2016 Election
Quote: Beethoven9thUm...the article proves why liberals don't need to bring up the 2000 election anymore...because the real results were already counted. Duh!
So you were attempting to prove the EXACT SAME POINT I was making, but still making it appear that I was arguing for the other side?
Quote: ams288So you were attempting to prove the EXACT SAME POINT I was making, but still making it appear that I was arguing for the other side?
Your point was that the 2000 election is a settled matter, but Benghazi isn't??
Could have fooled me...
Quote: Beethoven9thYour point was that the 2000 election is a settled matter, but Benghazi isn't??
Could have fooled me...
My point was that the 2000 election is a dumb argument for liberals to try to have. You responded as if I said the 2000 election was actually stolen.
I wasn't making a point on Benghazi, because as I've said a million times, I don't care about Benghazi.
My "lame" analogy was that the 2000 election was a losing issue for liberals to argue, and Benghazi is a losing issue for conservatives to argue. They can be settled or unsettled, it doesn't matter. Your side is never going to get anything out of Benghazi. I do enjoy mocking the Benghazi obsession though.
That last line says it all! LOL!Quote: ams288My point was that the 2000 election is a dumb argument for liberals to try to have. You responded as if I said the 2000 election was actually stolen.
I wasn't making a point on Benghazi, because as I've said a million times, I don't care about Benghazi.
My "lame" analogy was that the 2000 election was a losing issue for liberals to argue, and Benghazi is a losing issue for conservatives to argue. They can be settled or unsettled, it doesn't matter.
So conservatives ought to drop a matter that's unsettled (e.g., Benghazi) because liberals should be dropping a matter that's already settled (e.g., the 2000 election)? Huh?????
Like I said before, it's quite obvious how you're so easily manipulated by the Dems. :D
Quote: Beethoven9thThat last line says it all! LOL!Quote: ams288My point was that the 2000 election is a dumb argument for liberals to try to have. You responded as if I said the 2000 election was actually stolen.
I wasn't making a point on Benghazi, because as I've said a million times, I don't care about Benghazi.
My "lame" analogy was that the 2000 election was a losing issue for liberals to argue, and Benghazi is a losing issue for conservatives to argue. They can be settled or unsettled, it doesn't matter.
So conservatives ought to drop a matter that's unsettled (e.g., Benghazi) because liberals should be dropping a matter that's already settled (e.g., the 2000 election)? Huh?????
Like I said before, it's quite obvious how you're so easily manipulated by the Dems. :D
I only added that last line because you claimed Benghazi was unsettled in that prior post. It could be settled for all I know and you may just be clinging to some dumb republican talking point or something. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I'm gleefully ignorant of all the Benghazi crap because I don't care. Once it became clear that Benghazi was a non-issue, I stopped paying any attention to it whatsoever. I don't engage is Benghazi arguments other than to mock the conservative obession with it.
Quote: ams288It could be settled for all I know...
Quote: ams288I'm gleefully ignorant of all the Benghazi crap because I don't care.
Gee, is it any wonder why you vote Democrat?? lol :D
Quote: Beethoven9thQuote: ams288It could be settled for all I know...
Quote: ams288I'm gleefully ignorant of all the Benghazi crap because I don't care.
Gee, is it any wonder why you vote Democrat?? lol :D
Haha I'm not embarassed at all by my Benghazi ignorance. Had it been an actual scandal, I would have read up on it and formed an actual opinion. But when it became clear it wasn't, I decided to devote my time to other things. lol
And I can still get away with mocking the Republicans's obsession with it because deep down, they know they're just grasping at straws....
LOL!!!Quote: ams288I'm not embarassed at all by my Benghazi ignorance.
Only a lib would celebrate his own ignorance.....HAHAHAHA! :D
Quote: Beethoven9thLOL!!!
Only a lib would celebrate his own ignorance.....HAHAHAHA! :D
Lol or someone who just doesn't give a crap about something as irrelevant as Benghazi.
Quote: ams288Quote: Beethoven9thQuote: ams288It could be settled for all I know...
Quote: ams288I'm gleefully ignorant of all the Benghazi crap because I don't care.
Gee, is it any wonder why you vote Democrat?? lol :D
Haha I'm not embarassed at all by my Benghazi ignorance. Had it been an actual scandal, I would have read up on it and formed an actual opinion. But when it became clear it wasn't, I decided to devote my time to other things. lol
And I can still get away with mocking the Republicans's obsession with it because deep down, they know they're just grasping at straws....
