Topic: The DNC, Democrats and Wild Baseless Extrapolation of Election Results

[jason67]

Yep. And to put it simply, it's a fucking cop out when people say "oh, it was a terrible choice of candidates" because that implies that Clinton would have been just as bad a president as Trump. It's giving Trump voters a free pass for the shit they have dumped on the world. Fuck that. Even if Hillary Clinton were every bit as corrupt, duplicitous, charmless and hawkish as her most vehement critics have suggested, she'd still be a million times the president Trump is. This guy still hasn't even fucking grasped the concept of separation of government and the judiciary. He's a fucking moron.

See, this what gets me about the whole thing.

You, me, and even Ronald fuckin McDonald would have made a better president than him, he's terrible. A moron that will eventually mess up so badly he'll hopefully be removed, or worse...

I don't think that anyone who thinks that Hillary was a shite candidate would ever think that she would be as worse as him. And let's be clear on this as I've said in my previous post, she would have been so much better than him, something that a lot of you seem not to understand. Just because people think that she was shite doesn't mean that they are happy that he won.

But how did we ever get into a position where something is bad but the other option is so fuckin terrible that we decide the bad one is the best we have? If you went into a supermarket and the only thing on offer was rotten meat or stale bread what would you think? 'Well I'll take the bread because it tastes horrible as is not good for me but the meat will make me ill or maybe kill me'.

And all I hear on here is 'Well she's messed up many things but she's better than him, that's all we can hope for..blah blah' 'Yes she isn't good but at least she hasn't done this blah blah' 'She's lied but at least her lies have been small blah...'

What we are talking about is the most important job in the world, a job that will affect, not only those in the US but will have repercussions around the world. We're not talking about a petrol station attendant who if they press the wrong button the only bad outcome will be that you're overcharged for fuel..... Pressing the wrong button if you are in charge of nuclear weapons have a few different consequences..

We are paying a lot of money for these dickheads and it's not good enough, end of story.

Would you expect it from your workplace, shopping center, local garage when they service your car? Lifestyle, family or friends? So why when politicians do it you seem to say  'oh well..that's how it is...'

The way forward? fuck knows but to keep voting for a system that is making the bankers richer by the minute and politicians they serve can only be harmful to us.   

 

   

[killer-heels]

Absolutely true, Bernie shouldn't run.

But everyone, including Trump, have been putting it out there for ages that Bernie was robbed of the nomination. Its not a straightforward loss in many peoples eye.

[Something Worse]

But everyone, including Trump, have been putting it out there for ages that Bernie was robbed of the nomination. Its not a straightforward loss in many peoples eye.

A loss is a loss, I'm afraid. Same reason (well, one of many) I was against Hillary running.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

Well maybe it would've been different had Bernie ran as a Democrat.

He refused to do that though didn't he.

[elsewhere]

I am sorry but Elizabeth Warren is pissing me off. Wasn't she one of the biggest supporters of Hillary, now she is coming and admitting it was rigged? WTF was your role then, why didn't you say a word at the time and kept supporting Hillary? This is like those actors saying "oh i knew about those stories, it's really sad" about Weinstein abuses and nevertheless they kept being close friends with him and worked with him for years.

Anyways, I will definitely not vote if these airheads push me nominees like Clinton or Warren. I hated Clinton since she was a nominee against Obama. I followed her campaign very closely and remember very well how big of a selfish, egomaniac and nasty liar she is and how ugly her campaign can get.

If it's Michelle, different story. I'd love her to be the first woman president of the States.

Look at her, Warren, the lady who sold her soul to Clintons for years fucking looks to be devastated that elections are rigged on favor of Clinton. Now she has the guts to call out Clinton, really? I see she was adviced to do so, so that she can be the candidate for 2020.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

But everyone, including Trump, have been putting it out there for ages that Bernie was robbed of the nomination. Its not a straightforward loss in many peoples eye.

he lost by 3 million votes so pretty straight forward, just the regressive minority being fools

[Something Worse]

he lost by 3 million votes so pretty straight forward, just the regressive minority being fools

What's regressive about socialism? Be specific.

