Donald inherited wealth from daddy who inherited wealth from grand-daddy pimp running a brothel

Listen, we've firmly established you would abandon 99% of what you believe in while voting. I already know that, the actual math being broken down isn't necessary.

I, won't. I'm not going to support someone I 99% disagree with simply because I've been told my only other choice is someone I 100% disagree with. All that leads to is people picking between the lesser of two evils. That was never the intent of our democracy at all.
it's not "because I've been told my only other choice is someone I 100% disagree with" it is "you have two choices, choose one. if you choose anything but these two you are throwing your vote away"

and this election WAS "the lesser of two evils" most people knew that going in. it doesn't matter if that was the intent of democracy or not, that what this was. it doesn't matter how much you hate it, that is what it was.



And when neither of them will edge it in the direction you want, then what do you do? You're suggesting everyone's feelings are represented by one of the two candidates so they should make a choice. But what happens when neither represent any of your feelings? What do you do if both would edge it in a direction you don't want your country to go in, what would you do?
hillary and trump represented very different ideologies. if you're claiming neither one was more agreeable to you than the other you are straight up lying.



Do you really wanna talk about being "pretty edgy and anti-conformist" after your "I never said I had principles" display of teenage idiocy?
i never said that. i said that i know that in elections with only 2 candidates that have a chance of winning you need to choose one of those two or you're throwing your vote away. you can choose the one you like the most or you can choose the one you hate the least. it doesn't matter, there were only 2 candidates in that race

Yes, I am. I'm accomplishing the task of not abandoning what I believe in for an empty victory.
you can still have principles and vote between the only 2 candidates that had a chance.

you also helped get trump in the white house. congrats on that btw.





Yeah, if only i jumped on team Trump. I could be celebrating a promise right now buying coins with Kim on it. Such acomplish, so ment.
the accomplishment is voting for someon that you either wantged in the white house or preventing from someon you didn't want in the white house from getting in. you did neither. your vote was worthless.



No that would be the idiots like you so devoid of principle and reason that they willingly jumped behind a man who's only intention was to con them in every sense of the word.

Part of what helps the sleep is watching the republican party fall to pieces because of voters like you.
no, it's literally the people that wanted to keep trump out of the white house but couldn't be bothered to actually vote for the one person who could have prevented it.

all the people in the swing states that thought that hillary was a sure thing so they didn't even need to bother going out and voting, all the people in the blue states that didn't bother voting and eventually turned the state red. they are the reason. all the "never trump" who though hillary was going to win so they did a dumb fucking protest vote. they almost take as much blame for trump being elected as the trump voters themselves. you, and they, could have prevented trumps presidency but they didn't feel like preventing it.
 
https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-trump-family-fortune/



Full article at link. Unlike the Kennedy / bootlegging rumours, this is actually true. (Though I remember reading that Joe Kennedy was proven to have done something much worse than bootlegging, but I don't remember what.)

Assuming that is true, what does it matter? President Obama's great-great-great-great-grandfather owned slaves in Kentucky, as did his great-great-great-great-great-grandmother.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/mar/04/uselections2008.barackobama
 
@Cojopi Extomino you helped get Trump elected? I and the country thank you bud

You're welcome. Just doing my part to help destroy the republican party.

Hey remember when you pretended you couldn't remember what you were saying because a thread was merged, and then a mod pointed out nothing was merged and you were a liar?

Of course you don't, you fled from that scene.

<{MingNope}>


Try acquiring some credibility before talking again ODB. You're really hurting yourself lately.
 
I dont even know where this all started and regarding which of punk's comments. I dont really care that much and this shit conversation has been merged making it even more difficult to know what the fuck I was even originally responding to.
You can quote if to clarify or just shit post. Your choice. I dont care that much to figure it out after the thread got merged
The thread got merged bruh... you can keep crying tho

I don't see any history of this thread being merged with another.

<{Heymansnicker}>

it's not "because I've been told my only other choice is someone I 100% disagree with" it is "you have two choices, choose one. if you choose anything but these two you are throwing your vote away"

Yes, that's what YOU think it is. If the only two choices for president were Jared Fogel and Larry Nassar, who would you decide should be the president of the USA? Which one would you put your name on a ballot to endorse as the chief representative of our nation?

Me, I wouldn't vote for either. Would I then be wrong for not wanting a pedophile to be president? I don't think so. I think every American has the absolute right to not vote for someone if they feel that person doesn't represent what their country stands for. How you aren't getting this is beyond me.

and this election WAS "the lesser of two evils" most people knew that going in. it doesn't matter if that was the intent of democracy or not, that what this was. it doesn't matter how much you hate it, that is what it was.

I'm not saying it wasn't. I'm saying when the choices are two evils or anything else, I'm gonna vote for anything else. I don't care if I'm not effecting the outcome. I'm standing for what I believe in.

hillary and trump represented very different ideologies. if you're claiming neither one was more agreeable to you than the other you are straight up lying.

