It seems that only have left ones
@wannabe firefighter, donald trump isnt a left and right issue anymore, he's a smart and dumb issue
@Hoban Washburne, I think it's an arrogant vs sick of your shjt thing
@Medic135, if its arrogant to want a president that understands that "bigly" isnt a fvcking word, then yeah im arrogant. if its arrogant to want a president who has the balls to say "hey, nazis are bad" then yep buddy, im arrogant. happy to be it it too.
@Hoban Washburne, no it's arrogant to assume all who disagree with you are dumb, and I'm 100% sure he denounced Nazis but because he blamed Antifa too it wasn't enough because Antifa are violent for the "right" reasons
@wannabe firefighter, #bestcomments
@Hoban Washburne, your arrogance is that you assume that he actually said "bigly" and meant to say that. It would take minimal effort to view or hear the actual moment in question and realize that he said "big league" but his accent and annunciation made it easy to misinterpret as the misquoted "bigly."
It's as true that he spoke the word "bigly" as the Credence Clearwater Revival song goes "there's a bathroom on the right." ("Bad Moon Rising" 1969)
@JDPhi, you kidding me. there is a reel of him saying bigly in context 5 minutes long on youtube. just looked it up to get the time right. come on man, thats a damn weak argument
@JDPhi, and i couldnt help but notice you hedged the fun nazi topic. thoughts?
@Hoban Washburne, I honestly didn't get to the Nazi thing because I felt what I wrote already was too long for a single post on this forum. I genuinely feel that the Nazi/Antifa clashes are just a$$holes fighting with a$$holes, they all suck, and they all deserve to be blamed and all share responsibility for the violence and destruction resulting from their clashes. There are bad elements from both political factions, and it's idiotic to assume one side is bad, so the other can't be bad. They are all terrible.
@Hoban Washburne, he's saying "big league", you autist.
@JDPhi, no, you see, ive heard that argument and im all for bashing antifa. thats fine, they suck, violent idiots. but they're not the ones openly supporting and giving vitality to a preexisting movement responsible for the deaths of millions. antifa are bad, but they havent killed. nazis are bad and have killed millions predicated on race. trump supporters are so damn rabid they've managed to water down one of the things that should be ingrained in the core of every american, (nazi=evil) into, "well theres hate on both sides" bullcrap. theres hate, then theres nazis, and if you think they're equal, thats just idiotic. theres hate, then theres the folks waving te flag of the half of america that said "screw america, i want slaves" the two are not equal
@Doctor Krieger, yeah, keep telling yourself that, same way yall tell yourselves mexicos gonna pay for a border wall. or that a border wall would work......
@Hoban Washburne, dude, are you fücking joking? AntiFa are communists! For Christ's sake, they killed over 100 million people last century.
@Hoban Washburne, I don't really care for the wall and I doubt that Mexico will fund it. I'd rather just abolish the welfare state that brings these people here. Prevention is better than cure, after all.
@Doctor Krieger, or alternatively we could just let them become citizens. that way we could tax them and put their work towards making america better. thats not even a jab, i just think that seems like something thats a win win for everyone. they aint goin anywhere, we cant deport them all, and i dont particularly want to. make em citizens, make em pay taxes.
@Doctor Krieger, and folks hate on socialized healthcare but when push comes to shove, folks should be able to get a freakin cast for their broken arm, no matter how much they make, thats just basic compassion. and its not like its some abstract concept. half of europe is doing it, and doing it well
@Hoban Washburne, these people are absolutely not going to contribute more than they consume. Statistics already have proven this. What you're suggesting will simply drive wages down further and put more strain on the welfare system. It even screws over the legal immigrants.
@Hoban Washburne, sorry, but that completely ignores the principle of self ownership for "muh feels". Totally illegitimate.
@Hoban Washburne, the problem with political discourse right now is that many people have become so emotionally overwhelmed with their own opinion that they explode over the hint that someone may challenge them. Your passionate writing indicates that you are among them. I may lean mostly conservative, but I agree with the liberals on many issues. I take issue with the fact that your arguments presuppose that ALL people who agree on a single issue or voted for one candidate over the other (in opposition to your opinions) must one dimensionally agree on everything else. The people who show up (and act aggressively) at the volatile events are essentially extremists looking for a fight, not the rest of the population that may agree on the issue.