It is an actual scandal but we have a President who is unwilling to keep his promise of the most open and transparent administration in history. Benghazi should have been fully investigated and the results reported. If there was nothing there, that would have already been reported.
It should at least bother you that the administration sent someone out to call it a result of a movie rather than an attack by terrorist groups when they knew the truth. Why did they need to lie? If a Republican did that, I am sure that you would ask for some explanation, as would I...the same goes the other way.
I get it now. So you admit that you're ignorant, yet somehow you know it's irrelevant? LOL!! *facepalm*Quote: ams288Lol or someone who just doesn't give a crap about something as irrelevant as Benghazi.
+100Quote: RonCIt is an actual scandal but we have a President who is unwilling to keep his promise of the most open and transparent administration in history. Benghazi should have been fully investigated and the results reported. If there was nothing there, that would have already been reported.
It should at least bother you that the administration sent someone out to call it a result of a movie rather than an attack by terrorist groups when they knew the truth. Why did they need to lie? If a Republican did that, I am sure that you would ask for some explanation, as would I...the same goes the other way.
Quote: Beethoven9thI get it now. So you admit that you're ignorant, yet somehow you know it's irrelevant? LOL!! *facepalm*
Yes, I paid attention to it at the beginning until it quickly became clear it was nothing more than a republican distraction. Then, as I said, I devoted my time to other things.
Quote: RonCIf there was nothing there, that would have already been reported.
Naw the investigation is as much about politics as anything else. Just because they haven't got a big fish doesn't mean it's not useful to Republicans.
For instance how long will the investigation go on about Christie? About as long as possible. It doesn't matter if they ever get a direct link.
Besides they want to be able to clobber Hillary with it, no matter how small the implication.
PAC ad will probably use a Hillary lookalike shutting off her phone in the middle of the night.
Quote: ams288I devoted my time to other things.
...which is why you're so ignorant about Benghazi. *facepalm*
Quote: Beethoven9th...which is why you're so ignorant about Benghazi. *facepalm*
.... I don't even get the point you're trying to make here. How many times do I have to say I don't care about Benghazi? I'm not gonna devote my time to some republican distraction.
Yeah, that doesn't surprise me. lolQuote: ams288.... I don't even get the point you're trying to make here.
Of course not, because you're ignorant (which you even admitted). All low information voters are like that.Quote: ams288I'm not gonna devote my time to some republican distraction.
No matter what political leanings people have they all seem to hate the current government. Would they be ready for a big change?
I highly encourage this! I think that there should be an anti-tax and anti-Washington third party that feels that we've been taxed enough already and pulls members from both the Democrats and the Republicans. I'm certain that a whole lot of Democrats would feel welcomed into this new third party. Too bad that never happens.Quote: djatcWhy hasn't the independent party gathered momentum from people being fed up of the current two part system? Seems like a perfect storm of a Ross Perot type to really move votes.
No matter what political leanings people have they all seem to hate the current government. Would they be ready for a big change?
Quote: s2dbakerI highly encourage this! I think that there should be an anti-tax and anti-Washington third party that feels that we've been taxed enough already and pulls members from both the Democrats and the Republicans. I'm certain that a whole lot of Democrats would feel welcomed into this new third party. Too bad that never happens.
Something socially moderate/liberal?
Quote: Beethoven9thQuote: ams288*facepalm*Quote: Beethoven9thSome Bay Area Communities Could Run Out Of Water Within 4 Months
I say, let 'em suffer! You reap what you sow, California.
I agree. Californians love to whine about the politicians they willingly vote for.
I didn't realize that droughts were an attack on Liberals, which is funny because the communities affected mostly voted for Romney.
Fresno 51/58
Madera 59/39
Mariposa 57/40
Kern 58/39
Amador 58/39
Mendocino 28/66
Nevada 50/46
Placer 58/39
Santa Cruz 21/75
Sonoma 26/70.
Stupid droughts.
Quote: djatcWhy hasn't the independent party gathered momentum from people being fed up of the current two part system? Seems like a perfect storm of a Ross Perot type to really move votes.
No matter what political leanings people have they all seem to hate the current government. Would they be ready for a big change?
