Law When Trump, Schumer, and Pelosi Meet...

Don't call each other concessions. It's rude.
giphy.gif
Got eeeeeeeeem!
 
Clearly you're not, because I just explained it for you. Don't place your ineptitude for nuance at my feet.

Well, you didn’t frame things in a realistic way in your reply; that is, cracking down on immigration will necessitate expanding the State. You don’t deal in realities. It isn’t going to magically happen with the same levels of funding and State enforcement.
 
And going forward, after white people secede their own territory, that's something to take into consideration this time. Now we know how dangerous it is to include a population of people that are completely immiscible with the rest of the population.

White people wont secede dont be ridiculous.
 
Well, you didn’t frame things in a realistic way in your reply; that is, cracking down on immigration will necessitate expanding the State. You don’t deal in realities. It isn’t going to magically happen with the same levels of funding and State enforcement.

You asked me about an ethical justification, not about current fiscal policy. Shoo fly.
 
If you heard what he said (which you didn't 'cause you were lodged in Pelosi's starfish), Trump stated that of course it can be passed easily in the House BUT THEY NEED AT LEAST 10 DEMOCRATS TO APPROVE IT IN THE SENATE!

Think, McFly! Think! <LikeReally5><LikeReally5><LikeReally5>
Lol, a bullshit excuse so he can blame the democrats. He doesn't want another huge embarrassing failure possibly in the house this time with lame duck republicans, or again for certain in the house, where he didn't even crack 50 votes in the senate with the GOP plan back in February. Face it, he doesn't have the support.

Edit: accidentally quoted Greoric, deleted the quote, sorry about that.
 
Last edited:
Lol, a bullshit excuse so he can blame the democrats. He doesn't want another huge embarrassing failure possibly in the house this time with lame duck republicans, or again for certain in the house, where he didn't even crack 50 votes in the senate with the GOP plan back in February. Face it, he doesn't have the support.

<Huh2><Huh2><Huh2><Huh2><Huh2>
 
This is some stupid shit I'm reading here. "excuse", my ass. He needs 10 Democrats because that's how it is. If he could pass it through the Senate with the Republican Majority, he WOULD'VE.
 
This is some stupid shit I'm reading here. "excuse", my ass. He needs 10 Democrats because that's how it is. If he could pass it through the Senate with the Republican Majority, he WOULD'VE.
Dude. Again, he tried the gop plan in February and didn't even get 50 votes in the senate (the significance of that is it failed regardless of democrats, in case you're wondering). They then tried a bi-partisan bill that Trump roundly criticized, and that failed with 54 votes (I believe some of those were also republican but I'd have to check).

Now he's facing a lame duck house and doesn't want to risk it failing there before the dems take over. That's why Pelosi was pushing him to put it to a vote. She sucks in many ways but counting votes ain't one of them.

Keeping it real, I think the dems should be (and they say they are) willing to compromise on evidence based security measures that include an expansion of the wall, and I think they would if Trump didn't throw tantrums all the time, but who really knows.

Fact remains, my point stands. He doesn't have the votes and wants to implement a policy the isn't wanted by the majority of the people, as evidenced by the lack of votes and the turnover in the house. Blame who you want, the system was designed this way for a reason and he just wants to shut down when it doesn't go his way. He's a turd.

ETA: Forgot about the two bills in June that couldn't even pass the house.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/27/house-rejects-latest-republican-immigration-bill.html
 
Last edited:
You better hope they do, or this is going to get really nasty when they become the minority.

They have been the minority forever in Latin America and they still sit at the top of the food chain, so no, they wont secede and they wont relinquish control either.
 
They have been the minority forever in Latin America and they still sit at the top of the food chain, so no, they wont secede and they wont relinquish control either.

They also don't have the same social marxist pressures that are now abundant in the US.
 
They also don't have the same social marxist pressures that are now abundant in the US.

What makes you think a white nation wont have social marxist pressures? last time i checked Marxism was invented and gained global prominence in Europe, then it was exported to non-white countries.
 
What makes you think a white nation wont have social marxist pressures? last time i checked Marxism was invented and gained global prominence in Europe, then it was exported to non-white countries.

Because there won't be different races with drastically apparent distributions of outcome for the ideology to exploit, like there is now.
 
Because there won't be different races with drastically apparent distributions of outcome for the ideology to exploit, like there is now.

There wasnt such a thing 100 years ago either, when Bolshevism triumphed in Russia.

Im certain there is no racial element in the yellow jacket protests either, you just need people that feels that the current system fucks them up.
 
Dude. Again, he tried the gop plan in February and didn't even get 50 votes in the senate (the significance of that is it failed regardless of democrats, in case you're wondering). They then tried a bi-partisan bill that Trump roundly criticized, and that failed with 54 votes (I believe some of those were also republican but I'd have to check).

Now he's facing a lame duck house and doesn't want to risk it failing there before the dems take over. That's why Pelosi was pushing him to put it to a vote. She sucks in many ways but counting votes ain't one of them.

Keeping it real, I think the dems should be (and they say they are) willing to compromise on evidence based security measures that include an expansion of the wall, and I think they would if Trump didn't throw tantrums all the time, but who really knows.

Fact remains, my point stands. He doesn't have the votes and wants to implement a policy the isn't wanted by the majority of the people, as evidenced by the lack of votes and the turnover in the house. Blame who you want, the system was designed this way for a reason and he just wants to shut down when it doesn't go his way. He's a turd.

ETA: Forgot about the two bills in June that couldn't even pass the house.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/27/house-rejects-latest-republican-immigration-bill.html

I heard the Republicans in the Senate were putting out a bill for the Wall in support of the President.....
 
There wasnt such a thing 100 years ago either, when Bolshevism triumphed in Russia.

Im certain there is no racial element in the yellow jacket protests either, you just need people that feels that the current system fucks them up.

Exactly right. Marxism initially was plausible with regard to attacking different classes in terms of wealth. Now, with the almost universal and obvious realization that decentralized markets and capitalism are far superior at producing prosperous societies and not demociding their people en mass, no one except the most dull buy it anymore. The people that still wanted to push for an equal outcome and classless society had to find another angle to exploit, and the racial angle was it.

Ironically, Karl Marx was among the most grotesque racists, and it took @Trotsky ... literally Leon Trotsky to play up and attack the idea of classism on racial grounds... Hence why you have your different privilege levels. Really the uniting principle is that humans are completely malliable and exclusively the product of environment. The older marxists thought that if you just had a totalitarian state you could transform people into being self-less and achieve communism on the other end. In Marxism 2.0, they similarly completely reject biology and the fact that different human populations, are in fact different. The only reason there's any difference in outcome between groups, according to them.... is by virtue of oppression.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top