not a gimmick - What's your reasoning for having businessman as your primary scum read? I would be happy to vote for him since he's not contributing anything useful
Hey I resemble that remark! I'm contributing my rugged good looks. I'm flexing my bicep and showing you my remarkable smile. It kinda looks like this...
That's dangerously close to a misrep. I voted Hardwood, yes, but I think on a reread of the actual vote, that I wasn't being serious (still being barely out of RVS at the time, if [left]we were even out). Even if he did intentionally waste my time with that poem, how could I possibly think that would be alignment indicative?
Vote Mindreaver
Even though I'm voting someone else and encourage everyone else to do so, Gentleman Johnny's vote is a good vote. It's not as good as my vote but it's a good vote.
I saw a bunch of posts about lurking this game being more likely to be scum. I'm officially and intentionally lurking this game. This has been a public service announcement that I'm intentionally engaging in a scummy behavior and am calling attention to it.
I tried to read through, but I have a headache, and TappingStones' posts make me want to put a bullet into my temple.
VOTE:Bloscovi.
My vote is staying here all game for two reasons that I absolutely won't go into but I hope everyone would follow me here. Just have faith.
Fourth time posting here, and still haven't gotten a reply. So, again: as a Jewish person I'm curious if you could address my concern about the Alt-Right who are often self-described Neo Nazi's and their support for Trump.
Do you distinguish Neo Nazis as accidental and deplorable bedfellows which could be found in any large movement? Or are you sympathetic to their causes and hatreds? Again, all I need is "Neo Nazis are bad" or "I am against the methodical genocide or persecution of racial minorities in America."
Hopefully, this is so obvious that it strikes you as offensive to even ask. I hop you, like any person of moral standing, would proudly stand against Neo Nazis. But as this is my fourth time asking, you'll forgive me for getting anxious.
(Edit: I'm new to the forums and not sure how to Link or @ somebody properly. Could someone make sure this post comes to their attention?)
Best,
GhostDad420.
Oh. Neo-Nazi's are bad. I don't support them. They're bigots.
Yep, the USA wore sexy clothing and got raped. We should wear less sexy clothing. The provocative analogy not with standing, the argument does not hold water, nor should it be considered when we respond to terrorist. Kuwait, Bosnia, Kosovo, Somalia are only a few of the countries we've assisted in recent past. The rationale of terrorist is wrong. We do not use the terrorist rationale for attacking us to dictate American forigen policy. The end.
Your comparison to "we deserved it"/rape is a mischaracterization. There's a lot of frustration in the ME right now due to our unnecessary meddling. Specifically 9-11 was inspired in part due to our overthrowing of the Iranian presidency and our continued behavior of actions that continues to create aggravation needlessly in the middle east. And I didn't say killing innocents was right. I said it's better than Hillary Clinton's proposal because she literally advocates creating terrorists in order to overthrow governments just like how we did in Iran. So we have over 30 years of failed policies that have never worked and Hillary wants to continue doing it anyway because she's insane. Thanks for agreeing with me.
Some of the policies were not allowed to work. There is an argument to me made that the Middle East would be more stable if Obama had not withdrawn from Iraq. That was the single greatest mistake of his presidency and the one he will be remembered for. People forget the surge worked. The reasons for leaving were just as flawed as the reasons were to enter.
This is a tangent but Obama had no choice but to leave IRAQ. His administration tried to negotiate a new deal but one couldn't be acquired. There were riots in Iraq because the Americans were not leaving fast enough. This ties into what I've been saying about the U.S. being seen as "meddlers". The wanted us out and to stop meddling. That doesn't change the fact that Obama's methods for fighting ISIS have been weak and ineffectual; on that Trump is absolutely correct. If you would like to discuss the Iraq War in more detail it should go in a new thread I think.
Specifically 9-11 was inspired in part due to our overthrowing of the Iranian presidency...
