|
You're Right, Bernie....
|
Too bad your fans couldn't be bothered listening to you.
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/sander...8625475861 Quote:Sanders: Trump is a 'pathological liar' 
Yeah, we all know Trump is horrible. Hillary is too, but that's the one the DNC wanted to push, and they failed us. And they didn't seem to learn their lesson afterwards, either.
Poe's Law: "Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of Fundamentalism that SOMEONE won't mistake for the real thing."
10 Christ-like figures that predate Jesus. Link shortened to Chris ate Jesus for some reason... http://listverse.com/2009/04/13/10-chris...ate-jesus/ Good video to watch, if you want to know how common the Jesus story really is. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88GTUXvp-50 A list of biblical contradictions from the infallible word of Yahweh. http://infidels.org/library/modern/jim_m...tions.html
This just in, water....wet.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
 (December 9, 2016 at 12:04 am)Minimalist Wrote: Too bad your fans couldn't be bothered listening to you. Are you insinuating that Sanders supporters voted for Trump?!? 
More likely that Sanders supporters voted for Stein or abstained.
There's some truth to that. Youth turnout was lower than expected and the Green party got more votes than last election. My coworker had friends who all voted Stein (Bernie or Busters). Not that it matters - Trump is inevitable excepting something truly unheard of. Slave to the Patriarchy no more
It's what happens when people elevate the candidate over the issues they truly care about.
I'm convinced that a lot of the people who voted for Trump were able to do that very thing, while those who abstained on the left weren't able to.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
I think most Sanders supporters are Democrats, so I would expect them to vote Clinton. I wouldn't expect many Sanders supporters to flip to Trump though, based on political differences alone.
Voting for third party hurt Clinton in the same way that voting Clinton hurt third party candidates, so I don't put much weight in that argument. In the end its not the fault of Bernie fans that they didn't listen to Bernie; it's the fault of Clinton for not giving them enough reasons to vote for her.
We're well beyond that point. You asked and I clarified.
Also, your disregard of the third party vote argument is not skeptical at all. Given how first past the post voting operates, vote splitting in an ideological axis weakens all players in said axis. It also heavily pushes consolidation for increased political powet in an ideological axis. You are free to blame Clinton. But let's not dismiss the reality of how FPTP makes third parties a damaging dead weight on its closest ideologically aligned party. Slave to the Patriarchy no more
(December 9, 2016 at 2:13 am)Moros Synackaon Wrote: We're well beyond that point. You asked and I clarified. I asked Minimalist. I'd still like to know what he meant, because so far since the election I've seen him try to blame everyone but Clinton, and this seems more of the same from him. Quote:Also, your disregard of the third party vote argument is not skeptical at all. Given how first past the post voting operates, vote splitting in an ideological axis weakens all players in said axis. It also heavily pushes consolidation for increased political powet in an ideological axis. I know, but my comments were mainly for Minimalist again. He seems to operate under the delusion that any third party candidates somehow "take" votes away from the main parties, when you could reverse the candidates and argue the exact same thing (that the main party candidates "take" votes away from third parties). Quote:You are free to blame Clinton. But let's not dismiss the reality of how FPTP makes third parties a damaging dead weight on its closest ideologically aligned party. I'm not dismissing it, but rather saying there's more than one way of looking at it. People (including yourself here) tend to view the smaller party as the "damaging" one, and I believe this probably comes from years of seeing only two parties ever come out victorious. They are held up as the "major" parties, and people accept that as the norm, so third parties are often seen as "bad" or "lesser" off the bat. This, is what is truly damaging, IMO. So are third parties a damaging dead weight on their closest ideologically aligned "major" party, or are "major" parties a damaging dead weight on the third parties? No party has a right to your vote, and all votes are supposedly equal, and all voters have a free choice in who they vote for. If a person votes third party, more often than not, it's because they believe that third party is better than one of the major parties. If that party didn't exist, would they have voted for a major party? Maybe, maybe not. The fact is, they didn't. That's the crux of the matter for me. Clinton failed to get enough people to vote for her, so did Stein, so did Johnson, so did any other third party candidate. They are all in the same boat.  RE: You're Right, Bernie....
December 9, 2016 at 2:10 pm
(This post was last modified: December 9, 2016 at 2:12 pm by dyresand.)
(December 9, 2016 at 12:04 am)Minimalist Wrote: Too bad your fans couldn't be bothered listening to you. I didn't even vote for Trump and i sure as hell wasn't going to vote for Hillary. I voted on principle and integrity i voted for Jill but it may seem like i threw my vote away but the options between pepsi and cocola i went sprite. (December 9, 2016 at 1:17 am)Tiberius Wrote: I think most Sanders supporters are Democrats, so I would expect them to vote Clinton. I wouldn't expect many Sanders supporters to flip to Trump though, based on political differences alone. There was no good reason to vote for a war hawk id rather not have a Obama 2.0 sending more of our troops to a war and in turn starting a major war against a first world nation. To be frank she would have started a war with Russia and China for Oil reasons more or less she want's to get at North Korea we really shouldn't be starting wars we will never finish.
Atheism is a non-prophet organization join today.
Code: <iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/255506953&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true"></iframe> |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
