yes, it's hard to comprehend how he doesn't see the irony and hypocrisy in a lot of his opinions... but i guess self-reflection is hard when you're delusional. ok, that's it.

11/3/2016 1:24:48 PM

I'm always amazed Bullet is able to put so many sentences together without actually saying anything of substance.

Yes, there are dumbfucks on both sides. The difference is one side wants everyone to be a big gov dependent dumbfuck, the other doesn't. One side is trying to import millions of more poor dumbfucks for votes, the other isn't.

[Edited on November 3, 2016 at 2:21 PM. Reason : .]

11/3/2016 2:20:18 PM

Quote :

"man id put any amouny of money on hillary winning this election"

Hey E Man great news, YOU CAN DO THIS!

There are multiple websites that will allow you to do this. Wouldn't you like to have more money? You keep saying shit like this over and over, wouldn't your time be better spent actually placing the bets? Where are the screenshots of your positions?

11/3/2016 2:24:33 PM

Quote :

"republican and democrat voters are both extremely misinformed"

yeah, but have you ever seen the back of a five dollar bill...on weed?

11/3/2016 2:27:12 PM

Quote :

"Yes, there are dumbfucks on both sides. The difference is one side wants everyone to be a big gov dependent dumbfuck, the other doesn't. One side is trying to import millions of more poor dumbfucks for votes, the other isn't. "

ORLY?

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/

11/3/2016 2:37:40 PM

So Trump just passed the highest point he's ever been in the polls at 42% and rising, clinton is 1% below her max and dropping.

11/3/2016 2:42:17 PM

^^Have you ever heard of population density?

Lol at you trying to switch to dependency by state instead of by voter. 2EZ4Me, m8

[Edited on November 3, 2016 at 2:47 PM. Reason : .]

11/3/2016 2:44:39 PM

Go on...

oic. you don't like the source because it destroys your narrative. here are some more:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/michael-w-chapman/top-10-states-rely-most-federal-aid

http://taxfoundation.org/blog/which-states-rely-most-federal-aid-0



[Edited on November 3, 2016 at 2:52 PM. Reason : .]

11/3/2016 2:46:15 PM

Dependency by voter

=/=

Dependency by state

I should bill you for a tutoring fee.

11/3/2016 3:05:09 PM

My voting experience took over 45 minutes just at the polling center, and that was without anyone else in line. They had to look up my information in the database to ensure I was registered and hadn't voted already or received a mail-in ballot. Then once I got the ballot, I had 8 positions to vote for and 14 measures/propositions/etc. A lunch break is not long enough to get this done, and I can't imagine what it will be like on election day when there is a line around the block.

11/3/2016 3:49:07 PM

^^ wanna talk about food stamps? You can Google it since I'm busy, but the last time I checked, red states had a higher percentage of people on food stamps than blue ones. It's probably just a coincidence though.

11/3/2016 4:01:38 PM

Democrats are twice as likely to have received food stamps as Republicans. But please, try and muddy the waters by doing it by state since you are fighting a losing argument

11/3/2016 4:13:45 PM

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/jul/29/facebook-posts/are-97-nations-100-poorest-counties-red-states/

I bet none of those people in those counties are on food stamps. Just a coincidence.

http://frac.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/ny_times_snap_poverty_formatted.pdf

Data is a little old, but probably just a coincidence too.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2015/03/03/food-stamp-reliance-is-up-in-every-single-state-since-2000/

[Edited on November 3, 2016 at 4:22 PM. Reason : .]

11/3/2016 4:18:33 PM

Quote :

"Democrats are twice as likely to have received food stamps as Republicans."

That ignores the point that people who have to use food stamps are more likely to vote for the party who is offering them.

11/3/2016 4:24:29 PM

... Uh exactly my point?

11/3/2016 7:14:18 PM

Quote :

" Hey E Man great news, YOU CAN DO THIS! There are multiple websites that will allow you to do this. Wouldn't you like to have more money? You keep saying shit like this over and over, wouldn't your time be better spent actually placing the bets? Where are the screenshots of your positions?"

I just assumed none of them would give me odds that reflect the notion that the race is close or trump has a realistic shot of winning.

I'd jump on something that was anywhere close to a tossup like people are acting though...

[Edited on November 3, 2016 at 7:23 PM. Reason : i'm not going to waste my time putting up 500 to win 100.]

11/3/2016 7:23:40 PM

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=538twitter#now

Slight blip in hillarys slide today, we'll see if it holds.

11/3/2016 9:41:10 PM

All of the talk about Trump supporters and economic anxiety and barely a whisper on the jobs report. Remember how important it was in 2012.

Tells you all you need to know about these two campaigns and frankly the country. Gotcha is more important than issues. It hasn't always been this way.

