A little bit more hypocrisy... before claiming the moral high ground again. Meh...
I think the Dems have now a moral obligation to pack the court.
A little bit more hypocrisy... before claiming the moral high ground again. Meh...
CrazyIslander wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 1:28 am I wonder if the Dems win both houses whether they could impeach ACB due to the improper process of her nomination.
Many millions of people areBokJock wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 8:43 pmI really so hope so, it would be properly sad if they were actually this gullibleFat Old Git wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 8:22 pmTbf, I'm not convince that Mick and Santa are really Trump supporters and not just low grade trolls who want to believe they're scoring cool points and winding people up.4071 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 1:04 pmI think Mick gets it.Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 12:23 pmNothing surprising tbf. You'd have to be someone like Mick not to get it.TheFrog wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 11:48 am Interesting analysis
https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... tudy-trump
The strong correlation between support for Trump and pro-autocratic attitudes has been well-understood for some time.
These people (even the ones that rather amusingly claim to be libertarian) have a preference for autocracy and a fear of the wrong autocrat getting in. The likes of Mick and Santa clearly justify their support for Trump by creating a fictional autocratic Left and pretending that only their autocrat can prevent the other autocrat from getting in.
It apparently never occurs to them that there is an alternative to autocracy.
Over 60,000,000 and no trump is not the orange hitler or satan. Just a lot of rank and file Republican voters as well as the weirdo base trump built up in 2016...Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:12 amMany millions of people areBokJock wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 8:43 pmI really so hope so, it would be properly sad if they were actually this gullibleFat Old Git wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 8:22 pmTbf, I'm not convince that Mick and Santa are really Trump supporters and not just low grade trolls who want to believe they're scoring cool points and winding people up.4071 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 1:04 pmI think Mick gets it.Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 12:23 pm
Nothing surprising tbf. You'd have to be someone like Mick not to get it.
The strong correlation between support for Trump and pro-autocratic attitudes has been well-understood for some time.
These people (even the ones that rather amusingly claim to be libertarian) have a preference for autocracy and a fear of the wrong autocrat getting in. The likes of Mick and Santa clearly justify their support for Trump by creating a fictional autocratic Left and pretending that only their autocrat can prevent the other autocrat from getting in.
It apparently never occurs to them that there is an alternative to autocracy.![]()
It's the rank and file Republicans (including a former president) who refuse to vote for him who I understand. I wish like some others they would vote Democrat to hammer home the point.jamesfreeman wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:52 amOver 60,000,000 and no trump is not the orange hitler or satan. Just a lot of rank and file Republican voters as well as the weirdo base trump built up in 2016...Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:12 amMany millions of people areBokJock wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 8:43 pmI really so hope so, it would be properly sad if they were actually this gullibleFat Old Git wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 8:22 pmTbf, I'm not convince that Mick and Santa are really Trump supporters and not just low grade trolls who want to believe they're scoring cool points and winding people up.4071 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 1:04 pm
I think Mick gets it.
The strong correlation between support for Trump and pro-autocratic attitudes has been well-understood for some time.
These people (even the ones that rather amusingly claim to be libertarian) have a preference for autocracy and a fear of the wrong autocrat getting in. The likes of Mick and Santa clearly justify their support for Trump by creating a fictional autocratic Left and pretending that only their autocrat can prevent the other autocrat from getting in.
It apparently never occurs to them that there is an alternative to autocracy.![]()
Tbf the confirmation of a third(!) conservative justice in four years just a few hours ago could certainly be said to vindicate the hold-your-nose-and-vote-for-whoever's-wearing-the-red-tie voters.Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 4:41 am It's the rank and file Republicans (including a former president) who refuse to vote for him who I understand. I wish like some others they would vote Democrat to hammer home the point.
Oh they're doing well, thanks for asking. While some were fretting over emails and "debates" and some sort of popularity contest run amok, they've headed south and are presently soaking up in the sun in Covidville, FL.TheFrog wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 10:32 pmHow's the family keeping by the way? Worried you haven't shared a few updates on your cousins.fonzeee wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 8:34 pm I'll be damned if I'm going to go back through this thread but I presume the looming confirmation of ACB has been discussed?
I see Murkowski, who said she wouldn't vote for the confirmation, is going to vote to confirm. Some semantic excuse about disapproving of the process but approving the fitness of the nominee.
Biden is unacceptable to some Dems. They will not vote Trump, but will also not support Biden due to his stance on abortion.fonzeee wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 5:58 amTbf the confirmation of a third(!) conservative justice in four years just a few hours ago could certainly be said to vindicate the hold-your-nose-and-vote-for-whoever's-wearing-the-red-tie voters.Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 4:41 am It's the rank and file Republicans (including a former president) who refuse to vote for him who I understand. I wish like some others they would vote Democrat to hammer home the point.
Lots of "ends justifying the means" rationalizations in this day and age, on both sides.
Mick Mannock wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 8:36 amBiden is unacceptable to some Dems. They will not vote Trump, but will also not support Biden due to his stance on abortion.fonzeee wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 5:58 amTbf the confirmation of a third(!) conservative justice in four years just a few hours ago could certainly be said to vindicate the hold-your-nose-and-vote-for-whoever's-wearing-the-red-tie voters.Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 4:41 am It's the rank and file Republicans (including a former president) who refuse to vote for him who I understand. I wish like some others they would vote Democrat to hammer home the point.