What? Al-Qaeda are advocates of a Sunni caliphate. They don't give a damn about the downfall of a Shi'ite democracy. They'll use it for propaganda purposes, sure, but if Egypt or Saudi Arabia had done what we did, al-Qaeda would have been cheering about it.
I said it's better than Hillary Clinton's proposal because she literally advocates creating terrorists in order to overthrow governments just like how we did in Iran.
We did a lot of bad things in and to Iran, but we definitely didn't create the current Iranian regime (see: events of the Carter and Reagan Administrations), and it's not Iranian terrorists we're having trouble with (see again: Sunni vs. Shi'ite distinction).
Because Hillary's proposals involve arming terrorists who kill innocent people.
And Trump's proposals involve handing terrorists the propaganda motherlode. Their recruiting pitch all along has been "America hates Muslims, so join up to destroy America!" Trump basically wants to confirm everything they're saying.
1.We didn't create the current Iranian regime but our continued policies that we've engaged in for the past 30 years (and has never worked in the first place) inspires hatred among middle-easterners. No, shiites and shiah don't necessarily get along but that doesn't change the fact that we've been meddling all over the middle east and making bad decisions. And I bet if we would stop funding radicals then the hatred they spread would die down.
I fundamentally disagree. The recruiting pitch for radical terrorists has always been our meddling. Everything aside from that was just a cherry on top. Surprisingly enough most people in the middle east hate ISIS because they kill rather indiscriminately but the U.S. is arming terrorists who have a truce with ISIS. Middle easterners hate these radicals and the U.S. keeps funding and supporting them. The U.S. is so focused on the short-sighted goal of toppling government that the policy makers keep ignoring that those governments are legitimate and that those governments are not nearly as bad as the opposition.
Gaddhaffi was a monster but you don't get rid of him and give the keys to ISIS or Al-Qaeda. Toppling Assad is even more ridiculous. There is no strategic benefit to getting rid of him and it's very clear that he's been fighting ISIS the whole time but Hillary wants to get rid of him and allow ISIS to take over there too. Hillary Clinton has the worse foreign policy credentials I've seen in a very long time. Her foreign policy stances absolutely make her disqualified.
Yes, he is looking out for Americans, specifically, the middle aged white guys who make up the majority of this support.
Are women guys? It's a simple yes or no question.
Are young college student's middle aged? Again, yes or no.
Are computer programming and software development low skilled jobs? Yes or no?
Yes Nevada made it feasable for Elon Musk to build his plant in that state. The federal government gave tax breaks to companies to ship similar jobs overseas. At least what Nevada did helps Americans. What "Free trade deals" do is sacrifice American workers for the sake of foreigners in foreign countries. Foreign countries that engage in indentured servitude.
You say that the jobs can't come back because all the infrastructure is in other countries. You know how that happened in the first place? "Free Trade" deals. That's how the infrastructure got overseas in the first place. "Free trade" is an example of Orwellian double-speak. "Free Trade" does not involve the invisible hand of the free market. "Free Trade" is nothing more than government interference into the free market on behalf of large corporations and at the expense of American citizens. The infrastructure for electronics manufacturing (and a wide variety of other jobs) got overseas in the first place because of government interference. Your links were not dismissed. Your links proved my point and disproved your own messages.
Yes, he is looking out for Americans, specifically, the middle aged white guys who make up the majority of this support.
You said that Trump is advocating to support "middle-aged-white" guys when in reality Trump is working to support all AmericanS of all creeds. John Kerry got 88% of Black voters. Does that mean that he was looking out for Black voters during his campaign?
And I didn't say it was right. I said it's better than Hillary Clinton's proposal because she literally advocates creating terrorists. Thanks for agreeing with me.
