Post: #51

I think what America needs is a new Democratic Party.

The way it worked before the 1960s was that Democratic Party was the party of the people and the Republican party was the party of business. The Democrats would make sure that the workers got a share of the pie. So, you could be an ordinary worker and have a house, 4 children, a wife, and retire with a pension. The Democrats formed the majority so the Republicans would only win when the Democrats fucked up.

Now, we have globalization, and the position of the workers is getting worse. The globalists would be happy for everyone to be working for 1$ an hour. Pensions are a thing of the past. While this is happening, the Democrats main issue is pushing trannies into women's bathrooms. The current Democrats are appealing to small groups, less then 1 percent of the population, most likely because they are upper class elite perverts who contribute the money.

We need someone to represent us. Why not at least get guaranteed health insurance. We are suppose to work to support the globalist empire and we can't even afford to get sick. While the globalists are making trillions of dollars, their schemes are backed up by the full force of the American military. They still couldn't do it without us. We support them with our blood. Why don't we go back to demanding a bigger piece of the pie?

Post: #52

(05-10-2017 08:11 PM)911 Wrote:  The new Macron party is not just a repackaging for the sake of newness, it's also a move designed to kill off the old socialist left, which can often act as an obstacle to globalist policies. En Marche! goes full neoliberal, and pairs it with full blown year zero identity politics, which are still a fairly new thing in France.

As for Trump - we will see what is what at a later time. Currently there are some good things as well as some very bad ones.

The globalists did an excellent job with Macron and En Marche creating a new party from scratch and even taking an insider who has not dirtied his hands.

As for good-looking and appealing to women - it does not matter what we think here or how well Macron would do being a nobody in a club or approaching women in the streets of Paris. Politicians are automatically coupled with fame and power / celebrity status - women instantly find that attractive if the man is still bangable. Also he got the ageing feminist women vote with his geriatric bride. Most French politicians are usually the opposite so the globalists took an uber-cuck and went with that. It is by the way no mistake that they picked a very young one.

In some countries like Austria they made a 25 year old one of the main ministers of the government:



As we see an ever greater dumbing down of the population you will see more stunts like that coming out. I can even imagine once an entire cabinet of 18-25yo women and a few men - if the moronic population believes that they can "lead" - all the better.

Post: #53

^
Those...EARS...

Post: #54

(05-10-2017 09:52 PM)Sherman Wrote:  The way it worked before the 1960s was that Democratic Party was the party of the people and the Republican party was the party of business. The Democrats would make sure that the workers got a share of the pie. So, you could be an ordinary worker and have a house, 4 children, a wife, and retire with a pension. The Democrats formed the majority so the Republicans would only win when the Democrats fucked up.

Same thing with the Labour Party in the UK.

I'm no fan of Jeremy Corbyn but when he took Labour back in the direction of being a party for the working man, suddenly the media's "left-wing bias' evaporated.

That, and he was critical of Israel.

Post: #55

To those saying Macron is not attractive, most of the girls I know think he's just as or more attractive than Trudeau. That's saying something.

Why did we let them vote?

Post: #56

During World War II, British aristocrats would volunteer for the Royal Air force and die for their country. Today, the globalists have no loyalty to any country. They play countries off of each other to avoid paying taxes and arbitrage labor. But then they take advantage of the militaries of those countries to keep in business. The American navy keeps the trade routes safe. The capitalists need the state to keep away the highway robbers. This costs taxpayers trillions of dollars, but the globalists don't pay a dime for these defense services. And if that isn't enough, we are expected to die in wars to protect their interests. Syria, North Korea, Iran, Russia, and anyone else not already submissive to the system has to be controlled, and that is done by the military. The idea of a free market is a joke. But there are a lot of freebies for the globalists. We just need to demand a bigger share of the pie.

Post: #57

Post: #58

(05-09-2017 05:52 AM)Irenicus Wrote:  Story time:


In Croatia, like +10 years ago, there was a beer called Prima. If you wanted to poison someone, that beer would be a perfect weapon. Just sit and watch. The owner realized that, and tried to save the brand by making commercials involving the most popular models (female) of that time, but in vain. It went bankrupt. I guess there were too few Borgias.


5 years, another owner bought Prima. He invested a lot in that brand, and the quality of beer skyrocketed. But still...he did not do as well as his competition because the Prima brand was tarnished (see the above paragraph). He too, went bankrupt.


Now, you wonder what the hell that has to do with the topic?




Because of the parallel with French elections.



If Le Pain CHANGED the name of her party which was TARNISHED ALREADY, she would have done better 100%!!!


But all things aside...she, and her party did rather fine. All she has to do is re-brand her party (there are rumors that she will), and the French to organize a relevant alternative media (there are rumors that Breitbart wants to create their German and French versions, which is good).

How exactly was FN bad?

Post: #59

In any case, I think we can agree that Globalists will never again try to push physically tired, odd-looking and frankly speaking, almost repulsive, candidates. No more of:





From now on, we'll have to fight good-looking young (mostly male, ironically, considering they'll destroy the male natives' hopes) candidates, posing as "non-compromised" and "enlightened" centrists... who in reality will have a clear mission: push LGBT and massive-immigration agendas.