[Derzyjudek]

I am sorry but Elizabeth Warren is pissing me off. Wasn't she one of the biggest supporters of Hillary, now she is coming and admitting it was rigged? WTF was your role then, why didn't you say a word at the time and kept supporting Hillary? This is like those actors saying "oh i knew about those stories, it's really sad" about Weinstein abuses and nevertheless they kept being close friends with him and worked with him for years.

Anyways, I will definitely not vote if these airheads push me nominees like Clinton or Warren. I hated Clinton since she was a nominee against Obama. I followed her campaign very closely and remember very well how big of a selfish, egomaniac and nasty liar she is and how ugly her campaign can get.

If it's Michelle, different story. I'd love her to be the first woman president of the States.

Look at her, Warren, the lady who sold her soul to Clintons for years fucking looks to be devastated that elections are rigged on favor of Clinton. Now she has the guts to call out Clinton, really? I see she was adviced to do so, so that she can be the candidate for 2020.

Elizabeth Warren one of Clinton's biggest supporters? Where on earth did you get that nugget? She has criticised her many times and her ideology is completely opposite. She only endorsed her when it was clear Clinton was going to win the primary and campaigned for her like all Democrats did.

And now you are criticising her for telling the truth? It was rigged!

[Lush is the best medicine...]

What's regressive about socialism? Be specific.

im not talking about socialism, its the mouthy ‘progressives’ who think far more people share their views than they actually do and if you don’t agree with them you are an arsehole (see Bernie and how he’d win because he polls well, ignoring that he had no negative campaigning against him, largely as he was a massive help for the GOP for sticking around as long as he did and there is actually a fair bit of dirt on him but they don’t need to use that right now) - young Turks tends to do this a lot, if you’ve ever had the misfortune of watching their aggressive progressives show youd know what I mean about the ‘regressive’ mentality I refer to

[elsewhere]

Elizabeth Warren one of Clinton's biggest supporters? Where on earth did you get that nugget? She has criticised her many times and her ideology is completely opposite. She only endorsed her when it was clear Clinton was going to win the primary and campaigned for her like all Democrats did.

And now you are criticising her for telling the truth? It was rigged!

She was a top Clinton supporter from day one and campaigned for her. She says this damage control stuff now after the fact that it was obvious just to save face within the party, do you think she had no idea? Give me a break. She' throwing her under the bus just for her own political career. Even Democrats in her state knows how proven liar she has been.

And no, I am not criticising her for telling the truth. i'm criticizing her for rigging it with her and not saying a damn word when she was obviously aware and in this thing with her.

[elsewhere]

im not talking about socialism, its the mouthy ‘progressives’ who think far more people share their views than they actually do and if you don’t agree with them you are an arsehole (see Bernie and how he’d win because he polls well, ignoring that he had no negative campaigning against him, largely as he was a massive help for the GOP for sticking around as long as he did and there is actually a fair bit of dirt on him but they don’t need to use that right now) - young Turks tends to do this a lot, if you’ve ever had the misfortune of watching their aggressive progressives show youd know what I mean about the ‘regressive’ mentality I refer to

Off the record, i am a Turkish American myself and i know Cenk Uygur personally. he is a douchebag of the highest order. There is nothing he won't spit to get attention.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

Off the record, i am a Turkish American myself and i know Cenk Uygur personally. he is a douchebag of the highest order. There is nothing he won't spit to get attention.

i used to like them when I first heard of them around a decade ago but ever since the Bernie thing he’s gone to shit, a few on there are good (Michael shure and Ben Mankiewicz are good and the type you can disagree with but respect) but they give increasing amounts of time to dickheads like jimmy dore (who he should have binned off after that Alex jones incident at the RNC a year ago)

For light entertainment stuff they’re ok, but as soon as it gets to Bernie or the democrats they’re totally unwatchable

Btw as you say you know him I’m guessing you know him from a long time ago? Strikes me as the type of guy at college who would argue over anything to prove how great a debater they are only to piss everyone off by week 2

[Derzyjudek]

She was a top Clinton supporter from day one and campaigned for her. She says this damage control stuff now after the fact that it was obvious just to save face within the party, do you think she had no idea? Give me a break. She' throwing her under the bus just for her own political career. Even Democrats in her state knows how proven liar she has been.

