Jump to content
The King of Hate Forums

Politics General - The Road To The 2020 Presidential Election (Biden vs. Trump)


Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, dsfan324 said:

He's only doing this to get sympathy points from the idiots who watch him. All those comments from his drones caring more about PDP's reputation than about the incident and acting likes he's the biggest victim here.

He and his fanbase are disgusting.

Generally speaking, big 'youtubers' tend to have a group of hardcore fans that will protect and idolize blindly their role model, even at the cost of their own sanity and dignity, (if they have, to begin with). I don't watch Pewdiepie, but I know about the stereotype of his fanbase, (angry kids on the Internet that barely can think on their own), so would you say that this stereotype applies to the majority/all of them, or do you think that your claim "his fanbase are disgusting" is a hyperbole and a bold generalization?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I see this as the death throes of the democrat party, its an act of desperation. They have no platform, no able candidate to go against Trump so they're seeking to nullify the last election in the hop

Senate voted to save Net Neutrality 

Biden holds a drive in event and the parking lot quickly fills with Trump supporters. LOL  

Posted Images

44 minutes ago, MoraMoria said:

so would you say that this stereotype applies to the majority/all of them, or do you think that your claim "his fanbase are disgusting" is a hyperbole and a bold generalization?

I think there's something very wrong with anyone who watches him, especially who's a hardcore fan of him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

BREAKING: After a 2 year investigation U.S. Attorney General William Barr and deputy Rod Rosenstein conclude Mueller's findings are "not sufficient" to prove Trump committed obstruction-of-justice or collusion with the Russians to rig the 2016 presidential election.

Mueller's investigation, by the numbers:

•More than 2800 subpoenas

•Nearly 500 search warrants

•Obtained more than 230 orders for communication records

•Made 13 requests to foreign governments for evidence

•Interviewed approximately 500 witnesses

Edited by Icureditwithmybrain
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...
15 minutes ago, jawmur said:

Figured I'd post this as I saw people doing it on page 1. Not American, Australian.

I don't think that's a great test, maybe it's good to see a very rough approximation, but I don't think the grid has a high level of accuracy.

There's also a problem with the answers, (agree, disagree, strongly agree, strongly disagree), for some polar-questions, (yes or no), like: "All authority should be questioned". If you "agree" with this, are you saying that it is true, for the majority, of any authority, but not all, as opposed to "strongly agree" which would mean all authority? And if you only "agree", which one/s should be left not questioned, and how many?

Then we have: "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". Is this question regarding the death penalty, amongst other issues, or to a less extreme degree? There's no way to answer this properly just with that.

Then: "Good parents sometimes have to spank their children". This one could alter the result since it could go both ways. Someone might "agree/disagree" with this for completely different reasons.

"It’s natural for children to keep some secrets from their parents". Again, there's problems with this. I might agree with it, because I think it's natural, but with proper education and diligence children should trust their parents that know what's best for them, and tell them. Or I might also agree, because children have the right to have their secrets and no one should demand them to tell about it. I could disagree because children are innocent enough to tell their parents, or I could also disagree, because since they're provided with resources, they should behave and obey to such basic things. I don't have much trust in this question.

"Our race has many superior qualities, compared with other races". This makes little sense. There are intelligent people that are from whichever race, being from one 'race' doesn't mean that you'll have a particular quality. These are not blocks, it's a gradient, specially when we talk about humans with great variability because of all the possibilities in their genetic code, even within the same family.

"There is now a worrying fusion of information and entertainment". You might get the same answers from completely different people just because it's technically asking about reality, not your opinion. I might agree because I see that it is true, and I'm opposed to it, or I might also agree, and be fine with it.

"The death penalty should be an option for the most serious crimes". Which are the most serious crimes? I think driving too drunk is a very serious crime, as the consequences could be extreme.

"Abstract art that doesn’t represent anything shouldn’t be considered art at all". This might just come down as personal preference, (unrelated to anything pertinent in this context).

"Astrology accurately explains many things" & "Some people are naturally unlucky". I know people from both spectrums that could agree on this, and some from the same that would disagree with eachother, (and agree/disagree for the same/different reasons, without having an impact on their political ideology).

There's more to this, but that's my opinion and analysis of it so far, I hope that I made some sense.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, MoraMoria said:

I don't think that's a great test, maybe it's good to see a very rough approximation, but I don't think the grid has a high level of accuracy.

There's also a problem with the answers, (agree, disagree, strongly agree, strongly disagree), for some polar-questions, (yes or no), like: "All authority should be questioned". If you "agree" with this, are you saying that it is true, for the majority, of any authority, but not all, as opposed to "strongly agree" which would mean all authority? And if you only "agree", which one/s should be left not questioned, and how many?

