(09-04-2016 11:19 PM)Latinopan Wrote:  

(09-04-2016 08:07 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  I was Googling how Pepe became associated with Mr. Trump, and it has everything to do with the You Can't Stump The Trump videos. Both that Trump Pepe and a link to the fourth episode of You Can't Stump The Trump were tweeted to Mr. Trump. When he retweeted it, that Pepe became permanently associated with him.

I like the mission statement of the Alt-Right, as well as our strategy of being either intellectually philosophical or trollingly demoralizing depending on who we're taking to. The only downside is that Mr. Trump can't officially endorse our demoralizing tactics.

We are his secret shock troops.

I have been watching news videos about the Alt-Right, one common theme you see in the people on the left and journalist is, they point out how tech savy and smart the Alt-Right is, how they are winning the cultural war, even Time Magazine had a cover about it:



The left is used to deal people on the right who only listen to radio, and maybe some hours of Fox News, not people with knowledge to track Hillary's handler identity to the point to force her to disappear him, or knowing what a meme is, the left has never deal with the other side in the same battlefield, they have dominated online since always, they simple do not know what to do with people who outperform them at what they believe to good.

A person like Milo or Lauren Southern hit the left in America in different ways the left did not expect, both are young, Milo is gay European and Southern is Canadian, we all know how the left price Europe and Canada as epitome f hat America should be, having people from these countries and supporting Trump, gun rights etc.

I've always thought that the biggest reason why the left has been so successful with the cultural war and resonates so much with millennials isn't with the much maligned "leftist Marxist college professors" but because of people like Stephen Colbert and John Stewart as well as other "cool" celebs, cultural figures, and media. I'm sure Colbert has done more to turn the country left then all of the gender studies classes in colleges. The very reason why now see a bit of a resurgence of right wing ideas (though of course very different from the neo-con Moral Majority conservativism of the 80s and 90s) is now the right finally has figures like Milo and Gavin. For the first time in forever, right wingers are in the position of being the scrappy, rebellious counter-culture street fighters, a position that the left has traditionally occupied and which has allowed them to control the minds of the young.

Articles like that are just a buttering-up for the eventual introduction of mass internet censorship (not just on Facebook/Twitter and in news portals' comments like it is now). They will definitely take concrete steps in the next two years.

Ok, you caught me, Enigma is actually my split personality

There needs to be some "thread-out" feature, whereby the mod can tick all the budding off-thread posts, seal them from replies, and push a copy of them to a new thread.

(09-05-2016 01:27 AM)Wutang Wrote:  

(09-04-2016 11:19 PM)Latinopan Wrote:  

(09-04-2016 08:07 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  I was Googling how Pepe became associated with Mr. Trump, and it has everything to do with the You Can't Stump The Trump videos. Both that Trump Pepe and a link to the fourth episode of You Can't Stump The Trump were tweeted to Mr. Trump. When he retweeted it, that Pepe became permanently associated with him.

I like the mission statement of the Alt-Right, as well as our strategy of being either intellectually philosophical or trollingly demoralizing depending on who we're taking to. The only downside is that Mr. Trump can't officially endorse our demoralizing tactics.

We are his secret shock troops.

I have been watching news videos about the Alt-Right, one common theme you see in the people on the left and journalist is, they point out how tech savy and smart the Alt-Right is, how they are winning the cultural war, even Time Magazine had a cover about it:

The left is used to deal people on the right who only listen to radio, and maybe some hours of Fox News, not people with knowledge to track Hillary's handler identity to the point to force her to disappear him, or knowing what a meme is, the left has never deal with the other side in the same battlefield, they have dominated online since always, they simple do not know what to do with people who outperform them at what they believe to good.

A person like Milo or Lauren Southern hit the left in America in different ways the left did not expect, both are young, Milo is gay European and Southern is Canadian, we all know how the left price Europe and Canada as epitome f hat America should be, having people from these countries and supporting Trump, gun rights etc.

I've always thought that the biggest reason why the left has been so successful with the cultural war and resonates so much with millennials isn't with the much maligned "leftist Marxist college professors" but because of people like Stephen Colbert and John Stewart as well as other "cool" celebs, cultural figures, and media. I'm sure Colbert has done more to turn the country left then all of the gender studies classes in colleges. The very reason why now see a bit of a resurgence of right wing ideas (though of course very different from the neo-con Moral Majority conservativism of the 80s and 90s) is now the right finally has figures like Milo and Gavin. For the first time in forever, right wingers are in the position of being the scrappy, rebellious counter-culture street fighters, a position that the left has traditionally occupied and which has allowed them to control the minds of the young.

