Post: #33126

The resurrection of Jeb!?

Post: #33127

I think running "Jeb!" would be a joke. Trump effectively castrated him during the primaries. Would anyone even actually vote for that guy? I'd be more worried about Romney just since he hasn't been in the public eye as much and his 2012 loss might be more easy to overcome. Cuckservatives might even like seeing Romney go up against Trump to get back at him for calling him a "choke artist," etc.

What pisses me off about this whole thing -- it seems the objective of running a third-party isn't actually to win, it's to stop Trump from winning. These #NeverTrump douche bags would actually prefer Hillary to run what's left of the country into the fucking ground than see Trump make America great again, apparently.

I wonder if there's any way Kristol's efforts to run a third-party candidate can be thwarted or if it's already in motion. I would assume by the shithead's tweet he's already got something brewing.

Here's an article about how Kristol could try to bring his plan to fruition and what some of the ramifications could be. Obviously, Vice sucks but it's hard to find quality sources for this story just yet.

https://news.vice.com/article/this-is-ho...-candidate

Quote:At this point in the primary race, nothing short of a meteor strike on Trump Tower could stop Donald Trump from becoming the Republican nominee. But that doesn't mean the end of the Never Trump movement. A circle of Republican elites who are still in the "denial" stage of the grieving process have moved past the primary and are trying to draft a third party candidate for the general election.

Conservative operatives have been quietly working over the past two weeks to find a Republican willing to step up to the plate. These GOP insiders include 2012 presidential candidate Mitt Romney, the prominent conservative pundits Bill Kristol and Erick Erickson, as well as veteran Republican strategists Rick Wilson, Mike Murphy, and Stuart Stevens, according to the Washington Post.

Although conventional political wisdom makes the odds of a third-party outsider becoming president extremely slim, a pathway for such a scenario technically exists. According to the 12th Amendment of the Constitution, such a candidate would need to deny Clinton and Trump the requisite 270 electoral votes in the general election by winning several pivotal states.

If a third-party candidate appears on the ballot anywhere it will likely be in New Hampshire, Ohio, and Colorado — purple states with relatively lenient rules for getting on the ballot in time for Election Day. The decision would then go from the Electoral College to the House of Representatives, where each state delegation would be afforded one vote. Since the House is currently controlled by Republicans, the Never Trump crew hopes there could be a shot for an establishment Republican candidate to win.

Though this is a long-shot plan, it's not impossible: the last time it happened was in 1824, when the House chose John Quincy Adams over Andrew Jackson, despite Jackson winning the popular vote.

It's nevertheless exceedingly risky. If the effort fails, it could harm the Republicans in many of the down-ballot races and end up costing the GOP majorities in both the House and the Senate. Even if the plan somehow works, it would allow Trump supporters to argue that the political establishment had stolen the nomination from their candidate, inflaming voters who already believe the system is rigged and possibly alienating them from the party permanently.

The Never Trump effort is further undercut as more and more of the Republican Party comes to terms with the reality that Trump is the GOP's new standard-bearer. For the first time in the primary, a majority of Republican voters now support him, according to a recent NBC poll. An increasing number of GOP elected officials are also falling in line behind Trump, including figures such as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan, who met with him in DC last week.

Reince Priebus, the chair of the Republican National Committee, made his opposition to a third-party challenger to Trump clear on Sunday.

"They can try to hijack another party and get on the ballot, but look, it's a suicide mission for our country," Priebus said on Fox News, "because what it means is that you're throwing down not just eight years of the White House but potentially 100 years on the Supreme Court and wrecking this country for many generations."

Freshman Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse is said to be at the top of the list of possible third-party challengers to Trump. He has earned widespread attention in recent months for being one of the most outspoken anti-Trump Republicans, having remarked that there are "dumpster fires" more appealing than the choice between Trump and Hillary Clinton.

Romney has reportedly approached Sasse about a third-party run, but Sasse has said publicly that he is not interested in running. Despite appearing to be an obvious choice — Sasse is considered a rising star in the Republican Party and has said a third-party candidate would be a better option — such a risky move would jeopardize his valuable Senate seat and could effectively ruin his career.

