Bernie Sanders

PJ_Soul

brianlux said:

What Dreams, what's with the world being on the brink of destruction? Do you know something we don't, like a giant meteor heading our way? It's definitely a changing world and anthropogenically damaged world but unless something cataclysmic like a massive meteor coming, the world will carry one and re-establish new balances. Humans on the other hand- yeah, we're doing a good job of putting ourselves on the endangered species list. If that concerns you, Bernie would have been a better pick that HRC or Trump. And even better than Bernie is Stein.

But really, is avoiding our (and other animal's) extinction what America wants? Doesn't seem so to me. Seems to me America wants:

-A "strong, vigorous economy" (mass consumption with little or no regard to limits to resources).

-Lots of crap to buy to satisfy our instant gratification ADHD buying habits.

-Wars, crashing cars at auto races, football injuries, trauma drama, and all sorts of other kinds of violence.

-The continuation of suburbia and car culture.

-Greasy food and sweets.

-Mind numbing amusement (the word come from a (lack of) musing (thinking). Like amoral, only amusement.)

These were not high on Bernie's list of priorities and certainly not on Stein's. They are major factors for the other candidates. Don't get mad at me for saying this. If you look at it, you can't deny this is true.

I'm thinking the Yellowstone super volcano.... (no, seriously).

mrussel1

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

What Dreams, what's with the world being on the brink of destruction? Do you know something we don't, like a giant meteor heading our way? It's definitely a changing world and anthropogenically damaged world but unless something cataclysmic like a massive meteor coming, the world will carry one and re-establish new balances. Humans on the other hand- yeah, we're doing a good job of putting ourselves on the endangered species list. If that concerns you, Bernie would have been a better pick that HRC or Trump. And even better than Bernie is Stein.

But really, is avoiding our (and other animal's) extinction what America wants? Doesn't seem so to me. Seems to me America wants:

-A "strong, vigorous economy" (mass consumption with little or no regard to limits to resources).

-Lots of crap to buy to satisfy our instant gratification ADHD buying habits.

-Wars, crashing cars at auto races, football injuries, trauma drama, and all sorts of other kinds of violence.

-The continuation of suburbia and car culture.

-Greasy food and sweets.

-Mind numbing amusement (the word come from a (lack of) musing (thinking). Like amoral, only amusement.)

These were not high on Bernie's list of priorities and certainly not on Stein's. They are major factors for the other candidates. Don't get mad at me for saying this. If you look at it, you can't deny this is true.

I'm thinking the Yellowstone super volcano.... (no, seriously).

I know. That kind of shares the shit out of me. That will be the end of this civilization

brianlux

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

What Dreams, what's with the world being on the brink of destruction? Do you know something we don't, like a giant meteor heading our way? It's definitely a changing world and anthropogenically damaged world but unless something cataclysmic like a massive meteor coming, the world will carry one and re-establish new balances. Humans on the other hand- yeah, we're doing a good job of putting ourselves on the endangered species list. If that concerns you, Bernie would have been a better pick that HRC or Trump. And even better than Bernie is Stein.

But really, is avoiding our (and other animal's) extinction what America wants? Doesn't seem so to me. Seems to me America wants:

-A "strong, vigorous economy" (mass consumption with little or no regard to limits to resources).

-Lots of crap to buy to satisfy our instant gratification ADHD buying habits.

-Wars, crashing cars at auto races, football injuries, trauma drama, and all sorts of other kinds of violence.

-The continuation of suburbia and car culture.

-Greasy food and sweets.

-Mind numbing amusement (the word come from a (lack of) musing (thinking). Like amoral, only amusement.)

These were not high on Bernie's list of priorities and certainly not on Stein's. They are major factors for the other candidates. Don't get mad at me for saying this. If you look at it, you can't deny this is true.

I'm thinking the Yellowstone super volcano.... (no, seriously).

I know. That kind of shares the shit out of me. That will be the end of this civilization

To me, the difference between, say, nuclear annihilation and Yellowstone super volcano would be like the difference between dying a slow rotting death due to exposure to chemicals and being struck and killed by lightening. In both cases I think the latter are so much more desirable. There are human disasters but there is no such thing as a natural disaster. There are just natural occurrences. If Yellowstone want to blow her top (or bottom in this case), let 'er rip. I want to be there to see it!