Disagree. The reason the left has been so successful in the culture war is that they have used unconventional warfare aka fighting dirty, while the right has maintained the "high ground". The right has fallen for it hook, line, and sinker but with the rise of the alt-right (and all its iterations), fire is being fought with fire. Its akin to conventional maneuver units (cuckservatives) fighting a guerrilla force (transnational socialists, aka tranzies) and losing until special forces (alt-right) starts giving them the business in their sanctuaries.

Edit: Added quote tree to maintain context.

(09-05-2016 01:27 AM)Wutang Wrote:  I've always thought that the biggest reason why the left has been so successful with the cultural war and resonates so much with millennials isn't with the much maligned "leftist Marxist college professors" but because of people like Stephen Colbert and John Stewart as well as other "cool" celebs, cultural figures, and media. I'm sure Colbert has done more to turn the country left then all of the gender studies classes in colleges. The very reason why now see a bit of a resurgence of right wing ideas (though of course very different from the neo-con Moral Majority conservativism of the 80s and 90s) is now the right finally has figures like Milo and Gavin. For the first time in forever, right wingers are in the position of being the scrappy, rebellious counter-culture street fighters, a position that the left has traditionally occupied and which has allowed them to control the minds of the young.

The hypocrisy of those guys, is that as political humor shows, what is more humorous than a woman who pretends she doesn't know that 'c' stands for classified? Than mailing a fucking laptop? Than smashing a whole bunch of blackberries with a hammer, because that's just what you do??

The kids who 'revere' these leftist comedians, show just how little critical thinking they actually have by failing to question the fact that said comedians are essentially using them to shill propaganda.

Most of them were Bernie babies, jumping on his anti-establishment hype train, yet they're so mind numbingly dense that they buy into the very thing they are against... If Colbert can turn them left, then their minds have to be so under developed that something has gone really, really, wrong prior to them even watching an episode.

(09-04-2016 09:40 PM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  

(09-04-2016 08:09 PM)Rush87 Wrote:  Let's wheel this back on track. What is everyone's electoral college path for Trump?

Michigan is going Trump, especially after that Detroit speech/sermon. I think New York is going Trump as well.

While nothing is impossible, right now Hillary is up by 30 points in New York.

It would take something like Muslim Terrorists knocking down the empire state building, and Hillary giving no comment.

(09-04-2016 05:15 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  The Beast,

I have tried it. But my medical and scientific training has removed the narcissm required to say, "Since it's good for me, it must be good for everyone."

And my depth of thinking makes me immune to arguments that ask, "Why should we prohibit people from taking substances that don't cause obvious harm to themselves, or others?"

" What does that tell us about drugs? That adults should be able to make informed decisions about what substances they choose to put in their body."

True, provided they pay for any negative effects that their drug use causes. But the majority of drug users are not socially responsible enough to do such a thing, and many of them aren't wealthy enough to do so.

The best line in the article that Ghost Tiger posted asserted that drug users are self-absorbed. Your reasoning is definitely self-absorbed (since no one's needs but the drug user's is considered). And so is the collective anti-scientific viewpoint that pro drug people take.

Geeze son, go look in a mirror. This post is the epitome of self absorbed and a logical fallacy to boot!

Went to bed and now got my bit in. Trump at you!

Are you still arguing about pot? Take it to PM guys.

(09-05-2016 03:56 AM)eradicator Wrote:  Are you still arguing about pot? Take it to PM guys.

I'm done, I promise

Just a reminder:

We are 3 weeks away from the first debate on Monday, September 26th.

I get so overwhelmed with excitement every time I think about it. To see Trump rip apart Hillary on live television.... I look like this every time I think about it:

I'm afraid Hillary will try to weasel out of the debates. She's playing the run out the clock strategy the best she can.

Even with the biased moderators, Trump gonna destroy that evil wretch.

I wonder if they will let her sit down during the debates. I don't think she could make it through. Also a decent chance she short circuits on stage if there are actually 3 debates.

(09-05-2016 01:35 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  Articles like that are just a buttering-up for the eventual introduction of mass internet censorship (not just on Facebook/Twitter and in news portals' comments like it is now). They will definitely take concrete steps in the next two years.

