(05-02-2016 07:46 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  Fuck!
He's not gonna win.

(05-07-2016 01:36 PM)YossariansRight Wrote:  Anti-Islamist Leader Geert Wilders Will Travel to GOP Convention to Support Donald Trump:

Now we're really cooking with gas. Let the fucking Bushes, Romneys, Ryans and the rest of their cuck ilk "boycott" the RNC. Wilders is the real fucking deal. This is big.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/05/...ald-trump/

Trump is going to be President of the entire fucking WORLD.

(05-07-2016 01:36 PM)YossariansRight Wrote:  Anti-Islamist Leader Geert Wilders Will Travel to GOP Convention to Support Donald Trump:

Now we're really cooking with gas. Let the fucking Bushes, Romneys, Ryans and the rest of their cuck ilk "boycott" the RNC. Wilders is the real fucking deal. This is big.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/05/...ald-trump/

I want more Anti-Islamist leader to attend, Le pen from France, Petry from Germany etc I want the RNC to look like the Justice League Avengers.

(05-07-2016 01:18 AM)Canopus Wrote:  

I can hear Scott Adams laughing at his monitor somewhere.

Seriously, why is her meme game at Jeb Bush levels? Saving her energy for the general, or are her campaign advisors just that hard up for ideas?

God she is such an insufferable elitist snotbag. She is Marie Antoinette. Let's build her a guillotine.

The renewed talk of a third party run from the #NeverTrump people isn't so Hillary can get elected, they are hoping to create a situation where none of the candidates reach the 270 electoral college votes needed, and thus the (Republican majority) congress would choose the president (the 12th Amendment).

They hope to do this by running multiple candidates, one per state, in only a few select states, in order to get the vote split they are after which leads to no one reaching 270.

It's their last option.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidenti...ent-trump/

Quote:The U.S. president is elected by the 538 members of the Electoral College, not a popular vote of the American people. Under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution, if no candidate for president earns a majority of the Electoral College (270 votes), then the U.S. House of Representatives elects the president. When doing so, each state gets only one vote, so the House members of each state internally vote to decide which way that state will vote, and whoever gets most of the 50 votes becomes the president.

That was how Thomas Jefferson became president in 1800. No candidate gained a majority, and the U.S. House eventually elected Jefferson on the thirty-sixth ballot, after weeks of debate.

The Twelfth Amendment to the Constitution added one more condition: If the election goes to the House, the House may only consider the top three candidates from the Electoral College that resulted from the normal election process. The House cannot bring in any “white knight” who was not already running on Election Day.

Because a majority of state congressional delegations are Republican, a presidential election going to the current Congress essentially guarantees a Republican president.

With these constitutional provisions in mind and the reality that Republicans will control the House at least until January 3, 2017, NeverTrump activists are considering selecting five key states, then running a candidate in each of those states—and those states only—who could win that state with a plurality of the statewide vote, beating both Trump and Hillary. So long as neither Trump nor Hillary wins a landslide of the remaining states, these single-state candidates could result in no candidate receiving 270 Electoral College votes, sending the entire matter to the House. Then the House could elect the non-Trump Republican as the forty-fifth president of the United States.

While the list is still being finalized, sources tell Breitbart News that the states being looked at include Ohio, Colorado, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Arizona, and Texas. The organizers are looking primarily to “favorite sons” in those states who they expect could carry the state against both the Republican and Democratic nominees.

(05-07-2016 03:10 PM)GlobalMan Wrote:  The renewed talk of a third party run from the #NeverTrump people isn't so Hillary can get elected, they are hoping to create a situation where none of the candidates reach the 270 electoral college votes needed, and thus the (Republican majority) congress would choose the president (the 12th Amendment).

They hope to do this by running multiple candidates, one in state each, in only a few specific states, in order to get the vote split they are after which leads to no one reaching 270.

It's their last option.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidenti...ent-trump/

Quote:The U.S. president is elected by the 538 members of the Electoral College, not a popular vote of the American people. Under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution, if no candidate for president earns a majority of the Electoral College (270 votes), then the U.S. House of Representatives elects the president. When doing so, each state gets only one vote, so the House members of each state internally vote to decide which way that state will vote, and whoever gets most of the 50 votes becomes the president.