And no, I am not criticising her for telling the truth. i'm criticizing her for rigging it with her and not saying a damn word when she was obviously aware and in this thing with her.

I'm sorry but that's just not true.

It's well known that they don't really get on , Warren was scathing about Clinton when she completely flipped her position on the bankruptcy bill and supported wall st after receiving massive donations.

Indeed Warren wrote in one of her books that she had a "ten year war" against that bill and Clinton promised her support only to completely go back on her word when she needed donations, a point Warren made in the same book.

They are complete opposites, Clinton is a corporate neoliberal and Warren is a social democratic.

Warren was completely neutral during the primaries , Clinton was declared presumptive candidate on June 8th , Warren endorsed her on June 9th. She then campaigned for her in the general election like all Democrats did and Bernie Sanders himself did also.

[jooneyisdagod]

im not talking about socialism, its the mouthy ‘progressives’ who think far more people share their views than they actually do and if you don’t agree with them you are an arsehole (see Bernie and how he’d win because he polls well, ignoring that he had no negative campaigning against him, largely as he was a massive help for the GOP for sticking around as long as he did and there is actually a fair bit of dirt on him but they don’t need to use that right now) - young Turks tends to do this a lot, if you’ve ever had the misfortune of watching their aggressive progressives show youd know what I mean about the ‘regressive’ mentality I refer to

That's fair enough but many of the "mouthy progressives" were terming Sanders supporters "Bernie bros", which was an attempt to make it sound like it was all a bunch of white college-educated males that were the core of his support. There are many problems with the regressives, which I think was a term that was first popularised by Maajid Naawaz, but to say that it was the "regressives" that formed the core of Bernie's support would be seriously wrong.

On the Young Turks, it's been ages since I watched anything by them. Cenk is a fucking moron and Ana Kasparian has potential but she needs to get the fuck out of there. And hopefully she doesn't go the route of Dave Rubin, who started out as a sane voice and has now seemingly drunk the kool-aid, which I think is in part due to the immediate alienation that one faces from these regressives as soon as one takes a borderline opposing view.

[Something Worse]

im not talking about socialism, its the mouthy ‘progressives’ who think far more people share their views than they actually do and if you don’t agree with them you are an arsehole (see Bernie and how he’d win because he polls well, ignoring that he had no negative campaigning against him, largely as he was a massive help for the GOP for sticking around as long as he did and there is actually a fair bit of dirt on him but they don’t need to use that right now) - young Turks tends to do this a lot, if you’ve ever had the misfortune of watching their aggressive progressives show youd know what I mean about the ‘regressive’ mentality I refer to

Those damned mouthy regressive progressives, trying to get money out of politics and get equality for the oppressed.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

Those damned mouthy regressive progressives, trying to get money out of politics and get equality for the oppressed.

it was great when they voted for Jill stein wasn’t it? Really helped get money out of politics and the equality for the oppressed...

[Something Worse]

it was great when they voted for Jill stein wasn’t it? Really helped get money out of politics and the equality for the oppressed...

You can Google for yourself to see how wrong, lazy and shitty that post is. I'm not really inclined to educate you any more.

[Derzyjudek]

im not talking about socialism, its the mouthy ‘progressives’ who think far more people share their views than they actually do and if you don’t agree with them you are an arsehole (see Bernie and how he’d win because he polls well, ignoring that he had no negative campaigning against him, largely as he was a massive help for the GOP for sticking around as long as he did and there is actually a fair bit of dirt on him but they don’t need to use that right now) - young Turks tends to do this a lot, if you’ve ever had the misfortune of watching their aggressive progressives show youd know what I mean about the ‘regressive’ mentality I refer to

Could you tell me what this "fair bit of dirt" is they have on Bernie Sanders?

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

[Alan_X]

Could you tell me what this "fair bit of dirt" is they have on Bernie Sanders?

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

It really doesn’t matter what it is. Ed Gillespie is running ads in Virginia about Sanctuary Cities (which don’t exist in Virginia) and MS-13 gangs.