That screenshot someone posted about O2 in Britain blocking RooshV website on their wi-fi hotposts was a very disturbing warning, of what type of totalitarian-style censorship are they preparing soon. If internet culture is a major challenge to them - they will block access of undesirables. Simple, cruel and effective.

(09-05-2016 06:19 AM)Orion Wrote:  

(09-05-2016 01:35 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  Articles like that are just a buttering-up for the eventual introduction of mass internet censorship (not just on Facebook/Twitter and in news portals' comments like it is now). They will definitely take concrete steps in the next two years.

That screenshot someone posted about O2 in Britain blocking RooshV website on their wi-fi hotposts was a very disturbing warning, of what type of totalitarian-style censorship are they preparing soon. If internet culture is a major challenge to them - they will block access of undesirables. Simple, cruel and effective.

It would be interesting. Targeting a few select websites / addresses is easy enough.
Yet as the torrent crowd have demonstrated. Censorship methods are just as easy to circumvent.
All the while, 'they' have never shutdown the entire torrent crowd in one hit.

Quick question. With the various polls, are they only polling those who turned out to vote for the last election, or is it a cross section of everyone?

If it's the former, this could be a landslide, because anyone above the 55% [or there abouts] who turns out to vote, will be virtually 100% Trump.

(09-05-2016 06:44 AM)CynicalContrarian Wrote:  

(09-05-2016 06:19 AM)Orion Wrote:  

(09-05-2016 01:35 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  Articles like that are just a buttering-up for the eventual introduction of mass internet censorship (not just on Facebook/Twitter and in news portals' comments like it is now). They will definitely take concrete steps in the next two years.

That screenshot someone posted about O2 in Britain blocking RooshV website on their wi-fi hotposts was a very disturbing warning, of what type of totalitarian-style censorship are they preparing soon. If internet culture is a major challenge to them - they will block access of undesirables. Simple, cruel and effective.

It would be interesting. Targeting a few select websites / addresses is easy enough.
Yet as the torrent crowd have demonstrated. Censorship methods are just as easy to circumvent.
All the while, 'they' have never shutdown the entire torrent crowd in one hit.

Yes, but the effect is to isolate normies from our content, who barely bother with even simpler technological tasks. Yet, when exposed, they can "suck in" our narrative just as well as the establishment narrative.

(09-05-2016 07:14 AM)Orion Wrote:  

(09-05-2016 06:44 AM)CynicalContrarian Wrote:  

(09-05-2016 06:19 AM)Orion Wrote:  

(09-05-2016 01:35 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  Articles like that are just a buttering-up for the eventual introduction of mass internet censorship (not just on Facebook/Twitter and in news portals' comments like it is now). They will definitely take concrete steps in the next two years.

That screenshot someone posted about O2 in Britain blocking RooshV website on their wi-fi hotposts was a very disturbing warning, of what type of totalitarian-style censorship are they preparing soon. If internet culture is a major challenge to them - they will block access of undesirables. Simple, cruel and effective.

It would be interesting. Targeting a few select websites / addresses is easy enough.
Yet as the torrent crowd have demonstrated. Censorship methods are just as easy to circumvent.
All the while, 'they' have never shutdown the entire torrent crowd in one hit.

Yes, but the effect is to isolate normies from our content, who barely bother with even simpler technological tasks. Yet, when exposed, they can "suck in" our narrative just as well as the establishment narrative.

The question is can they keep themselves from getting "greedy" with censorship. If you block a few sites, no one cares. However, if you start mass shut downs like many Arab Spring countries did, you get the whole population angry at you. Essentially, for most people, "You can have my LOLcats when you pry them from my cold, dead hands!"

I would have thought the western left would have be sophisticated enough to be able to do this, but after seeing the DNC leak I'm not so sure.

If Hillary dropped out, would Kaine have a better chance?

(09-05-2016 08:05 AM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  If Hillary dropped out, would Kaine have a better chance?

I don't think it would be possible for Kaine to run as president since the ticket would be Pres: Hillary VP: Kaine.

All of the state's deadlines for having a name on a ballot have passed.

Such an event would throw the entire democratic party into complete disarray. We'd probably see the party collapse and coalesce around a different one.

(09-05-2016 08:33 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

(09-05-2016 08:05 AM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  If Hillary dropped out, would Kaine have a better chance?

I don't think it would be possible for Kaine to run as president since the ticket would be Pres: Hillary VP: Kaine.

All of the state's deadlines for having a name on a ballot have passed.

