N30F3N1X's forum posts

Avatar image for N30F3N1X
#1 Edited by N30F3N1X (8923 posts) -

@jeezers said:

@N30F3N1X: well said and i agree, Biden, Yang, or Gabbard are the only possible winning choices imo as well. They are the only 3 not diving straight in the progressives platform.

I think Trumps got the W either way.

I actually didn't like Gabbard as she too suffered from chronic question dodgery, pathetic pandering and general dishonesty during the first debate. I have to say though, her lawsuit against Google has me all hyped up. She might be the first dem politician who actually does something meaningful about the bias that oppressively omnipresent tech companies have in their political preferences, and as a man I consider very wise once said, politicians must be judged by performance and not by talk.

That, and Biden and Yang come off to me as the least insane of the whole gang and the more interested in actually doing worthwhile things with the executive power they would have if elected.

Avatar image for N30F3N1X
#2 Posted by N30F3N1X (8923 posts) -

@zaryia said:
@N30F3N1X said:

the realization that Trump was exonerated sinks in

lol.....what

You are literally lying now.

@N30F3N1X said:

the entire Russiagate scandal

Russia Interfered to help Trump. Trump was receptive of such aid.

@N30F3N1X said:

On a more serious note, the entire Russiagate investigation was launched on very flimsy and vague evidence to begin with,

Factually inaccurate.

@N30F3N1X said:

On a more serious note, the entire Russiagate investigation was launched on very flimsy and vague evidence to begin with, and the media and dem politicians' choice to hype it as the stake which they'd put through Trump's heart was one of the dumbest political blunders which I can think of in recent history. Any observer with the remotest degree of objectivity could have confidently told you this would've led nowhere even when Trump was only president elect, and banking so much on this investigation turned a nothingburger at best into a fully fledged and compounded backfire. The fact that the less educated are saying he's not exonerated instead of actually stating crimes he's been convicted of is proof of that beyond reasonable doubt.

This didn't completely lead nowhere. A lot of unethical behavior and crimes were uncovered. Did you read the report or watch the hearing?

@N30F3N1X said:

and the cultural shift of the party leaders' talking points away from topics of actual interest to the voters, I really, really fail to see how any of the big forerunners can build a winning platform. )

Polling shows more voters agree with Dem policy, they had 10~million more voters in 2018, and 3 Dem candidates easily beat Trump in the latest polls.

What cultural shift?

@N30F3N1X said:

Now, while by legal standards the thing has effectively blown over and Trump will most likely use it as a stepping stone to cement his lead in his re-election run, the most interesting thing as far as I'm concerned is the social research work that will take years if not decades to deconstruct and explain how exactly this case of year-long mass hysteria came to be.

The report is quite damning for Trump still.

@N30F3N1X said:

Admittedly, it's been a few months since I've last seen the epithet "russian bot" or the Mueller-related slogans, but how those became mainstream for over a year and a half despite having NOTHING solid behind their allegations is a very interesting mystery.

WTF? Russian Interference was real and confirmed.

I do have to make a correction: someone has to be proven guilty first and then proven innocent second to be exonerated, Trump was not convicted to begin with so the report, technically speaking, wasn't an exoneration. Y'all still got pwn'd though, I'd add a gif to properly represent the situation but I doubt the moderators would approve, so here's something funny along the same lines: check out what this page is and then check out number 8.7

And yes, plenty of convictions happened, none of them related to Trump campaign members willfully conspiring to sway the elections in Trump's favor while collaborating with russian officials. Unethical behavior you mean like Strzok and Page's? You got me there lol

Russian interference was confirmed, I recall even reports of attempts from russian sources to hack the election mechanism on 11/9, with no effect at all. None of that is of relevance as the driving force behind the Russiagate scandal's hype was the implication of Trump, which was, in case you missed it, proven to be non existant. The Russiagate went from investigation to "scandal" when you poor sods started deluding yourselves into believing said interference had a much greater scope and implications than what it actually had.

Polling shows Hillary was double digits ahead of Trump. Give me a break. What dem policy are you talking about exactly? Because I'm talking about the clown fiesta that was the two and a half hours of the first Dem debate. Who exactly do you think will be convinced to vote for a guy who dodges a question to start speaking stinted spanish, two women who promise free everything (one later even retracted her position), a guy who advocates for free abortions for everyone including transmen, etc. Do you understand that this kind of pandering and horseshit sounds completely outlandish and absurd to your average person who isn't on twitter 24/7, even if said person has more sympathy for democratic leaders than for Trump?

Avatar image for N30F3N1X
#3 Posted by N30F3N1X (8923 posts) -

@Vaasman said:
@N30F3N1X said:

Admittedly, it's been a few months since I've last seen the epithet "russian bot"

You're making a pretty solid case for us to get back to it.

Ohhhh snap. Did you make sure to put your big boy pants on before writing that? I'd wager those who take care of you wouldn't like seeing you make an oopsie on the floor while watching you suck your thumb and writing mean things on the internet.

Avatar image for N30F3N1X
#4 Edited by N30F3N1X (8923 posts) -

On a more serious note, the entire Russiagate investigation was launched on very flimsy and vague evidence to begin with, and the media and dem politicians' choice to hype it as the stake which they'd put through Trump's heart was one of the dumbest political blunders which I can think of in recent history. Any observer with the remotest degree of objectivity could have confidently told you this would've led nowhere even when Trump was only president elect, and banking so much on this investigation turned a nothingburger at best into a fully fledged and compounded backfire. The fact that the less educated are saying he's not exonerated instead of actually stating crimes he's been convicted of is proof of that beyond reasonable doubt.