It’s naive to imagine that any future election between a Trump-style candidate on the right and a Bernie-style candidate on the left would be about an open debate on the validity of the policies. The right have seen that dog-whistle issues win elections and simplistic personal attacks undermine left-leaning candidates in ways that don’t apply to the right. 

[Derzyjudek]

It really doesn’t matter what it is. Ed Gillespie is running ads in Virginia about Sanctuary Cities (which don’t exist in Virginia) and MS-13 gangs.

It’s naive to imagine that any future election between a Trump-style candidate on the right and a Bernie-style candidate on the left would be about an open debate on the validity of the policies. The right have seen that dog-whistle issues win elections.

Fair enough, I know the right will do every dirty trick imaginable and it would be very nasty , I have heard before that there are stories about him waiting to be used , would like to know if anyone knows anything about them.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

[Alan_X]

Dona Brazile:

Today’s lesson: Being quoted by Donald Trump means being MIS-quoted by Donald Trump. Stop trolling me. #NeverSaidHillaryRiggedElection

[Lush is the best medicine...]

You can Google for yourself to see how wrong, lazy and shitty that post is. I'm not really inclined to educate you any more.

and that sums it my point beautifully

Could you tell me what this "fair bit of dirt" is they have on Bernie Sanders?

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044

2. The Myth That Sanders Would Have Won Against Trump

It is impossible to say what would have happened under a fictional scenario, but Sanders supporters often dangle polls from early summer showing he would have performed better than Clinton against Trump. They ignored the fact that Sanders had not yet faced a real campaign against him. Clinton was in the delicate position of dealing with a large portion of voters who treated Sanders more like the Messiah than just another candidate. She was playing the long game—attacking Sanders strongly enough to win, but gently enough to avoid alienating his supporters. Given her overwhelming support from communities of color—for example, about 70 percent of African-American voters cast their ballot for her—Clinton had a firewall that would be difficult for Sanders to breach.When Sanders promoted free college tuition—a primary part of his platform that attracted young people—that didn’t mean much for almost half of all Democrats, who don’t attend—or even plan to attend—plan to attend a secondary school. In fact, Sanders was basically telling the working poor and middle class who never planned to go beyond high school that college students—the people with even greater opportunities in life—were at the top of his priority list.So what would have happened when Sanders hit a real opponent, someone who did not care about alienating the young college voters in his base? I have seen the opposition book assembled by Republicans for Sanders, and it was brutal. The Republicans would have torn him apart. And while Sanders supporters might delude themselves into believing that they could have defended him against all of this, there is a name for politicians who play defense all the time: losers.Here are a few tastes of what was in store for Sanders, straight out of the Republican playbook: He thinks rape is A-OK. In 1972, when he was 31, Sanders wrote a fictitious essay in which he described a woman enjoying being raped by three men. Yes, there is an explanation for it—a long, complicated one, just like the one that would make clear why the Clinton emails story was nonsense. And we all know how well that worked out.Then there’s the fact that Sanders was on unemployment until his mid-30s, and that he stole electricity from a neighbor after failing to pay his bills, and that he co-sponsored a bill to ship Vermont’s nuclear waste to a poor Hispanic community in Texas, where it could be dumped. You can just see the words “environmental racist” on Republican billboards. And if you can’t, I already did. They were in the Republican opposition research book as a proposal on how to frame the nuclear waste issue.Also on the list: Sanders violated campaign finance laws, criticized Clinton for supporting the 1994 crime bill that he voted for, and he voted against the Amber Alert system. His pitch for universal health care would have been used against him too, since it was tried in his home state of Vermont and collapsed due to excessive costs. Worst of all, the Republicans also had video of Sanders at a 1985 rally thrown by the leftist Sandinista government in Nicaragua where half a million people chanted, “Here, there, everywhere/the Yankee will die,’’ while President Daniel Ortega condemned “state terrorism” by America. Sanders said, on camera, supporting the Sandinistas was “patriotic.”The Republicans had at least four other damning Sanders videos (I don’t know what they showed), and the opposition research folder was almost 2-feet thick. (The section calling him a communist with connections to Castro alone would have cost him Florida.) In other words, the belief that Sanders would have walked into the White House based on polls taken before anyone really attacked him is a delusion built on a scaffolding of political ignorance.Could Sanders still have won? Well, Trump won, so anything is possible. But Sanders supporters puffing up their chests as they arrogantly declare Trump would have definitely lost against their candidate deserve to be ignored.Which leads back to the main point: Awash in false conspiracy theories and petulant immaturity, liberals put Trump in the White House. Trump won slightly fewer votes than Romney did in 2012—60.5 million compared with 60.9 million. On the other hand, almost 5 million Obama voters either stayed home or cast their votes for someone else. More than twice as many millennials—a group heavily invested in the “Sanders was cheated out of the nomination” fantasy—voted third-party. The laughably unqualified Jill Stein of the Green Party got 1.3 million votes; those voters almost certainly opposed Trump; if just the Stein voters in Michigan had cast their ballot for Clinton, she probably would have won the state. And there is no telling how many disaffected Sanders voters cast their ballot for Trump.  Of course, there will still be those voters who snarl, “She didn’t earn my vote,” as if somehow their narcissism should override all other considerations in the election. That, however, is not what an election is about. Voters are charged with choosing the best person to lead the country, not the one who appeals the most to their egos.If you voted for Trump because you supported him, congratulations on your candidate’s victory. But if you didn’t vote for the only person who could defeat him and are now protesting a Trump presidency, may I suggest you shut up and go home. Adults now need to start fixing the damage you have done.