11/4/2016 7:48:25 AM

Largest wage growth since recession this month.

You'd expect that at this unemployment level if you believe we are anywhere near full employment (cue BUT MAH PARTICIPATON RATE posts).

Normally would be extraordinary news for incumbent party but we are through the looking glass so it doesn't matter. Certainly explains Obama approval ratings, though.

11/4/2016 8:41:22 AM

Quote :

"Gotcha is more important than issues."

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/4/13500018/clinton-email-scandal-bullshit

[Edited on November 4, 2016 at 9:06 AM. Reason : i dislike vox, but this article's gist is true]

11/4/2016 9:06:01 AM

The gist being no policy talk despite her having very robust positions. That is partly her fault though I do understand she has to respond to the other side as well.

I disagree that the emails aren't an issue. At best, they show very bad decision making and at worst something much worse.

11/4/2016 9:22:17 AM

Does her email "decision making" overrule all the other decision making she did in 4 years as Secretary of State? And as a Senator. And all the other shit she's done in 30 years of public service? Because that is the way the media is positing it today.

Quote :

"That is partly her fault though I do understand she has to respond to the other side as well."

What? Can you point to a news cast in the last 3 months that has covered a single policy speech she has given? Unless her campaign literally controls the news, it is not her fault that news hasn't covered it.

[Edited on November 4, 2016 at 9:30 AM. Reason : .]

11/4/2016 9:28:40 AM

her tenure as secretary of state is one of the complaints against her

11/4/2016 10:14:41 AM

oh right. as SoS she founded isis.

what are the real non-partisan complaints about her tenure?

[Edited on November 4, 2016 at 10:29 AM. Reason : .]

11/4/2016 10:22:18 AM

the benghazi witch hunts are partisan, but not all the criticisms are. she definitely had a shortsighted view during the arab spring and libya and syria, and even if you accept that the obama administration directs foreign policy, its still clear that she believes in american exceptionalism and imperialism. another example is her role in the honduran coup, it shouldn't be accepted by any liberal, but its a completely unsurprising action by someone who looks to kissinger as a role model.

11/4/2016 10:42:15 AM

I'm sorry, but what was her role in Syria? She lobbied for greater US military presence and more weapons to rebel groups that never actually happened. As for Libya, you've really got to twist pretty hard to pin that on her considering it was as a UN sanctioned intervention that was led by the French. She again, lobbied for a greater US presence in the aftermath which could have helped stabilize the country, that never actually happened.

11/4/2016 11:15:28 AM

Quote :

"I just assumed none of them would give me odds that reflect the notion that the race is close or trump has a realistic shot of winning. I'd jump on something that was anywhere close to a tossup like people are acting though..."

1) They're all giving very similar odds to 538, which you've been railing against as being unrealistic.
2) If you believe she has a 99% chance of winning and someone is giving odds with anything significantly less than that (say, I dunno, 67%?), than you should be betting. In the world of money and finance finding an opportunity with that much of a discrepancy between what you "know" and what people are betting is a fucking slam dunk

As for your defense in the other thread about how you don't want to bet because something crazy could happen between now and the election: First off, that's part of 538's conservative number...and second, can we now assume that on the morning of the election if the odds are the same and nothing crazy has happened THEN you would be betting the farm?

11/4/2016 11:22:53 AM

^^ pretty convenient that you start the timeline for syria and libya after the conflicts started

11/4/2016 11:27:24 AM

Wow is Trump lucky Paul Manafort forced him to pick Pence and not Christie...

11/4/2016 11:36:24 AM

Quote :

"she believes in american exceptionalism"

the fucking horror

[Edited on November 4, 2016 at 1:01 PM. Reason : .]

11/4/2016 1:00:33 PM

it kinda is. One of our biggest problems is pretending how awesome this country is when it lags behind in quality of life, education, and corruption.

11/4/2016 1:22:56 PM

believing america is exceptional

believing america still has a lot to improve upon

these are not mutually exclusive ideas

11/4/2016 2:08:26 PM

i think you're not using the term the way other people are.

11/4/2016 2:09:34 PM

Remember when Democrats were all about change and Republicans called them unpatriotic for implying anything was wrong with our country?

11/4/2016 2:12:52 PM

i know what people mean when they try to use it to denigrate people who believe in american exceptionalism.

but given clinton wants to still promote improvements in health care, social issues, education, etc, it's pretty obvious she's not of that implied mindset.

in reality, the term is just something easy for a person who can't make a real argument to throwa around. a progressive dog whistle, if you would.

[Edited on November 4, 2016 at 2:14 PM. Reason : ,]

11/4/2016 2:13:38 PM

https://twitter.com/CorrectRecord/status/794584360968159232

Baier apologizing for the flawed reports about clinton foundation indictment he made a few days ago.

