Hey, Trump bashers
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in Hey, Trump bashers:
What I don't understand is if the Democratic zip codes are richer as well as being better educated, why is it that they're all characterized as being so stupid and clueless about business?
I never claimed that, did I?
@George-K said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@Doctor-Phibes said in Hey, Trump bashers:
What I don't understand is if the Democratic zip codes are richer as well as being better educated, why is it that they're all characterized as being so stupid and clueless about business?
I never claimed that, did I?
It has been claimed by more than one person here.
-
No, of course most reasonable people (not populist indoctrinaires) know that business is currently woke.
@Horace said in Hey, Trump bashers:
No, of course most reasonable people (not populist indoctrinaires) know that business is currently woke.
"business" is a very broad term.
GE, Honeywell, Siemens and Emerson don't have much in common with Facebook, Google and Twitter, at least in my experience.
-
@Horace said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@xenon said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@Horace said in Hey, Trump bashers:
It's about classism. Some people with certain genetic phenotypes are bound, without awareness, to their revulsion reflex against people they feel to be inferior. Trump has an inferior phenotype, what with the clownish reality shows and all that. So it's just people being people, slaves to their genetic and cultural programming. Pretty boring actually.
How would you classify people that finding him revolting, but still vote for him because of the supreme court or some other policy?
I would classify them as normal, with maybe a slightly better than average ability to think clearly through the revulsion reflex. I have learned to respect the revulsion reflex as an emotional trump card, through the Trump presidency. Average people are slaves to it. Witness NS here.
And below average people still think Trump's shit doesnt stink. Can't wait for the indictments after he's hauled out of the White House.
@nobodyssock said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@Horace said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@xenon said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@Horace said in Hey, Trump bashers:
It's about classism. Some people with certain genetic phenotypes are bound, without awareness, to their revulsion reflex against people they feel to be inferior. Trump has an inferior phenotype, what with the clownish reality shows and all that. So it's just people being people, slaves to their genetic and cultural programming. Pretty boring actually.
How would you classify people that finding him revolting, but still vote for him because of the supreme court or some other policy?
I would classify them as normal, with maybe a slightly better than average ability to think clearly through the revulsion reflex. I have learned to respect the revulsion reflex as an emotional trump card, through the Trump presidency. Average people are slaves to it. Witness NS here.
And below average people still think Trump's shit doesnt stink. Can't wait for the indictments after he's hauled out of the White House.
Typical of a left wing fool. When they can't come up with anything of substance - which is most of the time - they always show you that they think they are superior and of course, republicans are all rich old white men just trying to protect their money.
But the truth is, whatever they accuse you of, they are guilty of themselves. Sock, you're an ass wipe. YOU are the one who is below average. It is the democrats who are busy protecting their income, money made from selling our nation out to the highest bidder. According to you Trump was going to be in prison 2 years ago. Instead, we now know he wasn't guilty of a thing, and it was Hillary and the democrat party who were the guilty ones. Now, Biden has been proven to be corrupt. Yet here you are, the same brainless twit you've always been, blindly carrying water for a political party that is not only corrupt to the core, but don't give a tinker's damn about you.
The level of stupidity you display is disgusting.
-
@Horace said in Hey, Trump bashers:
Obviously it wouldn't be worth my time. Considering you're ultimately a troll and literally nothing else here, other than some occasional and not recent bragging about your small time gigs as a small time musician.
This used to be a piano forum. People like you have shamed anyone who even talks music here. Look at Ax. He posts music and is ridiculed for it. You and a handful of others here are disgusting human beings. I only come here now to feel the outrage. Its stimulating
@nobodyssock said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@Horace said in Hey, Trump bashers:
Obviously it wouldn't be worth my time. Considering you're ultimately a troll and literally nothing else here, other than some occasional and not recent bragging about your small time gigs as a small time musician.