You want to fix a problem created by unnessecary involvement in the Middle East....with more unnessecary involvement in the Middle East. No "solution" than involves killing more people is actually going to accomplish anything. If we go in and murder all the terrorists and their families, everyone that's left will see how the Americans are trying to destroy their way of life, find some weapons, and start killing people. It just doesn't work. If you really want to fix the Middle East, stop killing people. Work on rebuilding the economies. Give people ways to make a living. Set up programs to fight extreme poverty and health crises. Stop fanning the flames, or, as Trump would have it, poor Kerosene on them. Stop giving them a reason to hate Western society, and do something nice for a change.
Although to be fair Trump's revised policy is far and away better than Hillary's proposals.
I think you missed this. part. I'd prefer it if Trump didn't target families, however I'd be perfectly fine if there's actionable intelligence and not hesitating to take out a target, collateral damage/family members be damned.
Of course I'd love to see an easier immigration process. But before we start making it easier for people to immigrate here I'd like to ensure that our laws are enforced.
Ah, I see, you are more concerned about "illegals" that you will never meet, never interact with, never have any sort of impact on rather than making it easier for your family to immigrate. I find your entire rebuttal to me unbelievable and insincere. Seriously? Who prioritizes evicting Mexicans first, and bringing their family over second?
I've met a few illegal immigrants. Some were nice, some were ********s. I didn't get to experience getting mugged, robbed, have my identity stolen, or be killed by one. And I knew I guy who wanted a job at Wal*Mart but our department was full at the time. We had two illegals in my area and I was sorely tempted to call immigration to get them apprehended and create two open spots so my American Citizen friend could get a better shot at the post. I opted out of it though. And thank you for sharing that you think I'm being completely insincere even though I've incorporated my own personal experiences to show how I came to my perspective repeatedly in this thread.
But enough about me; do you have a problem with Trump's being ok with transgendered people? What about his lack of hatred towards gays? Do you have a problem with Trump not taking money from SuperPacs? What is it about Trump not being bought out by corporations that makes you dislike him so much?
Yep, the USA wore sexy clothing and got raped. We should wear less sexy clothing. The provocative analogy not with standing, the argument does not hold water, nor should it be considered when we respond to terrorist. Kuwait, Bosnia, Kosovo, Somalia are only a few of the countries we've assisted in recent past. The rationale of terrorist is wrong. We do not use the terrorist rationale for attacking us to dictate American forigen policy. The end.
Your comparison to "we deserved it"/rape is a mischaracterization. There's a lot of frustration in the ME right now due to our unnecessary meddling. Specifically 9-11 was inspired in part due to our overthrowing of the Iranian presidency and our continued behavior of actions that continues to create aggravation needlessly in the middle east. And I didn't say killing innocents was right. I said it's better than Hillary Clinton's proposal because she literally advocates creating terrorists in order to overthrow governments just like how we did in Iran. So we have over 30 years of failed policies that have never worked and Hillary wants to continue doing it anyway because she's insane. Thanks for agreeing with me.
My skin's not jaundiced and yellow.
Hey I resemble that remark! I'm contributing my rugged good looks. I'm flexing my bicep and showing you my remarkable smile. It kinda looks like this...
Only more handsome.
I don't understand what's going on with these quote errors.
Even though I'm voting someone else and encourage everyone else to do so, Gentleman Johnny's vote is a good vote. It's not as good as my vote but it's a good vote.
I have a strong townread on Jobie and Tapping.
VOTE:Bloscovi.
My vote is staying here all game for two reasons that I absolutely won't go into but I hope everyone would follow me here. Just have faith.
Oh. Neo-Nazi's are bad. I don't support them. They're bigots.
This is a tangent but Obama had no choice but to leave IRAQ. His administration tried to negotiate a new deal but one couldn't be acquired. There were riots in Iraq because the Americans were not leaving fast enough. This ties into what I've been saying about the U.S. being seen as "meddlers". The wanted us out and to stop meddling. That doesn't change the fact that Obama's methods for fighting ISIS have been weak and ineffectual; on that Trump is absolutely correct. If you would like to discuss the Iraq War in more detail it should go in a new thread I think.
