The Supremes

[Captainant 27311]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Gerrymandering is a great example of pols not doing the right thing.  The right thing would be to legislate it out of existence at the state level.

It is a "bothsides" thing, but it has gotten that much worse as an intellectually bankrupt GOP struggles to hold on to power.

It's what's so frustrating about #bothsides. Because yes, both sides are absolutely using gerrymandering - but there is absolutely not an equivalency in the scope, depth, or abuse of it on #bothsides.

But because it merely exists on both sides, it's the out for redhats and disingenuous posters. They just check out from the conversation and pound that one matter over and over and over and take glee in the frustration it causes everyone actually discussing the issue.

[fattyflattie 4636]

2 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

That's interesting, because the Business Insider report that just came out has her at only 40% of that number, behind 14 other congresspersons.  And, to be fair, her husband does own a successful VC firm, which is the source of their wealth.

But Nancy.

I used Forbes. Is that not legitimate?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanponciano/2022/03/22/pelosi-exercises-tesla-stock-options-to-buy-2-million-in-shares/?sh=2d40188d50f1

1 hour ago, TexasEd said:

Gerrymandering.  It's gerrymandering that gets us worse and worse results because the districts are polarized into +23 point safe zones for both sides so we get more extremes.

And lack of term limits.  I cant see a reason any one should be in office in the same position >20 years. 

[WBT 20397]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

I cant see a reason any one should be in office in the same position >20 years. 

Because their constituents continue to elect them?

[Chad Fuck 17503]

Just now, WBT said:

Because their constituents continue to elect them?

This.  

That said, I'd bet if you took care of the gerrymandering problem - pols getting to choose their own constituencies - you'd solve the term limits question.  

[Pescado_Rojo 19327]

1 hour ago, TexasEd said:

Gerrymandering.  It's gerrymandering that gets us worse and worse results because the districts are polarized into +23 point safe zones for both sides so we get more extremes. They need to go the other way to the +/-5% zone all the way around.  Make the districts using population and geographic cohesiveness (compact, following rivers, major roads or political entity boundaries like city or county lines).  Race, age, religion, education level, income, political bent, union membership, etc. are factors that should not be included in drawing the lines.  Just population density and geographic cohesiveness.

This is never going to happen now that the Supreme Court is throwing out any attempt to stop the Gerrymandering.

 

They could use the same software they use to create those +23 districts to create the +/-5% districts, too. Breaking up the gerrymanders and killing the Hastert rule would go a long way to fixing what's wrong with Congress. 

[TurkeyChew 383]

12 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

There's practical politics, and there's this.

Whether Felito would have preferred a more high-minded approach to political power at some point is irrelevant.  He has, in fact, willingly chosen to dance to the beat that he dances to.  And he dances like a motherfucker.

Politics is a nasty business in terms of pandering and other corruptions.  I have always believed that and generally been repulsed by politicians.

But what Cruz and his ilk are doing is absolutely beyond the pale.  He could quit at any time, but he fucking loves it.  I think he likes twattering and the power he gains from it more than being a lawyer.

In my pollyannaish world, I wish more politicians would "do the right thing" and appeal to the higher nature of Americans.  I get that the vast majority of them don't do that.

But not all of them actively whip the absolute worst tendencies of the American public for their own personal gain.

And that's why I don't fuck with the GOP anymore.

ADDENDUM:  I don't think you're a troll or a bad-faith poster.  But a lot of your posts, like the above, have a tendency to try to normalize what the GQP and Trumpists are doing as "politics as usual."  I don't think you're trying to be a dick about it, but I suspect you may be struggling to hold on to your "conservative" beliefs in the face of this dogshit.

 

I just saw your addendum.

I don't see it as "normalizing" as much as just accepting that politics is a disgusting business full of disgusting people, on all sides. Sure there are degrees, for me the differences don't move the needle for me as much as they do for others. It's probably the chaotic neutral version of Brisket's ledge; a political nihilism.

But that said of course I have my own "politics" that are derived from my north star beliefs which means if pressed for political comment which, to your point, I'll generally default to tacitly supporting whichever team is more conservative.