This used to be a piano forum. People like you have shamed anyone who even talks music here. Look at Ax. He posts music and is ridiculed for it. You and a handful of others here are disgusting human beings. I only come here now to feel the outrage. Its stimulating
Then get the fuck out.
-
@Horace said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@xenon said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@Horace said in Hey, Trump bashers:
It's about classism. Some people with certain genetic phenotypes are bound, without awareness, to their revulsion reflex against people they feel to be inferior. Trump has an inferior phenotype, what with the clownish reality shows and all that. So it's just people being people, slaves to their genetic and cultural programming. Pretty boring actually.
How would you classify people that finding him revolting, but still vote for him because of the supreme court or some other policy?
I would classify them as normal, with maybe a slightly better than average ability to think clearly through the revulsion reflex. I have learned to respect the revulsion reflex as an emotional trump card, through the Trump presidency. Average people are slaves to it. Witness NS here.
And below average people still think Trump's shit doesnt stink. Can't wait for the indictments after he's hauled out of the White House.
@nobodyssock said in Hey, Trump bashers:
Can't wait for the indictments
You've been waiting for 3 years because of Russia.
Your patience is awe-inspiring.
-
Trump's indictments have taken roughly as long as Hillary's did. A number of people appeared to become mildly tumescent at the thought of Mrs. Clinton in prison uniform for a period of many months. I'm not sure what it is about the colour orange that excites conservatives so, but there you are.
-
So let's see.... Horace is an intellectual snob, I am a selfish redneck, all republicans are amoral, and Sock is superior to us..
Got it.
Oh hark - do I hear the plaintiff cry of panic and desperation from a fruitcake lefty as it sinks in his thick, tiny brain that his party is about to be toast? Why yes, I believe I do!
Sock, I'll have you know that Horace is not a snob at all. I agree with you that he's intellectually superior to you, but he's far from being a snob. But if he WAS a snob about being smarter than you he'd at least have reason to feel that way - what's your excuse? Would you be considered an ignorant snob?
Redneck... hmmm.... I've noticed that California fruits like you tend to throw the word redneck at anyone from the South. You might want to know that not only does this show you to be ignorant, it shows you to be a bigot as well. I've seen a few redneck over the years, and I'm sorry but I don't qualify. Selfish... hmmm.... I give away more in a year than you make.
So fuck you.
-
Opening Statement
"Through the years, I have been blessed to personally know several Presidents on both sides of the aisle.
All were good people. All loved their country. And all believed in the American Dream."
This is a very good statement. It is frustrating to me when people (both inside and outside this forum board) say that President X "HATES" the US. I think when we had the discussion before, I disputed that and I still do very strongly.
But, in any case, like any celebrity endorser, I am not sure this will make much difference. Do you give more support to Jack Nicklaus endorse of President Trump or more support to Tom Hanks endorse of VP Biden.
What matters is WHO you endorse.
-
@George-K said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@nobodyssock said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@Copper said in Hey, Trump bashers:
Well if rolling stone says so, that ends the discussion.
Typical retort. Dont like the message, shoot the messenger. You really do have much in common with trump. Fucking ostrich
Nothing like making your point with name-calling.
But, seriously, try to find something more current (it's not that hard) on wealth of Red vs Blue states and see how they lean politically.
Look at the big donors that contribute to political campaigns and see where the money goes. That's not hard either.
Slogans are easy, facts are a bit more difficult.
You can start here: https://capitalresearch.org/article/party-one-percent/
Top 300 zip codes nationwide (representing the top 1.4 percent of socio-economic status):
Democrats $71 million
Republicans $47 million
(60 percent Democratic)Big Four metropolitan areas’ zip codes in top 5 percent by socio-economic status:
Democrats $77 million
Republicans $42 million
(65 percent Democratic)Big Four central-city zip codes in top 5 percent of socio-economic status:
Democrats $48 million
Republicans $21 million
(70 percent Democratic)These data are powerful evidence that affluent Americans in the most elite locales contribute significantly more money to Democrats than Republicans. The data also show that Democrats raise a notable chunk of their campaign money in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C. Democratic candidates and party officials attending affluent contributors’ fundraisers evidently have to spend a lot of time in airliners or private jets flying coast to coast across the country, while Republican candidates and party officials have to make significantly more fundraising stops, staggered across the giant landmass of America between the two coasts.
