Hey, Trump bashers
-
Well if rolling stone says so, that ends the discussion.
-
@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
-
@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
@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.
-
@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
@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
Now I feel stupid
-
@George-K said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@nobodyssock said in Hey, Trump bashers:
Hed never make it to nomination on democrat ticket.
And the woman who Biden chose dropped out before the first primary. Talk about electability, LOL.
As long as their guy protects their money
Might want to investigate who is the "Party of the Rich" these days
Dont really need to investigate something that is plain as the sky is blue.
@nobodyssock said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@George-K said in Hey, Trump bashers:
@nobodyssock said in Hey, Trump bashers:
Hed never make it to nomination on democrat ticket.
And the woman who Biden chose dropped out before the first primary. Talk about electability, LOL.
As long as their guy protects their money
Might want to investigate who is the "Party of the Rich" these days
Dont really need to investigate something that is plain as the sky is blue.
2011 article? Seriously?
-
@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
Now I feel stupid
-
@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.
@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.
-
@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:
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 inadvertently, I assume, missed the "fucking" in your comment.
So you criticize the person for doing exactly what you did? Is that what you're saying?
Be better.
If you can.
And thanks for not addressing any of my other points.
-
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?
-
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?
@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?
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
@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.