Romney has also reportedly courted John Kasich, who dropped out of the race last month after failing to win a single primary state besides his own. Kasich's position as a moderate, soft-spoken Republican who has been able to work with Democrats in the past make him an appealing option. But he has also repeatedly said that he has no interest in running as a third-party candidate.

Related: Americans Desperate to Flee Trump Can Hook Up With Canadians on This Site

Mark Cuban, the billionaire owner of the Dallas Mavericks basketball team, is also said to be an outsider alternative to Trump, but he told the Post that he doesn't see that happening.

"There isn't enough time," Cuban said.

Other options on the anyone-but-Trump list include former Republican Senator Tom Coburn, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and retired Army General Stanley McChrystal.

The mere possibility of a third-party candidate has provoked vitriolic criticism from some conservatives who see it as destructive to the GOP. The pro-Trump website Breitbart called Kristol, the editor of the conservative Weekly Standard, a "Republican spoiler" and "renegade Jew" for daring to endorse an independent candidate.

The risk of splitting the Republican vote, "is a political miscalculation so great and a betrayal so profound as to not be easily forgiven," Breitbart contributor David Horowitz wrote on Sunday.

Follow Olivia Becker on Twitter: @oliviaLbecker

Post: #33128

(05-29-2016 11:45 PM)LeoneVolpe Wrote:  I think running "Jeb!" would be a joke. Trump effectively castrated him during the primaries. Would anyone even actually vote for that guy? I'd be more worried about Romney just since he hasn't been in the public eye as much and his 2012 loss might be more easy to overcome. Cuckservatives might even like seeing Romney go up against Trump to get back at him for calling him a "choke artist," etc.

What pisses me off about this whole thing -- it seems the objective of running a third-party isn't actually to win, it's to stop Trump from winning. These #NeverTrump douche bags would actually prefer Hillary to run what's left of the country into the fucking ground than see Trump make America great again, apparently.

I wonder if there's any way Kristol's efforts to run a third-party candidate can be thwarted or if it's already in motion. I would assume by the shithead's tweet he's already got something brewing.

No need to worry, Romney is not nearly that stupid, he knows that a 3rd party "independent" run would be way too transparent of a sabotage operation. It would hand Hillary the presidency with around 40% of the vote, but the fallout from this would be heavy, the party base would bring out the pitchforks and purge itself from cuckservatives and neocons.

Serious independents like Cuban aren't going to be fall guys for Kristol. Only total traitors or losers would consider that kind of stunt. So eventually guys like Kristol will come to their senses and step back from the ledge. They would instead focus on sabotaging the Trump presidency from behind the scenes to make sure he only gets 4 years, and work with Adelson and Koch on saddling Trump with a two-faced VP and other operatives to try to control him.

Post: #33129

(05-30-2016 12:21 AM)911 Wrote:  

(05-29-2016 11:45 PM)LeoneVolpe Wrote:  I think running "Jeb!" would be a joke. Trump effectively castrated him during the primaries. Would anyone even actually vote for that guy? I'd be more worried about Romney just since he hasn't been in the public eye as much and his 2012 loss might be more easy to overcome. Cuckservatives might even like seeing Romney go up against Trump to get back at him for calling him a "choke artist," etc.

What pisses me off about this whole thing -- it seems the objective of running a third-party isn't actually to win, it's to stop Trump from winning. These #NeverTrump douche bags would actually prefer Hillary to run what's left of the country into the fucking ground than see Trump make America great again, apparently.

I wonder if there's any way Kristol's efforts to run a third-party candidate can be thwarted or if it's already in motion. I would assume by the shithead's tweet he's already got something brewing.

No need to worry, Romney is not nearly that stupid, he knows that a 3rd party "independent" run would be way too transparent of a sabotage operation. It would hand Hillary the presidency with around 40% of the vote, but the fallout from this would be heavy, the party base would bring out the pitchforks and purge itself from cuckservatives and neocons.