PJ_Soul

brianlux said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

What Dreams, what's with the world being on the brink of destruction? Do you know something we don't, like a giant meteor heading our way? It's definitely a changing world and anthropogenically damaged world but unless something cataclysmic like a massive meteor coming, the world will carry one and re-establish new balances. Humans on the other hand- yeah, we're doing a good job of putting ourselves on the endangered species list. If that concerns you, Bernie would have been a better pick that HRC or Trump. And even better than Bernie is Stein.

But really, is avoiding our (and other animal's) extinction what America wants? Doesn't seem so to me. Seems to me America wants:

-A "strong, vigorous economy" (mass consumption with little or no regard to limits to resources).

-Lots of crap to buy to satisfy our instant gratification ADHD buying habits.

-Wars, crashing cars at auto races, football injuries, trauma drama, and all sorts of other kinds of violence.

-The continuation of suburbia and car culture.

-Greasy food and sweets.

-Mind numbing amusement (the word come from a (lack of) musing (thinking). Like amoral, only amusement.)

These were not high on Bernie's list of priorities and certainly not on Stein's. They are major factors for the other candidates. Don't get mad at me for saying this. If you look at it, you can't deny this is true.

I'm thinking the Yellowstone super volcano.... (no, seriously).

I know. That kind of shares the shit out of me. That will be the end of this civilization

To me, the difference between, say, nuclear annihilation and Yellowstone super volcano would be like the difference between dying a slow rotting death due to exposure to chemicals and being struck and killed by lightening. In both cases I think the latter are so much more desirable. There are human disasters but there is no such thing as a natural disaster. There are just natural occurrences. If Yellowstone want to blow her top (or bottom in this case), let 'er rip. I want to be there to see it!

Interesting perspective. I'd personally prefer to not have millions burn alive and then live the rest of a miserable life in a barren wasteland where all living things slowly die from starvation and lack of sunlight, and as roving packs of desperate humans struggle to survive by preying on the weak. Not that there is anything to do about it.... but we don't have to embrace it, lol. I'm wondering if there isn't some scientific way to stop the eruption, or at least to reduce its impact. To release the pressure somehow. That would be great if they could somehow figure that out.

eeriepadave

for the wwe fans

mrussel1

brianlux said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

What Dreams, what's with the world being on the brink of destruction? Do you know something we don't, like a giant meteor heading our way? It's definitely a changing world and anthropogenically damaged world but unless something cataclysmic like a massive meteor coming, the world will carry one and re-establish new balances. Humans on the other hand- yeah, we're doing a good job of putting ourselves on the endangered species list. If that concerns you, Bernie would have been a better pick that HRC or Trump. And even better than Bernie is Stein.

But really, is avoiding our (and other animal's) extinction what America wants? Doesn't seem so to me. Seems to me America wants:

-A "strong, vigorous economy" (mass consumption with little or no regard to limits to resources).

-Lots of crap to buy to satisfy our instant gratification ADHD buying habits.

-Wars, crashing cars at auto races, football injuries, trauma drama, and all sorts of other kinds of violence.

-The continuation of suburbia and car culture.

-Greasy food and sweets.

-Mind numbing amusement (the word come from a (lack of) musing (thinking). Like amoral, only amusement.)

These were not high on Bernie's list of priorities and certainly not on Stein's. They are major factors for the other candidates. Don't get mad at me for saying this. If you look at it, you can't deny this is true.

I'm thinking the Yellowstone super volcano.... (no, seriously).

I know. That kind of shares the shit out of me. That will be the end of this civilization

To me, the difference between, say, nuclear annihilation and Yellowstone super volcano would be like the difference between dying a slow rotting death due to exposure to chemicals and being struck and killed by lightening. In both cases I think the latter are so much more desirable. There are human disasters but there is no such thing as a natural disaster. There are just natural occurrences. If Yellowstone want to blow her top (or bottom in this case), let 'er rip. I want to be there to see it!

I don't disagree at all. The difference is that we have zero control on Yellowstone. At least with nuclear weapons, maybe someone will make the right decision...

PJ_Soul

mrussel1 said:

brianlux said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

What Dreams, what's with the world being on the brink of destruction? Do you know something we don't, like a giant meteor heading our way? It's definitely a changing world and anthropogenically damaged world but unless something cataclysmic like a massive meteor coming, the world will carry one and re-establish new balances. Humans on the other hand- yeah, we're doing a good job of putting ourselves on the endangered species list. If that concerns you, Bernie would have been a better pick that HRC or Trump. And even better than Bernie is Stein.