[Alan_X]

I’d recommend listening to the latest episode of Pod Save America which covers some of this ground and more importantly talks about what Democrats need to do going forward. Guests include the deputy chair of the DNC (Bernie supporter) and Sally Yates.

The presenters were part of Obama’s team and as they pointed out, Hilary would have had the same advantage of being the establishment candidate when she ran against Obama.

[Alan_X]

and that sums it my point beautifully
http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044

And that’s just the stuff that’s real. God knows what the likes of Breitbart the alt-right and the Russian Facebook ads would have come up with - the equivalent of Uranium One, Pizzagate, opponents he’d had murdered. They’d probably have accused him of paedophilia and of course he’s an East Coast, Liberal, Jew which would have played well with the white nationalists.

[Derzyjudek]

and that sums it my point beautifully
http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044

Thanks for that , it's obviously a very biased piece but at least it is informative too , some of those things if true would have the potential to do damage but pale into insignificance compared with the stuff that could be fired back at Trump .

One sentence doesn't make any sense at all

"When Sanders promoted free college tuition—a primary part of his platform that attracted young people—that didn’t mean much for almost half of all Democrats, who don’t attend—or even plan to attend—plan to attend a secondary school. In fact, Sanders was basically telling the working poor and middle class who never planned to go beyond high school that college students—the people with even greater opportunities in life—were at the top of his priority list"

Surely the whole point of that policy is to make it possible for more working poor and middle class to go to college without worrying about debt.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

[Lush is the best medicine...]

Thanks for that , it's obviously a very biased piece but at least it is informative too , some of those things if true would have the potential to do damage but pale into insignificance compared with the stuff that could be fired back at Trump .

trump voters didn’t care if he was a dick, in fact it’s one of his selling points. Btw how is it biased?

One sentence doesn't make any sense at all

"When Sanders promoted free college tuition—a primary part of his platform that attracted young people—that didn’t mean much for almost half of all Democrats, who don’t attend—or even plan to attend—plan to attend a secondary school. In fact, Sanders was basically telling the working poor and middle class who never planned to go beyond high school that college students—the people with even greater opportunities in life—were at the top of his priority list"

Surely the whole point of that policy is to make it possible for more working poor and middle class to go to college without worrying about debt.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

college isn’t an option for a lot of people, such as those who have kids when they’re teenagers and those who aren’t good enough to get the grades and there are those who’d rather work when they’re 18 than spend another 4 years in school with no income or a part time one. People promoting free college/uni often forget that there are loads of people who don’t want to go to it, and a lot prefer to learn on the job not study for 3/4 years

[Derzyjudek]

trump voters didn’t care if he was a dick, in fact it’s one of his selling points. Btw how is it biased?
college isn’t an option for a lot of people, such as those who have kids when they’re teenagers and those who aren’t good enough to get the grades and there are those who’d rather work when they’re 18 than spend another 4 years in school with no income or a part time one.