Post: #60

(05-11-2017 03:01 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

(05-10-2017 08:11 PM)911 Wrote:  The new Macron party is not just a repackaging for the sake of newness, it's also a move designed to kill off the old socialist left, which can often act as an obstacle to globalist policies. En Marche! goes full neoliberal, and pairs it with full blown year zero identity politics, which are still a fairly new thing in France.

As for Trump - we will see what is what at a later time. Currently there are some good things as well as some very bad ones.

The globalists did an excellent job with Macron and En Marche creating a new party from scratch and even taking an insider who has not dirtied his hands.

As for good-looking and appealing to women - it does not matter what we think here or how well Macron would do being a nobody in a club or approaching women in the streets of Paris. Politicians are automatically coupled with fame and power / celebrity status - women instantly find that attractive if the man is still bangable. Also he got the ageing feminist women vote with his geriatric bride. Most French politicians are usually the opposite so the globalists took an uber-cuck and went with that. It is by the way no mistake that they picked a very young one.

In some countries like Austria they made a 25 year old one of the main ministers of the government:



As we see an ever greater dumbing down of the population you will see more stunts like that coming out. I can even imagine once an entire cabinet of 18-25yo women and a few men - if the moronic population believes that they can "lead" - all the better.

he sure can "ear" you well.

Post: #61

(05-10-2017 09:52 PM)Sherman Wrote:  I think what America needs is a new Democratic Party.

The way it worked before the 1960s was that Democratic Party was the party of the people and the Republican party was the party of business. The Democrats would make sure that the workers got a share of the pie. So, you could be an ordinary worker and have a house, 4 children, a wife, and retire with a pension. The Democrats formed the majority so the Republicans would only win when the Democrats fucked up.

Now, we have globalization, and the position of the workers is getting worse. The globalists would be happy for everyone to be working for 1$ an hour. Pensions are a thing of the past. While this is happening, the Democrats main issue is pushing trannies into women's bathrooms. The current Democrats are appealing to small groups, less then 1 percent of the population, most likely because they are upper class elite perverts who contribute the money.

We need someone to represent us. Why not at least get guaranteed health insurance. We are suppose to work to support the globalist empire and we can't even afford to get sick. While the globalists are making trillions of dollars, their schemes are backed up by the full force of the American military. They still couldn't do it without us. We support them with our blood. Why don't we go back to demanding a bigger piece of the pie?

That Democratic Party you spoke of before the 1960's died with JFK's assassination. Then came the wilderness years from 1968-1992. The Democratic Leadership Council formed in 1985 turned the Democrats into a party of corporate friendly liberals and window dressing gestures for their base. The DLC is what got Bill Clinton elected.

Post: #62

Just like corporations outsourcing jobs, the Democrats outsourced their votes to foreigners. They make much more reliable voters and identity politics are much easier than wooing working-class white voters as in the old days.

Post: #63

(05-20-2017 08:44 PM)RexImperator Wrote:  Just like corporations outsourcing jobs, the Democrats outsourced their votes to foreigners. They make much more reliable voters and identity politics are much easier than wooing working-class white voters as in the old days.

To be fair, a lot of ethnic white groups like Italians or Irish weren't seen as white by the WASP class in the old days and the Democrats were the dominant party for most of the 20th century. The Democrats used Tamanny Hall for ethnic white voters and immigrants.

Tamanny Hall has been rebranded to doing sanctuary cities and amnesty now.

Post: #64

The concept of "whites" in the US only came about in the 1950s-60s with the move to the suburbs and the policy of mass migration of Southern Blacks into cities like Chicago, Detroit, Philly etc.

Prior to this, people defined themselves in terms of their national origins and religion (Italian, Irish, Polish etc) as opposed to "whites", and lived in vibrant ethnic neighborhoods.

This was a social engineering conducted in postwar America through urban planning. It has a lot of commonalities with what is going on in Europe today. E. Michael Jones did a superb job documenting this in his book "The Slaughter of Cities: Urban Renewal As Ethnic Cleansing":





Doctor E. Michael Jones discusses his book The Slaughter of Cities: Urban Renewal As Ethnic Cleansing. We discuss how the decline of America's cities and the rise suburbia in the postwar period was part of a vast and covert social engineering scheme. As the book's dust jacket sums up Dr. Jones' thesis: "What began as the World War II intelligence community's attempt to solve America's 'nationalities problem' and provide workers for the nation's war industries degenerated by the early postwar period into full-blown ethnic cleansing".

Post: #65

Adding Božo Petrov, our resident Croatian Macron to the mix:



This 37-year old creature appeared literally out of nowhere and suddenly started being promoted by all the media as "the third option" and "the new face of centrism". He has successfully sabotaged the real opposition parties twice already and dutifully supports all globalist policies while pretending to be "neutral" and "third-party". His biggest stunt was signing a notarized letter promising that he would never enter a coalition with any mainstream party, then proceeding to do exactly that on the election eve - the media praised it as "being boldly flexible to save the country".

The cuck face phenotype is so textbook that it hurts...