But really, is avoiding our (and other animal's) extinction what America wants? Doesn't seem so to me. Seems to me America wants:

-A "strong, vigorous economy" (mass consumption with little or no regard to limits to resources).

-Lots of crap to buy to satisfy our instant gratification ADHD buying habits.

-Wars, crashing cars at auto races, football injuries, trauma drama, and all sorts of other kinds of violence.

-The continuation of suburbia and car culture.

-Greasy food and sweets.

-Mind numbing amusement (the word come from a (lack of) musing (thinking). Like amoral, only amusement.)

These were not high on Bernie's list of priorities and certainly not on Stein's. They are major factors for the other candidates. Don't get mad at me for saying this. If you look at it, you can't deny this is true.

I'm thinking the Yellowstone super volcano.... (no, seriously).

I know. That kind of shares the shit out of me. That will be the end of this civilization

To me, the difference between, say, nuclear annihilation and Yellowstone super volcano would be like the difference between dying a slow rotting death due to exposure to chemicals and being struck and killed by lightening. In both cases I think the latter are so much more desirable. There are human disasters but there is no such thing as a natural disaster. There are just natural occurrences. If Yellowstone want to blow her top (or bottom in this case), let 'er rip. I want to be there to see it!

I don't disagree at all. The difference is that we have zero control on Yellowstone. At least with nuclear weapons, maybe someone will make the right decision...

For sure. One is preventable. One isn't. And really, chances are very good that there will NOT be a nuclear holocaust. The eruption of Yellowstone is 100% inevitable. I'm just hoping it doesn't happen in my lifetime. Sorry future generations.

brianlux

mrussel1 said:

brianlux said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

What Dreams, what's with the world being on the brink of destruction? Do you know something we don't, like a giant meteor heading our way? It's definitely a changing world and anthropogenically damaged world but unless something cataclysmic like a massive meteor coming, the world will carry one and re-establish new balances. Humans on the other hand- yeah, we're doing a good job of putting ourselves on the endangered species list. If that concerns you, Bernie would have been a better pick that HRC or Trump. And even better than Bernie is Stein.

But really, is avoiding our (and other animal's) extinction what America wants? Doesn't seem so to me. Seems to me America wants:

-A "strong, vigorous economy" (mass consumption with little or no regard to limits to resources).

-Lots of crap to buy to satisfy our instant gratification ADHD buying habits.

-Wars, crashing cars at auto races, football injuries, trauma drama, and all sorts of other kinds of violence.

-The continuation of suburbia and car culture.

-Greasy food and sweets.

-Mind numbing amusement (the word come from a (lack of) musing (thinking). Like amoral, only amusement.)

These were not high on Bernie's list of priorities and certainly not on Stein's. They are major factors for the other candidates. Don't get mad at me for saying this. If you look at it, you can't deny this is true.

I'm thinking the Yellowstone super volcano.... (no, seriously).

I know. That kind of shares the shit out of me. That will be the end of this civilization

To me, the difference between, say, nuclear annihilation and Yellowstone super volcano would be like the difference between dying a slow rotting death due to exposure to chemicals and being struck and killed by lightening. In both cases I think the latter are so much more desirable. There are human disasters but there is no such thing as a natural disaster. There are just natural occurrences. If Yellowstone want to blow her top (or bottom in this case), let 'er rip. I want to be there to see it!

I don't disagree at all. The difference is that we have zero control on Yellowstone. At least with nuclear weapons, maybe someone will make the right decision...

Let's hope!

PJ_Soul

brianlux said:

mrussel1 said:

brianlux said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

What Dreams, what's with the world being on the brink of destruction? Do you know something we don't, like a giant meteor heading our way? It's definitely a changing world and anthropogenically damaged world but unless something cataclysmic like a massive meteor coming, the world will carry one and re-establish new balances. Humans on the other hand- yeah, we're doing a good job of putting ourselves on the endangered species list. If that concerns you, Bernie would have been a better pick that HRC or Trump. And even better than Bernie is Stein.

But really, is avoiding our (and other animal's) extinction what America wants? Doesn't seem so to me. Seems to me America wants:

-A "strong, vigorous economy" (mass consumption with little or no regard to limits to resources).

-Lots of crap to buy to satisfy our instant gratification ADHD buying habits.