Only one represented an ideology. Trump isn't a conservative at all, and his ideology can be summarized as "if it makes me look good, I do".

Also if I just vote based on who I hate the least and how much weight my vote has, voting was totally pointless.The state I voted in was already decided. You know why? Because we knew Trump better than every other state. That's why he only got 36% of the vote there.

Should I still have voted for Hilary even though I didn't believe she should be president?

i never said that. i said that i know that in elections with only 2 candidates

So not the Presidential Election of 2016.

that have a chance of winning you need to choose one of those two or you're throwing your vote away. you can choose the one you like the most or you can choose the one you hate the least. it doesn't matter, there were only 2 candidates in that race

I'm not throwing my vote away. Throwing a vote away would be using it to help someone you don't support.

you can still have principles and vote between the only 2 candidates that had a chance.

Not if those candidates don't share your principles. I know this is hard for someone who has none, but again, sleeping at night knowing I'm not a piece of shit is something I enjoy.

you also helped get trump in the white house. congrats on that btw.

Thanks. I never thought I'd be responsible for destroying the republican party and a great federal investigation exposing a pile of treasonous hypocrites.

the accomplishment is voting for someon that you either wantged in the white house or preventing from someon you didn't want in the white house from getting in. you did neither. your vote was worthless.

Worthless in the game of corrupted democracy. Priceless to those who refuse to take part.

no, it's literally the people that wanted to keep trump out of the white house but couldn't be bothered to actually vote for the one person who could have prevented it.

I'm never subscribing to the idea that the vote for POTUS is a "pick who you hate the least" contest. Period. You can keep going in circles with this, but eventually you're gonna be right back to posting your Trump artwork.

all the people in the swing states that thought that hillary was a sure thing so they didn't even need to bother going out and voting, all the people in the blue states that didn't bother voting and eventually turned the state red. they are the reason. all the "never trump" who though hillary was going to win so they did a dumb fucking protest vote. they almost take as much blame for trump being elected as the trump voters themselves. you, and they, could have prevented trumps presidency but they didn't feel like preventing it.

No I'd say people who didn't vote for something definitely don't share the blame with people who did. Especially those registered in NY. But we've long established reasoning isn't your strong suit.

I eagerly await the next hilarious picture.
 
So not the Presidential Election of 2016.

what you quoted for this response
i never said that. i said that i know that in elections with only 2 candidates
the full quote...

i never said that. i said that i know that in elections with only 2 candidates that have a chance of winning you need to choose one of those two or you're throwing your vote away. you can choose the one you like the most or you can choose the one you hate the least. it doesn't matter, there were only 2 candidates in that race

this is exactly why i don't bother responding to half of your stupid shit. you're taking things out of context to the point that you are literally quoting half of a sentence and arguing that

how many candidates had a real chance of winning the presidential election of '16 and what were the chances?




I eagerly await the next hilarious picture.
this is ironic considering i posted 1 picture that you can't let go of. yet you started this post with a picture.
 
what you quoted for this response

the full quote...

You really couldn't tell I did that intentionally just to make a joke reasserting my position?

this is exactly why i don't bother responding to half of your stupid shit. you're taking things out of context to the point that you are literally quoting half of a sentence and arguing that

If you actually read my response, you would realize I responded to the full quote even though I cut the start of it off to make a joke. My interpretation of what you were saying at no point displays a purposeful misinterpretation of anything you're saying.

how many candidates had a real chance of winning the presidential election of '16 and what were the chances?

Does real mean something different when it's italicized? Any candidate with a well articulated platform had a chance. Only 2 had a very good chance. But that's only because of 2 parties who've warped the mindsets of easily manipulated people like you. The rest of us don't submit to the corruption of our democracy just because we feel it's too late to fix it.

this is ironic considering i posted 1 picture that you can't let go of. yet you started this post with a picture.

The point is we've literally gone over every bit of this already, to the point where all you could offer as a reply, was a picture.

So save us both the headache, and just do it again. Because all I'm doing is explaining what a tree looks like to a blind person, and he won't even take me up on the free surgery I'm offering.
 
Last edited:
You really couldn't tell I did that intentionally just to make a joke reasserting my position?
the joke is shit because it's a two party race despite how many irrelevant idiots try to join in




Does real mean something different when it's italicized? Any candidate with a well articulate platform had a chance. Only 2 had a very good chance. But that's only because of 2 parties who've warped the mindsets of easily manipulated people like you. The rest of us don't submit to the corruption of our democracy just because we feel it's too late to fix it.
yes, because it wasn't meant as they literally have a chance as in .0000001% . it was meant as do they have a realistic chance. the answer is no, so even mentioning them is fucking dumb
 
the joke is shit because it's a two party race despite how many irrelevant idiots try to join in

Well now the joke is about how you missed a joke, had to have it explained to you, and are now falling back on the same... exact... shit we've discussed endlessly. What exactly(other than how jokes work) are you not getting here?

yes, because it wasn't meant as they literally have a chance as in .0000001% . it was meant as do they have a realistic chance. the answer is no, so even mentioning them is fucking dumb

And you have my answer for both interpretations.. So why are you still here? Just to piss and moan?
 