That was how Thomas Jefferson became president in 1800. No candidate gained a majority, and the U.S. House eventually elected Jefferson on the thirty-sixth ballot, after weeks of debate.

The Twelfth Amendment to the Constitution added one more condition: If the election goes to the House, the House may only consider the top three candidates from the Electoral College that resulted from the normal election process. The House cannot bring in any “white knight” who was not already running on Election Day.

Because a majority of state congressional delegations are Republican, a presidential election going to the current Congress essentially guarantees a Republican president.

With these constitutional provisions in mind and the reality that Republicans will control the House at least until January 3, 2017, NeverTrump activists are considering selecting five key states, then running a candidate in each of those states—and those states only—who could win that state with a plurality of the statewide vote, beating both Trump and Hillary. So long as neither Trump nor Hillary wins a landslide of the remaining states, these single-state candidates could result in no candidate receiving 270 Electoral College votes, sending the entire matter to the House. Then the House could elect the non-Trump Republican as the forty-fifth president of the United States.

While the list is still being finalized, sources tell Breitbart News that the states being looked at include Ohio, Colorado, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Arizona, and Texas. The organizers are looking primarily to “favorite sons” in those states who they expect could carry the state against both the Republican and Democratic nominees.

The Neocons are in complete meltdown mode.

History tells us that moves like these only accelerate a political downfall.

Goodbye Neocons! Goodbye!

So are you guys sick of winning yet or what

Apparently one of the reasons Nixon won in a landslide in 1972 is the fact that there were some riots in Chicago. This has been repeated at the Chicago Trump rally and several others this year and afterwards polls showed it actually played to his advantage. A lot of people in this thread said Trump cancelled that rally on purpose because he recognized what would happen and the potential effect of it.

I could see this happening more and more as the general elections nears and it will play to his advantage again. Imagine if several of these incidents happen, it could cause Trump to win a landslide because moderate Democrats and independents would be turned off by those SJW protestors.

Trump could repeat his Chicago bait by intentionally hosting rallies in liberal areas in swing states so that most Americans who aren't delusional are going to switch their votes or at least stay home.

What do you guys think?

I just started following the Trump x Clinton news lately, and I'm not nearly as informed as most are on the matter.

I was watching the news on CNN and they were saying since Trump has minimal Latino support and 80% of women are against him, that he has practically no chance against Hillary unless he "somehow" manages to get many more voters out of those two categories.

I'm aware how much the media lies and propagates BS according to an agenda.

What's the RVF unfiltered and honest view on this? I'm trying to catch up and follow this more closely.

(05-07-2016 04:25 PM)Nascimento Wrote:  I just started following the Trump x Clinton news lately, and I'm not nearly as informed as most are on the matter.

I was watching the news on CNN and they were saying since Trump has minimal Latino support and 80% of women are against him, that he has practically no chance against Hillary unless he "somehow" manages to get many more voters out of those two categories.

I'm aware how much the media lies and propagates BS according to an agenda.

What's the RVF unfiltered and honest view on this? I'm trying to catch up and follow this more closely.

My personal view is that he is going to have to pivot more to the general after he clinches the nomination 100% with 1,237 delegates.

He has already made a move with the taco bowl on Cinco de Mayo.

Newt Gingrich has put forth a playbook for increasing his support among Hispanic voters:

Quote:The real meat is a section that addresses the GOP’s most unanswered challenge: Winning minorities and women. “Demography is not destiny,” the report optimistically notes. “Demography is opportunity.” A series of case studies shows that Republicans can make gains among the Democratic base—if they do it right.

...

The report derides “outreach” as “when the old order makes a decision and then calls the community leaders to inform them.” Compare that with “inclusion,” when “the community is in on the discussion before the decision.” The report explains: In every campaign it studied, “successful Republicans built minority events into their schedules, created advisory groups from leaders in the communities, developed internships for young people,” and generally showed they wanted to be involved in these communities.

...

Mr. Coffman’s Spanish wasn’t ace, yet the report notes that even his attempt increased his “acceptability” among people who had been trained to believe “they can’t vote Republican.” The Republican’s “willingness to debate on Spanish television lowered resistance to him drastically. Suddenly he became acceptable both to many Hispanics and to moderate whites.” Mr. Coffman blew the Democrat out of the water by 9 percentage points.