Such an event would throw the entire democratic party into complete disarray. We'd probably see the party collapse and coalesce around a different one.

Knowing the Democrats and their Republican allies, if Hillary were to drop out and as you say, Kaine is only the VP and not the POTUS candidate, would it be in their bests interests for the Supreme court and/or Obama to stop or at least slow down the voting process?

The Republicans get their way with Trump and the Dems get a better candidate in.

I'd put more money on Hillary being a dogged bitch who would let the earth burn, before giving up 'her chance' at POTUS.
As opposed to any potential drop out.
Only a complete physical incapacity would convince Hillary (& the Soros / Rothschild apparatus) to give up.

(09-05-2016 08:54 AM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

(09-05-2016 08:33 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

(09-05-2016 08:05 AM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  If Hillary dropped out, would Kaine have a better chance?

I don't think it would be possible for Kaine to run as president since the ticket would be Pres: Hillary VP: Kaine.

All of the state's deadlines for having a name on a ballot have passed.

Such an event would throw the entire democratic party into complete disarray. We'd probably see the party collapse and coalesce around a different one.

Knowing the Democrats and their Republican allies, if Hillary were to drop out and as you say, Kaine is only the VP and not the POTUS candidate, would it be in their bests interests for the Supreme court and/or Obama to stop or at least slow down the voting process?

The Republicans get their way with Trump and the Dems get a better candidate in.

Who knows. There hasn't been any precedent in US history for such an event.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/art...whore.html

Quote:Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte called Barack Obama a "son of a whore" on Monday as he vowed not to be lectured by the US leader on human rights when they meet in Laos.

The acid-tongued Duterte bristled at warnings he would face questioning by the US president over a war against drugs in the Philippines that has claimed more than 2,400 lives in just over two months.

"You must be respectful. Do not just throw away questions and statements. Son of a whore, I will curse you in that forum," Duterte told a news conference shortly before flying to Laos to attend a summit.

"We will be wallowing in the mud like pigs if you do that to me."

Duterte was due to hold a bilateral meeting with Obama on Tuesday afternoon on the sidelines of a gathering of global leaders hosted by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in Vientiane, the Lao capital.

But shortly after Duterte spoke, Obama appeared to cast doubt on whether such a meeting could take place.

Calling Duterte "a colourful guy", the US president said was asking his staff to find out whether a meeting would be useful.

"I always want to make sure if I'm having a meeting that it's actually productive and we're getting something done," he told reporters.

Duterte, 71, was elected in May after a promise to wage an unprecedented war on illegal drugs that would see tens of thousands of suspects killed.

Official figures released Sunday show that, since he took office on June 30, over 2,400 people have been killed in police anti-drug operations and by suspected vigilantes.

Speaking on the sidelines of the G20 summit in the Chinese city of Hangzhou, Obama said Washington recognised that drugs were a significant problem for the Philippines. But he insisted that he would not shy away from raising concerns about the way the issue was being handled under the new administration.

"The issue of how we approach fighting crime and drug trafficking is a serious one for all of us. We've got to do it the right way," he said.

"Undoubtedly, if and when we have a meeting, this is something that's going to be brought up. And my expectation, my hope is that it could be dealt with constructively."

Duterte has angrily rejected criticism from the Catholic Church, human rights groups, legislators and the United Nations.

And he vowed Monday the bloodbath would continue as he pursued his goal of eradicating illegal narcotics in the Philippines.

"More people will be killed, plenty will be killed until the last pusher is out of the streets. Until the (last) drug manufacturer is killed, we will continue and I will continue," he said.

Duterte insisted he would not take orders from the United States, a former colonial ruler of the Philippines, and did not care about how he was perceived.

Duterte has quickly earned a reputation for making offensive comments about his critics, or others he does not like.

He has also branded Pope Francis and the US ambassador to Manila sons of whores.

T'would appear the New York Times is buying promotion space / influence of American Twitter trends.
NYT has only just released an article down playing Trump's activities in Detroit.
At the time of writing, there's at most ~200 tweets in relation to the article.
Yet according to Twitter - 'Donald Trump Does Detroit' just started 'trending'...

This after the 'Hillary Clinton Gets Gored' NYT article started trending with only ~250 retweets / comments...

(09-05-2016 03:56 AM)eradicator Wrote:  Are you still arguing about pot? Take it to PM guys.

The drug policy debate is a good one, it deserves its own thread, the long posts and elaborate arguments are just getting lost in this high-traffic thread, as well as going off-topic.