-Wars, crashing cars at auto races, football injuries, trauma drama, and all sorts of other kinds of violence.

-The continuation of suburbia and car culture.

-Greasy food and sweets.

-Mind numbing amusement (the word come from a (lack of) musing (thinking). Like amoral, only amusement.)

These were not high on Bernie's list of priorities and certainly not on Stein's. They are major factors for the other candidates. Don't get mad at me for saying this. If you look at it, you can't deny this is true.

I'm thinking the Yellowstone super volcano.... (no, seriously).

I know. That kind of shares the shit out of me. That will be the end of this civilization

To me, the difference between, say, nuclear annihilation and Yellowstone super volcano would be like the difference between dying a slow rotting death due to exposure to chemicals and being struck and killed by lightening. In both cases I think the latter are so much more desirable. There are human disasters but there is no such thing as a natural disaster. There are just natural occurrences. If Yellowstone want to blow her top (or bottom in this case), let 'er rip. I want to be there to see it!

I don't disagree at all. The difference is that we have zero control on Yellowstone. At least with nuclear weapons, maybe someone will make the right decision...

Let's hope!

Well so far so good, and it seems that we're much less at risk now than we were for decades back in the 20th Century. I am personally much more concerned about a natural disaster that has a globally catastrophic impact than I am about a nuclear holocaust.

brianlux

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

mrussel1 said:

brianlux said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

What Dreams, what's with the world being on the brink of destruction? Do you know something we don't, like a giant meteor heading our way? It's definitely a changing world and anthropogenically damaged world but unless something cataclysmic like a massive meteor coming, the world will carry one and re-establish new balances. Humans on the other hand- yeah, we're doing a good job of putting ourselves on the endangered species list. If that concerns you, Bernie would have been a better pick that HRC or Trump. And even better than Bernie is Stein.

But really, is avoiding our (and other animal's) extinction what America wants? Doesn't seem so to me. Seems to me America wants:

-A "strong, vigorous economy" (mass consumption with little or no regard to limits to resources).

-Lots of crap to buy to satisfy our instant gratification ADHD buying habits.

-Wars, crashing cars at auto races, football injuries, trauma drama, and all sorts of other kinds of violence.

-The continuation of suburbia and car culture.

-Greasy food and sweets.

-Mind numbing amusement (the word come from a (lack of) musing (thinking). Like amoral, only amusement.)

These were not high on Bernie's list of priorities and certainly not on Stein's. They are major factors for the other candidates. Don't get mad at me for saying this. If you look at it, you can't deny this is true.

I'm thinking the Yellowstone super volcano.... (no, seriously).

I know. That kind of shares the shit out of me. That will be the end of this civilization

To me, the difference between, say, nuclear annihilation and Yellowstone super volcano would be like the difference between dying a slow rotting death due to exposure to chemicals and being struck and killed by lightening. In both cases I think the latter are so much more desirable. There are human disasters but there is no such thing as a natural disaster. There are just natural occurrences. If Yellowstone want to blow her top (or bottom in this case), let 'er rip. I want to be there to see it!

I don't disagree at all. The difference is that we have zero control on Yellowstone. At least with nuclear weapons, maybe someone will make the right decision...

Let's hope!

Well so far so good, and it seems that we're much less at risk now than we were for decades back in the 20th Century. I am personally much more concerned about a natural disaster that has a globally catastrophic impact than I am about a nuclear holocaust.

I have to say it again (and then you can give me hell for being so adamant, LOL) There are no "natural disasters", just natural occurrences.

I wish I knew how to help people with worrying about things like earthquakes, floods, volcanoes, etc. For whatever reason, I don't worry about such things. I'm way more concerned about the harm humans can incur, both on a large scale and on a personal scale. I've been hurt far more severely and more often by people than by nature... so far anyway. And I would much rather die by lightening stick than gunshot.

Free

Bring Back Bernie Sanders. Donald Trump Now Leads Hillary Clinton in Ohio and Florida

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_57da669be4b0d5920b5b2547

Not that I care about daily polls, they're not real news. We just need the only candidate likely to beat windbag Drumpf back.

mrussel1

brianlux said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

mrussel1 said:

brianlux said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

What Dreams, what's with the world being on the brink of destruction? Do you know something we don't, like a giant meteor heading our way? It's definitely a changing world and anthropogenically damaged world but unless something cataclysmic like a massive meteor coming, the world will carry one and re-establish new balances. Humans on the other hand- yeah, we're doing a good job of putting ourselves on the endangered species list. If that concerns you, Bernie would have been a better pick that HRC or Trump. And even better than Bernie is Stein.