@Hoban Washburne, your passion is a good thing, but take it down a notch when it comes to making assumptions about other people's political opinions.
Political opinions are like opinions on what food is best. Each individual has their own answer and reasons, but that doesn't make them right and the other person wrong. (For the sake of an example) Even if you had a group that agrees pizza is the best food, there will be disagreements over what toppings, restaurant, or style of pizza is the best, and they still aren't wrong. Just because someone agrees pizza is best, doesn't mean they can't share opinions (or disagree) with the people who say tacos are best.
@JDPhi, I'm so confused...So your saying we're not going to eat at Papa Gino's because you're in the mood for Taco Bell? Bro I just want some damn food!
@Doctor Krieger, I would bet that more mexicans come to america because half of their country is controlled by drug cartels and not because they want to leech off of the welfare system.
@mrgork, NO! We are a Taco Bell family, and you will eat your chalupas and like them! If you get Norovirus, I will know you disgraced the family and ate at Chipotle! And if I find so much as one pepperoni, you are out of this house!
@JDPhi, i agree with you on political discourse though do need to point out the pertinent fact that this is an online meme comment board, maybe this isnt where political discourse in its truest form takes place. maybe this is where people look at funny pics and thus the burden of socratic discussion is lessened on the comment board of a flip flop meme
@Doctor Krieger, of course they havent contributed that much, they cant get jobs above dishwasher because they're not citizens. they're already consuming, so why not let them contribute? and what statistics? you cant just say "statistics" and expect it to be irrefutable. cite your source
@Doctor Krieger, fvck self ownership, im all for the principle of not dying of curable disease. this isnt even without precedent, you drive on socialized roads! you paid higher taxes, and the government provided everyone with roads, its the same concept. you went to a socialized school. (if you went to public school) why is THIS the line? you're already living in a socialist country, everyone is. no true capitalist country can last, everything the government provides to the public is, in effect, a socialized service. so why not healthcare?
@Hoban Washburne, thank you for your polite response, though I find your point that this funny picture forum is inappropriate for political discourse rather amusing. I realize that I, too, went on about politics, I just think it's funny that we both made a political discussion where we agree the discussion should not be.
Fück this political bullshjt. More memes about stupid people getting hurt!
@JDPhi, nobody can argue about a dude getting hit in the nuts
I don't get you Americans...millions of people change their mind or have someone convince them otherwise even in a single conversation. Yet the tweets here are years apart and because he is the president, it isn't a change of opinion it is him flip-flopping? Is a man not entitled to some leeway when it comes to his support for something? Perhaps previous statements were uniformed statements? Perhaps someone made enough compelling evidence that convinced his to change his mind regarding something. I madd fun of our prime minister shagging a pig and all in all don't always agree with a lot of things, but I still respected him as a leader. Whether you like it or not, Trump is still your president, show some respect and support. Don't attack him for his ignorance or incorrect ideology, but rather help to inform or persuade him to see the truth or to at least not blow you completely off.
I'm down for these if they have them for every President.
@SimonPetrikov, they'd sell millions
@SimonPetrikov, give us examples of at least 5 different US presidents with pics
Let's be honest though the idea of the electoral college really is stupid. I have never understood why it is still around.
@George Feeny, It's because it is written in the Constitution to have it so in order to legally get rid of it an Amendment would need to be added abolishing it. The Amendment process is really tedious and difficult so only things that people/politicians desperately want become Amendments so we probably won't see it removed for a while especially if there isn't a clear majority opinion to get rid of it
@George Feeny, i agree. but the modern justification for it is to keep small states relevent. its sorta like the senate in a sense, give the little guy a voice. otherwise candidates would only campaign in like, NYC, Chicago, houston, just go wherever the population density is highest. The EC makes them campaign to the whole country. its still wrong and flawed and needs some replacing
@George Feeny, the entire purpose of the electoral college is to prevent New York and California from deciding every election, the USA is a very large and diverse country and what is popular there isn't everywhere else so to keep lesser populated states relevant the electoral college is in place. Perfect? Not so much. Stupid? Not when you think about it
@Medic135, it was also to make it so that a snake oil salesman didn't con a bunch of people into voting for him. The EC is there to go "holy crap, they tried to vote in this guy/girl??" And then correct it. They failed miserably this past election.
