So I found out that searching gullible in Google gives you a false definition, I guess it's like googling askew
@Fruit Punch Samurai, I really don't want to search that because I don't want to be trolled
When Hillary is covering up for her sexual deviant husband and committing high treason her supporters be like "What does it matter, it's time we put a woman in office"
@Jeb Bush, yep
@Jeb Bush, I bet you're staring at the people reading that like "please clap"
@Jeb Bush, Don't even talk about sexual deviance when comparing the two.
@Charlemagne, i....I don't know what you mean sir....I'm merely a humble Guac bowl merchant.
@Jeb Bush, since when is it the woman's fault for her man cheating on her?
@Suq Madiq, it is when bill clinton raped a woman 25 years ago and she is on tape talking about destroying evidence and knowing he did it.
@Suq Madiq, it is when she creates a group of employees whose sole job is destroying any woman who comes forward about her husband...
Oh, and when she comes up with a name for the group, "The Bimbo Eruption Squad"
@Jeb Bush, "high treason" . . .
@Officer Obvious, there is no evidence suggesting she was selling information to foreign nations for millions of dollars. High treason.
@Officer Obvious, giving people and companies benefits against national security interests for "donations" to your fund is treason
@Jeb Bush, *evidence
@Jeb Bush, while I agree with you, I'm here for funny, not politics. Go rant on yahoo stories or something.
Yah, because I get this...
@Dildo Bike, because trump supporters are stupid
@Dildo Bike, Basically, Trump says obvious/ simple things and his supporters act like they are messages from a prophet.
@Dildo Bike, it's because we really all want to hear more about the oversaturated election and it's garbage memes regardless of what side you support. We definitely don't hear enough about it to be sick of it or anything
@UmActually, its also a reference to drakes new song 9
@Jeha95, yeah, that too.
@UmActually, I'd just like to point out that you criticized someone (probably rightfully so) for making blanket statements about Clinton supporters, yet you don't when someone makes a similar statement about Trump supporters.
@Middle Finger Emoji, That's what the picture was saying.
@UmActually, I'm a huge fan of toast
@Middle Finger Emoji, lets be real man, you've seen most of his supporters by now. They're pretty fücken dumb
@I Dexios Divine I, I guess you'll be voting for Sanders of course. Nothing like a handout
@UmActually, our current president and supporters do the same thing.
@FoodieAsFuk, Hey, I'm just saying what the pic says. Granted, for many of Trump's supporters it is true.
@UmActually, replace Trump with every politician ever and you get an upvote
@UmActually, kek funny considering Bernie supporters treat a bird like a messenger of God
A majority of the users on this app are under 18 and haven't held a job, so it doesn't surprise me that they lean democratic.
What did I miss?
@bigpapazero20four, a 69
@Ganjadalf the Green, with Donald trump. Ya missed out big time
@bigpapazero20four, they might be referencing drakes some "9" but I'm not sure
@Lightbox, or that his followers are dumb
@bigpapazero20four, his followers will take anything he says and does and make it seem like he is walking on water even though he is just doing something that everybody else is the world knows.
Clintons followers are like "YAY free stuff!" Until they fvcking grow up and have to pay taxes that go to lazy bums who won't get jobs or social security numbers
@Pubmarine Shamwich, Yeah, because that's why people vote democrat.
@Pubmarine Shamwich, You talk about politics on almost every single pic REMOTELY about the election and you need to reevaluate your approach, especially because you're not even having a decent conversation about it, which is tolerable, you're just using blanket statements targeted at anyone besides Trump supporters, trying to incite an argument/backlash.
@Pubmarine Shamwich, comment about Clinton, bunch of upvotes, replace the name with Sanders, bunch of downvotes
@UmActually, me? Never!
@UmActually, everyone is a democrat until they grow up and get real jobs
@UmActually, i comment on a fairly high number of political pictures, because i enjoy having discussions. Im a trump supporter and he makes us look bad.
@Pubmarine Shamwich, you can tell there's a lot of supporters of her on here.. And they know nothing about politics 😑
@FoodieAsFuk, here's my thing: I see a ton of uploads making fun of trump and his supporters. Not ONE about Hillary or Samders. Either stuckpixel is filtering or they don't exist. That's a huge problem in our society. Literally any republican or conservative is mocked by the media, but Democrats get a free pass? Pretty biased if you ask me.
