Foo wrote:
Just pointing out I do criticize a large group of republicans.
I don't know of anything you significantly disagree with the Democrats on. Feel free to share.
For me and the Republicans:
- pro-choice
- advocate government completely out of marriage
- push for criminal justice reform through trial
- hard stance on civil rights abuses by trading partners
- would dismantle medicare, medicaid, and SS
we've debated enough that you probably have a good idea of my politics. if that doesn't differ from the democrats, then maybe there is more variety than you wanna admit?
are you pro-choice? it feels like you lean more in the direction of pro-life to me.
I think you pretty much share every democrat position.
Always been pro-choice. I feel if a soulless monster is willing to kill an unborn baby out of convenience, the baby is better off not being forced on them. I am not willing to take care of that baby, so it would be hypocritical to force it onto society.
Foo wrote:
Just pointing out I do criticize a large group of republicans.
I don't know of anything you significantly disagree with the Democrats on. Feel free to share.
For me and the Republicans:
- pro-choice
- advocate government completely out of marriage
- push for criminal justice reform through trial
- hard stance on civil rights abuses by trading partners
- would dismantle medicare, medicaid, and SS
we've debated enough that you probably have a good idea of my politics. if that doesn't differ from the democrats, then maybe there is more variety than you wanna admit?
are you pro-choice? it feels like you lean more in the direction of pro-life to me.
I think you pretty much share every democrat position.
Always been pro-choice. I feel if a soulless monster is willing to kill an unborn baby out of convenience, the baby is better off not being forced on them. I am not willing to take care of that baby, so it would be hypocritical to force it onto society.
then maybe i have a skewed idea of what democrats push for and don't. *shrug*
Foo wrote:
Just pointing out I do criticize a large group of republicans.
I don't know of anything you significantly disagree with the Democrats on. Feel free to share.
For me and the Republicans:
- pro-choice
- advocate government completely out of marriage
- push for criminal justice reform through trial
- hard stance on civil rights abuses by trading partners
- would dismantle medicare, medicaid, and SS
we've debated enough that you probably have a good idea of my politics. if that doesn't differ from the democrats, then maybe there is more variety than you wanna admit?
are you pro-choice? it feels like you lean more in the direction of pro-life to me.
I think you pretty much share every democrat position.
Always been pro-choice. I feel if a soulless monster is willing to kill an unborn baby out of convenience, the baby is better off not being forced on them. I am not willing to take care of that baby, so it would be hypocritical to force it onto society.
then maybe i have a skewed idea of what democrats push for and don't. *shrug*
Maybe you found your fit? Nothing wrong with that.
Foo wrote:
Just pointing out I do criticize a large group of republicans.
I don't know of anything you significantly disagree with the Democrats on. Feel free to share.
For me and the Republicans:
- pro-choice
- advocate government completely out of marriage
- push for criminal justice reform through trial
- hard stance on civil rights abuses by trading partners
- would dismantle medicare, medicaid, and SS
we've debated enough that you probably have a good idea of my politics. if that doesn't differ from the democrats, then maybe there is more variety than you wanna admit?
are you pro-choice? it feels like you lean more in the direction of pro-life to me.
I think you pretty much share every democrat position.
Always been pro-choice. I feel if a soulless monster is willing to kill an unborn baby out of convenience, the baby is better off not being forced on them. I am not willing to take care of that baby, so it would be hypocritical to force it onto society.
then maybe i have a skewed idea of what democrats push for and don't. *shrug*
Maybe you found your fit? Nothing wrong with that.
If zombs really isn't a toe-the-line liberal, I think there might really be a God. :cry:
Foo wrote:
Just pointing out I do criticize a large group of republicans.
I don't know of anything you significantly disagree with the Democrats on. Feel free to share.
For me and the Republicans:
- pro-choice
- advocate government completely out of marriage
- push for criminal justice reform through trial
- hard stance on civil rights abuses by trading partners
- would dismantle medicare, medicaid, and SS
we've debated enough that you probably have a good idea of my politics. if that doesn't differ from the democrats, then maybe there is more variety than you wanna admit?
are you pro-choice? it feels like you lean more in the direction of pro-life to me.
I think you pretty much share every democrat position.
Always been pro-choice. I feel if a soulless monster is willing to kill an unborn baby out of convenience, the baby is better off not being forced on them. I am not willing to take care of that baby, so it would be hypocritical to force it onto society.
then maybe i have a skewed idea of what democrats push for and don't. *shrug*
Maybe you found your fit? Nothing wrong with that.
Democrats narrowly taking the house is considered a "blue wave"? It's like you guys are following a midterm election for the first time.