So even guys like Kristol will come to their senses and step back from the ledge. They would instead focus on sabotaging the Trump presidency from behind the scenes to make sure he only gets 4 years, and work with Adelson and Koch on saddling Trump with an VP and other operatives to try to control him.

911, your post certainly made me breathe a sigh of cautious relief. Is there anything the Republican party can do to thwart the #NeverTrump morons to keep this third-party shit from even happening?

Post: #33130

(05-29-2016 11:26 PM)Emancipator Wrote:  If anything Weld and Johnson are going to siphon off anti-Hillary centrist votes in the NE, this could result in helping Trump in places like New Hampshire, Maine.

Was catching up with a buddy in Oregon, apparently in Polls Trump is up or within margin of error with Crooked Hillary,

Make Oregon Great Again.

If OREGON is even close to being in play, Hillary is toast.

MAGA landslide.

Post: #33131

Everyone knows a third-party candidate doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of actualy winning a presidential election. Despite protestations to the contrary, we all know the real reason Bill Kristol wants to run a third-party is to stop Trump from winning not because he actually believes a third-party candidate can win.

Although I suppose Kristol could be delusional enough to think his candidate could stop either Trump or Clinton from getting the 270 delegates needed to win, in which case the House of Representatives would have to decide in 2017. I think the likelihood of that decision turning out in Kristol's favor is highly unlikely and will unfortunately and almost certainly put Crooked Hillary and Slick Willy back in the Oval Office.

I'm curious if someone more well-versed in politics than myself knows of any way the GOP could band together to prevent a third-party candidate from making the ballot...is that even possible? If not, what do you suspect the Trump campaign will do to help prevent this from costing them the election? Also, what are the chances of Sanders running as an independent against Hillary? Then it would be a five-man presidential race between Trump, Clinton, Sanders, Johnson whoever Kristol digs up. At least if Sanders did that it could help splinter the democratic vote as well. Thoughts?

Post: #33132

Sanders is a sackless old man who isn't going to make an independent run. He's an institutional leftist, and institutional leftists in good standing do not shit on the party in public -- which a third-party run would be since it would be an acknowledgement that there's no place for the extreme left among the Democrats. Leftists in the West don't do that: they parasitise and corrupt the bodies they latch onto from within. Sanders' agenda is to push the Democrats further left, which he'll try and do at the DNC, drawing on his movement of hipster discontent to power the change.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #33133

Bernie photobombed by Trump navy.

Note: Couldn't find a video URL so I just inserted a link URL.

Post: #33134

(05-30-2016 01:43 AM)LeoneVolpe Wrote:  Although I suppose Kristol could be delusional enough to think his candidate could stop either Trump or Clinton from getting the 270 delegates needed to win, in which case the House of Representatives would have to decide in 2017. I think the likelihood of that decision turning out in Kristol's favor is highly unlikely and will unfortunately and almost certainly put Crooked Hillary and Slick Willy back in the Oval Office.

You right and that is exactly his plan.



Newsmax article here.

What you have to understand about neoconservatives like him is that they are subversives that have infiltrated the Republican Party to further their own agenda. Why can't Bill Kristol accept Trump? Trump is a conservative when it comes to appointing judges, leaving social issues to the states, and wanting a prosperous and hardworking citizenry that pays taxes, but not too much taxes.

Trump is extremely different on three aspects of the globalist agenda: immigration, trade, and foreign policy.

And that is what it's about for the neoconservatives. They don't give a fuck about any other thing. They don't want to conserve the culture, communities, families and proper values. They did a fake conversion from Democrat to Republican when the former become more averse to their foreign policy interests. So even if they get everything from the traditional conservative wish list except immigration and foreign policy, they don't want it.

Rather, they prefer getting nothing from the conservative wish list but still get third-world immigration and more unnecessary wars, and obviously, they see that in Hillary Clinton.