@FoodieAsFuk, I'd say supporters of both have a very narrow view of politics. If a Trump supporter supports him for his platform, they don't understand that the president can't do most of what he says he wants to (the wall, tariffs on China and Mexico, repealing SC decision, and deporting all illegal immigrants, to name a few)
@Pubmarine Shamwich, Thats not true. They exist and they happen at about the same rate.
@Pubmarine Shamwich, you wanna know why it's biased...because being a trump supporter is dumb. It's as simple as that, it's stupid. He's the spitting image of the republican voters, a big fat white guy who is so caught up with his own selfish motives that he forgets about actual problems of the world. I would take a liar or a socialist any day of the week over a complete bafoon.
@UmActually, post the ref id for even ONE if you can
@Captain Penis, you're the buffoon, you can’t even spell the word correctly. Good example of a Democrat: uneducated and poor
@UmActually, oh we'll find out soon enough, once Hillary is indicted.
@Pubmarine Shamwich, 180617
@Pubmarine Shamwich, Then Sanders would be the nominee and most likeley win, since that's how every poll goes.
@UmActually, Sanders has a better chance than Hillary, but once the math on socialism is put out, he'll lose too. His plans will bankrupt us, and he won't do a thing to refresh our immigration policy. Just watch Trump win. The people are angry as hell with the establishment.
@UmActually, that pic didn't even have a caption, how is that making fun of Hillary or proving that stuckpixel isn't biased? Even IF it were funny that's like 1 for 25.
@Pubmarine Shamwich, Trump's plan actually spends more, since he can't make Mexico pay for his wall, that will be incredibly expensive (excess of 100 bn), and he does not even have a tax plan to cover it.
@UmActually, not true and he explained how he's going to do it. If we indeed do have a trade deficit of $50B between us and Mexico, we adjust tariffs to the degree that the difference finances the wall. Didn't you listen to what he said?
@Pubmarine Shamwich, Mexico is in the WTO, we can't put tariffs on it.
@Pubmarine Shamwich, 216236
@UmActually, so is the US but somehow we've got the bad end of the deal. What's surprising is that if you're an American you should be angry that we're getting screwed in trade, and you should be angry about our open borders, the drug cartel problem, and the fact that during the California protests illegal immigrants were burning the US flag and waving Mexican flags...ON US soil. How does that not bother you?
@UmActually, hey man, I vote we just back down now. Some people can't be helped. But pubmarine, man, I think you can be a better person than this. You are never going to persuade anyone through a comment section, ever.
@Pubmarine Shamwich, That isn't the trade deficit works. That deficit isn't in the hands of the Mexican government, it's in the hands of businesses and individuals. We buy more from them than they do from us, that's not their fault, and we need their aluminum, car parts, silicon, etc. Anyway, the drug cartel wouldn't be stopped by a wall, that's childish foe believing that. The cartel would be fvcked if we legalized marijuana. A wall also will only delay about 10-15% of illegal immigrants. Most immigrants come over legally and overstay their visa.
@Captain Penis, good point.
@UmActually, no people vote democrat because they want a big government to facilitate everything, protect everyone, and maintain overall control. Republicans are all over the map but most of us are in favor of a smaller government because we've seen what a big government does to the people who administer it and what those people do to the people it administers.
@Pubmarine Shamwich, Just want to say, Hillary will never be President. Not with the law riding her so hard. She's probably going to be in jail. Trump is the better one of the two. At least he sticks to his views, says it like it is, and genuinely wants what's good for America.
@UmActually, you forget the precedent that Obama has set.
"I have a pen and a phone"
Oh, and most of Trump's ideas wouldn't need to go through congress anyway.
-Congress already passed a law mandating the construction of a wall, back in the 90s. And Bill Clinton signed it.
-The president has complete authority to stop any group of people from immigrating into the country, for any reason, and for any length of time.
-Deporting illegal immigrants is federal law. He wouldn't need to pass a new one, just enforce the one on the books.
As for the tariffs, from what I understand those are bargaining chips.
Repealing what SC decision? You mean Obamacare? Trump could do what Obama did, and give waivers. However, Trump could give them to the whole country instead of just people who donated to his campaign.
@ssj343, damn, well said ssj!
@Grandfather Cock, yes, thank you! I feel the same!
@talmet, ha! Yes, sir! *high five* Nice!
@Pubmarine Shamwich, ty
@Pubmarine Shamwich, "once the math is put out" he has published a detailed breakdown of his plans and they work as well as anything else we have. You don't have to support him but at least make assertions that aren't blatantly incorrect
@talmet, -It was a fence in some areas, not a wall stretching from Gulf to Pacific.