I am privileged enough (as I suspect you are as well) to not really care either way, however. Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's of course, but beyond that, I take no joy in being either outraged or thrilled, depending on which team is in temporary control. I try to keep an even hand and emotionless approach to my criticism of both sides. I am actually surprised at how emotionally you responded because your hot take seemed to be an opinion without much supporting evidence (your take that the GOP are proactively creating the monsters rather than reactively feeding the monsters akin to blaming the cartels for creating the demand versus servicing the demand that inherently exists).

[The Original Greaser Bob 2785]

22 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

This.  

That said, I'd bet if you took care of the gerrymandering problem - pols getting to choose their own constituencies - you'd solve the term limits question.  

I think the problem is reflected in Texas, where we think Ted Cruz is a model of manhood and straight talk.

So, I would put the problems in this order:  1) wall-eyed idiocy 2) gerrymandering 3) term limits.

Solve the first and you'd solve the other two.

[wildcat09 29187]

Anti-Semitism exists and has basically always existed. But historically speaking, pogroms weren't an all-the-time thing. Sure, Christians throughout Europe disliked Jews who lived near them to varying degrees, but it was only when some asshole or group of assholes came along and started accusing Jews of eating their babies that they'd decide they needed to exterminate the Jews. 

Same thing here. There's demand for the type of shit they say, but they're also creating more demand by feeding it. And by continuing to feed it, they're going to get a lot of innocent people killed for the sake of their own political careers. Because they're monsters.

[The Original Greaser Bob 2785]

50 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Same thing here. There's demand for the type of shit they say, but they're also creating more demand by feeding it. And by continuing to feed it, they're going to get a lot of innocent people killed for the sake of their own political careers. Because they're monsters.

I personally think that those who link to the idiocy to mock it also feed it.  In this thread, somebody quotes Charlie Kirk.  Why the fuck does any sentient person care what that guys says, and linking to it just gives it another forum.  The monsters who feed off if it bear watching, but watching. Not quoting and linking and increasing the post count. 

People who insist on reading the trolls can feed their habit, although to me its bizarre.  And then they should count to 10 and determine if its worth spreading the troll's message.

[jimmyjazz 45513]

1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

I used Forbes. Is that not legitimate?

Seems legit enough.  Just pointing out the discrepancy between two different sources.

[Francisco 2.0 32290]

Afraid of getting primaried by a Klansman next cycle.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/24/ketanji-brown-jackson-supreme-court-hearing-live-updates/#link-J43LWV6I5ZF57I5QFPWS4L5XGA

Quote

Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, who was called by the GOP to testify Thursday in opposition to Jackson’s nomination, refused to say President Biden is the “duly elected and lawfully serving” president of the United States.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) repeatedly questioned Marshall — who was the chairman of the Republican Attorneys General Association’s Rule of Law Defense Fund in the lead-up to the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol — over what involvement he may have had in the robocalls the Rule of Law Defense Fund sent out urging recipients to march to the Capitol that day.

 

Quote

Marshall, who said he was not in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021, protested Whitehouse’s efforts to ask about the group’s ties to the insurrection.

“What I can tell you is that we’ve denounced lawlessness — not only as it related to what took place on January 6, but also the lawlessness that continues to go on across our country with violent crime.”

After numerous questions, Whitehouse finally asked Marshall, “Is Joseph R. Biden of Delaware the duly elected and lawfully serving president of the United States of America?”

 

Quote

Marshall replied, “He is the president of this country.”

Whitehouse tried again: “Is he the duly elected and lawfully serving president of the United States?”

Marshall was defiant: “He is the president of our country.”

After a bit more similar back and forth, Whitehouse said he had no further questions.

 

[fattyflattie 4636]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

Seems legit enough.  Just pointing out the discrepancy between two different sources.

Yeah. Personal wealth reports are always all over the place. Don’t know if that holds true to political figures too, but I assume it does. Hard to count the money of any truly rich person when tons of it is likely hidden in hard to track investments.  I’d like to reiterate, I’m not picking on Pelosi because I hate her. I saw the one eye soldier dude is making a killing, too.  And obv, Kush/Ivanka if that number is true, holy fuck. 

[Mo Horn 8795]

Idiots, every one of them. Fucking idiots. 