We're too jaded. We know that all politics are hopelessly lost, and it's just a game to see whether red gets to thumb their nose at blue, or vice versa. Really, look at the constant bickering by sides blue and red in this thread, in the Climate Change thread, in the Obamacare thread. A whole bunch of what the other side is doing wrong, not much about what their side is doing right. All that matters is the win, and between wins we bicker.
So I sit. And clean my guns. And await the revolution. Or for rdw4potus to rise to power and annex Canada after naming me Minister of Keeping It Real.
Actually, speaking of rdw, he had an awesome post on a political thread over on DT. We all took a political test, and MonkeyMonkey asked what he won for being the "most moderate". rdw responded "You get forgotten. Also possibly trampled on and spoken for. Have fun! "
Pretty much sums it up.
Obama voters don't have much credibility when they say they hate the government because what we currently have is what they eagerly & willingly voted for.Quote: djatcNo matter what political leanings people have they all seem to hate the current government.
Too bad you didn't read the story. The entire counties aren't affected. It's just certain communities within those counties, and they are all around the Bay Area. Guess you're not aware of how the Bay Area votes.Quote: boymimboI didn't realize that droughts were an attack on Liberals, which is funny because the communities affected mostly voted for Romney.
Like I said, let 'em suffer!
Quote: Beethoven9thLike I said, let 'em suffer!
Ha you're such a hypocrite, constantly getting your panties in a bunch about four dead Americans in Benghazi.
But you have no problem wishing suffering on Americans you disagree with politically.
Gross.
Quote: ams288Ha you're such a hypocrite, constantly getting your panties in a bunch about four dead Americans in Benghazi.
But you have no problem wishing suffering on Americans you disagree with politically.
Gross.
Ha, once again you don't think things through.
People in the Bay Area vote overwhelmingly Democrat, yet they complain when they get what they vote for. And guess who they want help from when these type of things happen? (Usually, it's from the other side whom they love to mock)
Plus, even if you had a valid point (which you do not), the 4 dead Americans worked under OBAMA. Big difference, Einstein, although it doesn't matter since the comparison was silly in the first place.
Quote: Beethoven9thHa, once again you don't think things through.
No thinking required here, as there often isn't when responding to your insanity.
Wishing suffering on ANYONE, as you did a couple times already, no matter "how they vote," is SICK. Un-American.
Like seriously, you may want to see a professional or something with thoughts like that.
And yet god forbid if liberals don't start out their day with a minute of silence for our fallen comrades in Benghazi.
Yeah, that's pretty obvious in your case. lolQuote: ams288No thinking required here
I wish for people (like you) to "suffer" under the government that they elect. What's wrong with that? Isn't that why people vote in the first place? If we had a genuinely conservative president, I'd be more than happy to "suffer" under their rule.Quote: ams288Wishing suffering on ANYONE
Sounds as if you don't like it when libs have to live under the rule of the people that THEY elect. *facepalm*
BTW, not caring about 4 dead Americans who were refused help is pretty darn SICK in my book. In fact, it's un-American. You may want to see a professional or something with thoughts like that.
Quote: Beethoven9thI wish for people (like you) to "suffer" under the government that they elect. What's wrong with that? Isn't that why people vote in the first place? If we had a genuinely conservative president, I'd be more than happy to "suffer" under their rule.
Notice how "suffer" is in quotes now. *facepalm*
Quote: Beethoven9thSounds as if you don't like it when libs have to live under the rule of the people THEY elect. *facepalm*
Huh? This is just a stupid argument. I'm ONLY talking about you wishing suffering on Americans. This has nothing to do with me, unfortunately.
Quote: Beethoven9thBTW, not caring about 4 dead Americans who were refused help is pretty darn sick in my book. You may want to see a professional or something with thoughts like that.
Great comeback.
Yeah, quotation marks are what people use when they take words/sentences from somewhere else. (In this case, "suffer" was exactly the word I used in a previous post. Duh!)Quote: ams288Notice how "suffer" is in quotes now.
Apparently, you have a chronic reading problem. What I had said is that if people end up running out of water (because of a crappy government that THEY themselves elected!), let 'em suffer as opposed to them getting help from the very people they mock & reject.Quote: ams288Huh? This is just a stupid argument. I'm ONLY talking about you wishing suffering on Americans.
This is a whole lot different from your characterization.
Thank you.Quote: ams288Great comeback.
Quote: Beethoven9thAnyway, what I had said is that if people end up running out of water (because of a crappy government that THEY themselves elected!), let 'em suffer as opposed to them getting help from the very people they mock & reject.
