Jul 24, 2016

 

Jul 25, 2016

crazy that most of the smarter posters on the site have yet to figure out that replying to genghis stan is a complete waste of time

 

Jul 24, 2016

R O Y C E
O
Y
C
E

 

Jul 23, 2016

"How is Hillary dishonest?" - tons of people on this board

 

Jul 25, 2016

Do you honestly think think that anyone is gonna fall for that

Holy s---, SG.

You haven't posted from the Perry account since the beginning of May, when you went into hiding because I embarrassed you by highlighting how ludicrously awful your political columns are. So you start posting on the Prhyme account, and it's very obviously you:

-- impossibly stupid, right-leaning political posts
-- a weird bent against me
--horrible music opinions, including latent Stannery
--clinging to Joe Budden's decaying corpse for dear life

Then I did a little bit of digging and found that the accounts had been flagged as aliases long ago.

But when I call you out, you mention the Perry account, and reply in a minute and a half?

And we're supposed to believe that a poster--a different one from you, of course!--who hasn't logged in in like twelve weeks just happens to be lurking at that very second?

Lmaoooooooooo dude who are you kidding?

@Swizz @captain awesome @M Solo

 

Jul 24, 2016

The last time one of the parties won a third consecutive presidential race was in '88, and even then it was with a vice president running. When this process started eighteen months ago, Obama's approval ratings were not sterling the way they are now. These races are difficult to win.

But before we get into the legality (what the DNC did is legal) or the logic (pushing the candidate with the best chance to win is literally the party leadership's job), can we talk about how asininely stupid your posts in this thread have been?

You can't argue concurrently that:

A. The DNC cares more about holding on to power than anything else; they suppressed Bernie Sanders
B. Bernie Sanders was "clearly the superior candidate"; they suppressed Bernie Sanders

I mean, which is it? Is the DNC a group of power-hungry monsters who will stop at nothing to get their candidates elected? (Again........they're a political party.) Or did they choose to go with an inferior candidate????

You're not making sense in the slightest.

Also a huge cry-laughing emoji at "clearly the superior candidate." I'm sorry, but as much as your boys on the right keep the insanely hypocritical email story alive, Clinton is a much more viable candidate for the general than a 75-year-old socialist.

 

Jul 23, 2016

Politicians being sneaky, what new?

 

Jul 25, 2016

Don't you think her, er, dishonesty plays a role too? Or would pointing that out make me a sexist, chauvinist pig?

 

Jul 25, 2016

I was gonna let him live, but *takes long drag on cigarette* I did what had to be done

 

Jul 24, 2016

>I suggest you wash your face

How the f--- will WPG ever recover from that

 

Jul 24, 2016

No, she's literally not. This is from May 6th. Trump's "taco bowl" thing was a major fiasco that the DNC obviously moved to exploit. Such a preposterous reach.

I'm so floored by how thickheaded you can be. "Taco bowl" is not being used to refer to Hispanic voters--it's being used to refer to A TACO BOWL.

The "mainstream media"? You cited "NewsNinja2012.com"

Why do you insist on continually embarrassing yourself?

 

Jul 24, 2016

-- freshman year roommates everywhere

 

Jul 24, 2016

The irony here is almost too much, but I'll entertain it for a second.

On what? Let's break it down here. Be specific. My suspicion is you don't know s--- about policy...

...or, like, basic history? Time must rly be a flat circle because I'm still struggling to understand how someone who posts so much about it knows so little about politics or current events. Hillary's Iraq vote has always been her single biggest political liability--by the time she finally ran for president, it was even bigger than her gender. This becomes doubly difficult when the Republicans can more or less skate by on the issue: Trump has no record, Rubio is too young, Cruz only had the light advising role with Bush. If she had ended up running opposite someone who projects competence--or even now with Trump, and couple that with the bs email story--Hillary's foreign affairs record creates infinitely more problems than a pacifist one.

Let's go a step further, though, and talk about your flimsy notion that Sanders is "better" for America on the subject. Sources from Bernie's own campaign leaked that they were frustrated with his lack of evolution on foreign policy. It was always a mushy spot on his resume, but he exhibited a poor grasp on the middle east shortly after he declared, and was hit even by many of his supporters when he was basically in the same spot between the second and third debates, back when O'Malley was still in. Even without predicting this recent rash of terror attacks, Bernie gave the impression that he was in completely over his head, and most people who have covered his campaign would concede that he was.

According to whom? I have never, not once in your history of posts, seen you make so much as a single thorough argument about a policy. Not even a bad one! Again, how is Bernie "better for America"? Be specific.

But here's another case where there are actually multiple levels to how stupid your case is: if Clinton is the better candidate, she's the one the party should back. That is such an indisputable ideological pillar of party politics that I'm sincerely embarrassed for you.

The irony of this is rich, too. I continually dismantle your posts slowly and systematically, with substance and specifics. You whine and show precisely zero grasp of any issue at hand. You absolutely humiliate yourself re: police reform on this board, what, daily? Get it together.

 

Jul 25, 2016

Pretty insane the DNC preferred an internationally famous, highly-qualified candidate to a 75-year-old socialist who isn't even a Democrat lmao

 

Jul 24, 2016

Why is Pato still here

 

Jul 23, 2016

still take her over trump anyday

 

Jul 23, 2016

f--- up

 

Jul 25, 2016

Yeah I'm actually with you @WPG, my Libertarian instincts are kicking in and they are telling me that the government enforcing photo ID laws without making the process more convenient is anti voter by its very nature.

 

Jul 25, 2016

She has an insane number of political liabilities--from the FBI investigation to her Iraq vote--that, legitimate or not, drive her unfavorables to historic levels. Before Obama, a sitting senator hadn't won since 1960. That's because winning elections is very hard with a record of votes that anyone can pick apart. It's easier to spin executive experience in your favor. To me, Hillary is experiencing an extreme version of that: thirty years of hyper-focused scrutiny on her record, versus a guy who's basically post-fact. Compared to most years, she's not a particularly strong candidate, and I worry about her botching a general, always have.

On more substantive points, I hate her support of that 94 crime bill which is, to me, one of the most egregious pieces of legislation in recent American history. It's racist, it's poorly conceived, and it doesn't solve any real problem in any important way. It is, along with bank deregulation, the big blemish on Bill's presidency.

But to be honest with you, she's really assuaged my fears on a lot of other fronts. Her stance officially is that she'll push for a public option; I don't know if that's realistic in four or eight years, but I trust her to expand the ACA and Medicare/Medicaid.

I mean, you know, I'd be happy if a major party candidate came out like "Hey lets dismantle police forces," but where she was clumsy re: cop killings a year ago, her speech at the NAACP was super good.

 

Jul 25, 2016

I'm an atheist so I won't argue that the Bible sucks, but Christians in the past twenty years have been far less extreme with their beliefs, your 60 year old uncle calling Anderson Cooper a fa---- is a lot less dangerous than 18-34 year old Islamic extremists. Plus, we're in the first world, we're too /comfy/ to start some Christian crusade circle jerk.