(This is why they keep on losing on social issues: They are leftists in disguise and when the host culture is eroded and degraded, and social cohesion and a common identity disappears, they will grab more power more easily. Social issues are only used around election time, to fire up the base, to distract them from their dispossession, and are just as quickly forgotten again when Obama enforces tranny dominance by decree.)

If Trump gets elected, an entire new establishment is build. All the bought-and-paid-for operatives, lobbyists, and blackmailed politicians they have spent so long cultivating and promoting up the ranks to key positions, will become irrelevant. It would be a disaster. If Trump loses and thereby loses control of the GOP, the old people can stay, the low-level operatives still get their fat checks, and the people in power behind the scenes will keep their controlled system. Thus, rather lose with Hillary than win with Trump, for these traitors.

Post: #33135

@sixsix, the comments below that Article give me hope. All are supportive of Trump.
Trump or bust this election cycle for y'all.

What are the states where election fraud is possible? I read that Minnesota required ID, so illegals could not vote.

Post: #33136

(05-28-2016 04:12 PM)Travesty Wrote:  Oh God the tears, they taste so wonderful! Hate to give this phony a view, yet I love even more.

Start at 10:04

Chris Christie has lost a LOT of weight looking at that old video. Trump makes everyone great again!

Post: #33137

Interesting article in which Salon points out Trump may have an easier path than many think:

Quote:Losing the Culture Wars

Many Trump supporters may well be racist, xenophobic or misogynistic—but if the Democrats think that it will be a winning strategy to sling these kinds of labels at the Donald, then they are going to be in for a nasty surprise in November.

For one thing, Trump’s parochialism resonates with many more Americans than the mainstream media likes to believe or acknowledge (although their obsessive coverage of the Donald is an implicit recognition of this reality). This is true across the board: male and female, young and old, rich and poor, educated and uneducated, highly-intelligent or not, Democrat or Republican (this is particularly true for his anti-Muslim proposals). And his nationalistic economic and foreign policy message resonates even more broadly: a majority of Americans support his “America-first” approach. So if the Clinton camp attempts to disparage people who hold these kinds of views as ignorant and bigoted, they are going to be alienating far more voters than they can likely afford.

Exacerbating this trend is something I call “negative intersectionality”: progressives have done a great job framing racial inequality, feminism and LGBTQ rights as part of the same basic struggle. However, this association works both ways. Accusations of misogyny, for instance, are often heard in the context of a fundamentally anti-white, anti-Christian culture war—a zero-sum campaign waged against ordinary hard-working Americans by condescending and politically correct liberal elites. As a result, many conservative white women who may be disturbed by Trump’s remarks would simultaneously feel antipathy toward liberals when they encounter a pro-Clinton ad that highlights those comments. Some may even come to view Trump more sympathetically if Democrats attempt to paint him as anti-woman or anti-minority.

If Clinton thinks she can criticize Trump as a sexist without stirring up this broader resentment against liberals, she is in for a rude awakening. If she thinks there’s an alternative path to victory by largely writing off the white vote and leaning more heavily on the support of minorities, she’s probably wrong about that too: Clinton would simultaneously need massive turnout and near-unanimous support from minority groups to compensate for decreased support among white Americans. However, turnout has been low among Democrats in the primary. Moreover, Trump seems to be performing surprisingly well among minorities:

Mitt Romney only garnered 6 percent of the black vote in 2012. However, this election is shaping up to be more competitive: nearly one-tenth of African-Americans view the Donald positively, with another 15 percent undecided. If even half of the latter group ultimately sides with Trump, or simply stays home on Election Day, Clinton loses. For her to win, African-American participation needs to at least match 2012 turnout, and Clinton must win roughly 90 percent of the black vote. Right now, it’s looking like she might fail on both counts.

Perhaps more shocking: despite his anti-immigrant rhetoric, nearly one-quarter of Hispanics support Trump, with another 15 percent undecided—putting him on pace to possibly exceed Romney’s 2012 share (27 percent).