@iOS10, not really, especially because if that happened to you and your preferred candidate you would say something totally different
@Medic135, what gets me about this is that by saying that small states need a voice, it's also saying that the individuals in the big cities have voices that (individually) matter less.... so why not have it be popular vote? Then everyone's vote matters. Because a state has a smaller population it means that it has more of a voice, which doesn't make sense. If you're a small state, you shouldn't have more of a say because there are less of you... what these small states are doing are affecting more people in the big cities.
@juicy steak, because it's an entirely different way of life, imagine electing a leader of world but the Chinese and Indians decide who it will be every time and what you want never stands a chance of happening
@Medic135, I think the problem most people have with it (including myself) is that it means that because I live in a more populated area, I have less of a say than some random person that lives out in the middle of nowhere. It's basically throwing out votes. In last years election around 3,000,000 individual's votes didn't matter. That's 3,000,000 million people, not cities or states, but people that wanted Clinton over Trump. Im not saying we should go strictly off of popular votes, but there needs to be a better system in place. It's an outdated system that was a good idea a few hundred years ago. But times change, so should the government.
@Medic135, but then why wouldn't you just adjust to the times so that whatever that Chinese/Indian candidate decided would be what I wanted?
The whole idea of people (for example those in the coal industry) holding onto their old jobs or ideas because they're too stubborn or just not willing to embrace the future- automation, clean energy, etc. is absurd to me- like no matter how you look at it coal is slowly dying, so why not just cash out and invest in the future
@ajr12100, I don't understand what your first sentence implied, the Chinese/Indians should choose what you want? I'm lost there
Secondly, YOU find it absurd. Others don't. That's why it's a republic, there is representation of all groups and areas (broadly speaking) and not just overwhelming influence of one group
@K1lgore, that's the entire point. I like this post because the fillip flop on the left is completely true. For a pure democracy, the electoral college is unfair. That's by design. But we're not a democracy. We were never intended to be a democracy. Democracy by definition is mob rule. The majority will always infringe on the rights of the minority. Clinton was extremely pro choice. She wanted free abortions, on demand, up until the baby was crowning. Most conservatives are pro life and I doubt the man living is South Dakota wants his taxes going to fund abortion clinics in California.
@George Feeny, then you aren't paying attention. Did you know that almost everyone living between I-5 on the west Coast and I-95 on the East Coast voted for Trump (that's like 99% of land mass of US) and the people along the very edge of the coast (outside those 2 major freeways) voted for Clinton?
Now imagine being on the opposite side of your current political affiliation and having the other side determine who gets to be president.
@iOS10, it failed because the 2 party system has failed us all. Vote 3rd party every single time and I guarantee this doesn't happen again.
@juicy steak, because that's mob rule. We DO NOT have a democracy. We have a Constitutional Republic. Democracy is terrible (especially if you care anything about minorities at all).
@George Feeny, The concept is actually clever. It makes a canadate go to and see/listen to the problems and opinions of all Americans. It seems like the only times people make a point of it is the rare cases where the EC and the popular vote present different winners, Bush/Gore and Trump/Clinton being the main examples. Nobody thinks its 'stupid' the rest of the time.
@George Feeny, because otherwise a handful of big cities would dictate policy for the entire nation. Hillary won about 10% of the US land area in districts.
@juicy steak, And then people in small states would have to move to big states to be involved in politics. You see the problem here? So either an entire group of people has absolutely no say in one of our core political processes, or another group of people has a little less of a say. One is clearly better than the other.