Link: http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-republican...1462571897

I think if Donald Trump follows Newt's advice, we will see Hispanic leadership be included more on the campaign trail.

In addition to this, I think Donald might downplay the wall thing relative to his primary campaign and not talk about it as much.

Edit: Added link.

(05-06-2016 08:26 PM)Libertas Wrote:  Now look at the left. Do they have these purity tests?

That's pretty unfair. They're all way too impure and far too stupid to make up tests.

(05-07-2016 12:29 PM)Fisto Wrote:  

(05-07-2016 11:35 AM)Isaac Jordan Wrote:  Nancy Pelosi Conspires With Mexican Ex-President Vicente Fox To Defeat Trump. Where’s The Outcry?

Quote:Almost nobody in U.S. national politics seems concerned about Mexican meddling in U.S. politics. As the Mexican elite gets more and more hysterical about Donald Trump, it ought to become even more obvious, and Trump should make a campaign issue of it.

A recent installment is open collusion between former Mexican president Vicente Fox and congressional Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi. As reported by the Washington Examiner:

Quote:Latin America’s toughest critic of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump spent 30 minutes with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi in Mexico this week plotting to help the Democrats defeat the businessman and give the presidency to Hillary Clinton.

Pelosi, Vicente Fox plot to defeat Trump, Mexican calls Trump voters lazy drunks

In an exclusive interview with the Washington Examiner Friday [May 6th], former Mexican President Vicente Fox also said that he is “becoming a fan of” Clinton, who he compared to former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, and he disparaged Trump supporters as lazy, uneducated, TV watching drunks.

[Fox] complained that that Mexico buys billions of dollars of items from the United States that create 10 million American jobs, but Trump supporters still “don’t respect us.”

He added, “We need to wake up that citizen. We need them to take them away from the TV and drinking beer, to working hard, to getting the skills, to getting knowledge, and they will come along, like everybody else.”

Quote:Yes, Nancy Pelosi, along with a congressional delegation, was in Mexico City, where she told a Mexican newspaper that Mexico shouldn’t worry about Trump, that the candidate “is speaking to a minority, people who are insecure, who maybe lost their job and think it was because of immigration, because of trade, so I think it’s putting too much weight on all this, but he only has one half of one half, 25 percent.” (See here).

So there’s Nancy Pelosi, in a foreign capital, running down Americans who lost their jobs. That’s a real class act. Trump ought to make a campaign issue out of that also.

This has got to be talked about! Holy shit, I can't believe Pelosi has a fucking job!

Pelosi is a total traitor for doing this. To have the nerve to go to a foreign capital and side with its former President is just unbelievable. Vicente Fox is way out of line here. This guy has no business whatsoever in interjecting himself in a United States Presidential campaign. What's gets me is that he's actually conspiring to swing the election in favor of Hillary Clinton. This is so blatant! Can you imagine if this was reversed and a former US President did this in Mexico ?

(05-07-2016 05:47 PM)MKE-Ed Wrote:  

(05-07-2016 12:29 PM)Fisto Wrote:  

(05-07-2016 11:35 AM)Isaac Jordan Wrote:  Nancy Pelosi Conspires With Mexican Ex-President Vicente Fox To Defeat Trump. Where’s The Outcry?

Quote:Almost nobody in U.S. national politics seems concerned about Mexican meddling in U.S. politics. As the Mexican elite gets more and more hysterical about Donald Trump, it ought to become even more obvious, and Trump should make a campaign issue of it.

A recent installment is open collusion between former Mexican president Vicente Fox and congressional Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi. As reported by the Washington Examiner:

Quote:Latin America’s toughest critic of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump spent 30 minutes with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi in Mexico this week plotting to help the Democrats defeat the businessman and give the presidency to Hillary Clinton.

Pelosi, Vicente Fox plot to defeat Trump, Mexican calls Trump voters lazy drunks

In an exclusive interview with the Washington Examiner Friday [May 6th], former Mexican President Vicente Fox also said that he is “becoming a fan of” Clinton, who he compared to former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, and he disparaged Trump supporters as lazy, uneducated, TV watching drunks.

[Fox] complained that that Mexico buys billions of dollars of items from the United States that create 10 million American jobs, but Trump supporters still “don’t respect us.”

