Snoop Dogg takes on Trump (again) bit this time crosses the line (again)
- Thread starter Jedi.Knight
- Start date
So raping women isn't a big deal? Where'd you go to school, the Harvey Weinstein School of Chivalry?
Even less of the country voted for Bill Clinton in 1992 as well. We can play this game all day.
Understand I'm a Libertarian, and I call out both Democratic and Republican voters when they play games and try to put asterisks on voting. The Constitution is the Constitution, and make statements, excuses, complaints, etc... all you want. It can be amended, so get out there and get it amended if you don't like things.
Of course, you'll have to find a supermajority of the people in a supermajority of the states ... and not just the supermajority of California. It's civics 101, and I'm sorry you don't like it.
I'm just pointing out that if you remove 1 state, the popular vote swings to Trump. One state basically decides the popular vote. Sorry, but that's just fact.
So get over trying to put an asterisk on the elected Executive of the United States.
Then don't care about anything I post then. Why do you keep taking issue?
Actually, Democrats very much do!
Because Clinton was considered so anti-civil rights by registered Democratic voters more than Trump,
, Johnson had 2-to-1 Clinton voters over Trump, despite taking 1-to-3 in 2012. The is also part of the same reason why why 8% of African-Americans who are registered to vote, and voted Obama in 2012, stayed home in 2016. They refused to support Clinton, and it had nothing to do with alleged "Voter ID laws" (they were still very much registered to vote).
That's when a $50M SuperPAC was formed to target the 10 states where 70% of Johnson's voter base was at, especially among young voters. That's 10x as much as the entire, nationwide Johnson campaign had + 2 minor SuperPACs supporting him. It was also followed up by leveraging the mainstream media mouthpieces 1 week before the national debates.
Would you like the list of the TV news people that take their orders directly from the DNC? We Libertarians got the list 3 weeks before the debates.
So I understand what the Republicans complain about with entire swaths of the US media being directly controlled by the DNC. There are countless subcontracted people by the major media outlets that are basically run by the DNC.
That's when a $50M SuperPAC was formed to target the 10 states where 70% of Johnson's voter base was at, especially among young voters. That's 10x as much as the entire, nationwide Johnson campaign had + 2 minor SuperPACs supporting him. It was also followed up by leveraging the mainstream media mouthpieces 1 week before the national debates.
Would you like the list of the TV news people that take their orders directly from the DNC? We Libertarians got the list 3 weeks before the debates.
So I understand what the Republicans complain about with entire swaths of the US media being directly controlled by the DNC. There are countless subcontracted people by the major media outlets that are basically run by the DNC.
What are you talking about? We Libertarians debate with everyone!
In fact, as the joke goes ... "Did you heard what the Republicans agreed to with the Democrats? They agreed didn't want to hear the Libertarians at all."
Just like in 1992. Even less people wanted Bill Clinton then, than Trump in 2016.
Last edited:
Your comment on "most people" really just comes down to California where "most" of the margin in difference came from. To that I say who gives a shit? This sad, pathetic insistence to whine about the popular vote, or the fact that we have an Electoral College, has been old for 6 months already.
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
I love these mental gymnastics. Maybe you can work for ESPN: "Navy actually won last night, if you discount the points SMU scored in the first half".
I love these mental gymnastics. Maybe you can work for ESPN: "Navy actually won last night, if you discount the points SMU scored in the first half".
Trump had more points. Hillary may have had more yards but she didn't score enough.
My original statement was that he would never be respected by the majority of the country. You all brought up the electoral college.
No one is arguing that! Fuk. You people really are stupid. Here is a recap drawn in crayons for you people:
1)Mac said most of the country did not vote for Trump.
2)Bt and Snowflake85 said he was wrong.
3) They are dumb. Mac was correct in his statement.
4) snowflake tried to move the goalposts and say "well if you don't count part of the country, more people voted for trump."
5) Jesus you people really have me worried for the future.
Looking beyond the fact that Navy played Temple, not SMU ... brain far, it happens, I won't hold it against you.
I love these mental gymnastics. Maybe you can work for ESPN: "Navy actually won last night, if you discount the points SMU scored in the first half".
You really do throw stones from inside your glass house, eh?
Why do you do this?
You're making me defend the Conservatives here ... way too much
Bob the Knight nailed it here ...
A far better analogy!
Let's say the yardage was flipped (in Navy's favor), or we factor in kickoff+punt return yardage, or some other yardage ...
- Ninja says Navy had more 30 yards, they won
- I point out that Navy got 20%, some 75 of its 300 yards, on one play
- Let's say Temple's top 2 plays were 18 and 23 yards
- So .. take away Navy's best play, and ...
- Take away Temple's best 2, and ...
- Navy has less yards
- Ninja now says that we cannot take away Navy's best play from yardage
- Yardage does not matter at all ... just the scoreboard
- Ninja brought up yardage, I did not
- Ninja, do not start something that you want to later dismiss
- I only mentioned California's popular vote, because ...
- You mentioned the national popular vote ... first
- But you now claim the California popular vote "doesn't matter"
- Neither California nor the national, popular vote matters!
So ... could you stop undermining your position? This is classic Clinton-Progressive logic that gets them into trouble. Especially with a civics-focused Libertarian like myself.
Seriously. You're undermining yourself.
Holy fuking shit I'm not reading that. I'm sure you are wrong though, because this is not that difficult. Literally Mac said most people did not vote for Trump. That is 100% correct, if you try to argue that you are a fuking moron. It is not complicated in the slightest. Do not write another damn novel.
Holy shit. BS made a post without mentioning that he's a god damn libertarian.
No. I hit command F, did a search for "libertarian," and nothing was highlighted.
