2016 Presidential General Election Thread

[Elphenor]

Trumps horrors are only words atm only because he doesn't have any political power

The argument is that Trump is a worse choice than Clinton not that Clinton is a saint

[ninsp]

Originally Posted by reprise85

oh fuck off

awe. u mad?

[reprise85]

no it's just ridiculous and i think fuzzy is actually getting dumber the more he posts in this thread

[ilikeplanets]

It's hilarious to watch people fall down, politician or not.

[TuralyonW3]

Silly semantic games

[redbreegull]

Originally Posted by Poots

So what you're saying, in so many words, is that Hillary and Obama did likely arm ISIS (maybe before it was called that), but fuck it what's new they all do it.

But how many of them testify before Congress that they didn't do it? Well, we know one: Hillary.

did something happen in your childhood that makes you crave negative attention more than positive attention

[redbreegull]

your summary was "you make some valid points but I'm going to repeat the same thing I already said leaving you with the choice of either repeating yourself or calling me out for being a dick"

[ninsp]

Originally Posted by redbreegull

did something happen in your childhood that makes you crave negative attention more than positive attention

so when you don't have a valid opinion do you just spout angsty insulting bullshit?

are you 10?

[redbreegull]

Originally Posted by ninsp

so when you don't have a valid opinion do you just spout angsty insulting bullshit?

are you 10?

I mean do I really have to look up and quote some of the stuff you've said on here or can we just communally look back on it and decide it would be better if you didn't go any further?

[ninsp]

Originally Posted by redbreegull

I mean do I really have to look up and quote some of the stuff you've said on here or can we just communally look back on it and decide it would be better if you didn't go any further?

Are you referring to the many times I've told you to kill yourself

[Disco King]

Is ninsp 17?

I don't believe him when he says he has a degree.

nvm actually he says it's in critical theory or something. Checks out.

[redbreegull]

Originally Posted by Poots

The point, before you changed the subject, was Hillary arming ISIS. You then brought up Reagan and the Taliban, then Bush and other terrorists he armed, in an attempt to justify Hillary's actions because past presidents have done it. When I called you out on it, you simply ignored it and insulted me.

Just because Reagan armed terrorists and Bush did and everybody did, that doesn't make it right that Hillary did. She also lied about doing it before Congress. Now, stick to the subject or stfu.

for future reference, this is good quality trolling because it is honestly unclear if you are really this bad at logic or if you are baiting me. I'd like to see this more often from you. I know I have high expectations, but I believe you can do it.

[redbreegull]

I love when you say something and I can actually quote myself from earlier showing that you (purposely or no) are misunderstanding what I said

[redbreegull]

Originally Posted by Poots

You were caught in your red herring attempt, and even though you won't directly admit it, your unwillingness to address your justification of Hillary arming terrorists and perjuring herself is just as satisfying to me. Thank you and good night.

Originally Posted by redbreegull

My point was exactly what you just said. This is a very old story. We arm people who down the line switch sides, turn against us, splinter off and become different groups than who we actually gave weapons to. Clinton did not arm "ISIS" any more than Reagan armed "The Taliban." That's not a defense of the US perennial practice of foolishly arming friendly groups who become something different later, but your argument is attempting to directly link 2 things which are not directly linked for emotional impact

.

[redbreegull]

btw an analogy and a red herring are not the same thing

[redbreegull]

so was Trump's whole Obama founded IS thing meant to preempt the disclosure of Paul Manafort taking 13 million in mystery money from the pro-Russians in the Ukraine?

[redbreegull]

[The Omega Concern]

Originally Posted by redbreegull

Poots, saying that Ronald Reagan "created" or "armed" the Taliban is like saying George III created and armed the United States of America. The Mujaheddin and the Northern Alliance are no more the Taliban than the British colonial authority is the same thing as the government of the United States just because one developed from the other later. The Northern Alliance government was poised to take control of Afghanistan when the US deposed Mullah Omar, except Bush and co. then installed their own personal oil puppet, which probably contributed more to why this war is still going on than any other factor.

My point was exactly what you just said. This is a very old story. We arm people who down the line switch sides, turn against us, splinter off and become different groups than who we actually gave weapons to. Clinton did not arm "ISIS" any more than Reagan armed "The Taliban." That's not a defense of the US perennial practice of foolishly arming friendly groups who become something different later, but your argument is attempting to directly link 2 things which are not directly linked for emotional impact

Clinton did arm Isis. Reagan did arm the Taliban, but when you think of ol Ronnie, you really should be focusing on his VP -- same guy yanking Hillary's chain at the moment.

You just illustrated in part what I've been saying for a long time; that the Bush's and the Clinton's are criminal alliances. From Saddam to Qaddafi they set up these dictators to justify massive military intervention while they agitate the very situation they claim needs to be dealt with via the war machine. Its all a hegelian meets machiavellian clusterfuck, so fuck 'em all. I love the fact both political parties are on tilt and nearing a meltdown.

[Elphenor]

the way it's phrased it makes it sound like Hillary wanted to give weapons directly to murderers when in reality it's just the clusterfuck of intervention policies we have that lead to funding what we think are the good guys but turn out not so great

Sadly there isn't a candidate running on either side and hasn't been for a very long time, we're talking since WW2, that's against these sorts of policies

[ninsp]

Originally Posted by Disco King

Is ninsp 17?

I don't believe him when he says he has a degree.

nvm actually he says it's in critical theory or something. Checks out.

Masters in Critical Theory actually

[ninsp]

might start my PhD soon tbh

[ilikeplanets]

Yes

[ilikeplanets]

And if I vote, it will be for a tree. Best and safest current option.

[ilikeplanets]

Easy to cut down if they get too high, and they spew oxygen instead of shit.

[ilikeplanets]

Trees never shit

[redbreegull]

guys it's so simple

we only have to trash our country a few times, allow the Supreme Court to be stacked with wingnuts for 5 or 6 decades, deal with our country falling behind the rest of the Western world and alienating its allies, and learn to cope with terms and terms of laws enshrining discrimination and wealth stratification to fix the system and open up things for third parties. Then we can just sweep the whole mess up easily. What's wrong with you numbskulls?

[reprise85]

hey do you guys think if trump gets elected the united states is likely headed to dissolution sooner rather than later

cause i really wonder

[redbreegull]

historically most empires take centuries to dissolve. regardless of trump v. clinton the era of the american empire is probably fading... but it's gonna be a long, slow, protracted lessening, not some big collapse

[reprise85]

maybe he'll just antagonize russia and they'll kill us all

hopefully

[redbreegull]

Originally Posted by Poots

case in point

are you trying to construct a strawman? like those things aren't problems? I mean I know they aren't problems for you because you are a white male


don't worry guys, just turn it off and turn it back on again, should work fine