Thread for orphaned comments
invite response
2005 Apr 11, 5:00pm 188,095 views 117,730 comments
by Patrick ➕follow (60) 💰tip ignore
« First « Previous Comments 79,724 - 79,763 of 117,730 Next » Last » Search these comments
MisdemeanorRebel
2017 Jan 18, 3:51pm
Hell, in 2014-2015 Hillary's narrative was that she was this highly skilled technical expert, who knew all the tricks of the Chinks and Ruskies to spy on her. Talking about meeting under a tent to prevent Chinese with telescoping cameras from taking pictures of their phone screens.
I gotta find that clip.
Ceffer
2017 Jan 18, 5:42pm
They need to send in an IHL skank stealth pussy bomber, and make Trumpligula pull back a puddled, boiling mass of stinky Chlamydia and yeast pus on his hand.
zzyzzx
2017 Jan 18, 6:43pm
Hollywood Liberals To Protest Trump Inauguration By Committing Mass Suicide
Strategist
2017 Jan 18, 7:14pm
Hollywood Liberals To Protest Trump Inauguration By Committing Mass Suicide
I can hardly wait.
Ceffer
2017 Jan 19, 3:18am
A new merchandising opportunity. Trump branded "pucker up to suck my dick, America!" MAGA lip balm.
Y
2017 Jan 19, 6:22am
The only reason they announced is to hide the embarassment of not being invited...
More than 60 Democratic lawmakers now skipping Trump’s inauguration.
"The only reason they announced is to hide the embarassment of not being invited..."
Yes, I'm sure that's it. Because the tickets are so hard to get.
"Some flippers, who acquired tickets to Trump's inauguration with the intent of reselling them on the secondary market, are striking out in their efforts to peddle them and are now looking at some relatively "yuge" losses."
http://mashable.com/2017/01/17/trump-inauguration-facebook-ad/#lyULqiuHvaq3
there are many more. Republicans blocked a great number of bills that had strong public support. You need to listen more, I guess.
You're still talking about republicans; you are still having reading comprehension problems. I was talking about these guys (democratic inauguration boycotters) facing shit storm moving forward, if they try to behave in an obstructionist manner.
wtf are you talking about? I was obviously referring to Republican Congressmen
Because you were changing the subject to fit some narrative that you are trying to push. Im saying that these democratic congressmen will face shit storm for any future attempt to behave in obstructionist manner. My writing is fine, your ability to read, on other hand, sucks.
"Where are links that these democrats standing in solidarity behaved in obstructionist manner during obama presidency. Links or you are talking out of anus"
wtf are you talking about? I was obviously referring to Republican Congressmen who did exactly that over the last 8 years during the Obama Presidency. Why would a Dem. obstruct a Democratic President? Are you an idiot?
Did any of these democrats boycotting the inauguration ever behave in a manner supportive of obstructionist republicans, how complicated is that to understand?
Are you an idiot?
Youre still too much of pussy to admit that you are a limousine liberal who votes for welfare to keep coloreds on their side of tracks. Of course, you lie to yourself and say that you're doing it for the 'betterment of society'.
By the way, what kind of pussy changes their handle from tatupu70 to joeyjojojunior?......pathetic.joeyjojojunior says
Why would a Dem. obstruct a Democratic President? Are you an idiot?
Why would republicans vote against trump....what kind of retard are you?
"Did any of these democrats boycotting the inauguration ever behave in a manner supportive of obstructionist republicans, how complicated is that to understand?"
It's not complicated. It's just a stupid question.
I think you need a writing class. Your overuse of the pronoun "they"
You're the one who has overused the pronoun "they" as I was quoting you, dumbass
It's not complicated. It's just a stupid question
Why is it a stupid question, same thing happened between establishment GOP and trump?
why is it so hard to comprehend that these reps are digging a ditch for themselves that will be hard to overcome. No proposal of these guys will see light of day.
I think you need a writing class. Your overuse of the pronoun "they" makes it impossible to determine your point.
The point is that you changed the subject because you want to push a different narrative or because you lack reading comprehension skills
"You're still talking about republicans; you are still having reading comprehension problems. I was talking about these guys (democratic inauguration boycotters) facing shit storm moving forward, if they try to behave in an obstructionist manner."
Of course I'm talking about Republicans. Do you really not follow the point? Republicans were in this exact situation in 2008 and were obstructionist for the next 8 years with no consequences. It's called a parallel and serves to give a strong indication of what will happen to Dems if they do the same thing.
"Because you were changing the subject to fit some narrative that you are trying to push. Im saying that these democratic congressmen will face shit storm for any future attempt to behave in obstructionist manner. My writing is fine, your ability to read, on other hand, sucks."
Narrative? I'm showing you what happened in the past under almost the exactly same scenario.
"The point is that you changed the subject because you want to push a different narrative or because you lack reading comprehension skills"
wtf is wrong with you. I didn't change the subject. I used an example from recent history to show that Republicans, facing the same scenario, were strong obstructionists and suffered no consequences.
. It's called a parallel and serves to give a strong indication of what will happen to Dems if they do the same thing.
I think you are discounting the social media and 'fake news' factors; trump is a master of it and these guys will most likely face more negative publicity than any other times of their respective careers
"Youre still too much of pussy to admit that you are a limousine liberal who votes for welfare to keep coloreds on their side of tracks. Of course, you lie to yourself and say that you're doing it for the 'betterment of society'."
My lord. I give up with you. You make zero sense and cannot comprehend the simplest of discussions.