Cliffs:
- You brought up "some smack"
- I modified that "some smack"
- You said "my smack" did not matter
- I said "all smack" does not matter ... and you started "the smack" (don't start it if you don't want to deal with it)
So now you'll debate me on how you don't read my stuff, that is always wrong.
Don't start some smack if you don't want to look at the smack.
You don't have to be a Libertarian to use your brain.
This is why Progressives are no longer Liberals. I can deal with Liberals. Progressives are just literally, "Only what I say matters, I'm not listening to you. You're wrong."
Classic Clinton-Progressive agenda. You're turning more people Conservative.
Ninja: "I HATE THE WC EVERYONE IS SO STUPID I'M TOO SMART FOR THIS PLACE!!!"
Also Ninja: "Hey, I think I'll post in the WC daily"
Also Ninja: "Hey, I think I'll post in the WC daily"
That's how Clinton-Progressives comes off as well. They literally complain about how they don't go there ... but do. And when someone calls them out on it, they move the goal posts.
Yep. Same agenda.
Jesus you literally are obsessed with me. Have you made a post in the last 24 hours that didn't contain my screen name?
It's just amusing to watch you always whine and cry about this board, as you continue to rapidly post on here most every day. You're like the guy who badmouths a restaurant to his friends but secretly gets take out from there daily.
Bs look, I know you think you are smart.
You aren't
You are weird.
You can redeem yourself though: explain in under 5 sentences how Mac's statement of "most people did not vote for Trump" was wrong. Alternatively: admit you and BT and Mr obsessed with me Snowflake85 were wrong.
You aren't
You are weird.
You can redeem yourself though: explain in under 5 sentences how Mac's statement of "most people did not vote for Trump" was wrong. Alternatively: admit you and BT and Mr obsessed with me Snowflake85 were wrong.
The only one whining and crying is your little hormonal bitch self. I rather enjoy pointing out how stupid the things that you and others say. It's entertaining, especially when you bro rage out like you are probably about to do.
Tell me more about how most people, excluding people that you don't agree with, voted for trump. It's pretty funny.
But you won't accept any explanation that you don't agree with. You have phrased not only the question, not only the answer, but the entire discussion -- no valid points or other debate allowed.
That's to the same attitude-extremism of Clinton-Progressive arrogance that literally causes half of the country to hate the Democratic party right now -- especially via the mainstream media. It's no better than the worst attitudes and criticisms of Donald Trump.
I'm not saying this to tell you that "you're wrong," but to point out the obviousness of why the Democratic party is shooting itself in the foot.
Understanding civics isn't about being smart. In fact, if you're watching "The Crown" on Netflix, it makes the same point in season 1.
I've long accepted I'm 'socially awkward.' That, in itself, is not a bad thing. In fact, it not only makes me unique, but desired by many for specific roles and tasks, by most people.
I already answered your question, and you did not accept it. Why?
Again ...
Yep. Absolutely. They don't see it. I cannot stand Trump. I cannot stand most RealityTV stars in general. But damn if the US media and the Progressives didn't ensure it!
The f'er wasn't even polling 4% awhile back!
Fuk dude I don't care about your new age anarcho libertarian mumbo jumbo. This isnt about your overplayed fox news sound bite that Democrats are pushing people towards Trump. Literally all I did was correct bt and Snowflake85 when they said Mac was wrong.
Actually, it's 17th century, but I'm sure you can come up with a demonization for that too. More accurately, it's the original Republican party (1850s to 1960s) that finally split by 1971.
No, it isn't -- it's about your arrogance, straight from the Clinton-Progressive regime and Mainstream Media. If you weren't floating in it, maybe we could talk about the non-sense that goes over on Fox News as well ... but you're not amenable to that.
And I interjected something you didn't like.
Lol you are the reason people hate libertarians. You interjected bullshit, and aren't man enough to admit you were wrong. I love how you keep assuming my political party too, it's hilarious so I let it slide but it's just another example of you being wrong.
Yes, Democratic and Republican voters often agree they hate Libertarians.
No, more accurately, I interject more BS (Californian popular vote) into the original BS (national popular vote).
And here it comes ...
Yes, we Libertarians do not see the world in just "right v. wrong," like Progressives and Neo-Conservatives. We don't see things as "you're either with us, or against us."
And in all honesty, you Progressives have 1-up'd the Neo-Conservatives on that one, especially since 2006.
If you act like a Clinton-Progressive, you are a Clinton-Progressive.
I'm registered No Party Affiliation, not even Libertarian Party. The Libertarian Party in the US regularly pisses me off too. But my ideals are most aligned to original, Libertarian ideals that were founded in the 16-18th centuries by Europeans, and cultivated by the British ... in the Americas.
In fact, we're still fighting the same issues today.
I don't have to assume. You are literally a Mainstream Media mouthpiece, to the letter. My response to your very first post in this thread ...
... hypocrisy in action ... you too look like yet another Progressive ... Deflect a valid criticism by charging they do good for society, and should be excused
The OP made an extreme valid point about the Mainstream Media applying double-standards. I can agree with Conservatives when they make a valid point.
What I didn't expect was you to literally pull the response out of Hillary Clinton's rectum. Are you that brainwashed that you responded in such a way? Apparently so.
Dude! Seriously ... what has happened to people like you in this country?
Correct. Most of the country didn't vote for Trump:
326M people in the USA.
250M of voting age
137M voted
63M voted for Trump
so
only 19% of the USA population voted for Trump,
only 25% of citizens of voting age voted for Trump,
only 46% of voters voted for Trump,
Even 3 (at least) of his 5 kids didn't vote for him in the primaries