No, this is what you said and what I was initially grossed out by:
Quote: Beethoven9thToo bad you didn't read the story. The entire counties aren't affected. It's just certain communities within those counties, and they are all around the Bay Area. Guess you're not aware of how the Bay Area votes.
Like I said, let 'em suffer!
Sounds to me like you don't like liberal Bay Area voters. You'd be pleased by their suffering.
Nothing in there at all about a crappy government THEY themselves elected or them getting help from the people they mock & reject. But nice try.
Um...yeah? Like I said before, you have a chronic reading problem. Where did I "wish" anything upon anybody?Quote: ams288No, this is what you said and what I was initially grossed out by:
If they run out of water, then I say "let 'em suffer". (Simple English here. Too bad you're having problems with it.)
"Nice try"? You don't even read what people write, and you say "Nice try"? lol!Quote: ams288Nothing in there at all about a crappy government THEY themselves elected or them getting help from the people they mock & reject. But nice try.
FYI, here's my original post:
Quote: Beethoven9thSome Bay Area Communities Could Run Out Of Water Within 4 Months
I say, let 'em suffer! You reap what you sow, California.
Most people don't need their hands held and can figure out what I meant by that last line. They can also read and see that there's no "wishing" going on.
Quote: Beethoven9thMost people don't need their hands held like you do, and they can figure out what I meant by that last line. They can also read and see that there's no "wishing" going on.
lol you have two redundant posts in which you say "let 'em suffer!" because they disagree with you politically.
Seems pretty wishful to me.
As I said, seek professional help. Those thoughts are Un-American.
You're not even good at making stuff up...LOL! Where did I say that last part???? *facepalm*Quote: ams288lol you have two redundant posts in which you say "let 'em suffer!" because they disagree with you politically.
You know who needs professional help? The guy who said this:Quote: ams288As I said, seek professional help. Those thoughts are Un-American.
"...because as I've said a million times, I don't care about Benghazi."
FYI, I think it's SICK that you don't even care about 4 dead Americans who were refused help by the guy you voted for. That's just un-American. You may want to see a professional or something with thoughts like that.
Quote: Beethoven9thYou're not even good at making stuff up...LOL! Where did I say that last part???? *facepalm*Quote: ams288lol you have two redundant posts in which you say "let 'em suffer!" because they disagree with you politically.
Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realize you shared the political views of most Bay Area voters! MY BAD! LOL
Wanna come officiate a gay marriage with me this weekend?
You're the one who keeps inserting partisan politics into this particular discussion. I simply want people to live/suffer under the politicians that they eagerly and willingly vote for. Apparently, you want these same people to be bailed out by those whom they mocked and voted against.Quote: ams288Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realize you shared the political views of most Bay Area voters!
Since you brought the subject up, are you gay?Quote: ams288Wanna come officiate a gay marriage with me this weekend?
Quote: Beethoven9thSince you brought the subject up, are you gay?
Yep.
Ah, so that explains everything.Quote: ams288Yep.
Are you female?
Quote: Beethoven9thAh, so that explains everything.
Are you female?
No.
Quote: ams288No.
Didn't think so. You fit the lib profile to a 'T'. lol
Quote: Beethoven9thDidn't think so. You fit the lib profile to a 'T'. lol
True.
I come from a conservative Catholic middle class family. If I was straight I probably would have ended up on the other end of the spectrum. Thank "god" that didn't happen (I'm also an atheist lol.)
Quote: ams288I come from a conservative Catholic middle class family. If I was straight I probably would have ended up on the other end of the spectrum. Thank "god" that didn't happen (I'm also an atheist lol.)
Wow, this forum attracts all types. There's also an asexual who posts here. He's a big time lib too.
Quote: Beethoven9thWow, this forum attracts all types. There's also an asexual who posts here. He's a big time lib too.
Roughly 4% of the population identify as fitting the LGBT spectrum and about close to 10% of the general US population are either atheist or agnostic so not at all unusual that you would have a gay atheist. Also again what is with you and knowing peoples orientation? I mean what did that question positively add to this conversation?
Quote: TwirdmanRoughly 4% of the population identify as fitting the LGBT spectrum and about close to 10% of the general US population are either atheist or agnostic so not at all unusual that you would have a gay atheist. Also again what is with you and knowing peoples orientation? I mean what did that question positively add to this conversation?
