Welcome to Thunderdome

Posted: **Tue Mar 22, 2016 6:35 pm**

Malcolm wrote:I value guile...

Is he running?

Posted: **Tue Mar 22, 2016 6:38 pm**

Maybe in Brussels.

Posted: **Tue Mar 22, 2016 6:39 pm**

TPRJones wrote:Sure. But how does that make Trump better? Just because I'm tired of being fed shit on toast doesn't mean I'll like shit on a bagel any better.

Didn't say it did, I just don't think Malcolm's argument holds water. He says he wants a leader with guile, then says Trump is bad because he lies. I dunno. Maybe I'm wrong. Honesty is just one of the big things I look for in a leader. I don't follow people who lie to me over and over "for my own good."

Again, don't care. Personally as of now I'm voting for Trump just for the comedy if he actually gets elected. NONE OF IT WILL AFFECT ME NO MATTER WHO GETS ELECTED, and my pride and sense of self-worth is not tied to how well my political party performs during the election. I'm golden, because I don't give a fuck. I can sit back and troll.

Posted: **Tue Mar 22, 2016 6:42 pm**

GORDON wrote:
Malcolm wrote:If I can't trust a politician to confuse and misdirect his own countrymen, I can't expect him to do it to world leaders. I value guile, and Redd Foxx had more than Donnie Dumbass.

Obama has being a fucking liar his entire administration, and has tens of millions of groupies willing to kill or die for him, and he has been a disaster with foreign relations.

Yeah, but he does it badly. Now, Clinton ... THERE was a liar. FDR was a fantastic liar. The last one the pachyderms had who was in the professional leagues was Ray-gun.

Edited By Malcolm on 1458686658

Posted: **Tue Mar 22, 2016 7:53 pm**

GORDON wrote:NONE OF IT WILL AFFECT ME NO MATTER WHO GETS ELECTED

(makes a note to bring this up again later as needed)

Posted: **Tue Mar 22, 2016 7:57 pm**

Now I'm going to vote for Trump twice.

Posted: **Tue Mar 22, 2016 8:28 pm**

GORDON wrote:Now I'm going to vote for Trump twice.

He's going to need all the help he can get. I can't think of a willing running mate he could pick that's sane enough to do anything except make his life more difficult.

Posted: **Wed Mar 23, 2016 1:36 pm**

Donny Smallballs decides to twitter ambush Ted Cruz's wife, because his absurdly undersized micropenis won't allow otherwise.

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2016 3:17 pm**

You know what? Maybe we need Trump. At the very least, maybe we fucking deserve Trump.

If your brain can take the absolute fucking TORTURE that is this article about Emory students responding to pro-Trump chalk writings then give it a look and tell me that this country's youth deserves a better leader than Trump. Hell or even Sanders or Clinton.

Hopefully someone will give them all a trophy so they feel better about themselves.

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2016 3:19 pm**

College students, in spite of their voting age, are generally morons. All they needed to do was write "... loves the cock" after every pro-Trump message.

Maybe we need Trump. At the very least, maybe we fucking deserve Trump.

Hell no and fucking hell no. Donald Trump is what happens when ego and self-esteem run amok. In his case, it turns him into a rabid, frothing at the mouth demagogue instead of a cowering, passive-aggressive pussy. I mean demagogue by the strictest, most complete sense of the word.

a political leader who seeks support by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than by using rational argument.

Edited By Malcolm on 1458847635

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2016 4:26 pm**

I am somewhat bewildered that anyone thinks any candidate is better than any other when they are all walking piles of lying human trash. Every single one.

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2016 4:29 pm**

Malcolm wrote:
a political leader who seeks support by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than by using rational argument.

How does that not apply to Sanders and Clinton?

It seems to me that accurately describes the Democrats' political strategy since they lost the 2000 election.

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2016 5:36 pm**

Leisher wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
a political leader who seeks support by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than by using rational argument.

How does that not apply to Sanders and Clinton?

It seems to me that accurately describes the Democrats' political strategy since they lost the 2000 election.

If you want to get picky, politics is inherently irrational but that's a matter for another time. At the very least, both have a coherent platform and plan for wtf they'd do if elected. Probably because they've been wetdreaming about it for the two centuries each has been alive. Trump has offered nothing but:

1) reactionary blanket statements which betray an utter lack of logical and historical comprehension on pretty much any subject he spends more than a few sentences on

2) debate tactics I'd call immature for a fucking forensics team raised exclusively in a frat house

3) lame personal insults that would earn a devastating riposte from lowly comedians even "Last Comic Standing" wouldn't touch

Edited By Malcolm on 1458855440

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2016 6:43 pm**

Malcolm wrote:At the very least, both have a coherent platform and plan for wtf they'd do if elected.

And they both lie about 100% of what they plan to do.

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:00 pm**

GORDON wrote:
Malcolm wrote:At the very least, both have a coherent platform and plan for wtf they'd do if elected.
And they both lie about 100% of what they plan to do.

I got a decent idea what they'll do if they get elected. Trump is less predictable and has the potential to fuck up on the scale of Hoover, Nixon, or Buchanan.

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:07 pm**

Malcolm wrote:
GORDON wrote:
Malcolm wrote:At the very least, both have a coherent platform and plan for wtf they'd do if elected.
And they both lie about 100% of what they plan to do.
I got a decent idea what they'll do if they get elected. Trump is less predictable and has the potential to fuck up on the scale of Hoover, Nixon, or Buchanan.

Hillary has already fucked up more than all of them put together, and no one cares.

I think FDR still has her beat, though.

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:37 pm**

James Buchanan is almost universally regarded by legit historians as the worst motherfucker ever to take up the office. To put it bluntly, no, Hillary has not fucked anywhere near as badly. We'll see how long it takes a civil war to break out after she wins the election, because I'm calling her victory right now. To quote catt, "Any takers?"

EDIT: Really, FDR? The four-term loser that got us through most of WWII? His grasp of economics was laughably bad and his "four freedoms" speech makes me cringe every time I hear it, but he's not even in the bottom third.

Edited By Malcolm on 1458870181

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:42 pm**

Hillary hasn't taken office, so she wouldn't be in any lists compared to Buchanan.

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:43 pm**

GORDON wrote:Hillary hasn't taken office, so she wouldn't be in any lists compared to Buchanan.

The worst shit she's done in any office pales in comparison to Jimmy B.

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:48 pm**

I don't have anything to say about that. I am not familiar with Buchanan's presidency.

Welcome to Thunderdome

Trump 2016