Lots of "ends justifying the means" rationalizations in this day and age, on both sides.
.Mr Biden's key message: We will protect a woman's right to choose and fight to keep access to abortion legal.
Probably 2016. Almost certainly 2012Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 9:49 amMick Mannock wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 8:36 amBiden is unacceptable to some Dems. They will not vote Trump, but will also not support Biden due to his stance on abortion.fonzeee wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 5:58 amTbf the confirmation of a third(!) conservative justice in four years just a few hours ago could certainly be said to vindicate the hold-your-nose-and-vote-for-whoever's-wearing-the-red-tie voters.Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 4:41 am It's the rank and file Republicans (including a former president) who refuse to vote for him who I understand. I wish like some others they would vote Democrat to hammer home the point.
Lots of "ends justifying the means" rationalizations in this day and age, on both sides..Mr Biden's key message: We will protect a woman's right to choose and fight to keep access to abortion legal.
When was the last time these Dems voted for a Democratic presidential candidate ?
Yes, the requested file was only available at the link for 10 minutes. I'm not sure if you understand how time works, but if that 10 minute period had already expired in the past, then it wasn't going to be any less expired a week later.Mick Mannock wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 10:50 pm4071 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:36 pmPolitical Science Quarterly.Mick Mannock wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:33 pmWhatever he is up to, I am not clicking any more of his speciality links.
A journal of Public and International Affairs, published since 1886 by the Academy of Political Science.
I know, I know. Fake News.
Whatever.Still gives this result.The requested file is available at this link only for 10 minutes.
It would be nice if you stopped being such a prissy self-important little pansy.4071 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 9:58 amYes, the requested file was only available at the link for 10 minutes. I'm not sure if you understand how time works, but if that 10 minute period had already expired in the past, then it wasn't going to be any less expired a week later.Mick Mannock wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 10:50 pm4071 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:36 pmPolitical Science Quarterly.Mick Mannock wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:33 pmWhatever he is up to, I am not clicking any more of his speciality links.
A journal of Public and International Affairs, published since 1886 by the Academy of Political Science.
I know, I know. Fake News.
Whatever.Still gives this result.The requested file is available at this link only for 10 minutes.
However, you could look at the root of the URL and work out the source (even if I hadn't told you the source), and I included the names of the people who contributed to the study. It wouldn't take a genius to work out how to find the information.
Not that you would read it anyway.
Nor would you need to - I posted it for Bimbo to ignore, rather than you, as he was the one who had demanded the information under the mistaken belief that such studies didn't exist.
I actually thought you were not one of these posters
Sure, it's "both sides"fonzeee wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 5:58 amTbf the confirmation of a third(!) conservative justice in four years just a few hours ago could certainly be said to vindicate the hold-your-nose-and-vote-for-whoever's-wearing-the-red-tie voters.Anonymous 1 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 4:41 am It's the rank and file Republicans (including a former president) who refuse to vote for him who I understand. I wish like some others they would vote Democrat to hammer home the point.
Lots of "ends justifying the means" rationalizations in this day and age, on both sides.
Homophobia on top of the paedo obsession.Mick Mannock wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:02 amIt would be nice if you stopped being such a prissy self-important little pansy.4071 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 9:58 amYes, the requested file was only available at the link for 10 minutes. I'm not sure if you understand how time works, but if that 10 minute period had already expired in the past, then it wasn't going to be any less expired a week later.Mick Mannock wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 10:50 pm4071 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:36 pmPolitical Science Quarterly.Mick Mannock wrote: ↑Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:33 pm
Whatever he is up to, I am not clicking any more of his speciality links.
A journal of Public and International Affairs, published since 1886 by the Academy of Political Science.
I know, I know. Fake News.
Whatever.Still gives this result.The requested file is available at this link only for 10 minutes.
However, you could look at the root of the URL and work out the source (even if I hadn't told you the source), and I included the names of the people who contributed to the study. It wouldn't take a genius to work out how to find the information.
Not that you would read it anyway.
Nor would you need to - I posted it for Bimbo to ignore, rather than you, as he was the one who had demanded the information under the mistaken belief that such studies didn't exist.
I am not sure there is anyone on here who takes themselves so seriously as you do.
Hunter BidenMullet 2 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:25 am
Dangerous and frankly ignorant nonsense.
Anyway I wonder who gets today’s Paedo accusation
Mick Mannock wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:12 am I withdraw "pansy."
I will substitute "boring, dull, prig."
And not the guy who was accused of raping a child (who then withdrew the claim after threats from Trump's acolytes), and who has been caught on camera making sexually inappropriate comments about a 10-year old girl and who has actually admitted deliberately walking in on underage girls whilst they are getting changed?Mick Mannock wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:28 amHunter BidenMullet 2 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:25 am
Dangerous and frankly ignorant nonsense.
Anyway I wonder who gets today’s Paedo accusation
Christians don't need him now.
It won't make a difference this time. I think the supreme court announcement could get more conservative undecided voters to vote for Trump.
That smear tactic worked against Hilary last time but don't think people will be fooled twice now that they've gotten to know Donald better.