-We can't, it would ravage our produce industry.
-Again, we can't put a tariff on Mexico unless the WTO Ok'd it, which they wouldn't.
-SC decision I was referring to was the gay marriage one.
@ssj343, Republicans want less control on businesses, but more on private life, like marijuana, gay marriage, etc. Dems want more business regulation, but less personal interference.
-the bill passed says all along the border. Go read it.
-And ending slavery hurt the plantation industry. That doesn't mean it was wrong to end slavey.
-Trump could threaten it. Have you ever done any negotiation? Oh, and we could pass any tariff we wanted to, the WTO would be pissed...but what are they going to do?
-he never said anything about personally overturning gay marriage. But court cases get overturned all the time. Sometimes that's a good thing, unless you think Dred Scott should still be the law.
@UmActually, that's why I said all over the spectrum, I while technically republican am more libertarian. Or to be more historically correct an anti federalist.
@ssj343, oh and free trade though nafta is essential if you think the wall is necessary think about it if it's already tough to make a living in Mexico then you impose a tariff the problems there will only get worse.
@talmet, -Nope, it says on public land, which isn't even close to the majority of the border.
@UmActually, there's a thing you may not have ever heard of before.
It's called eminent domain. Look it up.
@talmet, Also, sorry, hit send. If you want to buy a carton of strawberries for 10-15 dollars, more power to you.
-The WTO can place international tariffs on us for violating their charter
-He did. And Gay marriage =/= Dred Scott
@talmet, We still need to allocate enough money to purchase the land at fair market value. Also, a wall would destroy an already delicate ecosystem around the border.
@Officer Obvious, officer, I totally support Trump and have been defending him. What did I assert that wasn't correct? Sheez what team are you on??
-The economy will shift, people will have money who don't now (due to them being hired to pick strawberries).
-The WTO can't place tariffs on us if we veto them.
-He said he didn't agree with the SC decision. Guess what? Support for gay marriage has dropped since the decision, many people who support gay marriage don't support it being enacted by the court. As one of those people, I can tell you why. We live in a democracy, not an oligarchy. And because it was enacted by the court we'll have to deal with the issue for the next 50+ years (look at abortion). Social changes should be passed by legislatures and/or people.
@UmActually, hahahaha, you really need to look more into what was in the bill that was passed back in the 1990s.
Oh, and a lot of the border that is on public land still doesn't have a wall or a fence on it. At the very least we can build that.
@talmet, -That's risky, millions would lose jobs and Tucson/Nappa Valley/Dallas would look like Detroit after the oil shortage
-We aren't the WTO, we can't veto their own motions. The WTO can impose tariffs on countries who break their laws. We'd have to have a really good reason for placing tariffs on a country in the WTO (we are at war with them/ they support our opponents in a war/ they tariff us/ etc.) "Vetoing" a tariff placed on us by every WTO affiliated nation including China, Switzerland, Mexico, and others that make up 95% of imports and exports in the world is IMPOSSIBLE, since we didn't pass it.
-Laws making gay marriage illegal were deemed unconstitutional, and that's what the SC does, saying that's overstepping their bounds shows you don't understand the Supreme Court, or what exactly was the court decision. The SC decided that laws making gay couples illegitimate or barring gays from marriage were in violation of the 14th Amendment, which they were.
@talmet, That's moronic. Building a partial wall or fence on areas just along public land would do less than the miniscule impact a wall would have. A wall is simply too costly and ineffective for anyone who is rational to believe it will be built. Build a 50 foot wall, they get a 51 foot ladder and a rope. Patrol it heavily, they burrow under. Fill in spaces with steel, they launch the drugs in a catapult over the wall (true story). It's not even as simple as that, since every "solution" above is crazily expensive. Making a steel foundation too deep to dig under? Easily 50 billion for the whole stretch of the border. Patrolling in a way that every inch is being watched at all times? Between 760 million and 1 billion
@UmActually, you should look into the national border patrol's stance about building a wall, and the effectiveness of even a partial wall. They know about this issue than you or I, and they say "even partial walls work."
@UmActually, oil shortage? What oil shortage? Detroit looks like it does because of stupid liberal policies.
As a member of the WTO, we have some say over what they do. And we do have a reason. Look up China's currency devaluation. That's actually where Trump got the 45% number, a 45% tariff on China would cancel out their currency devaluation.