But really, is avoiding our (and other animal's) extinction what America wants? Doesn't seem so to me. Seems to me America wants:

-A "strong, vigorous economy" (mass consumption with little or no regard to limits to resources).

-Lots of crap to buy to satisfy our instant gratification ADHD buying habits.

-Wars, crashing cars at auto races, football injuries, trauma drama, and all sorts of other kinds of violence.

-The continuation of suburbia and car culture.

-Greasy food and sweets.

-Mind numbing amusement (the word come from a (lack of) musing (thinking). Like amoral, only amusement.)

These were not high on Bernie's list of priorities and certainly not on Stein's. They are major factors for the other candidates. Don't get mad at me for saying this. If you look at it, you can't deny this is true.

I'm thinking the Yellowstone super volcano.... (no, seriously).

I know. That kind of shares the shit out of me. That will be the end of this civilization

To me, the difference between, say, nuclear annihilation and Yellowstone super volcano would be like the difference between dying a slow rotting death due to exposure to chemicals and being struck and killed by lightening. In both cases I think the latter are so much more desirable. There are human disasters but there is no such thing as a natural disaster. There are just natural occurrences. If Yellowstone want to blow her top (or bottom in this case), let 'er rip. I want to be there to see it!

I don't disagree at all. The difference is that we have zero control on Yellowstone. At least with nuclear weapons, maybe someone will make the right decision...

Let's hope!

Well so far so good, and it seems that we're much less at risk now than we were for decades back in the 20th Century. I am personally much more concerned about a natural disaster that has a globally catastrophic impact than I am about a nuclear holocaust.

I have to say it again (and then you can give me hell for being so adamant, LOL) There are no "natural disasters", just natural occurrences.

I wish I knew how to help people with worrying about things like earthquakes, floods, volcanoes, etc. For whatever reason, I don't worry about such things. I'm way more concerned about the harm humans can incur, both on a large scale and on a personal scale. I've been hurt far more severely and more often by people than by nature... so far anyway. And I would much rather die by lightening stick than gunshot.

This brutal summer was not a natural occurrence! Can we call man made interference a disaster?

hedonist

I find occurrence vs disaster to be a matter of semantics, just based on the aftermath.

People dying during an earthquake, tornado, flood, volcano eruption - long list of course...and sure a natural disaster but a disaster nonetheless.

what dreams

Hysterical. Just hysterical. Thank you for proving my point. Good night.

what dreams

And just for more shits and giggles, Toniflig, (or whatever your name is) can you please quote me where I "dehumanized" Trump in any other another thread? I'm trying to recall the last time I said anything about Trump. It may have been Easter when I told a story about my brother who loves Trump and I had to endure his similarly unhinged view of the world. I believe I dehumanized my brother in that thread. In fact, my view of Trump is that he would be relatively harmless because I believe as a president he'll never accomplish anything. Kind of like Bernie. A one term do-nothing president, he would be. Clinton might get some things done. Maybe not. Who knows. She's a flawed human being as well. My consistent opinion has always been that we are all flawed human beings, and I'm okay with Clinton's warts.

I also happen to be a thyroid cancer survivor. When I read people ripping Clinton to shreds through 10 pages because she has a thyroid condition and it makes her unqualified to be president, it kind of pisses me off. You may see that as whatever you wish. Who cares. I see you as a member of the unhinged electorate. Too bad that I really hit a nerve.

brianlux

what dreams said:

Hysterical. Just hysterical. Thank you for proving my point. Good night.


And just for more shits and giggles, Toniflig, (or whatever your name is) can you please quote me where I "dehumanized" Trump in any other another thread? I'm trying to recall the last time I said anything about Trump. It may have been Easter when I told a story about my brother who loves Trump and I had to endure his similarly unhinged view of the world. I believe I dehumanized my brother in that thread. In fact, my view of Trump is that he would be relatively harmless because I believe as a president he'll never accomplish anything. Kind of like Bernie. A one term do-nothing president, he would be. Clinton might get some things done. Maybe not. Who knows. She's a flawed human being as well. My consistent opinion has always been that we are all flawed human beings, and I'm okay with Clinton's warts.