My lord. I give up with you. You make zero sense and cannot comprehend the simplest of discussions
You think that this publicity stunt won't face retaliation and you are using past precedent to predict future events.
I'm saying you are stupid because people like you totally thought trump couldn't win.
Also, republicans did everything in their power to obstruct trump, your past precedent couldn't predict that either.
boycotting the inauguration is a stupid political stunt that has no chance in hell of doing anything positive for the future of the democratic party, that's the real point.
People like tatty/joeyjojo, think it is either "no big deal" or actually a "good idea"
But otherwise joeyjojo makes a lot of sense and has the comprehension skills of an einstein.
"Hey Tatty, Where's the list I asked for?? I'm STILL waiting."
If you want to find the list, try www.google.com. I don't have time to do research for you.
"boycotting the inauguration is a stupid political stunt that has no chance in hell of doing anything positive for the future of the democratic party, that's the real point.
People like tatty/joeyjojo, think it is either "no big deal" or actually a "good idea""
Yep--I'd say no big deal. It will be forgotten in 1 month.
"Translation: I can't back up the statements I make."
What statement would that be?
Yep--I'd say no big deal. It will be forgotten in 1 month.
maybe the boycott will be forgotten, but every boycotter will be under increased scrutiny and hair trigger twitter and fake news attacks for everything they do counter to the Trump agenda. Stupid political move.
Still discounting the power of social media and 'fake news'. Par for the course for someone who seeks confirmation bias via MSM sources
zzyzzx
2017 Jan 19, 7:54am
Why do you keep posting the same fake tweet over and over? You can do better than that.
If you want to find the list, try www.google.com. I don't have time to do research for you.
The list was number of republicans who boycotted a democratic presidential inauguration. The number is zero, why do you have to be such a fucking pussy?
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) forecasted in early 2016 that America will never see 3.0% economic growth again.
CBO non-partisan, but what if the US is a matured economy like Europe before. We might be able to get some short term gains, but can't say for sure if those gains would be sustainable.
"The list was number of republicans who boycotted a democratic presidential inauguration. The number is zero, why do you have to be such a fucking pussy?"
How is that being a pussy exactly? Why is it my job to do Ironman's research? I have no idea if a Republican has ever not attended a Democratic inauguration. I'd be surprised if it's never happened in the history of the US, but you could be right.
"maybe the boycott will be forgotten, but every boycotter will be under increased scrutiny and hair trigger twitter and fake news attacks for everything they do counter to the Trump agenda. Stupid political move.
Still discounting the power of social media and 'fake news'. Par for the course for someone who seeks confirmation bias via MSM sources"
You presume that being against the Trump agenda will hurt these candidates in their election. Which is a bad assumption. I bet if you look, Trump lost badly in pretty much all of the non-attendee's districts. Supporting Trump would hurt them a lot more in a primary--which is what they are more worried about.
I understand some dumb fucking Democrat presidents are going to attend.
FUCK ALL DEMOCRAT VOTERS.
How many Republican presidents have attended Democrat Inaugurations?
Go ahead ! Tell me it's not a big club.
I'm not dumb enough to believe you.
Did you find which statement I supposedly can't back up yet?
I bet if you look, Trump lost badly in pretty much all of the non-attendee's districts. Supporting Trump would hurt them a lot more in a primary--which is what they are more worried about.
Which is why they feel emboldened to boycott the inauguration. Lot of those districts consist of the LCDs of the democratic vote bank. I think having a lot of negative publicity thrust upon them for such a transgression will come back to bite them in ass, because unlike the last 8 years, no one was using twitter and social media like trump did in his relatively cost-effective campaign.
Kind of surprised that the democrats didn't think of it first, since they are the party that tends to be more tech-savvy, at least when compared to older, stodgy establishment republicans.
How is that being a pussy exactly? Why is it my job to do Ironman's research? I have no idea if a Republican has ever not attended a Democratic inauguration. I'd be surprised if it's never happened in the history of the US, but you could be right.
Because you know the answer is zero and you are not even remotely willing to concede the point. But again, if you're willing to provide a link that is contrary, I would certainly read it and consider it.
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
2017 Jan 19, 10:07am
Where's Hoover - the other guy who dealt with a depressionary market crash?
This site has very different numbers for real GDP:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/238600/gdp-per-capita-growth-by-us-president-from-hoover-to-obama/
OLD NEWS!
I already knew DEMOCRATS SUCK!
Lewis Black: "Democrats are the party of no ideas."
They do have one idea.
Let's march protest,carry signs,placards,banners that say
"Hooray for our side." (That what the Republicans say,too).
I got interviewed on TV. Did You see me? Did you see me?
Look! Look! I've got it on video. Ain't I great?
Watch Ds & Rs when they gather to make an announcement.
There will be a large group of their ilk standing behind the speaker.
Each one thinking, We're the Greatest!
What's sad is that the retard ,slime voters keep electing these
DECEIVERS.
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
2017 Jan 19, 10:16am
Reading comprehension issues again?
The fact that Hoover is included towards the end of your lackluster post and is specifically omitted from the graph says something about the bias in gateway pundit's head and the confirmation bias you are exhibiting by reposting such stories all day long. See ya tomorrow rust bucket.
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
2017 Jan 19, 10:18am
Because that's NOT GDP, but GDP per capita.
That explains it I did see that the #s in your graph are listed elsewhere from neutral sources, so I believe them. The per capita GDP is more representative of what is achievable, so it is a much better measure of what is happening with the health of the economy.
« First « Previous Comments 79,724 - 79,763 of 117,730 Next » Last » Search these comments
patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,248,985 comments by 14,895 users - zzyzzx online now