He added, “We need to wake up that citizen. We need them to take them away from the TV and drinking beer, to working hard, to getting the skills, to getting knowledge, and they will come along, like everybody else.”

Quote:Yes, Nancy Pelosi, along with a congressional delegation, was in Mexico City, where she told a Mexican newspaper that Mexico shouldn’t worry about Trump, that the candidate “is speaking to a minority, people who are insecure, who maybe lost their job and think it was because of immigration, because of trade, so I think it’s putting too much weight on all this, but he only has one half of one half, 25 percent.” (See here).

So there’s Nancy Pelosi, in a foreign capital, running down Americans who lost their jobs. That’s a real class act. Trump ought to make a campaign issue out of that also.

This has got to be talked about! Holy shit, I can't believe Pelosi has a fucking job!

Pelosi is a total traitor for doing this. To have the nerve to go to a foreign capital and side with its former President is just unbelievable. Vicente Fox is way out of line here. This guy has no business whatsoever in interjecting himself in a United States Presidential campaign. What's gets me is that he's actually conspiring to swing the election in favor of Hillary Clinton. This is so blatant! Can you imagine if this was reversed and a former US President did this in Mexico ?

Look at it from Mexico's point of view. Without illegal coming over the border and then sending money home western union, the country is over. Millions will die and the ruling class will be slaughtered. Trump knows this and will leverage the shit out of it.

(05-07-2016 04:21 PM)CaptainChardonnay Wrote:  So are you guys sick of winning yet or what

I apologise for the Debbie Downer:

Don't get cocky. Get out there and vote in those remaining states. Never presume they mightn't count.

It's a long way until November. I expect the bullshit we've seen so far is just a warm up.

Remember, a large segment of the left has been programmed into a dangerous combination of Righteous Belief and Functional-Insanity, couple this with Narcissistic Fury, and I'd expect drastically-amped-up protestor violence and the possibility of a mass shooting or two to come, particularly when they've been trained to not see 'Evil Racists' as human beings.

OK, guys, attention please! Ring the alarm bells! Ding ding ding! We have a watershed cultural moment here. Don't miss it.

Remember how I once wrote that presidents are more than the sum of their policies and decisions? Their presence and persona also creates societal change. For example Jimmy Carter>Ronald Reagan led to gay discos>"Family Ties." That's one example, but the whole mood of the country was made over when Reagan took office.

Scroll back to 2016, and I can safely say that I have seen the first major cultural sign of Trump's influence. And it's come up in a weird place. It's in an ad for the home improvement store Lowe's that's titled "Lowe's House Love." This ad came up just before I was going to watch a video of Jack Donovan being interviewed by Milo.

It caught my attention because it's so "1980s wholesome." It features two normal, suburban teens falling in love and comes off like the old show "The Wonder Years."

But what's really telling is what it lacks. There is no SJW propaganda. No single mothers. No gay couple. No tattoos or piercings. No ugly MTV hairdos. No urban slang. No "accept the immigrants -- or else!" message. No woman becoming an Alpha Widow. No obnoxious "Two Broke Girls"-type uber-bitches. No cats (don't laugh -- cat obsessions are culturally significant). The ad is un-apologetically straight, family-oriented and conservative.

This might seem minor to you all, but I watch for signs like this and think it shows that advertising firms have correctly sensed that the county's mood is changing.

I did a little research on it, and the writers at Ad Week came off as cynical about the spot in their review. Of course they did. Most writers are hacks who are years behind the times and can never see the future.

Below is the ad -- and remember, when you read about this someday in the idiotic lamestream press, I called it first!!

(05-07-2016 07:24 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  OK, guys, attention please! Ring the alarm bells! Ding ding ding! We have a watershed cultural moment here. Don't miss it.

Remember how I once wrote that presidents are more than the sum of their policies and decisions? Their presence and persona also creates societal change. For example Jimmy Carter>Ronald Reagan led to gay discos>"Family Ties." That's one example, but the whole mood of the country was made over when Reagan took office.

That was a great ad.

But perhaps it might be the other way round? That the society shifts affect the culture, and also would tend to affect who would be elected?

As Milo would say here(quoting a few things in the video):

Quote:(0:25)There's this thing called preference falsification right where everybody tells you they believe certain things even when they don't believe them even when they don't because they have tot fit in with their friends.

...