Half a century ago, many liberal commentators argued that Democrats, as the party whose policies allegedly represented the interests of lower-income Americans, had an unfair disadvantage in raising money for campaigns, because they couldn’t compete with Republicans for access to the checkbooks of the wealthy. The data presented here make clear that that argument, regardless of whether it was valid then, has no validity today.
The hypocrisy here is mindnumbing. The resident redneck calls people names here on a daily basis here. Far worse names than ostrich. But his politics align with yours, thus the pass.
@nobodyssock said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@George-K said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@nobodyssock said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@Copper said in Hey, Trump bashers:
Well if rolling stone says so, that ends the discussion.
Typical retort. Dont like the message, shoot the messenger. You really do have much in common with trump. Fucking ostrich
Nothing like making your point with name-calling.
But, seriously, try to find something more current (it's not that hard) on wealth of Red vs Blue states and see how they lean politically.
Look at the big donors that contribute to political campaigns and see where the money goes. That's not hard either.
Slogans are easy, facts are a bit more difficult.
You can start here: https://capitalresearch.org/article/party-one-percent/
Top 300 zip codes nationwide (representing the top 1.4 percent of socio-economic status):
Democrats $71 million
Republicans $47 million
(60 percent Democratic)Big Four metropolitan areas’ zip codes in top 5 percent by socio-economic status:
Democrats $77 million
Republicans $42 million
(65 percent Democratic)Big Four central-city zip codes in top 5 percent of socio-economic status:
Democrats $48 million
Republicans $21 million
(70 percent Democratic)These data are powerful evidence that affluent Americans in the most elite locales contribute significantly more money to Democrats than Republicans. The data also show that Democrats raise a notable chunk of their campaign money in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C. Democratic candidates and party officials attending affluent contributors’ fundraisers evidently have to spend a lot of time in airliners or private jets flying coast to coast across the country, while Republican candidates and party officials have to make significantly more fundraising stops, staggered across the giant landmass of America between the two coasts.
Half a century ago, many liberal commentators argued that Democrats, as the party whose policies allegedly represented the interests of lower-income Americans, had an unfair disadvantage in raising money for campaigns, because they couldn’t compete with Republicans for access to the checkbooks of the wealthy. The data presented here make clear that that argument, regardless of whether it was valid then, has no validity today.
The hypocrisy here is mindnumbing. The resident redneck calls people names here on a daily basis here. Far worse names than ostrich. But his politics align with yours, thus the pass.
You are doing some terrific work here tonight.
I am just about ready to follow you and switch sides.
You are such a persuasive person.
Just give me a little more wisdom.
-
@nobodyssock said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@George-K said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@nobodyssock said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@Copper said in Hey, Trump bashers:
Well if rolling stone says so, that ends the discussion.
Typical retort. Dont like the message, shoot the messenger. You really do have much in common with trump. Fucking ostrich
Nothing like making your point with name-calling.
But, seriously, try to find something more current (it's not that hard) on wealth of Red vs Blue states and see how they lean politically.
Look at the big donors that contribute to political campaigns and see where the money goes. That's not hard either.
Slogans are easy, facts are a bit more difficult.
