefiting from it, and that triggers you.
1 I_love_garlic_salt 2019-01-07
not even gonna dignify this shit with an actual answer lmao
1 the_marx 2019-01-07
Too triggered to think of a rebuttal?
1 I_love_garlic_salt 2019-01-07
lol. just lol. i cant seriously believe people like you exist. anyway, not gonna waste more time. bye.
1 UmmahSultan 2019-01-07
That's been Trump's philosophy for his entire life, and it has not failed him even once.
1 NoSeriousPosting 2019-01-07
since it seems to upset people like you
1 lucajones88 2019-01-07
Gr8 b8 m8 I r8 it 8/8
1 NoSeriousPosting 2019-01-07
1 ineed750bucks 2019-01-07
That's literally the opposite of what he said though:
1 NoSeriousPosting 2019-01-07
i translated it from retard-talk
1 ineed750bucks 2019-01-07
No you didn't, you reversed it.
1 NoSeriousPosting 2019-01-07
Yes i did
1 ineed750bucks 2019-01-07
No you didn't
1 NoSeriousPosting 2019-01-07
whats your source
1 ineed750bucks 2019-01-07
Ummm logic, duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh
1 RealJackAnchor 2019-01-07
I'm sorry but how is "we shouldn't just elect a woman just because she has a vagina" retard-talk exactly?
1 NoSeriousPosting 2019-01-07
yikes
1 RealJackAnchor 2019-01-07
Y I K E S
1 NoSeriousPosting 2019-01-07
Without checking your post history I'm going to make an educated guess and say yes.
1 RealJackAnchor 2019-01-07
Oh I don't deny my stupidity in plenty of things. I don't know everything. No one does.
But in this instance of voting for a vag just because it's a vag, you're clearly the retard here.
1 NoSeriousPosting 2019-01-07
yeah but i called you retarded, not normal
1 RealJackAnchor 2019-01-07
Alright, you're a boring perpetual "no u" machine. Enjoy voting for women solely because they're women. I'm sure that'll bring us loads of progress.
1 NoSeriousPosting 2019-01-07
i will, women on company boards lead to better performing companies, and i expect the same is true for everything
facts dont care about your feelings
1 wwaalleess 2019-01-07
> Unironic yikes- and ya'll-posting
OUT
1 NoSeriousPosting 2019-01-07
mega yikes
1 hi_0 2019-01-07
1 NoSeriousPosting 2019-01-07
the discussion of women being elected is my one vice
1 lucajones88 2019-01-07
Try heroin
1 NoSeriousPosting 2019-01-07
try school
1 Van-Diemen 2019-01-07
Literal Trumptard tactics. 'He makes you mad so he must be right'.
1 NoSeriousPosting 2019-01-07
ok now what's really upsetting you?
1 Lindseyisagirlsname 2019-01-07
If every retard could stop repeating this line for everything that happens that they find dumb...That'd be great.
1 hi_0 2019-01-07
I agree, it's comments like these that will lead to 4 more years of Trump!
1 Lindseyisagirlsname 2019-01-07
It's statements like that that will give us 4 more years of DONALD TRUMP LMAO
1 Nebor 2019-01-07
People will vote for that mother fucker.
1 GeauxHouston22 2019-01-07
implying that mayos are people
1 the_marx 2019-01-07
more proof that trumpoids are NPCs
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2019-01-07
An iconic duo
1 ChaddeusThundercock 2019-01-07
"Life" in this "society" being, at best, an utter bore and no aspect of "society" being at all relevant to women, there remains to civic-minded, responsible, thrill-seeking females only to overthrow the government, eliminate the money system, institute complete automation, and eliminate the male sex.
1 heavenlytoaster 2019-01-07
Trump: not the president we want. Or the president we need. But he is the president we deserve.
1 shallowm 2019-01-07
This was the whole comment, you retard:
1 Kat_B0T 2019-01-07
We need a knock knock knocking on heavens door ticket of Biden/sanders, though I doubt Biden’s going to heaven tbh
1 throwaway-familyhelp 2019-01-07
He will if they have young girls there to touch
1 MetaFactoryFactory 2019-01-07
Larry David and Chief One-Drop Rule will split the chapotard vote if they both run, and he had his shot last time. It's her turn!