[hpslugga 4039]

7 minutes ago, Mo Horn said:

Idiots, every one of them. Fucking idiots. 

They’re not idiots. The people who believe in the dishonest horseshit they spew to the point where they vote for them in elections are idiots. That’s all they were doing with this feeble, garbled drivel: campaigning. If neither cameras nor microphones were on them, that pathetic imitation of theatre never takes place.

[Lurch 5919]

Yesterday was pretty much just a long string of commercial shoots.

[C-Man 26992]

1 hour ago, TurkeyChew said:

I just saw your addendum.

I don't see it as "normalizing" as much as just accepting that politics is a disgusting business full of disgusting people, on all sides. Sure there are degrees, for me the differences don't move the needle for me as much as they do for others. It's probably the chaotic neutral version of Brisket's ledge; a political nihilism.

But that said of course I have my own "politics" that are derived from my north star beliefs which means if pressed for political comment which, to your point, I'll generally default to tacitly supporting whichever team is more conservative.

I am privileged enough (as I suspect you are as well) to not really care either way, however. Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's of course, but beyond that, I take no joy in being either outraged or thrilled, depending on which team is in temporary control. I try to keep an even hand and emotionless approach to my criticism of both sides. I am actually surprised at how emotionally you responded because your hot take seemed to be an opinion without much supporting evidence (your take that the GOP are proactively creating the monsters rather than reactively feeding the monsters akin to blaming the cartels for creating the demand versus servicing the demand that inherently exists).

Why don't you get back to us when the leader of the left falls on the wrong side of an election and decides he/she doesn't really want to vacate the office, calls the election unfair and then directly fuels his backers to stage a violent insurrection with the aim of derailing forever the peaceful transfer of power in this country. Until then, you can kindly shut the fuck up with this "both sides are terrible" mealy-mouth bullshit. Pretty please. With sugar on top.

[Pig Bellmont 8679]

16 minutes ago, Mo Horn said:

Idiots, every one of them. Fucking idiots. 

Challenging the ABA witnesses won’t get you highlights in Brietbart, the Daily Caller, or Tucker Carlson. They are bad faith actors performing for a different audience in a different media environment. There is no desire to actually vet the qualifications of someone who has passed Senate approval 3 or 4 times already with bipartisan support. 

[TurkeyChew 383]

3 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Why don't you get back to us when the leader of the left falls on the wrong side of an election and decides he/she doesn't really want to vacate the office, calls the election unfair and then directly fuels his backers to stage a violent insurrection with the aim of derailing forever the peaceful transfer of power in this country. Until then, you can kindly shut the fuck up with this "both sides are terrible" mealy-mouth bullshit. Pretty please. With sugar on top.

You really should ignore me, like yesterday.

@wildcat09 great post.

[TurkeyChew 383]

59 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

I personally think that those who link to the idiocy to mock it also feed it.  In this thread, somebody quotes Charlie Kirk.  Why the fuck does any sentient person care what that guys says, and linking to it just gives it another forum.  The monsters who feed off if it bear watching, but watching. Not quoting and linking and increasing the post count. 

People who insist on reading the trolls can feed their habit, although to me its bizarre.  And then they should count to 10 and determine if its worth spreading the troll's message.

100% this. Just look at the last page where Ted Cruz was scrolling through his Twitter for mentions and retweets after he did his bit. As everyone knows there is no such thing as bad publicity; anything that gets you mind space for folks, whether outrage or adoration, is solidifying as relevant or legitimate. It’s always been that way (hence that Hollywood adage from yesteryear) but exponentially so in todays attention-based economy with 24 hour news cycles and feeds and algorithms vying for eyeballs and eliciting the aforementioned outrage/love response.

Case Study: Yiannis Milapious or whatever that Greek agitator right wing gay guys name was. As soon as the oxygen was sucked out of his go to market (deplatformed, not doing speaking tours, going broke, etc.) nobody has heard from him since. No mentions, no existence. 

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11667]

3 hours ago, TexasEd said:

Gerrymandering.  It's gerrymandering that gets us worse and worse results because the districts are polarized into +23 point safe zones for both sides so we get more extremes. They need to go the other way to the +/-5% zone all the way around.  Make the districts using population and geographic cohesiveness (compact, following rivers, major roads or political entity boundaries like city or county lines).  Race, age, religion, education level, income, political bent, union membership, etc. are factors that should not be included in drawing the lines.  Just population density and geographic cohesiveness.