One reason to suspect these dynamics might hold: positive intersectionality. Trump’s ambivalence on gay marriage, his opposition to the so-called “Bathroom Bills” in North Carolina and elsewhere, his consistent praise for Planned Parenthood, his commitment to loosening the Republican platform on abortion, and his openness to legalizing marijuana (which would have a huge and positive impact on people of color)—these will counteract depictions of him as a xenophobe or bigot among those who view these struggles as interconnected. In fact, Trump’s unorthodox positions, when paired with the public’s record distrust of mainstream media, may lead many to believe he is being unfairly maligned in the press.

Post: #33138

   

Post: #33139

^^^ FISHES?!

Post: #33140

Gentlemen, we are winning the culture war. There is hope. I have a story for you. First I need to describe my sister-in-law to you. She is a shitlib Canadian SJW socialist. Think Anita Sarkeesian but way worse. So, as you can imagine, I am not her favourite person to have over for dinner parties as I am not shy about my political opinions and I have lately become a Trump shitlord from hell. But, alas, she could not escape my unholy presence on Saturday as we were seated at the same table at a family wedding.

My 15-year-old daughter was seated beside me and there were 3 other girls about the same age as my daughter there. The 3 other girls started talking about how great Justin Trudeau is and how he has "abs". I chuckled and nudged my daughter and caught my sister-in-law rolling her eyes. This is because I frequently expound at length at how Justin Trudeau was elected by air-headed SJW's who voted for him mainly because he's cute. I had made a promise to my daughter to keep my lip zipped at the wedding and avoid causing trouble, so my daughter decided to compromise by wading in herself. She asked the girls, "Hey guys, what are Justin Trudeau's policies that you like?" 2 out of the 3 tapped out immediately with the tired old, "I don't know anything about politics" line, but the 3rd one gave it a go with, "Well, you know, I'm all about social justice, so I like that he is making the world safe for transgendered people." I had to physically restrain myself from responding and my daughter shot me an evil glare, but my self-control won out and I remained silent. I caught my sister-in-law smiling at this with delight. But I thought, whatever, one night with my mouth shut so as not to ruin my cousin's wedding was not such a big deal. But my daughter was feeling mischievous and she wanted to test the limits of my self-control so she then said, "Hey guys, what do you think of Donald Trump?" I laughed out loud at this, but I accepted the challenge. The social justice champion of transgender safety piped up immediately with, "Well, you know, he's like, a businessman, you know? So it's like he wants to turn the United States into a corporation, you know? It's like, he doesn't have any political experience."

Then suddenly, from across the table, my SJW sister-in-law EXPLODED from her blue pill slumber with: "NEITHER DOES JUSTIN TRUDEAU!"

BOOM

I high-fived the bitch. We laughed. The champion of transgenders just sat there... blinking... completely and utterly OWNED. My daughter's jaw was on the floor.

If I can red-pill my communist sister-in-law, we can red-pill ANYONE gentlemen. Who's fucking next?

Post: #33141

(05-30-2016 08:30 AM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  Gentlemen, we are winning the culture war. There is hope. I have a story for you. First I need to describe my sister-in-law to you. She is a shitlib Canadian SJW socialist. Think Anita Sarkeesian but way worse. So, as you can imagine, I am not her favourite person to have over for dinner parties as I am not shy about my political opinions and I have lately become a Trump shitlord from hell. But, alas, she could not escape my unholy presence on Saturday as we were seated at the same table at a family wedding.