1.We didn't create the current Iranian regime but our continued policies that we've engaged in for the past 30 years (and has never worked in the first place) inspires hatred among middle-easterners. No, shiites and shiah don't necessarily get along but that doesn't change the fact that we've been meddling all over the middle east and making bad decisions. And I bet if we would stop funding radicals then the hatred they spread would die down.
I fundamentally disagree. The recruiting pitch for radical terrorists has always been our meddling. Everything aside from that was just a cherry on top. Surprisingly enough most people in the middle east hate ISIS because they kill rather indiscriminately but the U.S. is arming terrorists who have a truce with ISIS. Middle easterners hate these radicals and the U.S. keeps funding and supporting them. The U.S. is so focused on the short-sighted goal of toppling government that the policy makers keep ignoring that those governments are legitimate and that those governments are not nearly as bad as the opposition.
Gaddhaffi was a monster but you don't get rid of him and give the keys to ISIS or Al-Qaeda. Toppling Assad is even more ridiculous. There is no strategic benefit to getting rid of him and it's very clear that he's been fighting ISIS the whole time but Hillary wants to get rid of him and allow ISIS to take over there too. Hillary Clinton has the worse foreign policy credentials I've seen in a very long time. Her foreign policy stances absolutely make her disqualified.
- Are women guys? It's a simple yes or no question.
- Are young college student's middle aged? Again, yes or no.
- Are computer programming and software development low skilled jobs? Yes or no?
Yes Nevada made it feasable for Elon Musk to build his plant in that state. The federal government gave tax breaks to companies to ship similar jobs overseas. At least what Nevada did helps Americans. What "Free trade deals" do is sacrifice American workers for the sake of foreigners in foreign countries. Foreign countries that engage in indentured servitude.You say that the jobs can't come back because all the infrastructure is in other countries. You know how that happened in the first place? "Free Trade" deals. That's how the infrastructure got overseas in the first place. "Free trade" is an example of Orwellian double-speak. "Free Trade" does not involve the invisible hand of the free market. "Free Trade" is nothing more than government interference into the free market on behalf of large corporations and at the expense of American citizens. The infrastructure for electronics manufacturing (and a wide variety of other jobs) got overseas in the first place because of government interference. Your links were not dismissed. Your links proved my point and disproved your own messages.
You said that Trump is advocating to support "middle-aged-white" guys when in reality Trump is working to support all AmericanS of all creeds. John Kerry got 88% of Black voters. Does that mean that he was looking out for Black voters during his campaign?
I think you missed this. part. I'd prefer it if Trump didn't target families, however I'd be perfectly fine if there's actionable intelligence and not hesitating to take out a target, collateral damage/family members be damned.
I've met a few illegal immigrants. Some were nice, some were ********s. I didn't get to experience getting mugged, robbed, have my identity stolen, or be killed by one. And I knew I guy who wanted a job at Wal*Mart but our department was full at the time. We had two illegals in my area and I was sorely tempted to call immigration to get them apprehended and create two open spots so my American Citizen friend could get a better shot at the post. I opted out of it though. And thank you for sharing that you think I'm being completely insincere even though I've incorporated my own personal experiences to show how I came to my perspective repeatedly in this thread.
But enough about me; do you have a problem with Trump's being ok with transgendered people? What about his lack of hatred towards gays? Do you have a problem with Trump not taking money from SuperPacs? What is it about Trump not being bought out by corporations that makes you dislike him so much?
Your comparison to "we deserved it"/rape is a mischaracterization. There's a lot of frustration in the ME right now due to our unnecessary meddling. Specifically 9-11 was inspired in part due to our overthrowing of the Iranian presidency and our continued behavior of actions that continues to create aggravation needlessly in the middle east. And I didn't say killing innocents was right. I said it's better than Hillary Clinton's proposal because she literally advocates creating terrorists in order to overthrow governments just like how we did in Iran. So we have over 30 years of failed policies that have never worked and Hillary wants to continue doing it anyway because she's insane. Thanks for agreeing with me.