This is never going to happen now that the Supreme Court is throwing out any attempt to stop the Gerrymandering.

 

This would all be illegal under the VRA.  No minority opportunity districts.  A state with racially polarized voting, 60% majority, and evenly distributed population would elect 100% majority candidates.  

[Macanudo 12922]

16 minutes ago, Lurch said:

Yesterday was pretty much just a long string of commercial shoots.

Being a politician is just a long string of commercial shoots.   And trips to Cancun.

[TexArcher 37455]

3 hours ago, Captainant said:

It's what's so frustrating about #bothsides. Because yes, both sides are absolutely using gerrymandering - but there is absolutely not an equivalency in the scope, depth, or abuse of it on #bothsides.

But because it merely exists on both sides, it's the out for redhats and disingenuous posters. They just check out from the conversation and pound that one matter over and over and over and take glee in the frustration it causes everyone actually discussing the issue.

Exactly.  Right wingers have been coached by their Fox News overlords to believe that finding any similar charge against the other side constitutes a stalemate, and therefore an adequate defense, regardless of the difference in scope of the charges.

It's about as logical as a defense attorney trying to get his client out of a murder rap by pointing at a petty theft defendant and saying, "See, everyone commits crimes!"

And the fact that it's so widespread is evidence of how stupid and truly fucked this country is.

[Chad Fuck 17503]

2 hours ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

I think the problem is reflected in Texas, where we think Ted Cruz is a model of manhood and straight talk.

So, I would put the problems in this order:  1) wall-eyed idiocy 2) gerrymandering 3) term limits.

Solve the first and you'd solve the other two.

Unpossible says millennia of people doing stupid ass shit.  

[Chad Fuck 17503]

1 hour ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

I personally think that those who link to the idiocy to mock it also feed it.  In this thread, somebody quotes Charlie Kirk.  Why the fuck does any sentient person care what that guys says, and linking to it just gives it another forum.  The monsters who feed off if it bear watching, but watching. Not quoting and linking and increasing the post count. 

People who insist on reading the trolls can feed their habit, although to me its bizarre.  And then they should count to 10 and determine if its worth spreading the troll's message.

Yes, this is true.

But if we didn't like to idiocy, what would we be doing here?  We can't just link to ourselves all the time.

[Lurch 5919]

100% this. Just look at the last page where Ted Cruz was scrolling through his Twitter for mentions and retweets after he did his bit. As everyone knows there is no such thing as bad publicity; anything that gets you mind space for folks, whether outrage or adoration, is solidifying as relevant or legitimate. It’s always been that way (hence that Hollywood adage from yesteryear) but exponentially so in todays attention-based economy with 24 hour news cycles and feeds and algorithms vying for eyeballs and eliciting the aforementioned outrage/love response.
Case Study: Yiannis Milapious or whatever that Greek agitator right wing gay guys name was. As soon as the oxygen was sucked out of his go to market (deplatformed, not doing speaking tours, going broke, etc.) nobody has heard from him since. No mentions, no existence. 

Just because you bury your head in the sand doesn’t mean they went away. They remain very dangerous, perhaps more so when they think no one is watching

[Mo Horn 8795]

54 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

They’re not idiots. The people who believe in the dishonest horseshit they spew to the point where they vote for them in elections are idiots. That’s all they were doing with this feeble, garbled drivel: campaigning. If neither cameras nor microphones were on them, that pathetic imitation of theatre never takes place.

 

44 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Challenging the ABA witnesses won’t get you highlights in Brietbart, the Daily Caller, or Tucker Carlson. They are bad faith actors performing for a different audience in a different media environment. There is no desire to actually vet the qualifications of someone who has passed Senate approval 3 or 4 times already with bipartisan support. 

I don't disagree with any of this. I do, however, still think they are fucking idiots. 

[TexasEd 8062]

35 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

This would all be illegal under the VRA.  No minority opportunity districts.  A state with racially polarized voting, 60% majority, and evenly distributed population would elect 100% majority candidates.  