11/4/2016 2:21:18 PM

except that she actually believes in american imperialism and exceptionalism and both of those things are actually bad things

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/08/31/hillary_clinton_trump_thinks_american_exceptionalism_is_insulting_to_the_rest_of_the_world.html

Quote :

"HILLARY CLINTON: Donald Trump has said very clearly that he thinks 'American Exceptionalism' is insuting to the rest of the world. In fact, when Vladimir Putin --of all people-- criticized American exceptionalism, my opponent agreed with him, saying, I quote: "If you're in Russia, you don't want to hear that America is exceptional." Well maybe you don't want to hear it, but that doesn't mean it is not true. My opponent misses something important. When we say America is exceptional, it doesn't mean that people from other places don't feel deep national pride, just like we do. It means that we recognize America's unique and unparelleled ability to be a force for peace and progress, a champion for freedom and opportunity. Our power comes with a responsibility to lead humbly, thoughtfuly and with a fierce commitment to our values. Because when America fails to lead, we leave a vacuum. That either causes chaos, or other countries or networks rush in to fill the void."

and this is not like a one-off speech, she has a history of supporting these things.

i mean fuck, here is her defending fucking henry kissinger:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-reviews-henry-kissingers-world-order/2014/09/04/b280c654-31ea-11e4-8f02-03c644b2d7d0_story.html

11/4/2016 2:21:47 PM

i see you quoted something, and i assume you're doing that because you think it's bad. but it isn't. like i said. progressive dog whistle.

Quote :

"America's unique and unparelleled ability to be a force for peace and progress, a champion for freedom and opportunity. "

there is zero wrong with this sentence. but there is also zero in this sentence that claims we are doing this all the time and doing it right. it's that we have an ability to do all these things other countries can't do because of scale.

sweden? great education. great social programs. it does not have the ability to matter fuck all on the global scene as an independent country unless you're talking about economies of scale for shitty flat packed furniture. they can't do shit to ensure peace short of joining on to regional and global alliances. and when they do, they play an important role. but sweden isn't ensuring freedom of naviagtion through the straits of malacca or hormuz


[Edited on November 4, 2016 at 2:49 PM. Reason : .]

11/4/2016 2:43:55 PM

yes some of us here are progressives and think exceptionalism is bad.

i guess you do agree with Trump on at least one thing

11/4/2016 2:47:16 PM

except he doesn't, either. his whole campaign has basically been "america is shit and everyone but me is incapable of making us less than shit"

besides, if he did believe in american exceptionalism, he would be in support of TPP. instead, he and bernie have somehow forced us to run away from taking the lead on developing economies in the pacific rim and are going to allow china to fill that vacuum

[Edited on November 4, 2016 at 2:51 PM. Reason : .]

11/4/2016 2:50:20 PM

Lol oh TPP is coming right back. Don't you worry.

11/4/2016 2:58:34 PM

This election has been such a paradigm shift with both parties. It's been amazing.

American exceptionalism is a cornerstone of conservatism, but its now being touted by the democrat party and dropped by the republican party.

11/4/2016 3:00:10 PM

Democrats are also becoming the party of war.

11/4/2016 3:01:14 PM

Democrats have been a party of war for a long time now. Predating HRC as Secretary of State. Only were against any war when it became politically expedient.

Hard to argue she isn't an exceptionalist if you're being objective though she is far less jingoistic than mid-2000's GOP.

11/4/2016 3:03:40 PM

pretty simple to see they just merged into one governing body with two arms

11/4/2016 3:03:48 PM

lol k

11/4/2016 3:07:10 PM

once again goalielax is a great example of why we can't have nice things

even fucking democrats are shills now for american exceptionalism

11/4/2016 3:09:24 PM

I wonder how hard Maddow is gonna suck off Kissinger when he finally croaks.

11/4/2016 3:13:29 PM

Quote :

"even fucking democrats are shills now for american exceptionalism"

there you go with your dog whistle again. american exceptionalism has roots in reality, but it is not a de facto state for the country. there are things America can do that no other western state can do. and there are other aspects of western states the united states needs to ape.

the real reason we can't have nice things is because of people like you who look at everything in fucking binary. you're just the progressive version of the binary dickheads in the GOP who are already promising to impeach clinton and deny a supreme court appointment for the duration of a democratic presidency.

maybe that's a little unfair. earl is that guy. you're alike a standard deviation closer to center than he is

[Edited on November 4, 2016 at 3:19 PM. Reason : .]

11/4/2016 3:17:30 PM

Ideological purism is the worst. Do people even remember what the Democrats were before the Clintons came along?







Oh right, a party that had become completely irrelevant on the national stage.

11/4/2016 3:20:04 PM