Back then, did dudes use rubber? Were they commercially available, or did the ladies let them be raw-dogged? How did they control pregnancies and STD's?
Rubber condoms have been around since the 1850s. Modern latex condoms originated in the 1920s. Before the AIDS crisis it was common for sex workers not to use them at all.
 
Tell me more about superfluously peacocking as you spend 34973 words arguing the semantics surrounding a broken and misused system.

Answer this: when you go to vote, can you only vote for a democrat or a republican?
Depending on the state, the round of voting, and your registration, yes.

Are you one of those people who debates politics on the internet, but doesn't vote? How in the blue fuck does an American adult not know this?
Answer this: How many political parties exist in the US?
An unlimited number.

Follow-up question: How many have primary tickets?
Answer this: Are those parties capable of being involved in a general election with enough support?
Yes.

Follow-up question: do they currently have or have they ever had that support? Second follow-up: perusing history, when a third party has gained enough support to successfully disrupt one of the major party platforms, what has typically been the result of that disruption? Which time did the two-party platform implode?
Answer those 3 questions, then write me another novel about how we only have a 2 party system. The truth is "the majority of America has been tricked into thinking we have a 2-party system". But all you have to do is cast a vote for something other than a republican or democrat to see that's factually incorrect.
The fact that you don't have to vote for a candidate from one of the major two parties is not mutually exclusive to the definitions of the system.

Your inability to grasp this simple fact reflects a capacity for comprehension that exceeds mere ignorance.
 
Depending


My question had nothing to do with specific circumstances, and you know it.

on the state, the round of voting, and your registration, yes.

Are you one of those people who debates politics on the internet, but doesn't vote? How in the blue fuck does an American adult not know this?

There's a lever right!

An unlimited number.

Seems strange for a country with a 2 party system.

Follow-up question: How many have primary tickets?

Not many, because it's entirely dependent on support they get from people who haven't been convinced they only have 2 choices every 4 years.

Yes.

Follow-up question: do they currently have or have they ever had that support?

Nope. Does that in any way invalidate what I'm saying? You're sitting here agreeing with me that any number of parties can have a presidential candidate with enough support... while telling me it's a 2 party system.

We're in full agreement about the corruption. I'm simply not submitting to it.

Second follow-up: perusing history, when a third party has gained enough support to successfully disrupt one of the major party platforms, what has typically been the result of that disruption? Which time did the two-party platform implode?

So we should never strive for something there is no precedent of even though it represents our stated ideals? You're basically telling me "everything's fucked up, deal with it!" is the reason "the USA is a 2-party system". While agreeing that it's entirely possible for it not to be. So if the only reason it's "a 2-party system" is our submissive nature in the face of corruption, is it smart to refer to it as a "2 party system"? Or should we remind people democrats and republicans haven't completely stolen our country yet?


The fact that you don't have to vote for a candidate from one of the major two parties is not mutually exclusive to the definitions of the system.

Your inability to grasp this simple fact reflects a capacity for comprehension that exceeds mere ignorance.

Can a political party in America put forth a Presidential candidate that isn't a democrat or republican with enough support?

Than how are we just a 2 party system?
 
My question had nothing to do with specific circumstances, and you know it.
No, the only thing that I learned was your ignorance to our voting process.

Be quiet and read more.
 
You're welcome. Just doing my part to help destroy the republican party.

Hey remember when you pretended you couldn't remember what you were saying because a thread was merged, and then a mod pointed out nothing was merged and you were a liar?

Of course you don't, you fled from that scene.

<{MingNope}>


Try acquiring some credibility before talking again ODB. You're really hurting yourself lately.

Hahahaha I just realized what happened. I posted in the other thread and you quoted me here for absolutely no reason. My original comment was to some idiot saying Punk had the same political experience as Trump.

What the fuck are you going on about?
 
Hahahaha I just realized what happened. I posted in the other thread and you quoted me here for absolutely no reason. My original comment was to some idiot saying Punk had the same political experience as Trump.

What the fuck are you going on about?

I was talking about how you randomly made a stupid comment, got called on it, then tried to pretend this thread got merged with another. Until a moderator pointed out you were completely full of shit.

But you knew that already.
 
The amount of butthurt that keeps the left this way has provided so much entertainment...not even 2 obama terms didn't do this to the rights....lol...
 
Some of you should charge Trump rent for all the time he spends in your heads.

52582381.jpg
 
Back
Top