My 15-year-old daughter was seated beside me and there were 3 other girls about the same age as my daughter there. The 3 other girls started talking about how great Justin Trudeau is and how he has "abs". I chuckled and nudged my daughter and caught my sister-in-law rolling her eyes. This is because I frequently expound at length at how Justin Trudeau was elected by air-headed SJW's who voted for him mainly because he's cute. I had made a promise to my daughter to keep my lip zipped at the wedding and avoid causing trouble, so my daughter decided to compromise by wading in herself. She asked the girls, "Hey guys, what are Justin Trudeau's policies that you like?" 2 out of the 3 tapped out immediately with the tired old, "I don't know anything about politics" line, but the 3rd one gave it a go with, "Well, you know, I'm all about social justice, so I like that he is making the world safe for transgendered people." I had to physically restrain myself from responding and my daughter shot me an evil glare, but my self-control won out and I remained silent. I caught my sister-in-law smiling at this with delight. But I thought, whatever, one night with my mouth shut so as not to ruin my cousin's wedding was not such a big deal. But my daughter was feeling mischievous and she wanted to test the limits of my self-control so she then said, "Hey guys, what do you think of Donald Trump?" I laughed out loud at this, but I accepted the challenge. The social justice champion of transgender safety piped up immediately with, "Well, you know, he's like, a businessman, you know? So it's like he wants to turn the United States into a corporation, you know? It's like, he doesn't have any political experience."

Then suddenly, from across the table, my SJW sister-in-law EXPLODED from her blue pill slumber with: "NEITHER DOES JUSTIN TRUDEAU!"

BOOM

I high-fived the bitch. We laughed. The champion of transgenders just sat there... blinking... completely and utterly OWNED. My daughter's jaw was on the floor.

If I can red-pill my communist sister-in-law, we can red-pill ANYONE gentlemen. Who's fucking next?

Post: #33142

I've been in so many situations like that where I had to restrain myself from starting a political debate at a family gathering or risk ruining the entire thing because arguments with me get heated.

Last time I was at a family BBQ trying to explain to one of my dumb leftist SJW brothers that Hillary's email scandal is a serious offense and my other brother got up out of his chair, walked over to me and interjected himself only to insult me by labeling me a "child" because I dared to assert that Clinton might be indicted (that's how brainwashed and mentally retarded he is)

Anyway - I just keep my mouth shut now because id rather have a relationship with my own brothers than find a way to prove them right, even if that relationship is strained as a result of them being idiot cucks.

Post: #33143

(05-30-2016 10:38 AM)eskimobobseal Wrote:  I've been in so many situations like that where I had to restrain myself from starting a political debate at a family gathering or risk ruining the entire thing because arguments with me get heated.

Last time I was at a family BBQ trying to explain to one of my dumb leftist SJW brothers that Hillary's email scandal is a serious offense and my other brother got up out of his chair, walked over to me and interjected himself only to insult me by labeling me a "child" because I dared to assert that Clinton might be indicted (that's how brainwashed and mentally retarded he is)

Anyway - I just keep my mouth shut now because id rather have a relationship with my own brothers than find a way to prove them right, even if that relationship is strained as a result of them being idiot cucks.

You can start injecting a bit of red into their pills just by pointing out that Bill Clinton is a serial rapist, and Hillary an accessory in the coverups. I would start with the Juanita videos, those are blindingly real, and add to that Hillary's cynical, evil treatment of the child rape victim, whose life she helped destroy. Being pro-Clinton is either being ignorant, or being pro-rape, and you can make sure it's the latter by informing them. I've turned several family members away from the Clintons and into Trump voters.

Post: #33144

I know that feel brahs. Keeping my mouth shut to avoid drama is pretty routine in the liberal la-la lands I live in. I usually disguise myself as a Bernie supporter who hates Hillary.

That said, I believe the reason Trump is able to win at all this election is because of the power of the internet; it has given a way for conservatives to organize and communicate without enemy interference. The internet has been a major game changer, and forums like this one have been at the forefront of the political battles in America. The overall effect is killing traditional media and throwing out the baby boomer shitheads.

I think a lot of people were despondent about our cultural decay, but they do not see the excalibur they wield via the internet; the pen is mightier than the sword, and the internet has been the biggest invention of mankind since the printing press and movable type.

Post: #33145

@911

Trust me, I've tried everything. I've read quotes from Juanita Broaddrick herself, sent photos of Bill Clinton's name on a manifest for the "Lolita Express" pedophile plane - proof that Hillary blackmailed and threatened rape victims, everything.