(0:57)
As soon as they get the hit that there are no social consequences attached to telling people the truth about things, so explaining how they really believe, and all of their friends believe that way, you get a really quick cascade, it's called a preference cascade.

So this is explaining a lot of things about the world. My simple theory goes:

-(Most) People are conformist by nature.
-Americans are less conformist than most, but still quite a lot so.
-There is this huge amount of Jewish subversion/degeneracy that's really been apparent in the last few decades, targeting the US and western countries most.
-The idea of "American public being stupid/sheeple" is far more to do with the targeted subversion than anything about the inferiority(or even conformist nature) of Americans.
-The subversion/degeneracy seems big. But there's hope it's only temporary. You see the big media/culture/college all painting the degeneracy as right, and no one wants to speak out about it. But enough people are sensing something is wrong, they just think they are alone, and they can't do anything about it.
-I was reading about one of the FSU countries about preference cascades. How the communist ideology seemed so deeply entrenched, but most people secretly disliked it. In the next election, people thought the reformed communists would be polling close to the nationalists. But the nationalists won in a landslide.
-Tldr Things might not actually be this bad in the West! We are strong and shall overcomb!

(05-07-2016 06:51 AM)eradicator Wrote:  Geez, Bill Clinton is vegan now, and lost a lot of weight. I am convinced that a vegan diet is not a healthy diet. You can have a lot of vegetables in your meals, but might want to mix in a piece of meat or chicken or fish as well.

^^ Is that real? :O

it's possible that bill clinton is only using the vegan diet as front to hide the real reason. when asked why he is in such bad shape, he said it's because of the diet. if he knew it's bad for his health, why would he still do it? he's not stupid. the reason he went vegan, as he said it himself, was health preservation, not moral feeling and empathy for animals. furthermore, there are a lot of buddhist monks who are as old but chubby.

and then there is this unexplained lesion on his forehead

Hillary must be hitting him. Spousal abuse.

(05-07-2016 07:24 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  This might seem minor to you all, but I watch for signs like this and think it shows that advertising firms have correctly sensed that the county's mood is changing.

Great catch, Days. I like the ad. It's sweet: there's no other word for it. I smile when I see the two kids wordlessly-seek each others hands, because I recognise the natural instinct behind it - but then, I'm not dysfunctional.

When I read the writer describing it as 'treacly', I knew exactly what he'd look like: someone whose construct is built around ironic affectation who can't risk being genuine in their emotional presentation out of fear of rejection.

A quick search later, suspicion confirmed:



See how staged and artificial his presentation is?

I think I drunkposted earlier in this thread that I sense the Age Of Narcissism is drawing to a close, and that I suspect male-female interaction might be about transition back into genuine communication with each other, with the emotional risk that would require, because people are sick of being bullshitted and played and want to hear the truth.

I'm already seeing the Vanguards of the Coming Shift out there: when I talk about observing sides being deliberately-chosen over the last year or so, this ad is exactly the sort of thing I mean. People are feeling me out with their statements, wanting to hear commonality of thought: Do you choose Love? Beauty? Community? Aspiration? Or do you side with the false narrative, that's making everyone unhappy, nihilistic, broken and, well, insane?

Guys like Mr. Nu-Male above will find themselves swept-away by new optimism. Hell, I've been experimenting with Snarking with Leftie girls over the last few days, and I find being the required Millennial Kind of Negative on a regular basis soul-exhausting. Who wants to live like that?

----

What we're living through is very similar to the dreariness of my 1970's childhood: civil unrest, the spectre of resource scarcity, the cloud of gloom of our inevitable destruction, the threat of violence and terrorism, and an overwhelming sense of cultural-stagnation.

It's hard to explain to younger men here just how black-and-white the decade seemed. There was an overwhelming sense of urban decay and that things were inevitably falling apart. The increasing concretisation of environments, the dull grey always weeping and water-stained. Watch 'A Clockwork Orange' sometime. Kubrick saw.

The decade was so dull, until suddenly, in the last few years, colour and optimism started creeping in around the edges. I'd see Debbie Harry surrounded by urban decay in the 'Union City Blue' film clip and she glowed with life and possibility of what was coming. You'd get a record like 'Video Killed The Radio Star', that's trying to be a Bowie-Style prophetic warning of where society is heading, but it's just too alive and exciting to stick. Colour bursts through in the cheesy-synth of Prince's 'Dirty Mind', the punk and post-punk DIY explosion or the raw cut-up nature of early hip-hop records. Wider culture followed suit. It was a fun time, even living under the threat of the bomb: my generation's nihilism was much more mocking in tone, rather than deeply-felt. See, the black humour of a record like '1999', or a movie like 'Return of the Living Dead'.