Apparently the VRA is already dead since Texas, fueled by immigrant growth, gained two additional congressional seats but cut the number of minority-majority districts in the latest redistricting. 

[TurkeyChew 383]

22 minutes ago, Lurch said:

 

Just because you bury your head in the sand doesn’t mean they went away. They remain very dangerous, perhaps more so when they think no one is watching

 

 

 

 

 

If a tree falls in the woods with nobody there to hear it, does it make a sound?

[TexasEd 8062]

39 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

Yes, this is true.

But if we didn't like to idiocy, what would we be doing here?  We can't just link to ourselves all the time.

it used to be that you linked to it in a Nelson Muntz way to mock it:

 

But we're in the age of "Jackass" the tv show and movie, more recently "Impractical Jokers" where people basically do the "ow my balls" skit for attention and laughs so people go out of their way to get impressions and the more of an asshole they are the more impressions they get which they often use twitter to measure (see Rafael "Cancun" Cruz).

So now stupid people celebrate their stupidity and other stupid people like them because they are "just like us".

 

Edited March 24, 2022 by TexasEd

[elfenix 34168]

2 minutes ago, TexasEd said:

it used to be that you linked to it in a Nelson Muntz way to mock it:

 

But we're in the age of "Jackass" the tv show and movie, more recently "Impractical Jokers" where people basically do the "ow my balls" skit for attention and laughs so people go out of their way to get impressions and the more of an asshole they are the more impressions they get which they often use twitter to measure (see Rafael "Cancun" Cruz).

So now stupid people celebrate their stupidity and other stupid people like them because they are "just like us".

 

[Jive Turkey 12562]

 

[Dutchrudder 11103]

I have seen other forums lock their political sections to people who have a minimum x number of posts, and x time on the board. It helps with removing socks and enforcing bans. People are a lot less likely to push the envelope when they know they can't come back the next day. 

[Biff Tannen 45477]

2 hours ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

I personally think that those who link to the idiocy to mock it also feed it.  In this thread, somebody quotes Charlie Kirk.  Why the fuck does any sentient person care what that guys says, and linking to it just gives it another forum.  The monsters who feed off if it bear watching, but watching. Not quoting and linking and increasing the post count. 

People who insist on reading the trolls can feed their habit, although to me its bizarre.  And then they should count to 10 and determine if its worth spreading the troll's message.

Overall, I agree with your premise, but Charlie Kirk has a tiny face!

[TurkeyChew 383]

2 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Overall, I agree with your premise, but Charlie Kirk has a tiny face!

Like a Dick Tracy villain, now that you mention it.

 

[Mdhorn 5908]

3 hours ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

They could use the same software they use to create those +23 districts to create the +/-5% districts, too. Breaking up the gerrymanders and killing the Hastert rule would go a long way to fixing what's wrong with Congress. 

How would this help Republicans?  

[Biff Tannen 45477]

49 minutes ago, TexasEd said:

it used to be that you linked to it in a Nelson Muntz way to mock it:

 

But we're in the age of "Jackass" the tv show and movie, more recently "Impractical Jokers" where people basically do the "ow my balls" skit for attention and laughs so people go out of their way to get impressions and the more of an asshole they are the more impressions they get which they often use twitter to measure (see Rafael "Cancun" Cruz).

So now stupid people celebrate their stupidity and other stupid people like them because they are "just like us".

 

Dude, Impractical Jokers is fucking funny.  It's not "ow my balls".

[Mdhorn 5908]

1 hour ago, TexArcher said:

Exactly.  Right wingers have been coached by their Fox News overlords to believe that finding any similar charge against the other side constitutes a stalemate, and therefore an adequate defense, regardless of the difference in scope of the charges.

It's about as logical as a defense attorney trying to get his client out of a murder rap by pointing at a petty theft defendant and saying, "See, everyone commits crimes!"

And the fact that it's so widespread is evidence of how stupid and truly fucked this country is.

I want al criminals prosecuted.  Another entire side only wants Democrats prosecuted and for lies spread by Republican propaganda.  Lock her up wasn't based on truth because they tried Hillary plenty.  It was lock her up because we said so. 

[Lurch 5919]

If a tree falls in the woods with nobody there to hear it, does it make a sound?

