Social WR Lounge v214: RR, will it be Meth?

Favorite dinosaur?

  • Total voters
    44
Status
Not open for further replies.
Higus said:
Some potential benefits of impeachment even after inauguration are that it would make him ineligible for the pension and other benefits, as well as preventing him from running for office in 2024.
Click to expand...

You see, I want him to be ineligible for retirement benefits, but I don't want to disqualify him from running.

I want him as the 2024 and 2028 Republican candidate if possible. I'm not sure there's any other Republican that Kamala can beat.
 
Trotsky said:
You see, I want him to be ineligible for retirement benefits, but I don't want to disqualify him from running.

I want him as the 2024 and 2028 Republican candidate if possible. I'm not sure there's any other Republican that Kamala can beat.
Click to expand...
She couldn’t even secure the democratic presidential nomination.
 
Trotsky said:
You see, I want him to be ineligible for retirement benefits, but I don't want to disqualify him from running.

I want him as the 2024 and 2028 Republican candidate if possible. I'm not sure there's any other Republican that Kamala can beat.
Click to expand...
I remember a lot of smug libs (myself included) saying they welcomed Trump winning the 2016 primaries because he would be a shoe in to lose. Be careful what you wish for.
Anyway, a lot can happen in 4 years. Back in 2016, if Trump didn't win, the next choices down were Jeb, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich, Carson, etc. I wouldn't call any of them a great odds against Harris today. And I say this as someone that has no attachment to Biden or Harris today.
 
Sara said:
She couldn’t even secure the democratic presidential nomination.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's really all that relevant tbh (I think weak primary candidates can be strong general candidates), but I thought and continue to think she's the weakest general election candidate of the 2020 Democratic field. By far. She's (1) nonwhite, (2) a woman, (3) from California, (4) someone with a spotty and apparently opportunistic political history, and (5) attractive and sexually charming enough that she'll trigger the weird horny-hate thing from white men.

Combine that with the fact that she wasn't nearly as impressive as we all expected in the primary or general debates and it's just a loser candidacy.
 
136387095_5622252941134037_4005697887030464776_n.jpg
 
Trotsky said:
I don't think that's really all that relevant tbh (I think weak primary candidates can be strong general candidates), but I thought and continue to think she's the weakest general election candidate of the 2020 Democratic field. By far. She's (1) nonwhite, (2) a woman, (3) from California, (4) someone with a spotty and apparently opportunistic political history, and (5) attractive and sexually charming enough that she'll trigger the weird horny-hate thing from white men.

Combine that with the fact that she wasn't nearly as impressive as we all expected in the primary or general debates and it's just a loser candidacy.
Click to expand...
I think it’s, and it pains me as a woman to say this but they are not going to put up an unlikable woman against any Republican, for Christ sakes Trump, a known moron crook beat Hilary.
 
Captain Davis said:
Even though I believe the election was certainly compromised, without any proof, I would accept it as is, by January 20. I don’t mind Trump using every legal Avenue to assure a legitimate election, but once his measures are exhausted, I would accept the results.
Click to expand...
I meant more along the lines that you would be satisfied that the election results were valid, or that there wasn't enough evidence to support a credible widespread fraud theory.
 
Sara said:
I think it’s, and it pains me as a woman to say this but they are not going to put up an unlikable woman against any Republican, for Christ sakes Trump, a known moron crook beat Hilary.
Click to expand...

I don't think there's much central power, let alone central wisdom, in the Democratic Party. And I personally find Harris to be very likable, but I'm just making guesses based on my own observations. For instance, Amy Klobuchar seems notoriously unlikable to....well, everyone. But I would expect her to perform much better than Kamala in the general by virtue of the fact that she is Midwestern rather than coastal, is perceived as moderate rather than liberal, is white rather than nonwhite, and isn't perceived as being as sexual as Harris.

I think similar factors work against Kirsten Gillibrand, who I think is a very shrewd politician but who inspires a lot of sexist hate from all across the political spectrum.
 
Trotsky said:
I honestly had never even thought about the fact that Donald Trump, as reward for spending 4 years lying and engaging in open corruption, will get $219,000 a year for the rest of his life as his presidential pension.

That's infuriating. It's a drop in the bucket compared to his debts, but still annoying.
Click to expand...


Don't forget the travel allowance of $1M a year lol
 
Gregolian said:
I frankly don't care. I don't get why former presidents earn such a large pension and still get tax paid security their whole damn lives after leaving office.
Click to expand...

People felt bad for Truman being penniless due to his principles not allowing him to make money in the private sector and overcompensated
 
Someone commented this on an unrelated story about Illinois state congressional politics:

"100 plus days of far left extremism laying siege trying to burn down federal property and police stations. At one point in Portland they tried to barricade doors. The exits and entrances to a police station and burn it. To cook the police officer inside alive. That is terrorism." - Tim Pool, Liberal Democrat Journalist
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,281,149
Messages
58,344,193
Members
176,009
Latest member
wmmaf

Share this page

Back
Top