• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Dahbomb

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,610
The only thing I want to see from Steve Crowder is his debate against Sam Seder in which he gets absolutely annihilated.
 

Slim Action

Member
Jul 4, 2018
5,560
Meanwhile, in Georgia:

KrobMMr.jpg
 

Slim Action

Member
Jul 4, 2018
5,560
According to Gay Instagram, Atlanta is just full of bottoms. It's really no surprise that she's the current incumbent.

The 2017 ATL mayoral contest was really funny, it was Bottoms vs. Mary Norwood, an "Independent" (Republican) who previously ran in 2009 and lost by 700 votes. This time, Norwood ran again and lost...by 700 votes.
 

sangreal

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
10,890
Warren will definitely not back off of M4A after the primary, nor should she. It would be a disastrous look for her among both people who do and don't support the policy because she would be reneging on a commitment that she doubled and tripled down on in very public, detailed ways.

like when the cornerstone of Obama's healthcare plan was "no individual mandate"?

I don't think she will abandon M4A but I wouldn't put any stock in the current specifics of her proposals either. She is a smart politician who will inevitably bring her plans into alignment with the political realities
 

Deleted member 3896

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,815
I went back for my grandma's funeral this weekend. My mom & her five siblings are a mixed bag politically but my grandpa & grandma were blue collar Dems for life. This was on her dresser.

bdadb1f236710a8592581561632aeacc-full.jpg
 

PantherLotus

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,900
Let's go back to agreeing that M4A is popular until people realize they'd lose their private insurance. Auto has the correct take.
 

pigeon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,447
I think it is right both to say that M4A may not be a good general election message and that it's not necessarily great for Warren if she gets nominated and then walks it back. And, separately, that it's easy to imagine relatively moderate Dem senators just killing M4A anyway.

I don't know what the right solution is, though!
 

Kusagari

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,359
Isn't Carmen part of the political party in PR that advocates for remaining a commonwealth?

Just interesting with her being a major part of Bernie's campaign.
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,927
I was completely unaware racists and alt-right people would be racist and garbage. Thank you for bringing this to our attention...
 

pigeon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,447
This wasn't a positive promotion but just making people aware of the shit that people are doing.

I can remove it if people want but again, I promise that I wasn't posting it as a good thing since Crowder is a nazi piece of shit.

Please remove it!

I don't think you are posting it intentionally to propagate it but hate retweeting or sharing just upsets people and tells Twitter the content is highly engaging. It's a bad idea. Believe me, if I want to interact with racists, I can just call my in-laws.
 

Dahbomb

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,610
I think it is right both to say that M4A may not be a good general election message and that it's not necessarily great for Warren if she gets nominated and then walks it back. And, separately, that it's easy to imagine relatively moderate Dem senators just killing M4A anyway.

I don't know what the right solution is, though!
Glad I am not running for president!

Or at least glad I am not running for president on the Democratic side because on the Republican side I can just talk out loud what the deplorables are thinking.
 

ArkhamFantasy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,541
Paying national income taxes.
The biggest argument against is they would have to pay income tax.

Beaten. And that's the only substantive argument. Everything else is just "mah culture" misplaced nationalism.

Obviously i'm incredibly biased, but i feel like if PR had 2 senators then the president wouldn't throw paper towels at them after a catastrophic natural disaster. The senators would be worth every penny.
 

Steel

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
18,220
Obviously i'm incredibly biased, but i feel like if PR had 2 senators then the president wouldn't throw paper towels at them after a catastrophic natural disaster. The senators would be worth every penny.
Oh yeah. And they'd get more reps, too. And they wouldn't be subject to some stupid tax shenanigans.
 

Zed

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,544
Obviously i'm incredibly biased, but i feel like if PR had 2 senators then the president wouldn't throw paper towels at them after a catastrophic natural disaster. The senators would be worth every penny.

That's not a guarentee. Trump is doing everything he can to cut off all kinds of federal funding to Califoronia.
 

Sheepinator

Member
Jul 25, 2018
27,911
That's not a guarantee. Trump is doing everything he can to cut off all kinds of federal funding to California.
4.5M people voted for Trump in CA, but fuck 'em is his response. When it's CA burning, all he offers is ridiculous "ideas", threats to cut funding, insults, etc. When Russia was burning, different response:

"Mostly we discussed the forest fires in Siberia, and other parts of Russia. And I said, look, we have the greatest equipment, if we could help you let us know. Large sections are burning, and so I said to President Putin, if we can help you, let me know."
 

Absent

Member
Oct 26, 2017
3,045
India's rightwing March continues.

Background: in 1992, Hindu extremists demolished Babri Mosque, a 14th century mosque erected by Mughal emperor Babur (or during his reign) in the town of Ayodhya. The Hindu extremists claim that Babur destroyed a revered Hindu holy site: a temple devoted to Hindu God Ram's birth place. Since 92 and more recently since 2010, the case has been litigated in courts. Hindu extremists have made a makeshift temple on top of the site since the demolition. Today India Supreme Court said Hindus have a right to build a real temple on the place where Babri Masjid once stood.

Pic from pre-destruction

f7feb283624947a3855798ed1b95c391_18.jpg

The ruling greenlighted construction of a Hindu temple on a site where a mosque had stood before Hindu devotees destroyed it in 1992 with sledgehammers and their bare hands. The demolition of the Babri Mosque in the city of Ayodhya set the tone for sectarian tensions that haunt India today.

The prime minister, Narendra Modi, and his Bharatiya Janata Party swept India's elections in May by campaigning on a Hindu nationalist agenda, and the court case became an emotionally charged flash point. The party cast its quest to build a temple as a key step in establishing India as Hindu, wiping away centuries of oppression at the hands of the Muslim Mughal Empire and British colonialists.
Many Hindus believe that the disputed site was the birthplace of their revered god Ram and that an earlier temple was demolished during Mughal rule to build the mosque. The case has been in Indian courts since the 1950s, but when it reached the Supreme Court in 2010, the deity Ram was given legal standing, awkwardly pitting the god Hindus revere most against the country's Muslim population.

Many of India's Muslims fear that the court's decision will relegate them to second-class citizenship and empower Hindu extremists. Though many appeared to accept the ruling with sullen resignation, they see an India where mob lynchings of Muslims are seldom condemned by the government and where members of the governing party are implicated in sectarian violence.
After the court announced its verdict, senior government officials were quick to call journalists in and promise — anonymously — that no more mosques would be destroyed and that they, too, wanted to move on and focus on building the nation. Before this year's election, Mr. Modi promised to deliver ambitious growth, to make India a $5 trillion economy by 2025. But growth so far has been sluggish, with unemployment reaching a 45-year high.
Sitting in the courtyard of his home in Ayodhya, Haji Mahboob Ahmad, a litigant who had wanted the mosque to be rebuilt, said that Muslims would accept a ruling against them but that he feared that right-wing Hindu forces would be emboldened and more mosques would be destroyed.

"Violence against Muslims will rise, and it will become institutionalized," said Mr. Ahmad, 75, who had to flee the town for a month after the mosque was demolished nearly 30 years ago.
Officials calling in anonymously says a lot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.