Look up what the role the SC was supposed to have. Here's a hint for you, they were supposed to be the weakest of the three branches because rule by unelected men was looked at like the greatest danger to the democracy.
Oh, also look into where the SC got the authority to rule on what is and what isn't unconstitutional. Here's a hint, the SC gave that power to itself.
@talmet, -Oil shortage bc of conflict in the Middle East led to a demand for more fuel-efficient cars in the 70s and 80s, which at the time were Japanese cars. The American car industry, mainly in Detroit, was ruined. You don't know history.
-We can't flat out veto a punishment, that's like getting a detention, then, because your parent is on the school board, vetoing the detention. And tariffing a country because of currency devaluation just leads to further inflation, since we are there biggest trade partner. That isn't a good reason in the eyes of the WTO, because it isn't China's fault. Just like it isn't Mexico's fault that we need their exports more than they need ours.
-Judicial review is incredibly helpful. Just because it wasn't immediately granted doesn't mean it shouldn't have been. The SC established Judicial Review by themselves, but that was less than 10 years after their conception, so they've had that power since before anyone on earth alive today was born,
@talmet, Complaining about it now and acting like it is overstepping their bounds is stupid.
-and why couldn't American companies make fuel efficient cars that were inexpensive enough to sell? *Cough unions, *Cough EPA
-As one of the main members of the WTO, we have more power over the WTO than a child has over their parents...
And you really need to look up how currency devaluation works....
-so we shouldn't complain and try to overturn SC decisions? Good to know. Does that apply to citizens United, and the 2nd Amendment? Or just to cases that you personally like...
@talmet, -Come on, that's a stretch.
-We still can't veto a punishment placed on us.
-You can protest all you want. The laws were not protecting some American citizens, that's a violation of the 14th Amendment.
@UmActually, -nope, that's actual history. Look it up.
-we have a lot of control over what the WTO does. Just like if we wanted to, we have a lot of control over what the UN does, we just don't use it.
-wait, so now it's OK to complain and protest SC decisions? You said it wasn't ok just two posts ago.
@talmet, -American companies made steel cars, Japanese made cheaper cars out of aluminum which made it cheaper.
-Do you understand how punishments work? We can't expect others to follow the rules of the WTO if we don't.
-I said it was pointless to complain about Monroe v. Madison because that was settled in the 1780s. To undo that would be to undo every SC decision ever, that means no desegregation and no protection from illegal search and seizure. I never said you couldn't protest SC decisions, but I said you saying the SC can't rule laws unconstitutional is incredibly stupid.
@UmActually, -American companies couldn't retool and make aluminum cars? Want to guess the reason why they couldn't adapt?
-Do you understand that America is not a child in the WTO?
-let me see if I understand you:
It's horrible that Trump disagrees with a recent SC decision.
Complaining/protesting about recent SC decisions is ok.
Complaining about old SC decisions is pointless?
@talmet, -They thought it was a fad, nothing about the EPA mandated that they use steel.
-I do, but we still have to FOLLOW THE FVCKING RULES, DUMBASS.
-He wants to repeal it with "Strategic judge placement."
-Yeah, it's ok.
-Yeah, because complaining about the power of judicial review is complaining about every single supreme court case
@UmActually, -retooling factories requires EPA approval, and reducing worker hours which violated Union agreements.
-we set the rules. Just like at the UN, if we wanted to, we could decide anything that the UN does.
-so the problem is that Trump wants to appoint judges who agree with him? How is that different than Hilary or Obama wanting to appoint judges who agree with them?
Well basically, except they're all white
@total dad move, ummm no. Surprisingly enough Trump has a pretty large group of diverse minorities that support him
@Captain TR8R, not mexicans doh
@I Dexios Divine I, not sure what doh was supposed to mean but okay.
@Captain TR8R, doh = though
@I Dexios Divine I, incorrect, Trump is polling better with Mexicans than any Republican has for more than 39 years.
@Mr Tall sir, odd I thought though = though. My bad
@Captain TR8R, I spent days with the natives to learn the language. It's hard to understand sometimes.
I hope Trump doesn't win. I also hope Clinton doesn't win....either way, I'm moving to Canada
@Itzforeal, no you're not. Own it
@Itzforeal, You know you can't just move to Canada right? They don't want people that don't have special skills
@Suq Madiq, who said I didn't have special skills?
The grand wizard taught him that trick
When donald trump throws out upvotes like the are tax credits
a line from drake's new album, views. he says on a song named 9, "turn the 6 upside down (416, Toronto's area code) it's a 9 now".