Search the Community

What is significant about this group is that while Tester and Heitkamp and Manchin are facing tough reelection fights in states that went for Trump, Durbin, Blumenthal, and Coons have seats for life and they have strong credibility with the Democrat base. If they aren’t pushing filibuster then, more likely than not, it isn’t going to happen. Schumer has pretty much locked himself into pushing a filibuster and daring McConnell to get rid of the filibuster. This is going to strike directly at his ability to lead his caucus in the coming fights. Not only that, but Durbin's position as minority whip speaks loudly here as well.

If I've said it once I've said it thousands of times: multikult does not work. End of story. The way these people live is not compatible with Western values. Sweden is committing cultural suicide and their "feminist government" bloviates about Trump's choice of men for his cabinet while happily donning hijabs in Iran. The doublethink would be hilarious if it weren't so horrific.

Someone I know was talking about Trump's tweet re: flag burning, calling for punishment for it: Them: "Can you believe that Trump wants to punish people who burn the flag?" Me: "You mean he would have supported that flag-burning bill that Hillary co-sponsored?" Them: "..." Either these are some funny coincidences or Trump is having a lot of fun making the left trip over their own shoelaces.

Once the Supreme Court repeals the 20th Century and we deport about 75 million people maybe we'll get some actual Constitutional governing again. Until then I just hope that Trump can muster even 25% of the Trump you lot seem to fear should he get elected. I'm not holding out any hope.

It's a (really, another) campaign promise that Trump seems fully intent on keeping. The lower courts are being stuffed to the gills with right-wing judges.

Recent Republican presidents not named George W. Bush and Donald Trump have an awful track record when it comes to that. Based on his Gorsuch pick I don't think Trump would make the same mistakes Reagan and H. W. did.

Kind of like Nate Silver did this time around. Over, and over, and over, and over... It'd be interesting to see a retrospective on Nate Silver's coverage of Trump's chances to win the GOP nomination. Of course, we won't be seeing that over at fivethirty!@#$you anytime soon.

Personally, I, too, think of the greatest generation. I would add that they valued family, community, and loyalty as well. Agree (in at least some part) with your assessment of Trump. However, he isn't the important part of the idea anyway. This argument is always brought up to put down reactionary politics. It's silly at best, stupid at worst, and should be put down.

So, #cuckservative has been trending quite a bit in the "alt-right" blogosphere and social media lately. It has even broken into mainstream media in this WaPo article. Though it's silly and fraught with cries of "rayyyyycism" it touches on something that I've been thinking about for a while: Trump's current campaign slogan concedes something that shouldn't be overlooked: America is no longer great. The "cuckservative" idea, I think, comes from this: "conservatives" (aka "cuckservatives") ceded so much ground to leftists over time that there is nothing good left to conserve. Thus, a return to status quo ante is the only option left for those who wish America to be great again. So what do the minds that fall on the right of the political spectrum here think about this? Is it time to start thinking in terms of the reactionary, rather than the conservative? P.S. For the leftists who may wish to chime in: cries of "raaaayyycism" will not be tolerated and you will leave my beloved thread immediately should it be your desire to make such idiocy heard. P.P.S. This (NSFW, possibly) Breitbart article is recommended reading. A choice quote: Sound like anyone we know here? It's on the tip of my tongue...

Can't wait to watch Trump just **** on everyone.

She looked highly !@#$able in that little black dress. Despite the chickenhawking and bible-thumping, Cruz came out and impressed me last night. Kasich was good, though I don't like him politically. Carson is sensible as hell, and brilliant. Rubio was impressive as well. Not impressed with: Jeb (no surprises there), Christie (when you lean that much on sophistry and sentimentalism, you look like an asshat), Trump (needs moar insults). Like others have said, Fiorina was killing it out there in the early debate. Nobody else looked like they belonged on stage.

Remember when the people who said that Trump wouldn't accept the conclusions of the Mueller report ended up being the exact same people who can't accept the conclusions of the Mueller report? Fun times. Fun times. But back to the task at hand: Chicago politicreeps managed to get this guy off the hook, but why? Could it be that he's in a group that prides itself on providing group members with old-fashioned privileges because of some sense of superiority? They had him dead to rights on at least one charge. What about money? Who got money, from whom, when, and for what purpose? And don't forget that Chicago PD basically called it when it was revealed Kim Foxx was going to handle the case (at first).