I also happen to be a thyroid cancer survivor. When I read people ripping Clinton to shreds through 10 pages because she has a thyroid condition and it makes her unqualified to be president, it kind of pisses me off. You may see that as whatever you wish. Who cares. I see you as a member of the unhinged electorate. Too bad that I really hit a nerve.

Interesting. Maybe try scrolling up.


As for HRC's thyroid condition, no that should not be a big issue here. Three very important women in my life have or had a thyroid conditions and or cancer. But HRC's overall health is what is more important and might factor in if she can't muscle through the next few months.

And the fact remains, there are plenty of other issues that make HRC problematic as potential president. And this- we all know how politics work- drag any old thing out you can to bash the other candidate. Business as usual.

Bit it wouldn't have been if Sanders had been nominated. No way near to the degree it is between HRC and The Donald. But maybe we don't want an election. Maybe we just want a circus. Curious, we Americans.

It's a bummer that Bernie is not the candidate and Stein won't win of course but look father down the path. It's not all desert.

Free

You're right Brian, Who exactly do we have to thank that the candidate proven to be Trump was ostracized and ridiculed while the media ignored and refused to show exactly how big his movement is? Oh yeah, the DNC.

benjs

brianlux said:

what dreams said:

Hysterical. Just hysterical. Thank you for proving my point. Good night.


And just for more shits and giggles, Toniflig, (or whatever your name is) can you please quote me where I "dehumanized" Trump in any other another thread? I'm trying to recall the last time I said anything about Trump. It may have been Easter when I told a story about my brother who loves Trump and I had to endure his similarly unhinged view of the world. I believe I dehumanized my brother in that thread. In fact, my view of Trump is that he would be relatively harmless because I believe as a president he'll never accomplish anything. Kind of like Bernie. A one term do-nothing president, he would be. Clinton might get some things done. Maybe not. Who knows. She's a flawed human being as well. My consistent opinion has always been that we are all flawed human beings, and I'm okay with Clinton's warts.

I also happen to be a thyroid cancer survivor. When I read people ripping Clinton to shreds through 10 pages because she has a thyroid condition and it makes her unqualified to be president, it kind of pisses me off. You may see that as whatever you wish. Who cares. I see you as a member of the unhinged electorate. Too bad that I really hit a nerve.

Interesting. Maybe try scrolling up.


As for HRC's thyroid condition, no that should not be a big issue here. Three very important women in my life have or had a thyroid conditions and or cancer. But HRC's overall health is what is more important and might factor in if she can't muscle through the next few months.

And the fact remains, there are plenty of other issues that make HRC problematic as potential president. And this- we all know how politics work- drag any old thing out you can to bash the other candidate. Business as usual.

Bit it wouldn't have been if Sanders had been nominated. No way near to the degree it is between HRC and The Donald. But maybe we don't want an election. Maybe we just want a circus. Curious, we Americans.

It's a bummer that Bernie is not the candidate and Stein won't win of course but look father down the path. It's not all desert.

Honestly, I really feel that the first left-leaning POTUS in ages needs to have the first left-leaning support system (i.e. House and Senate) in ages. The first of anything in the US government carries the weight of setting a precedent. All African-American Presidential candidates will be compared to Obama. All female Presidential candidates will be compared to Clinton. When someone like Sanders sits in office, he must possess the ability to drive major change without the bullshit of power-seizing/maintaining in the House and Senate. For the liberalization of America to penetrate the government levels, this can't be a game of checkers, it must be chess.

Free

benjs said:

brianlux said:

what dreams said:

Hysterical. Just hysterical. Thank you for proving my point. Good night.


And just for more shits and giggles, Toniflig, (or whatever your name is) can you please quote me where I "dehumanized" Trump in any other another thread? I'm trying to recall the last time I said anything about Trump. It may have been Easter when I told a story about my brother who loves Trump and I had to endure his similarly unhinged view of the world. I believe I dehumanized my brother in that thread. In fact, my view of Trump is that he would be relatively harmless because I believe as a president he'll never accomplish anything. Kind of like Bernie. A one term do-nothing president, he would be. Clinton might get some things done. Maybe not. Who knows. She's a flawed human being as well. My consistent opinion has always been that we are all flawed human beings, and I'm okay with Clinton's warts.