You can start here: https://capitalresearch.org/article/party-one-percent/
Top 300 zip codes nationwide (representing the top 1.4 percent of socio-economic status):
Democrats $71 million
Republicans $47 million
(60 percent Democratic)Big Four metropolitan areas’ zip codes in top 5 percent by socio-economic status:
Democrats $77 million
Republicans $42 million
(65 percent Democratic)Big Four central-city zip codes in top 5 percent of socio-economic status:
Democrats $48 million
Republicans $21 million
(70 percent Democratic)These data are powerful evidence that affluent Americans in the most elite locales contribute significantly more money to Democrats than Republicans. The data also show that Democrats raise a notable chunk of their campaign money in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C. Democratic candidates and party officials attending affluent contributors’ fundraisers evidently have to spend a lot of time in airliners or private jets flying coast to coast across the country, while Republican candidates and party officials have to make significantly more fundraising stops, staggered across the giant landmass of America between the two coasts.
Half a century ago, many liberal commentators argued that Democrats, as the party whose policies allegedly represented the interests of lower-income Americans, had an unfair disadvantage in raising money for campaigns, because they couldn’t compete with Republicans for access to the checkbooks of the wealthy. The data presented here make clear that that argument, regardless of whether it was valid then, has no validity today.
The hypocrisy here is mindnumbing. The resident redneck calls people names here on a daily basis here. Far worse names than ostrich. But his politics align with yours, thus the pass.
You are doing some terrific work here tonight.
I am just about ready to follow you and switch sides.
You are such a persuasive person.
Just give me a little more wisdom.
@Copper said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@nobodyssock said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@George-K said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@nobodyssock said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@Copper said in Hey, Trump bashers:
Well if rolling stone says so, that ends the discussion.
Typical retort. Dont like the message, shoot the messenger. You really do have much in common with trump. Fucking ostrich
Nothing like making your point with name-calling.
But, seriously, try to find something more current (it's not that hard) on wealth of Red vs Blue states and see how they lean politically.
Look at the big donors that contribute to political campaigns and see where the money goes. That's not hard either.
Slogans are easy, facts are a bit more difficult.
You can start here: https://capitalresearch.org/article/party-one-percent/
Top 300 zip codes nationwide (representing the top 1.4 percent of socio-economic status):
Democrats $71 million
Republicans $47 million
(60 percent Democratic)Big Four metropolitan areas’ zip codes in top 5 percent by socio-economic status:
Democrats $77 million
Republicans $42 million
(65 percent Democratic)Big Four central-city zip codes in top 5 percent of socio-economic status:
Democrats $48 million
Republicans $21 million
(70 percent Democratic)These data are powerful evidence that affluent Americans in the most elite locales contribute significantly more money to Democrats than Republicans. The data also show that Democrats raise a notable chunk of their campaign money in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C. Democratic candidates and party officials attending affluent contributors’ fundraisers evidently have to spend a lot of time in airliners or private jets flying coast to coast across the country, while Republican candidates and party officials have to make significantly more fundraising stops, staggered across the giant landmass of America between the two coasts.
Half a century ago, many liberal commentators argued that Democrats, as the party whose policies allegedly represented the interests of lower-income Americans, had an unfair disadvantage in raising money for campaigns, because they couldn’t compete with Republicans for access to the checkbooks of the wealthy. The data presented here make clear that that argument, regardless of whether it was valid then, has no validity today.
The hypocrisy here is mindnumbing. The resident redneck calls people names here on a daily basis here. Far worse names than ostrich. But his politics align with yours, thus the pass.
You are doing some terrific work here tonight.
I am just about ready to follow you and switch sides.
You are such a persuasive person.
Just give me a little more wisdom.
Part of it is that he still hasn't gotten over it that I told him anyone who would play a keyboard that hangs around your neck is a pussy.
-
@Copper said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@nobodyssock said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@George-K said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@nobodyssock said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@Copper said in Hey, Trump bashers:
Well if rolling stone says so, that ends the discussion.
Typical retort. Dont like the message, shoot the messenger. You really do have much in common with trump. Fucking ostrich
Nothing like making your point with name-calling.
But, seriously, try to find something more current (it's not that hard) on wealth of Red vs Blue states and see how they lean politically.
Look at the big donors that contribute to political campaigns and see where the money goes. That's not hard either.
