Jump to content

Asithappens

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    2190
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Asithappens

  1. What I've seen from past pages (giving reasons, not conclusions, i.e., saying "I know racism when I see it" doesn't provide a reason, even if the statement is true) is that the primary reason is that Trump wouldn't/didn't say the same thing to white European immigrants/non-native Americans. Which seems to imply what, I don't know. It's also interesting that if one uses the argument that Trump's assertion that native-born women of color "originally came" from other countries is racist, then why isn't the term "African-American" also inherently racist?
  2. Then answer my question. This seems more xenophobic and un-american than specifically racist. But Trump has spewed much racist nonsense in the past. I think he is a racist.
  3. No, I despise Trump and all things Trumpkin. But how is this specifically racist rather than Trump being an abject ahole?
  4. Siap, how is Trump's latest statement racist? I think he is a racist, but how is his comment of "go back to your shit hole country" necessarily racist?
  5. It's a full scholarship now? Covers everything? Tuition, r&b, books, etc? I thought it was just tuition.
  6. California is better than Texas in some ways. Just heard that California is spending money on the census which will help them with the count and could directly translate to more Reps/$. Texas? Not spending a dime.
  7. Does the book mention Ryan fucking his Ayn Rand blow-up doll? Someone check the index.
  8. Jesus, this sounds stupid. "Other counting mechanisms"? We have the census. Use it.
  9. I frankly don't understand this mentality. The census is also used to distribute government funds and undercounting people will negatively affect some states. Hint: one of those affected would be Texas. Big time.
  10. We obviously need some slavery reparations to rectify this situation.
  11. No, it's politics, not war. Play the political game. Play it smart. Something the Dems have not been able to do for a while.
  12. I'll bite. How do you force the Rs to come to the table? Shame them? Good luck with that.
  13. Way overstated, imo. Vote him out of office. Vote. Vote. Vote.
  14. I liked the FWWC better than the men's, to be honest. Less bullshit flopping.
  15. And this confirms my opinion that the majority of Dem voters are dumb. Again, you are refusing to see that impeachment would fire up Trump's base. So the Dem's are inspired, say 20% via impeachment. And the Trumpkins are inspired, say 40%. What's the old saying? Keep fucking that chicken? And I am not (at least didn't mean to) refusing to admit that Dems may be "energized". Please quote me if I did so I can do my mea culpas. My point has pretty much been that the GOP base will be energized. Probably a lot more than the Dem's would be. If you can't see that then I must not be doing a good job of explaining myself.
  16. And I would say that's why the Dems don't win. They focus on fighting and not on doing what it takes (politically) to win. To win you have to battle, that's for sure. But if your whole point is the battle and not the winning, then you're doing it wrong imo. That assumes you want to actually get your guys/girls elected to office, preferably the WH.
  17. Welcome to the rough and tumble world of politics, I guess. You're looking for purity where it cannot be found.
  18. Well, simply by virtue of the fact that somebody is posting numbers about how the voters (voters, not Senators) feel about conviction. And let's try to get some sense here for the Dems (god knows they've been run over by the GOP for a while): the point is NOT to "fucking fight". The point is to WIN.
  19. This is a false dichotomy. Pelosi's lack of initiating impeachment proceedings does not mean her only other option is to roll over to McConnell. I still am gobsmacked that people don't think that Trump would eat this impeachment shit up like two scoops of ice cream.
  20. The Senate votes on impeachment, not the voters. That's a mighty big difference.
  21. Yeah, imo the Dems don't need a "messaging" win. They need an electoral win. And let's look at the statement that doing nothing has no upside, or is a neutral tactic. It could be that impeachment has a real downside. I'll take a political position that has no upside over a position that (probably) has a downside any day of the week.
×
×
  • Create New...