He brought the whole thing up, not me. I just thought he might find it interesting to know about others here. *shrug* (I didn't even name you, BTW)
Quote: Beethoven9thHe brought the whole thing up, not me. I just thought he might find it interesting to know about others here. *shrug* (I didn't even name you, BTW)
He brought up officiating a gay wedding not being gay. So again what does the question add to anything. You just brought it up to go aha knew it a gay liberal.
Quote: TwirdmanHe brought up officiating a gay wedding not being gay. So again what does the question add to anything. You just brought it up to go aha knew it a gay liberal.
You don't think bringing up gay weddings in the middle of a discussion about Benghazi is a little strange? *headshake*
Quote: Beethoven9thYou don't think bringing up gay weddings in the middle of a discussion about Benghazi is a little strange? *headshake*
The discussion at the time was water policy in the bay area which you brought up and the Bay area is known as a gay friendly area so not at all unusual. Also most of those 17 communities are not bay area. For instance Fresno and Madera county are both clearly in the central valley as is Kern County and Mariposa. Can't remember the other ones too well. Hence most of those counties also tend to vote Republican not Democrat. So you are saying the central valley should suffer for what the bay area voted for even though they vote quite differently. Also the effect is caused by a drought and while some of the policies made have an adverse effect the truth is the drought is playing a much larger role.
Quote: TwirdmanThe discussion at the time was water policy in the bay area which you brought up and the Bay area is known as a gay friendly area so not at all unusual. Also most of those 17 communities are not bay area. For instance Fresno and Madera county are both clearly in the central valley as is Kern County and Mariposa. Can't remember the other ones too well. Hence most of those counties also tend to vote Republican not Democrat. So you are saying the central valley should suffer for what the bay area voted for even though they vote quite differently. Also the effect is caused by a drought and while some of the policies made have an adverse effect the truth is the drought is playing a much larger role.
Good lord, I was talking about the BAY AREA communities. Do you people really expect some type of disclaimer in forum posts?? Most people can figure out what I meant when I responded to an article entitled "Some Bay Area Communities Could Run Out Of Water Within 4 Months". Too bad you couldn't figure it out. *facepalm*
And yes, the discussion drifted over to Benghazi as well!
Quote: Beethoven9thGood lord, I was talking about the BAY AREA communities. Do you people really expect some type of disclaimer in forum posts?? Most people can figure out what I meant when I responded to an article entitled "Some Bay Area Communities Could Run Out Of Water Within 4 Months". *facepalm*
And yes, the discussion drifted over to Benghazi as well!
Again though one that article is poorly thought out as almost none of those communities are Bay Area Communities and two how does one go about voting for a drought, which is the cause of the water shortage. I mean is that a special ballot measure since I never saw it when I lived in California. Seems basically everyone would vote against a drought but maybe you know more about it then me.
Quote: Twirdmanhow does one go about voting for a drought, which is the cause of the water shortage.
Now you're just willfully acting ignorant. C'mon, you people are smarter than that.
If you vote for people who don't know how to handle a drought (or anything else, for that matter) and laugh at those who tell you not to vote for those idiots, then you get what you deserve.
Quote: Beethoven9thNow you're just willfully acting ignorant. C'mon, you people are smarter than that.
If you vote for people who don't know how to handle a drought (or anything else, for that matter) and laugh at those who tell you not to vote for those idiots, then you get what you deserve.
Dealing with disasters like these are incredibly complex and it is very unlikely that any government would be able to properly handle it. I mean its being handled roughly as well if not better then the drought in Texas and would you blame that one in Texas on voting for people who don't know how to handle a drought. No it was simply a disaster that is very difficult to handle.
More willful ignorance.Quote: TwirdmanDealing with disasters like these are incredibly complex and it is very unlikely that any government would be able to properly handle it. I mean its being handled roughly as well if not better then the drought in Texas and would you blame that one in Texas on voting for people who don't know how to handle a drought. No it was simply a disaster that is very difficult to handle.
Did you even read the story? Probably not, but I see that still hasn't prevented you from spouting off. Anyway, there is no "disaster", and those communities haven't run out of water. Heck, the article has given everybody fair warning, so if they're still pathetic enough to screw things up from top to bottom, then (like I said before) they get what they deserve.
And, contrary to what you believe, part of the job of government officials is to prepare for disasters!!
EDIT: How come you've picked up right where your buddy ams288 left off? There was such a smooth transition. (IP check!)