Slogans are easy, facts are a bit more difficult.
You can start here: https://capitalresearch.org/article/party-one-percent/
Top 300 zip codes nationwide (representing the top 1.4 percent of socio-economic status):
Democrats $71 million
Republicans $47 million
(60 percent Democratic)Big Four metropolitan areas’ zip codes in top 5 percent by socio-economic status:
Democrats $77 million
Republicans $42 million
(65 percent Democratic)Big Four central-city zip codes in top 5 percent of socio-economic status:
Democrats $48 million
Republicans $21 million
(70 percent Democratic)These data are powerful evidence that affluent Americans in the most elite locales contribute significantly more money to Democrats than Republicans. The data also show that Democrats raise a notable chunk of their campaign money in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C. Democratic candidates and party officials attending affluent contributors’ fundraisers evidently have to spend a lot of time in airliners or private jets flying coast to coast across the country, while Republican candidates and party officials have to make significantly more fundraising stops, staggered across the giant landmass of America between the two coasts.
Half a century ago, many liberal commentators argued that Democrats, as the party whose policies allegedly represented the interests of lower-income Americans, had an unfair disadvantage in raising money for campaigns, because they couldn’t compete with Republicans for access to the checkbooks of the wealthy. The data presented here make clear that that argument, regardless of whether it was valid then, has no validity today.
The hypocrisy here is mindnumbing. The resident redneck calls people names here on a daily basis here. Far worse names than ostrich. But his politics align with yours, thus the pass.
You are doing some terrific work here tonight.
I am just about ready to follow you and switch sides.
You are such a persuasive person.
Just give me a little more wisdom.
Part of it is that he still hasn't gotten over it that I told him anyone who would play a keyboard that hangs around your neck is a pussy.
@Larry said in Hey, Trump bashers:
Part of it is that he still hasn't gotten over it that I told him anyone who would play a keyboard that hangs around your neck is a pussy.
Hey, no dissing Herbie Hancock.
-
So let's see.... Horace is an intellectual snob, I am a selfish redneck, all republicans are amoral, and Sock is superior to us..
Got it.
Oh hark - do I hear the plaintiff cry of panic and desperation from a fruitcake lefty as it sinks in his thick, tiny brain that his party is about to be toast? Why yes, I believe I do!
Sock, I'll have you know that Horace is not a snob at all. I agree with you that he's intellectually superior to you, but he's far from being a snob. But if he WAS a snob about being smarter than you he'd at least have reason to feel that way - what's your excuse? Would you be considered an ignorant snob?
Redneck... hmmm.... I've noticed that California fruits like you tend to throw the word redneck at anyone from the South. You might want to know that not only does this show you to be ignorant, it shows you to be a bigot as well. I've seen a few redneck over the years, and I'm sorry but I don't qualify. Selfish... hmmm.... I give away more in a year than you make.
So fuck you.
@Larry said in Hey, Trump bashers:
So let's see.... Horace is an intellectual snob, I am a selfish redneck, all republicans are amoral, and Sock is superior to us..
Got it.
Oh hark - do I hear the plaintive cry of panic and desperation from a fruitcake lefty as it sinks in his thick, tiny brain that his party is about to be toast? Why yes, I believe I do!
Sock, I'll have you know that Horace is not a snob at all. I agree with you that he's intellectually superior to you, but he's far from being a snob. But if he WAS a snob about being smarter than you he'd at least have reason to feel that way - what's your excuse? Would you be considered an ignorant snob?
Redneck... hmmm.... I've noticed that California fruits like you tend to throw the word redneck at anyone from the South. You might want to know that not only does this show you to be ignorant, it shows you to be a bigot as well. I've seen a few redneck over the years, and I'm sorry but I don't qualify. Selfish... hmmm.... I give away more in a year than you make.
So fuck you.
well yeah fixed it for you but you're good, Larry. Thanks for that.
image url)