@George Feeny, You should take a political science class. Or just read some John Locke. He warned against the dangers of mob rule, which is exactly what a direct democracy is. It's the reason ancient Athens constantly failed. The Founding Fathers knew this and made the country a Representative Republic instead, to prevent mob rule. The Electoral College is a part of that too.
@CriTiKa1, no they wouldn't... one person in Montana should have the same say as one person in NYC.... the Montana person can move wherever, their vote should just be weighted the same.
@Medic135, that would be fine... since they have the most people lol. Whoever the leaders are would effect the Chinese and Indians the most since they have the most people... so to me that makes sense that they have more of a say.
@juicy steak, you're either in Jr high school or you really don't understand this concept, myself and @CriTiKa1 have explained it thoroughly
@Medic135, I understand it.... also I'm an auditor so not exactly in junior high. I just think that it should be weighted more on population than it is. That's just what I think. The electoral college isn't perfect, so there are other ways to do things. In my eyes, every vote should count equally.
@juicy steak, it isn't perfect but your method would be cataclysmic, it's just a blatantly awful idea that would lead to not only civil unrest but actual war
@juicy steak, You're not looking at the big picture here. Let me give you an extreme example. If 51% of the population thinks we should nuke North Korea, should the other 49% of the population be powerless to stop it? This is what is called mob rule. This is the reason we have the Senate and the EC.
@juicy steak, If you reject the idea of giving the minority tools to defend themselves against the majority then you must also reject the Senate, because that is exactly what the Senate was made for.
@CriTiKa1, I understand where you're coming from, I'm just saying the 51% shouldn't have their voice docked because they ARE the majority, their voice should matter more because they represent more of the population.
@CriTiKa1, I AM THE SENATE
@juicy steak, Like I said, that's mob rule. It is the worst part of democracy. It's what has caused direct democracies to always fail. There is no successful example of a direct democracy. That is exactly what John Locke warned against and what the Founding Fathers worked to prevent. Turning the US to direct democracy would destroy it. Luckily, it will never happen.
@CriTiKa1, totally understand the concept. Don't understand why I need to be down voted for my opinion... just because something didn't work in the past doesn't mean it wouldn't work now and I'm saying how I feel. Yes, I get that there are inherent reasons why it would be wrong, but there's something wrong with saying that every voice doesn't matter. But thanks for the down votes, always cool when they're unwarranted. 👌🏼
@CriTiKa1, my big thing is that just because something worked well for x amount of years doesn't mean it should be the same forever. Boundaries need to be pushed and rules need to be changed. I'm socially liberal and fiscally conservative, to me it's clear what would make this country better and most everyone I talk to is the same, parties need to be taken out of the equation
@juicy steak, What's that cheesy saying about the definition of insanity? Something about trying the same thing several times expecting different results. If it didn't work in the past, it's especially not going to work now. You simply do not understand political science if you honestly think a population of almost 400 million could survive under a system that constantly ruined a city of a few hundred thousand. You have it wrong. Your way would mean that every voice outside the majority doesn't matter. Having the EC and the Senate gives the minority a voice as well. Of course this comes at the expense of some of the majority's power, but it's necessary to avoid mob rule, which is what the Founding Fathers, John Locke, Abraham Lincoln and I'm sure many other of our country's leaders have worked desperately to avoid. We're just going in circles now, I'd suggest reading up on the arguments made against mob rule and why direct democracies will always fail.
@juicy steak, If you were really a liberal, you'd understand the necessity of institutions against mob rule.
@CriTiKa1, lol. Honey, I was actually a political science minor in college... I do know all about this. As I said before, just my opinion.
@CriTiKa1, at the same time however the Electoral College is a completely outdated system that inaccurately represents the US electorate, I'm from the UK so I recognise that I am an outsider looking in since my country has a parliamentary government meaning the prime minister is indirectly elected; basically the leader of the party that won the majority of seats in parliament is prime minister. Point Being there are many other types of government which function perfectly fine as a proportional democracy for example France which uses a two round system for presidential elections
Why are you dead?
Hispanic mothers beating their children with these in a few months
Every president flip flops it's just that most don't do it with tweets
Or someone's opinion changes over the course of years.
Those are funny