Now, given the blue party's inner turmoil with the rise of media coverage towards degenerates like AOC and her ilk, the total inability to properly respond to anything Trump does or says with anything more solid than the incoherent barking of insults such as "racist" or "sexist" or other such unsubstantiated nonsense, the soaring economy and the cultural shift of the party leaders' talking points away from topics of actual interest to the voters, I really, really fail to see how any of the big forerunners can build a winning platform. Fate had some serious irony in turning what should've been the final nail in the coffin of Trump's presidency into the final nail of the democrats' run for presidency. My take is that if the dems were smart, they'd commit everything to getting rid of their big names as quickly as possible and try to narrow down their choices between Biden and Yang (maybe even Gabbard) which seem to me as the least able to alienate the three quarters of their voters that they need to at least have a chance to win, because as it stands right now the group of people who are vying to be the most representative of anti-Trumpism are trying to beat Trump at his own game after failing repeatedly and clamorously (and their attempts at out-woke'ing eachother are even more pathetic and sad. Advocating for a welfare program that allows transmen to have an abortion free of charge? F***ing seriously?)

Now, while by legal standards the thing has effectively blown over and Trump will most likely use it as a stepping stone to cement his lead in his re-election run, the most interesting thing as far as I'm concerned is the social research work that will take years if not decades to deconstruct and explain how exactly this case of year-long mass hysteria came to be. Admittedly, it's been a few months since I've last seen the epithet "russian bot" or the Mueller-related slogans, but how those became mainstream for over a year and a half despite having NOTHING solid behind their allegations is a very interesting mystery.

Avatar image for N30F3N1X
#5 Posted by N30F3N1X (8923 posts) -

Just gonna leave this here in case you guys need a reminder of why exactly you're having a meltdown

Avatar image for N30F3N1X
#6 Posted by N30F3N1X (8923 posts) -

Innocent until proven guilty. He is exonerated. The fact that you think he isn't means you're the one missing things. I suggest opening a jurisprudence book, or heck even a dictionary, and look up what "exonerated" means.

Avatar image for N30F3N1X
#7 Posted by N30F3N1X (8923 posts) -

This whole ordeal was delightful to watch.

Seeing leftists sink into emotional and political despair as the realization that Trump was exonerated sinks in, and they come to the realization that it turns out that it was them who were selling fake news when the entire Russiagate scandal that they had been banking on for two and a half years evaporated in the face of hard evidence is one of the most entertaining spectacles I've ever had the pleasure to witness.

The damage control on this forum section also vaguely invokes some nostalgic feelings as it reminds me of the good old times in the SW board, when Sony or MS did some particularly significant blunder and cows or lemmings felt like they had a moral obligation to downplay that blunder. Except this time it feels like trying to bandage someone who has just been decapitated.

All I have to say is this:

Avatar image for N30F3N1X
#8 Posted by N30F3N1X (8923 posts) -

@Serraph105 said:

Oh look, the post right above you where I did the math and it's all about the early age when Trump received the vast sum of wealth that far surpasses a "million dollars: and the roughly 400 million dollars it's worth today.

You realize that the article you're talking about said he received inflation-adjusted 413M$ over his lifetime, while the math you did compressed the entirety of the sum he received over a lifetime in a single payment?

"I did the math" lmao this is full-blown Dunning-Kruger at work

Avatar image for N30F3N1X
#9 Edited by N30F3N1X (8923 posts) -
@Serraph105 said:
@joshrmeyer said:

@joebones5000: @sonicare: He wasn't given 400 million back then. Stop with the blatent lies. There's plenty of truth you can use against him. He was given a 1 million dollar loan from his father.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/02/us/politics/trump-family-wealth.html

"In all, financial records reveal, Mr. Trump received the equivalent today of at least $413 million from his father’s real estate empire."

Citation: You're link.

The fact that even with abysmal reading comprehension and financial skills such as those you just displayed in this comment you can still afford to live comfortably enough to get on a forum using an electronic device and whine about Trump is testament of how really great the american economy is doing.

Like seriously, how do you confuse a single loan's present value with a 40 years span of cash flows?

Avatar image for N30F3N1X
#10 Posted by N30F3N1X (8923 posts) -

@HoolaHoopMan said:
@N30F3N1X said:
@mattbbpl said:

The entire party apparatus, federal and state, is systematically engaging in coordinated efforts to undermine minority votes.

The party is racist.

If I recall correctly it's not republicans who said voter ID laws exclude minorities because they can't get an ID.

That's a textbook definition of bigotry of low expectations and a manifestation of racism.

That's not what racism is, but it's certainly some mind boggling logic you've applied there. Essentially saying, 'No, you!'

No, that is precisely what racism is. Leftists have come to understand the term as "any position that does not uncritically promote giving free shit to anyone who isn't white skinned", while the actual definition of racism is "prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior". I would argue that this definition is not broad enough to encompass all racism but it's still fitting enough for this context.

The idea that voter ID laws are discriminatory because they impede non-whites more than they impede whites is a reasoning which is in itself prejudicial against non-whites and, as I just said, represents a textbook example of racism.

Yes, "no you" applies when you're trying to paint one party in its entirety as racist while you are also outright supporting racism yourself.

Sorry, facts don't care about your feelings.