So what do you guys think about Trump's new campaign poster? http://twt-thumbs.washtimes.com/media/image/2015/08/26/gunman_s878x918.jpg?9300b3ccffdd437968616acd1b80788ffa6580b1

Cruz - 94% Santorum - 94% Walker - 92% Bush - 91% Perry - 88% Huckabee - 87% Paul - 86% Rubio - 85% Carson - 83% Trump - 78% Fiorina - 75% Christie - 69% Kasich - 67% Clinton - 19% Sanders - 12% O'Malley - 9% (lol) Right-Wing Libertarian.

C'mon man, you've had a trump card in your sleeve all along. PO is from Canada, the country that produced nickelback. And he's trying to assert superior taste to ours.

I tend to hold the position that nurture and environment, for the most part, trumps nature. There are certain conditions that can make behavior like this "normal" for their state of mind (then it would fall under nature), but they are extremely rare.

Voted for Trump just to !@#$ up the pBills poll

Let's say NY DA actually charge Trump. I have a surefire way to know if it is a political persecution vs. a legitimate prosecution: If Trump spends a single minute behind bars, it's a political/media stunt. 100% Those of you who know nothing about criminal justice in New York County need not reply.

Sorry I don't identify as a Trump fan and have been very publicly critical here of both him and China.

Has nothing to do with spending, or a country losing nearly an entire generation of men, or any number of other reasons why it was always a bad idea. Just that Trump is a Kremlin-owned asset. Who had four years in the WH which allowed Putin to continue to increase aggressions in Ukraine unabated, right? Oh, no, that didn't happen. But Trump did relax sanctions on Russia, right? Oh, no, that's right, that didn't happen either. But Trump did at least continue the Obama policy on not arming Ukraine, right? Hmm...no that doesn't track either. Wait, didn't Trump do nothing when it was found that Russia wasn't complying with arms treaties? I think at this point the questions will answer themselves.

Well, let's not assume anything regarding the level of delusion or self-deception in the Democratic party. They might have legitimately thought if they pumped Biden with enough supps and stims they could get him through with a ton of prep. Moving it up would also hold off 3+ months of further decline and they can hide him in October like they did last time. The whole reason for running Joe to begin with was because the Dems had very few viable options going into 2020. They haven't really developed any more since (Newsome is intriguing for them but clearly had no plans to run this year and appears to be gearing up for a possible 2028 bid). Republicans, for all their faults, have a few people that could bring out all the normal Republican voters should they choose to run. But for a moment let's accept Dave "I buy boys" Rubin's premise that Trump "fell for it" with regard to the debate. The Democrats now have a little inside two months to get their act together and coalesce around another candidate. In this scenario, the DNC old guard who are currently running the country in Biden's stead certainly already have *their guy* and have had him for some time now. The problem is that there are some much younger Dems with some actual principles in Congress currently who wouldn't be able to see the writing on the wall and think it's the time for *their guy* instead. I doubt very much that the likes of AOC, Omar, etc. and the folks that support and vote for those types are rushing to install another Biden-type who can have the strings pulled by the same shills managing the decline of this country currently. And now Trump is in a position where he may beat the hell out of the Biden piñata but also very publicly raise the obvious question to everyone with a functioning frontal lobe: who, in fact, is calling the shots? He can pillory the entire democratic party for allowing this to continue when many of them obviously knew. Meanwhile the Dems have to somewhat scramble to get the ducks and delegates in a row to nominate someone in August with a very short ramp to the election. In short, I think Trump stands to *gain* more than lose by having an early debate, even if the plan all along was to move off Biden.

Is he wrong, in that specific instance? If Trump had actually followed through on his campaign promises regarding the border no amount of ballot harvesting and 4am box dumps would have been able to overcome the incredible majority that would have pulled the lever for him. It was all over by SOTU 2018.

I wish Trump was what leftists constantly say he is.

DEEP STATE REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE Also come on, nobody thought Trump was getting elected during primary season 2014. Give me a break, Lenz.

If I recall, it was real, and was probably inserted due to the "Trump hates Mexicans" rhetoric coming from the other side.