The reality is there's a big age gap between myself and my two brothers (over a decade) and that will always get in the way of them taking me seriously, so I give up.

It's "what's the weather like?" and "how are the kids?" from now on.

Post: #33146

   

Goofy Elizabeth Warren (aka Pocahontas). "Woman of color." LOL! Fraudulently uses affirmative action to get ahead. "The system is rigged" indeed!

Post: #33147

That Salon article is highlighting shit we've been saying since last year. Amazing how we're the trailblazers.

As for Romney, he's denied even in the past few days that he's running, so I'm not sure what's going on here. Can anyone pull up a list of ballot deadlines? North Carolina's not passing yet is worrying, but the deadline is so soon that I'm not sure even if they put up a nominee now they'll be able to make it. North Carolina, as you recall, is one of my "Big 6."

This isn't a good development, but the Republican elites have to know that if anyone tries this, the Republican Party base walks forever, so it might be just talk or get squashed by insiders and by Manafort's people.

Post: #33148

I've been trying to convert liberals and BernieBros to the dark side. They're close man, for real. The mood is shifting and people who hoped for Bernie to bring real change in this country are feeling pretty fucked over now.

Hannibal does the same thing.

If you're an aspirational type who looks like he has his shit together and you speak very highly about Trump to people, and you go out and evangelize the Great Word of the Trumpening to randos at bars and strangers you meet, I'd say about 80% of these BernieBros get pretty fucking curious about why you've got such a big freedom boner at the prospect of a Trump dynasty.

I talk up all the good points about Bernie until they see he's literally a fucking saint in my eyes and point out all the traits Trump has that are just as similar.

The BernieFolk are totally willing to vote Trump over Hillary. They're just not gamblers who want big radical changes in this country. You find a Bernieperson who drinks a bit and talk his ear off for half an hour, he'll totally swing Trump in the general.

You can't be a Berniepeoples and not be open minded and willing to hear a perspective, even if you're some kind of messed up blue haired feminist. Trump is a peoples champion. MAGA is a guarantee with Trump in office.

Those BernieBros are our allies though. Don't forget that. They feel just as fucked over by Hillary as they are scared of outright supporting Trump.

(05-30-2016 12:23 PM)Libertas Wrote:  That Salon article is highlighting shit we've been saying since last year. Amazing how we're the trailblazers.

As for Romney, he's denied even in the past few days that he's running, so I'm not sure what's going on here. Can anyone pull up a list of ballot deadlines? North Carolina's not passing yet is worrying, but the deadline is so soon that I'm not sure even if they put up a nominee now they'll be able to make it. North Carolina, as you recall, is one of my "Big 6."

This isn't a good development, but the Republican elites have to know that if anyone tries this, the Republican Party base walks forever, so it might be just talk or get squashed by insiders and by Manafort's people.

Those Captain Hindsight sophists working at Salon are reading Mike Cernovich and Scott Adam's blog now.

Everybody in media should be sending both those guys checks.

Post: #33149

Post: #33150

(05-30-2016 11:46 AM)eskimobobseal Wrote:  @911

Trust me, I've tried everything. I've read quotes from Juanita Broaddrick herself, sent photos of Bill Clinton's name on a manifest for the "Lolita Express" pedophile plane - proof that Hillary blackmailed and threatened rape victims, everything.

The reality is there's a big age gap between myself and my two brothers (over a decade) and that will always get in the way of them taking me seriously, so I give up.

It's "what's the weather like?" and "how are the kids?" from now on.

It's because your brothers are "demoralized" in the Yuri Bezmenov sense of the word...

/thread-48360...pid1309524

And so they are "unable to assess true information... the facts tell nothing" to them.

@Hades: I like what you are doing to convert the berniepeople but I could never do it man. Bernie is one of Uncle Yuri's "half-baked intellectuals" carrying out the KGB's demoralization strategy beyond the dreams of "even Comrade Andropov and all his experts". I can't fucking stand Bernie. He's worse than the enemy. He's Benedict fucking Arnold. May he Bern in hell.