Jpowors

Not the new Donald Trump Presidency thread

50,426 posts in this topic

Probably because Bernie is polling in 4th place while Biden and Warren are the top 2??? Seems pretty clear. :shrug:

The Hill sucks though and it's really frustrating to see the obvious best choice to run against Trump in particular keep getting undermined by the media. :flush:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Carter said:

Probably because Bernie is polling in 4th place while Biden and Warren are the top 2??? Seems pretty clear. :shrug:

The Hill sucks though and it's really frustrating to see the obvious best choice to run against Trump in particular keep getting undermined by the media. :flush:

Probably because the Dnc is a rigged org. Always has been, continues to be.

Sn4tteRBoxXeR likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Carter said:

Probably because Bernie is polling in 4th place while Biden and Warren are the top 2??? Seems pretty clear. :shrug:

The Hill sucks though and it's really frustrating to see the obvious best choice to run against Trump in particular keep getting undermined by the media. :flush:

Exactly. So, you do have a few neurons still firing in the noggin. I tip my hat.

Medhi is a sensationalist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Wokezone said:

This makes me even more likely to vote for Gabbard. I hope she wins the Democrats nomination. 

I like her calling out Hillary but everything else about it is pretty dumb. She and Hillary are both irrelevant but she says the primary is really between the two of them??? I mean... really? The "I might boycott the debates" thing was galaxy brain attention whoring. 

And honestly I'm pretty annoyed that she keeps harping on her service in the national guard. Being a service member/veteran can give you extremely valuable perspective, but it's incredibly annoying to me when folks politicize their service as a platform of merit in and of itself. Like when Tulsi says she is the most qualified to be commander in chief because she has been in the national guard and deployed 3 times or whatever - or when Buddha Judge opposes assault rifles because he carried one in Afghanistan. It's shallow and manipulative.

Sn4tteRBoxXeR likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Carter said:

I like her calling out Hillary but everything else about it is pretty dumb. She and Hillary are both irrelevant but she says the primary is really between the two of them??? I mean... really? The "I might boycott the debates" thing was galaxy brain attention whoring. 

And honestly I'm pretty annoyed that she keeps harping on her service in the national guard. Being a service member/veteran can give you extremely valuable perspective, but it's incredibly annoying to me when folks politicize their service as a platform of merit in and of itself. Like when Tulsi says she is the most qualified to be commander in chief because she has been in the national guard and deployed 3 times or whatever - or when Buddha Judge opposes assault rifles because he carried one in Afghanistan. It's shallow and manipulative.

I think my top 2 are Tulsi and Sanders. If neither of them get the nod I may sit out 2020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sn4tteRBoxXeR said:

 

 

Hmmmm, I have no position on this yet.

Watson being a wannabe smear merchant aside...

Why? Because she talked **** to Hillary after Hillary claimed she was a foreign agent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Wokezone said:

I think my top 2 are Tulsi and Sanders. If neither of them get the nod I may sit out 2020

I thought you liked Warren?

The way things are going she has a better chance than Tulsi or Sanders. I still have reservations about her not being straightforward about potentially unpopular issues/positions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Carter said:

I like her calling out Hillary but everything else about it is pretty dumb. She and Hillary are both irrelevant but she says the primary is really between the two of them??? I mean... really? The "I might boycott the debates" thing was galaxy brain attention whoring. 

And honestly I'm pretty annoyed that she keeps harping on her service in the national guard. Being a service member/veteran can give you extremely valuable perspective, but it's incredibly annoying to me when folks politicize their service as a platform of merit in and of itself. Like when Tulsi says she is the most qualified to be commander in chief because she has been in the national guard and deployed 3 times or whatever - or when Buddha Judge opposes assault rifles because he carried one in Afghanistan. It's shallow and manipulative.

Personally I prefer someone who's been in the military to be commander in chief. If you are going to order people into harm's way you should know what its like to be in those situations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Psychic Gibbon said:

Watson being a wannabe smear merchant aside...

Why? Because she talked **** to Hillary after Hillary claimed she was a foreign agent?

Because it might be true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Carter said:

I thought you liked Warren?

The way things are going she has a better chance than Tulsi or Sanders. I still have reservations about her not being straightforward about potentially unpopular issues/positions.

I did.   Until her anti 2nd amendment stuff ramped up. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sn4tteRBoxXeR said:

Because it might be true.

giphy.gif

If you're going to go with the "foreign agent" angle then India would be believable with her. Retreading Russiagate is lazy, sore loser ****.

JDaveG likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Wokezone said:

I think my top 2 are Tulsi and Sanders. If neither of them get the nod I may sit out 2020

 

 

 

LOL

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Wokezone said:

Personally I prefer someone who's been in the military to be commander in chief. If you are going to order people into harm's way you should know what its like to be in those situations. 

Hey I hear that. I am a veteran myself, so it's something I value a lot. However, it's fairly small compared to other policy issues in the overall picture. All veterans are not created equal.

There are many officers in the military who don't understand the value of life beyond numbers on a report and willfully make things insanely political, creating situations where life saving resources are not readily available just so they can put a bullet on their award submission about some inane "improvement" they made.

It can be a great characteristic but it's best taken on a case by case basis with how the person actually embodies it.

Sn4tteRBoxXeR and Door Gunner like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Psychic Gibbon said:

giphy.gif

If you're going to go with the "foreign agent" angle then India would be believable with her. Retreading Russiagate is lazy, sore loser ****.

Nobody said she's a foreign agent, but she has foreign agent backing. It's a vital distinction; one that I hope you can appreciate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now