i just meant that it does t matter why someone dislikes someone else. people dislike people. whether it is something they can and are willing to change about theyselfs is up to them, but the fact that they are not lieked is what it is. unless a group has a clearly identifiable premium associated with their existence, the government should remain neutral. for example, fats require higher medical expenditures and should be held financially responsible for that.

don't see what the issue with foreigners is, but okay. i still think we owe it to our friends, families and countrymen whether born and raised here or newly immigrated to be selective in whom we admit, most especially with consideration of those already on the bottom run of our ladder. it doesn't help the bottom 15% who are too dumb for military service if we bring in a similarly sized population of people rendered we comparably ineffective by lack of education, language or cultural divides.

can't beat safeway for meat if you shop the sales. Cash And Carry is competitive though for bulk premium meats thought liek ribeye and tenderloin if you have a place to store it. they got lotta other good deals too liek, cucumbers, mushrooms and tomatoes. ^^

hey i got a patent on that word.

woke

i hate stupid fats. its a scientific fact fact peoples brains r slow

fathead is the best insult NA

The difference between the mess of the Republican party and the mess of the Democratic party -- is the Democrats don't actually have a legitimate business pillar. It's not as if there are actually a lot of pro-business Democrat votes -- it's all unofficial and corrupt.

They can't rally anyone to vote for the pro business wing -- because their not even supposed to fuckin be here. All they can do is split the vote with racial tension -- But I doubt it will work 2020 in a Democratic primary.

Edit: One thing I often find myself agreeing with Republicans on, is how completely out of touch your average well-off Democrat is. They are the ones concerned about Russia lets just say. But -- despite what it may look like on T.V. -- most Democrats really are poor fucks and aren't even paying attention yet. So you can believe some rich out of touch media Democrat -- and their (Hillary 2016) perspective on what Democrats think...But I'd ask a socialist if you want to know what most working people are thinking. Don't mistake media spin and narrative for populist confusion.

Holy MTV naive batman.


85% of the DNC voters aren't aware of the DNC's dealings or the illegitimate railroading of Sanders.

You think your politics change just because 1 populist got elected? Think again. There is no Democrat revolution brewing. You're going to race bait just like every other election and 0bama will do most of the campaigning as he already said he is capable of mobilizing the Dem base enough to beat Trump. We already have a forecast of 2020 and it doesn't involve any major changes to the DNC or the Dem superstructure. 0bama will mobilize a fuckload of votes (Through the Biden connection), and we'll see how it stacks up to the populist politics.

its a Dem victory if 0bama goes hard enough when you add some Sanders voter bloc pandering.

I don't think politics is going to change because 1 populist got elected. I think politics has already changed and people like you are hanging on to some 1950s ideal of moderate incrementalism and negotiation with conservative businessmen. It hasn't worked in a long time. Everyone in the country watched one of 3 news shows back then -- and believed the information uncritically.

We don't need a fucking compromiser to win elections. We need a god damn lightning rod to excite the base

Attachment 9099

It's about turn out -- we knew that in 2016 before Hillary made everyone forget. We need a big turn out -- Trump will take care of the low-Republican turn out.

But this isn't about who is best able to get elected Azzar...That's the cover story for getting another pro-business corporate douchebag in like before. It's not that we don't want to elect Bernie...it's that we can't right? Except that only makes sense when your surrounded by an aura paid to believe it.

Those people are going to sound a lot more convincing in their nice offices than me on the elf sim forum -- but just remember called the direction of the party and who was blowing a bunch of smoke up your ass about their self-importance and knowledge of things.

We are definitely in an age of populism, as this is the first time I've seen Fox News primetime slam a tax cut policy and sternly question the wisdom and logic of Trump's tax cut plan with regards to Middle America. Again, this has never happened before. This is called the "Sanders effect". Sanders and populism has conservatives talking at the dinner table. Conservatives are beginning to question the wisdom of for-profit healthcare.

The wheels are in motion as Daywolf said.

Hopefully we aren't repeating the 1960s, 70's, 80's what have you all over again.

I was just flipping through a LIFE magazine from 1965, the NASA issue. Its amazing how the Israeli politic was the exact same, JFK assassination photos and talking points, the EXACT same as 2017. No momentum, no movement. The Israeli politic is exactly the same as it was in 1965. The exact same articles from 1965 could be published again today and you wouldn't even know. Someone needs test that somehow, just to prove the no-change theory.

Its not about electing a corporatist so much as its about just about maintaining the status quo while the wealth accumulates. If you were making huge money simply because you had money, you wouldn't want to change anything either.


The articles in the magazine 1965 about Lyndon Johnson are the EXACT SAME articles we publish today on Bush and 0bama. The CHANGE is that the same article cannot adlib in "Trump".

That is hugely powerful. That is real tangible change. When they can't copy and paste anymore-- you know you got a bitch.

The public on foreign policy is much more debatable. There is movement in younger Americans beliefs on on Israel -- but your right that the story is the same and probably written by similar people. It's amazing how Gen Xers don't have a political identity separate from Boomers when it comes down to it. So we'll see on FP -- millenials are still like what 35 at most?

But Foreign Policy is a total hobby -- and maybe the public will always be a bit left out. It takes a really good private school or a lot of college courses in Political Science to start wrapping your head around it in my experience.

I loved politics before college -- but didn't even understand or pay attention to FP. When a guest speaker from the defense department came to my class and asked "is foreign policy just for the elite? or can the public come to its own conclusions (generally)?"

I admit I still mostly think its for the elite.

Just to clarify -- I don't think Socialists are going to control the congressional agenda -- I think that will be the stronghold of money politics for awhile more. I think Socialists are going to take control over the Democratic Presidential nominations. Because that is the populist office anyway and it's obtainable and will eventually be acceptable to the elite. The president will then slowly torture Congress into giving us some of what we want.