 Then we have: "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". Is this question regarding the death penalty, amongst other issues, or to a less extreme degree? There's no way to answer this properly just with that.

 Then: "Good parents sometimes have to spank their children". This one could alter the result since it could go both ways. Someone might "agree/disagree" with this for completely different reasons.

"It’s natural for children to keep some secrets from their parents". Again, there's problems with this. I might agree with it, because I think it's natural, but with proper education and diligence children should trust their parents that know what's best for them, and tell them. Or I might also agree, because children have the right to have their secrets and no one should demand them to tell about it. I could disagree because children are innocent enough to tell their parents, or I could also disagree, because since they're provided with resources, they should behave and obey to such basic things. I don't have much trust in this question.

"Our race has many superior qualities, compared with other races". This makes little sense. There are intelligent people that are from whichever race, being from one 'race' doesn't mean that you'll have a particular quality. These are not blocks, it's a gradient, specially when we talk about humans with great variability because of all the possibilities in their genetic code, even within the same family.

"There is now a worrying fusion of information and entertainment". You might get the same answers from completely different people just because it's technically asking about reality, not your opinion. I might agree because I see that it is true, and I'm opposed to it, or I might also agree, and be fine with it.

"The death penalty should be an option for the most serious crimes". Which are the most serious crimes? I think driving too drunk is a very serious crime, as the consequences could be extreme.

"Abstract art that doesn’t represent anything shouldn’t be considered art at all". This might just come down as personal preference, (unrelated to anything pertinent in this context).

"Astrology accurately explains many things" & "Some people are naturally unlucky". I know people from both spectrums that could agree on this, and some from the same that would disagree with eachother, (and agree/disagree for the same/different reasons, without having an impact on their political ideology).

There's more to this, but that's my opinion and analysis of it so far, I hope that I made some sense.

Completely agree with everything you've said.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

So, I don't know much about politics, or pay close attention to it, unless it's something big, but... What is this about Yang's proposal?

https://www.yang2020.com/what-is-freedom-dividend-faq/

Just rhetorical, but that's weird. And then I saw this on minute 3:09:03, (cannot embed this video), when he said that he would give 1K$ to 10 American families each month, during an entire year. After that, some people laughed for some reason.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UWVO0Trd1c

What's the point of this? If your plan is solid you don't need to do these things, specially before a debate, it seems kind of cheap to me, ironically enough.

And of course when it comes to politics, usually it all sounds the same to me, nice sounding, rehearsed lines that will most likely let people down. Makes me sleepy...

W.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 12/19/2019 at 1:29 AM, Icureditwithmybrain said:

I see this as the death throes of the democrat party, its an act of desperation. They have no platform, no able candidate to go against Trump so they're seeking to nullify the last election in the hopes that it will decrease Trumps incumbent advantage. This will most likely blow up in their face.

spoken like an idiot, the republican party is the party in its death throes, and trump is their chance to steal as much money as possible from taxpayers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah democrats are fucked, Impeachment isn't going to mean much when Trump gets reelected. Literally nobody likes any of the democrats running for 2020.

On 12/19/2019 at 1:29 AM, Icureditwithmybrain said:

This will most likely blow up in their face.

Gonna hit them hard next year, can't wait.

So many critical issues to address in the world and they fill our news headlines with garbage drama.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
On ‎12‎/‎27‎/‎2019 at 7:55 PM, KGhaleon said:

Yeah democrats are fucked, Impeachment isn't going to mean much when Trump gets reelected. Literally nobody likes any of the democrats running for 2020.

Gonna hit them hard next year, can't wait.

So many critical issues to address in the world and they fill our news headlines with garbage drama.

The majority of the democrats are f***ing pond scum.

 

20 minutes ago, Icureditwithmybrain said:

The first article of impeachment was rejected 48 to 52, and the second article was defeated 47 to 53. And just like that their partisan impeachment attempt blows up in their face.

Good shit

On ‎12‎/‎19‎/‎2019 at 4:29 AM, Icureditwithmybrain said:

I see this as the death throes of the democrat party, its an act of desperation. They have no platform, no able candidate to go against Trump so they're seeking to nullify the last election in the hopes that it will decrease Trumps incumbent advantage. This will most likely blow up in their face.

That's because the democrats (most of them anyway) are pure garbage.

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, MasterOfAwesomeness said:

Article 1 - Abuse of Power - 52-48 in favor of acquittal.  
Article 2 - Obstruction of Congress - 53-47 in favor of acquittal.
Only difference is that Mitt Romney voted Guilty on Article 1, but Not Guilty on Article 2.

Mitt Romney is an idiot.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...