Yes. That’s precisely the point. Just because you are unaware does not mean irrelevance

[TurkeyChew 383]

7 minutes ago, Lurch said:

Yes. That’s precisely the point. Just because you are unaware does not mean irrelevance

So you are saying it does make a sound?

That tweet you posted which literally nobody on all 33 pages of this thread would have known of its existence if you hadn't posted it, has like 1000 views. That is as non-audience as you can get for a once-upon-a-time national name on social media. I have random comments on YouTube videos doing more comments and likes than that.

For all intents and purposes, that guy has been relegated to nobody-status and in rather short order. If your argument is that he still has obscure attention-grabbing status for those who want to follow him and shame or that he might get minimal views and likes for his desperate attempts at outrage attention, then I guess you are right. Once a political celebrity I guess you never really go back to anonymous everyman, but it's impossible to argue he's as relevant as he once was.

He's like a Cory Feldman or other disgraced and ridiculed failed child actors-- will always have some sort of name recognition but only briefly and to laugh at for a second before moving on.

Edited March 24, 2022 by TurkeyChew

[The Original Greaser Bob 2785]

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

Overall, I agree with your premise, but Charlie Kirk has a tiny face!

The eyes.  Too close together.

[Fudge Nuggets 19118]

15 hours ago, C-Man said:

FIFY.

The absolute worst/bad political actors are Republicans. And they do it because they can't get/stay elected otherwise.

Translated:  They do it because of booger eating morons like fatty. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33825]

41 minutes ago, TurkeyChew said:

So you are saying it does make a sound?

That tweet you posted which literally nobody on all 33 pages of this thread would have known of its existence if you hadn't posted it, has like 1000 views. That is as non-audience as you can get for a once-upon-a-time national name on social media. I have random comments on YouTube videos doing more comments and likes than that.

For all intents and purposes, that guy has been relegated to nobody-status and in rather short order. If your argument is that he still has obscure attention-grabbing status for those who want to follow him and shame or that he might get minimal views and likes for his desperate attempts at outrage attention, then I guess you are right. Once a political celebrity I guess you never really go back to anonymous everyman, but it's impossible to argue he's as relevant as he once was.

He's like a Cory Feldman or other disgraced and ridiculed failed child actors-- will always have some sort of name recognition but only briefly and to laugh at for a second before moving on.

I have you on ignore so I usually don't engage your posts, but this one is dumb, even for you. Congrats, you out-regarded yourself.

Of course a fucking tree makes a sound when it falls, dipshit

And then you come in and for some crazy reason defend Milo who is literally posting death threats to people just living their fucking lives. 

And for your finale you solidify what a piece of shit you are by invoking Cory Feldman, of all people. Do you usually mock people who were molested as children? Do you ridicule rape victims too? What the fuck is wrong with you?

[TexasEd 8062]

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

Dude, Impractical Jokers is fucking funny.  It's not "ow my balls".

I agree for the most part I get a 80-20 ratio of "ha-ha" to "um no" skits out of them.

[elfenix 34168]

[MontereyMX 847]

there’s over 300 million people in this great country and this is the option that bag of bones puts up as a nominee?   🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️ we are fucked.  

[Longhorn_Fan68 33825]

1 minute ago, MontereyMXmuthafucka said:

there’s over 300 million people in this great country and this is the option that bag of bones puts up as a nominee?   🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️ we are fucked.  

if the vote is successful she will be the most qualified person on SCOTUS. what issue do you have with her? I think I have a hunch I know what it is.

[Huckleberry 32685]

2 minutes ago, MontereyMXmuthafucka said:

there’s over 300 million people in this great country and this is the option that bag of bones puts up as a nominee?   🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️ we are fucked.  

There are only 130 million people in Mexico. 

[Biff Tannen 45477]

21 minutes ago, MontereyMXmuthafucka said:

there’s over 300 million people in this great country and this is the option that bag of bones puts up as a nominee?   🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️ we are fucked.  

[miguelito 11204]

34 minutes ago, MontereyMXmuthafucka said:

....

Monterrey Mexico has 2 r's.

Monterey California has 1.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33825]

look at this hypocritical piece of shit