1 aqouta 2019-01-07
How about we run someone who isn't a billion years old?
1 funpen 2019-01-07
The realized that all the socialists sucked grandpa’s pp dry, and they need to move on to some other economic illiterate idiot like AOC
1 aqouta 2019-01-07
They're actually going to find a way to lose to trump. I don't think a party who's sole platform was intentionally losing could be this bad at winning elections.
1 JuniorGongg 2019-01-07
Bernie will run and they will find an old Access Hollywood tape then say he has zero chance at winning. then when he does win, they will say Russia helped him win and then spend the next 4 years investigating false claims and try to indict small groups of internet trolls to seem legitimate.
Is this how liberals operate?
1 MrSmallANDLoud 2019-01-07
Why would the MOST POPULAR POLITICIAN in the country not run? Poll after poll shows he beats trump by the highest margin of all other nominees. Is this the newspaper that childishly kept repeating that Hillary was a better candidate, despite polls showing sanders beating him by double digits... and she only beat trump by single digits? Nonsense . Illogical, not based on science. Go Home.
1 Automaticus 2019-01-07
/r/neoliberal poster coming in with the real truths
1 Shitpost2victory 2019-01-07
TBH Russia probably would back Bernie because he has the spine of a slug and would literally have the most limp-wristed American foreign policy of all time. The difference between him and Trump is either have an embarrassing, cowardly, ineffective Senator who is too afraid to use any form of hard power or an emotionally driven egotistical ass who flip-flops to much to have any sort of consistent application of power and if I was lil Vlady I'd definitely take the first one.
1 Automaticus 2019-01-07
Because putting Nato into question is less helpful to Russia theeeeeeen Bernie probably letting russia annex Crimea anyways.
​
Oh neoconnwo poster, nooooow I get it.
1 Shitpost2victory 2019-01-07
1 [deleted] 2019-01-07
[deleted]
1 Shitpost2victory 2019-01-07
Were gonna bomb Syria into having human rights or
diebe disappointed tryingAnd yeah, Russia could have preferred Trump or Sanders to the competition in each of their own party, both at the time were very beneficial to Russia's long-term goals unless you somehow think they would prefer Bernie to Hillary. Also, depending on where DJ stops flopping at he may give Syria to them as well.
1 ottawabrandonwright 2019-01-07
you personally identify as a neocon, no one sane thinks your foreign policy takes are good.
Last time a neocon was in the white house the US spent a trillion dollars and killed 400k iraqis for basically nothing positive.
1 Shitpost2victory 2019-01-07
I'd say neocurious more than anything. For example, we have a commitment to the Kurds to make sure they aren't decimated by Assad, ISIS or the Turks because we told them we would and therefore we owe them that. It's also important that we contain the influence of illiberal powers in the region such as Russia and Iran.
Nevertheless in situations like Venezuela I'm unconvinced that the situation is at the point that we should do anything militarily because even though it would be a human rights issue at this point we still have to decide if it's worth the trouble. Its one of those things where if its broken when you're done you're left with the entire mess, even if it was broken before you got there. It makes me genuinely sad that people are going to continue suffering and dying there, however I just don't know if it's best for us to get involved.
If that makes me the crazy warmongerer than I'm not particularly bothered by it.
On a separate note, I will say I was a little harsh on Sanders. He isn't terrible when it comes to certain aspects of foreign policy but I don't see him having the backbone to competently exercise hard power.
1 ottawabrandonwright 2019-01-07
Im going to pretend i read this wall of stupid opinions
1 Shitpost2victory 2019-01-07
Hey my dude you do you! I don't particularly mind if you disagree with or even ignore my opinions, you're entirely entitled to your own!
1 GeauxHouston22 2019-01-07
goddamnit I hate this website so fucking much
1 EviscerateTheProles 2019-01-07
This is a tiny paper nobody cares about and I'm actually surprised they still exist.
The only paper of note in vermont is the burlington free press.
Aside from that, most vermonters get their news from wcax or VPR.
1 strallus 2019-01-07
Wait. Berniebros are still going strong? Isn't it like, 2019?