I think alot of people who voted for Trump were prepared to overlook that sort of thing because they wrongly believed he was an anti  establishment crusader who would look after the "forgotten " as he put it,  now they know that is not the case ,to say the least, I think alot of them will turn against him. The language in the piece is obviously anti Bernie and liberals in general.

The point you make about college may be true but surely it will encourage alot more to do it who otherwise wouldn't of and you can hardly call it an anti poor policy which that sentence appears to do.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

[Lush is the best medicine...]

I think alot of people who voted for Trump were prepared to overlook that sort of thing because they wrongly believed he was an anti  establishment crusader who would look after the "forgotten " as he put it,  now they know that is not the case ,to say the least, I think alot of them will turn against him. The language in the piece is obviously anti Bernie and liberals in general.

The point you make about college may be true but surely it will encourage alot more to do it who otherwise wouldn't of and you can hardly call it an anti poor policy which that sentence appears to do.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

dont think the piece is anti liberal, it’s more anti the Bernie or bust brigade than anything?

As for the anti poor policy, it’s because his signature policy disproportionately helps the better off over the poor?

[Derzyjudek]

dont think the piece is anti liberal, it’s more anti the Bernie or bust brigade than anything?

As for the anti poor policy, it’s because his signature policy disproportionately helps the better off over the poor?

On the contrary,  I'd say the policy will stop the inequality that makes it more likely the better off go to college in the first place and also tackles the massive problem of student debt.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

[Lush is the best medicine...]

On the contrary,  I'd say the policy will stop the inequality that makes it more likely the better off go to college in the first place and also tackles the massive problem of student debt.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

would disagree going off what happens here, England has to pay but Scotland doesn’t but there’s a far higher % of students who are from better off backgrounds in Scotland than England

[Derzyjudek]

would disagree going off what happens here, England has to pay but Scotland doesn’t but there’s a far higher % of students who are from better off backgrounds in Scotland than England

I will take your word for that , if so it makes no sense at all and maybe there are other reasons? So you don't support the Democrats having that policy in their platform?

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

[Elmo!]

I will take your word for that , if so it makes no sense at all and maybe there are other reasons? So you don't support the Democrats having that policy in their platform?

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

As I understand it, there are a limited number of university places, so people from poorer backgrounds are less likely to get the grades to be selected. There have been calls to have lower entry requirements for people from poorer backgrounds.

The argument for fees is that universities in Scotland have to take in a lot of students from rUK and abroad to boost their funding (though there are limits on how many they are allowed to take), reducing the amounts of places for Scottish students.

[stevensr123]

trump voters didn’t care if he was a dick, in fact it’s one of his selling points. Btw how is it biased?
college isn’t an option for a lot of people, such as those who have kids when they’re teenagers and those who aren’t good enough to get the grades and there are those who’d rather work when they’re 18 than spend another 4 years in school with no income or a part time one. People promoting free college/uni often forget that there are loads of people who don’t want to go to it, and a lot prefer to learn on the job not study for 3/4 years

just because people don't want to go to college doesn't mean it shouldn't be an option for at least an affordable price.

Apparently even the interest rates of a student loan is more than it is for a car or a mortgage. Education and knowledge is how society grows, becomes better and how nations more often succeed.

It's the one thing how the western world sets itself apart from most other nations (not like it should be a competition but you get my drift).

Education
Defence
Health.

These are the 3 key things to a good society and guess what? Without education 2 of those things wouldn't work.

The reason why America has succeeded as a nation is because of knowledge. Either bringing through the best or granting citizenship for the best. So it's frankly bizzare they make it so expensive to succeed or don't provide enough funding for it

[Derzyjudek]

As I understand it, there are a limited number of university places, so people from poorer backgrounds are less likely to get the grades to be selected. There have been calls to have lower entry requirements for people from poorer backgrounds.