I also happen to be a thyroid cancer survivor. When I read people ripping Clinton to shreds through 10 pages because she has a thyroid condition and it makes her unqualified to be president, it kind of pisses me off. You may see that as whatever you wish. Who cares. I see you as a member of the unhinged electorate. Too bad that I really hit a nerve.

Interesting. Maybe try scrolling up.


As for HRC's thyroid condition, no that should not be a big issue here. Three very important women in my life have or had a thyroid conditions and or cancer. But HRC's overall health is what is more important and might factor in if she can't muscle through the next few months.

And the fact remains, there are plenty of other issues that make HRC problematic as potential president. And this- we all know how politics work- drag any old thing out you can to bash the other candidate. Business as usual.

Bit it wouldn't have been if Sanders had been nominated. No way near to the degree it is between HRC and The Donald. But maybe we don't want an election. Maybe we just want a circus. Curious, we Americans.

It's a bummer that Bernie is not the candidate and Stein won't win of course but look father down the path. It's not all desert.

Honestly, I really feel that the first left-leaning POTUS in ages needs to have the first left-leaning support system (i.e. House and Senate) in ages. The first of anything in the US government carries the weight of setting a precedent. All African-American Presidential candidates will be compared to Obama. All female Presidential candidates will be compared to Clinton. When someone like Sanders sits in office, he must possess the ability to drive major change without the bullshit of power-seizing/maintaining in the House and Senate. For the liberalization of America to penetrate the government levels, this can't be a game of checkers, it must be chess.

I disagree. The job of Congress is to work with and compromise w/ the sitting president. It's not being done now, and you can't blame the president for that. You're suggesting that we wait to vote in the appropriate representatives that would work with a progressive president? And how long would that take? When congressmen and women do not have term limits?

fife

Free said:

benjs said:

brianlux said:

what dreams said:

Hysterical. Just hysterical. Thank you for proving my point. Good night.


And just for more shits and giggles, Toniflig, (or whatever your name is) can you please quote me where I "dehumanized" Trump in any other another thread? I'm trying to recall the last time I said anything about Trump. It may have been Easter when I told a story about my brother who loves Trump and I had to endure his similarly unhinged view of the world. I believe I dehumanized my brother in that thread. In fact, my view of Trump is that he would be relatively harmless because I believe as a president he'll never accomplish anything. Kind of like Bernie. A one term do-nothing president, he would be. Clinton might get some things done. Maybe not. Who knows. She's a flawed human being as well. My consistent opinion has always been that we are all flawed human beings, and I'm okay with Clinton's warts.

I also happen to be a thyroid cancer survivor. When I read people ripping Clinton to shreds through 10 pages because she has a thyroid condition and it makes her unqualified to be president, it kind of pisses me off. You may see that as whatever you wish. Who cares. I see you as a member of the unhinged electorate. Too bad that I really hit a nerve.

Interesting. Maybe try scrolling up.


As for HRC's thyroid condition, no that should not be a big issue here. Three very important women in my life have or had a thyroid conditions and or cancer. But HRC's overall health is what is more important and might factor in if she can't muscle through the next few months.

And the fact remains, there are plenty of other issues that make HRC problematic as potential president. And this- we all know how politics work- drag any old thing out you can to bash the other candidate. Business as usual.

Bit it wouldn't have been if Sanders had been nominated. No way near to the degree it is between HRC and The Donald. But maybe we don't want an election. Maybe we just want a circus. Curious, we Americans.

It's a bummer that Bernie is not the candidate and Stein won't win of course but look father down the path. It's not all desert.

Honestly, I really feel that the first left-leaning POTUS in ages needs to have the first left-leaning support system (i.e. House and Senate) in ages. The first of anything in the US government carries the weight of setting a precedent. All African-American Presidential candidates will be compared to Obama. All female Presidential candidates will be compared to Clinton. When someone like Sanders sits in office, he must possess the ability to drive major change without the bullshit of power-seizing/maintaining in the House and Senate. For the liberalization of America to penetrate the government levels, this can't be a game of checkers, it must be chess.

I disagree. The job of Congress is to work with and compromise w/ the sitting president. It's not being done now, and you can't blame the president for that. You're suggesting that we wait to vote in the appropriate representatives that would work with progressive president? And how long would that take? When congressmen and women do not have term limits?

congressmen and woman do have term limits, its called voting. I understand that it is very hard to get a person out of office but what has to happen is that people have to vote not just during the main elections but also during the mid terms elections.