I feel a similar shift coming closer every day. People long in an aspirational way for much more than our cultural leaders are offering. Sadly, I think we're going to have to go through a period of violence first.

----

I'm not the only one feeling this: I'm drawing near the completion of a long term musical project and I was talking quietly with my sister on the phone about how I was damn proud of it, but was honestly-indifferent to publicly-releasing it, 'given the climate'.

She paused for a few seconds. "I agree. Not this year. It's too... real for now."

I was about to go onto another topic, but she spoke again, a heavy-weight behind the words. "Its time isn't now, but it's soon."

(05-08-2016 05:39 AM)Praetor Lupus Wrote:  Interesting video featuring an interview with a retired firefighter who reportedly wrote a prophecy in 2011 about Trump being chosen by God to run for President.

To those of you who can listen to a full hour of Christian talk radio, this podcast will interest you. I was raised Christian, so I know how they talk and feel, and if the message in this video becomes viral, a massive number of Cruz supporters will vote for Trump.

For those who have Christian friends but can't stand Christian talk radio, you should probably listen to the podcast anyway, so you can intelligently discuss it with your Christian friends.

(05-08-2016 05:31 PM)Latinopan Wrote:  

(05-08-2016 05:10 PM)911 Wrote:  Obama's mother ...now that's a whole can of worms. Let's just say that her background, like that of her son, is a bit murky. I'll leave it at that. This picture is from one of her naked pictures sets from 1960s adult mags:

Obama is the president with the most shadows in its past in USA history, never before we have a guy getting elected while the public knew nothing about this guy, up to this day Obama's past is a still a mystery.

Take a look at her Wikipedia entry:

Quote:Stanley Ann Dunham (November 29, 1942 – November 7, 1995) was the mother of Barack Obama, the 44th President of the United States, and an American anthropologist who specialized in economic anthropology and rural development.[1] Dunham was known as Stanley Dunham through high school, then as Ann Dunham, Ann Obama, Ann Soetoro, Ann Sutoro (after her second divorce), and finally as Ann Dunham.

Anyone who has that severe of an identity crisis is unfit for motherhood. Makes sense that she produced a person who is a chameleon. Barry Hussein Soetoro's shape shifting skills made him perfect for modern politics.

(05-08-2016 05:31 PM)Latinopan Wrote:  

(05-08-2016 05:10 PM)911 Wrote:  Obama's mother ...now that's a whole can of worms. Let's just say that her background, like that of her son, is a bit murky. I'll leave it at that. This picture is from one of her naked pictures sets from 1960s adult mags:

Obama is the president with the most shadows in its past in USA history, never before we have a guy getting elected while the public knew nothing about this guy, up to this day Obama's past is a still a mystery.

The mainstream media completely ignored and refused to look in to and research Obama's past and his known association with a lot of people of questionable reputations and character. Any other Presidential candidate would have had to endure a comprehensive look in to his background and the people they associate with. This was intentionally done to help Obama win the Presidency.

(05-07-2016 07:24 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  It caught my attention because it's so "1980s wholesome." It features two normal, suburban teens falling in love and comes off like the old show "The Wonder Years."

But what's really telling is what it lacks. There is no SJW propaganda. No single mothers. No gay couple. No tattoos or piercings. No ugly MTV hairdos. No urban slang. No "accept the immigrants -- or else!" message. No woman becoming an Alpha Widow. No obnoxious "Two Broke Girls"-type uber-bitches. No cats (don't laugh -- cat obsessions are culturally significant). The ad is un-apologetically straight, family-oriented and conservative.

Another subtle note to wholesome Americana - every single automobile in the background is domestic. And its not just one or two - GMC Jimmy, Chevy Impala, Saturn SL, Chrysler Sebring convertible, Buick Century, Saturn LS, Chevy Traverse, Chevy Cruze, Chevy Malibu.

May seem a little pedantic to point it out, but very little in advertising is not intentional.