The argument for fees is that universities in Scotland have to take in a lot of students from rUK and abroad to boost their funding (though there are limits on how many they are allowed to take), reducing the amounts of places for Scottish students.

Thanks for that , so surely a well thought out and properly funded program in the U.S could get past these difficulties.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

[Lush is the best medicine...]

I will take your word for that , if so it makes no sense at all and maybe there are other reasons? So you don't support the Democrats having that policy in their platform?

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

they should support means testing it so the better off pay and help subside the worse off. And fuck off the bullshit colleges like that shite religious one which I can’t think of run by that trump loving knob

just because people don't want to go to college doesn't mean it shouldn't be an option for at least an affordable price.

Apparently even the interest rates of a student loan is more than it is for a car or a mortgage. Education and knowledge is how society grows, becomes better and how nations more often succeed.

It's the one thing how the western world sets itself apart from most other nations (not like it should be a competition but you get my drift).

Education
Defence
Health.

These are the 3 key things to a good society and guess what? Without education 2 of those things wouldn't work.

The reason why America has succeeded as a nation is because of knowledge. Either bringing through the best or granting citizenship for the best. So it's frankly bizzare they make it so expensive to succeed or don't provide enough funding for it

you have to provide options for people, and college isn’t the only place where you can get ‘educated’, and of course if you make it ridiculously easy to get in then the value of having an education massively decreases.

Didn’t know about the interest rates, know it’s very complex how you pay it back. Have found it funny seeing republicans talk about letting private companies do student loans instead of the government, nothing stopping them doing that now like...

[Lush is the best medicine...]

As I understand it, there are a limited number of university places, so people from poorer backgrounds are less likely to get the grades to be selected. There have been calls to have lower entry requirements for people from poorer backgrounds.

and when you have limited places the better off kids have the benefit of things like private tuition, more likely their parents went through the same experience years ago to help them get through it

[Something Worse]

Thanks for that , it's obviously a very biased piece but at least it is informative too , some of those things if true would have the potential to do damage but pale into insignificance compared with the stuff that could be fired back at Trump .

One sentence doesn't make any sense at all

"When Sanders promoted free college tuition—a primary part of his platform that attracted young people—that didn’t mean much for almost half of all Democrats, who don’t attend—or even plan to attend—plan to attend a secondary school. In fact, Sanders was basically telling the working poor and middle class who never planned to go beyond high school that college students—the people with even greater opportunities in life—were at the top of his priority list"

Surely the whole point of that policy is to make it possible for more working poor and middle class to go to college without worrying about debt.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

It's an opinion piece written by a Hillary supporter who's most notable moment this year is getting busted looking at tentacle porn - most of it is conjecture and nonsense.

The idea that everyone who voted for Stein was just an angry BernieBro is a liberal talking point put out there by Hillary supporters like Kurt fucking Eichenwald trying to let Hillary off for being a shitty candidate who ran a shitty campaign.

If you want the other side, the book that came out that broke down exactly how terrible her campaign was and how dumb her entire team was is called Shattered.

[Derzyjudek]

It's an opinion piece written by a Hillary supporter who's most notable moment this year is getting busted looking at tentacle porn - most of it is conjecture and nonsense.

The idea that everyone who voted for Stein was just an angry BernieBro is a liberal talking point put out there by Hillary supporters like Kurt fucking Eichenwald trying to let Hillary off for being a shitty candidate who ran a shitty campaign.

If you want the other side, the book that came out that broke down exactly how terrible her campaign was and how dumb her entire team was is called Shattered.

Excuse my ignorance but tentacle porn? [emoji3]

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

[stevensr123]

Excuse my ignorance but tentacle porn? [emoji3]

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

MOGA?

Make octopus great again haha but yea what the fuck is tentacle porn again

[Something Worse]

Excuse my ignorance but tentacle porn? [emoji3]

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/news.avclub.com/newsweek-s-kurt-eichenwald-was-just-looking-at-tentacle-1798263101/amp

It's an incredible story made even better by Eichenwald corncobbing himself