US politics general thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
:laugh:

And some of you guys say the lefties are guilty of circle jerking, the last three pages have been one big circle jerk.
The difference therein is that the right directs their circle jere
I see Cerebus succeeded in moving on swiftly as he has been found being deceitful and dishonest. He's happy he can now talk about something else.

Them libards be libtarding
Even by your standards; that's a far reach
 
Even by your standards; that's a far reach

You have anything to add to the debate about immigration and Trump, or just getting in on the circle jerk action now? You a bit late, he needed your help the whole day, you guys left him stroking it himself :D
 
I see Cerebus succeeded in moving on swiftly as he has been found being deceitful and dishonest. He's happy he can now talk about something else.

Them libards be libtarding

well he's good at it, he got shown an idiot in the coastguard right-wing ok sign thread and made a super hasty retreat there too :ROFL:

Speaking of libtards -

43311661_10156100256303821_7036857791947997184_n.jpg

One side is as bad as the other in all this, as much as anyone likes to think their 'side' is better ......
 
Just read the most amazing thing, and I quote:

"The one and only thing that could knock me off the "Trump Train" is if I find out he has sex with Hillary Clinton"
 
No dog in this fight. Couldn't be bothered to see what this collective argument in semantics is on about.

Pretty simple, really. The people who were wailing about 'muh due process' actually don't care about it at all, and are quite happy when it's discarded, as long as it's targeted at people they don't like. cerebus has been fighting a valiant fight to try and talk about facts, but at some point you end up hitting a wall of bad-faith, feelings-based motivated reasoning from people who are more interested in 'owning the libs' than having substantive discussions.
 
"Zuma hasn't said "I'm corrupt", so he's not corrupt. Duh." - Temujin.
:rolleyes:Expected nothing less... even after giving you guys massive leeway that I'd accept any 'implied, overtones, undertones', even after goal posts were moved to 'pushing' etc, still no answers to anything, no reasoning as to how for example you guys read 'hillary must go to jail' as 'hillary must go to jail without due process', just more garbage. Be gone
 
Pretty simple, really. The people who were wailing about 'muh due process' actually don't care about it at all, and are quite happy when it's discarded, as long as it's targeted at people they don't like. cerebus has been fighting a valiant fight to try and talk about facts, but at some point you end up hitting a wall of bad-faith, feelings-based motivated reasoning from people who are more interested in 'owning the libs' than having substantive discussions.

You do realise that you are the biggest hypocrite when it comes to due process in this group, right?

There is no talking immigration facts in this group. The USA has an immigration problem. 11 million undocumented problems (with some estimates going even higher), the majority of which are from Mexico and other countries from the south. Using tax payer's money to fast track these people into the USA (along with all the other rights and benefits that come with it) does not sit well with many people in the US (and rightly so). The USA has a right to lock down its borders and process illegal immigrants and asylum seekers however they see fit (and in accordance with basic human rights). Conflating due process in terms of being labelled a rapist, and that of an asylum application is fruitless and a waste of time as the two are so unrelated, it's grasping at straws.
 
You do realise that you are the biggest hypocrite when it comes to due process in this group, right?

No, that would be Trump. He cherry picks the people he wants to accord 'due process' to. If you're on his side, he's screaming about your rights. If you aren't on his side, he'll make it a campaign promise to have you locked up when he becomes president. He'll be especially vocal for your 'rights' if he himself has been accused of the same misconduct.

People Trump has presumed to be innocent:

Rob Porter
Brett Kavanaugh
Roy Moore
Bill O'Reilly
Roger Ailes
Corey Lewandowski

People Trump has presumed to be guilty:

Hillary Clinton
The Central Park Five
Undocumented immigrants
Robert Mueller
James Comey
 
No, that would be Trump. He cherry picks the people he wants to accord 'due process' to. If you're on his side, he's screaming about your rights. If you aren't on his side, he'll make it a campaign promise to have you locked up when he becomes president. He'll be especially vocal for your 'rights' if he himself has been accused of the same misconduct.

People Trump has presumed to be innocent:

Rob Porter
Brett Kavanaugh
Roy Moore
Bill O'Reilly
Roger Ailes
Corey Lewandowski

People Trump has presumed to be guilty:

Hillary Clinton
The Central Park Five
Undocumented immigrants
Robert Mueller
James Comey

It's funny you put Hillary Clinton in there.

Oh, and I wasn't talking about you or Trump. OD showed his hypocrisy in one post, and he didn't even realise it.
 
It's funny you put Hillary Clinton in there.

Oh, and I wasn't talking about you or Trump. OD showed his hypocrisy in one post, and he didn't even realise it.

He really didn't. You just love acting outraged.
 
He really didn't. You just love acting outraged.

And you keep making personal assumptions about me with zero evidence, yet I make a quip about you and you whine right off the bat. It's pretty hilarious.

And apparently you didn't see the hypocrisy either. Some here are all over the place. Believe some women who have zero corroborating evidence. Don't believe another women who has corroborating evidence, but wants irrefutable evidence. The key difference being the political alignment of the accused.
 
And apparently you didn't see the hypocrisy either. Some here are all over the place. Believe some women who have zero corroborating evidence. Don't believe another women who has corroborating evidence, but wants irrefutable evidence. The key difference being the political alignment of the accused.

Sorry I have no idea what you're talking about here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X