Jump to content

Foosters

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    5479
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Foosters

  1. 10 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

    Yeah of course she is.  The left would do the same thing to a GOP kid who came out of nowhere just as she has.  It's the 24 hour news cycle.  

    She's made some empty comments about how we should be spending 10's of billions of dollars, and hasn't given a single cogent plan of attack for that yet. When or if she does it will be the first time she has done so. I'm reserving judgement till then.

    When conservatives propose increased military spending, space forces, or massive tax cuts, why are they not expected to put forth cogent plans of attack?

    • Like 2
  2. 3 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

    While that is fucking astounding, it is the case and we can't just chastise them and say they should be better with their money.  This is a massive issue.

    Meanwhile, the Trump sycophants will log on here and, dead serious, tell you the erosion of the middle class is do to over taxation and regulation.

    • Like 1
  3. 5 minutes ago, Droopy said:

    #9 Kwame Cavil.  He was the last that I remember.

    That one still hurts for some reason.

    Man, I was convinced that he was going to be a star in the NFL.

    Of course I was like 14 and a fucking idiot.

  4. 37 minutes ago, Mole said:

    If you read the actual questioning, there’s no accusation of bigotry directly, but there’s the repeated suggestion and assumption that a member of a Catholic Church group is unable to objectively apply the law. This fits in with the historical anti-catholic bigotry that JFK and others faced. You don’t want the Pope calling the shots in Nebraska courts.

    I guess if the right wants to go back to the 1950s the left has decided to join in.

    Of course, there's this repeated suggestion and assumption that he is unable to objectively apply the law because he has stated repeatedly he disagrees with the laws.

  5. 2 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

    I'm sorry, grabbing media attention is not magic, it's just attention for a photogenic candidate who defeated an incumbent, and hasn't articulated a clear answer to any of her plans for free stuff.

    What has she done, what has she accomplished ?  Nothing other than win an election.  Ya might wanna hold off on fapping to her success till she actually backs up her win with some success in Congress.

    Perhaps she should simply state that Mexico will pay for it.  That seems to work on about half the voting population.

    • Like 1
  6. 3 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

    Not you specifically.  Just anyone who seems flabbergasted at the opinion that some highly qualified people (who admittedly would probably be great Presidents) should not be the nominee.  We can ignore what the general public has indicated to us and nominate the "best" candidate, electability be damned, and act surprised in November 2020.  Or we can find someone that has a shot at winning over the general population.  

    It sucks.  There's absolutely a double standard between the two parties.  But it is reality. There is no universe where Trump is more qualified to be President than Hillary.  How much did that matter in November 2016?

    I don't disagree with any of that.

    • Like 1
  7. 1 minute ago, Bama Chick said:

     


    Like I said, it’s shallow and ignorant and reality.

    It sucks but the alternative is another four years of the orange monster.

    And I don’t think this country can survive that.

    We may not survive the next two.

    And it’s not only personality. Bernie has serious flaws on a lot of fronts.

    And how he escapes having stupid think piece articles about his likability being written while female candidates like Warren and Clinton are plagued with them is rage inducing.

    In a perfect world, elections would be all about the issues and policies. To pretend that personality and popularity and yes, likability don’t matter is ignoring reality.

     

    I guess I'll preface this by saying I am not, nor have I ever been, a Bernie supporter.  I just found it odd that an educated person would so easily dismiss a candidate for things like "seems grumpy," and then would admit that this perceived character trait would be enough to foreclose further inspection of said candidate. 

    I will agree that women candidates are the victims of an unfair double standard when it comes to likability. No question there.  I will say, however, that  I do recall a lot of similar stuff about Bernie in 2016. 

     

  8. Just now, Bama Chick said:

    Bernie’s a sexist old fart.

    And he’s got a serious lack of appeal to people of color.

    He creeps me out.

    He acts entitled and grumpy.

    Add all those things up and I’m turned off before I’ve even bothered to learn about his policies and positions.

    The democratic nominee in 2020 CANNOT win without women and people of color. Period.

    The Bernie Bros need to face that truth.

    It’s shallow. It’s ignorant. It’s fucking reality.

    Cool. personality over positions.

  9. 2 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

    Sounds like he’s going to declare a state of emergency and build the wall, announce he's going to build a wall triggering a court battle, is that correct? 

     

  10. I'm not sure I see the problem. You voluntarily belong to a group that espouses positions contrary to Federal law.  I don't see why making sure the candidate doesn't also support those positions is problematic. Now, making them renounce their religion or sever all ties does seem a bit much, although I'm wondering what OP would think if an Muslim candidate belonged to an Islamic org that promoted anti-constitutional positions.

    • Like 1
  11. So assuming that's true, how does that happen? Guy goes to camps, coaches watch film, see them workout, and everything is recorded.

    Then guy shows up and it's "oops, this guy is slower than offensive tackles. Guess, he'll just ride the bench."

  12. 19 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

    Every sign is that the rich will continue to get richer at a level we haven’t seen in the last hundred years or so.  And the poor will make up a larger percent of the population.  I don’t think you will find anyone that will say that trend  is good.    However the only solution is massive govt forced wealth redistribution and most seem against that as being inherently unfair to the rich.  

    America wont be leading the world in deploying an universal basic income.

    american children will need to understand that a middle to upper middle class lifestyle requires starting at a young age.  There are fewer and fewer jobs that pay well with low education.     But even take the welder job that we’re discussing.  I Doubt you can go from starting a welding 101 class to earning 100k in a year.   You still need a to build your education and experience which takes commitment.

    The US is now towards the bottom of the list when it comes to socio-economic mobility among developed nations. If you want to improve your lot in life, I'm afraid you've picked a difficult place to try and attain it.

    • Like 1
  13. 2 minutes ago, elguapo said:


    You are too dumb to be real

    I mean, you gotta give him credit. At least he's not a coward like the swarms of posters reveling in his election who have all disappeared.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...