This was not a blue wave by any measure. Even Don Lemon and Cenk from the young turds are admitting this isn't a blue wave. They are just happy with a narrow retaking of the house. For a blue wave to occur, it would have to consist of being up 45-60 house seats as CNN, MSNBC and other liberal outlets like the young turds predicted, and potentially retaking the senate. None of these happened. And all the talk of impeachment now that the dems retook the House is absolute nonsense and fuckin' hilarious to me that anybody thinks it's even a possibility. The pattern in midterm elections in the U.S. favors the party that isn't in power. This particular midterm is a favorable battleground for the left. There is always a backlash toward the opposition in this regard and the fact the left underperformed should be alarming to anyone who is team blue. But as we all know, most of them are spin-doctors and create their own version of victory in their minds. This was exactly what I expected to happen in every regard in this midterm. The democrats underperforming, narrowly taking the House while the Republicans obtain either 53 or 54 Senate seats. Bare in mind, this is me ignoring the migrant caravan that Beta O'Male funded, as well as the election fraud in Broward County (again).
I would like to see the alleged maps the Republicans had. I enjoyed watching panelists and Fox News anchors scramble in fear of potentially losing the senate, which was never even up for grabs. Some of the posts in this thread is probably the most ill-informed and hilarious liberal circle jerk I've ever seen.
The dems taking the House by only a narrow margin is a win for Trump. Because not only do we get Nancy Pelosi as SotH (where we get to see her on TV 10x more and where the memes will write themselves), Trump can make a lot of room in his 2020 campaign to run on obstructionism. Not to mention he is going to be live-tweeting the DNC debates (as the sitting president, mind you) while they all tear each other down.
Reign in Blood wrote:You know damn well Seb is special.
That I am.
After multiple losses and massive shifts only a moron would suggest this was a good midterm for Republicans and not a worry for them. The only good news, at this point, is Ohio. Everything else went blue and surged blue.
Reign in Blood wrote:You know damn well Seb is special.
That I am.
After multiple losses and massive shifts only a moron would suggest this was a good midterm for Republicans and not a worry for them.
This is definitely the most attention you've paid to a midterm election. The blue wave is non-existent here, as is the red wall. Whatever party the president is a part of during a midterm election will always consist of a favorable battleground for the opposing party. 45-60 House seats ahead of the Republicans as well as retaking the Senate by a couple of seats is a blue wave. Neither happened. They narrowly took the House and lost seats in the Senate. This is nowhere near a blue wave. Trump now has a platform to run on obstructionism and his next order of business will be replacing Ruth Bader Ginsburg when she retires in January 2019 (because I believe she has early stage Alzheimer's). It will be another female, probably center-left on politics but leans right on guns. There'll be a compromise involved in order to maybe get a few democratic senators on board. It'd be a shorter process than with Kavanaugh if it's a female nominee, by the way. Because there is no risk of the #MeToo movement blind-siding his decision.
Reign in Blood wrote:You know damn well Seb is special.
That I am.
After multiple losses and massive shifts only a moron would suggest this was a good midterm for Republicans and not a worry for them.
This is definitely the most attention you've paid to a midterm election. The blue wave is non-existent here, as is the red wall. Whatever party the president is a part of during a midterm election will always consist of a favorable battleground for the opposing party. 45-60 House seats ahead of the Republicans as well as retaking the Senate by a couple of seats is a blue wave. Neither happened. They narrowly took the House and lost seats in the Senate. This is nowhere near a blue wave. Trump now has a platform to run on obstructionism and his next order of business will be replacing Ruth Bader Ginsburg when she retires in January 2019 (because I believe she has early stage Alzheimer's). It will be another female, probably center-left on politics but leans right on guns. There'll be a compromise involved in order to maybe get a few democratic senators on board. It'd be a shorter process than with Kavanaugh if it's a female nominee, by the way. Because there is no risk of the #MeToo movement blind-siding his decision.
Nonsense. You can’t set absurd expectations and then laugh when they don’t materialize
Reign in Blood wrote:You know damn well Seb is special.
That I am.
After multiple losses and massive shifts only a moron would suggest this was a good midterm for Republicans and not a worry for them.
This is definitely the most attention you've paid to a midterm election. The blue wave is non-existent here, as is the red wall. Whatever party the president is a part of during a midterm election will always consist of a favorable battleground for the opposing party. 45-60 House seats ahead of the Republicans as well as retaking the Senate by a couple of seats is a blue wave. Neither happened. They narrowly took the House and lost seats in the Senate. This is nowhere near a blue wave. Trump now has a platform to run on obstructionism and his next order of business will be replacing Ruth Bader Ginsburg when she retires in January 2019 (because I believe she has early stage Alzheimer's). It will be another female, probably center-left on politics but leans right on guns. There'll be a compromise involved in order to maybe get a few democratic senators on board. It'd be a shorter process than with Kavanaugh if it's a female nominee, by the way. Because there is no risk of the #MeToo movement blind-siding his decision.
Nonsense. You can’t set absurd expectations and then laugh when they don’t materialize
These aren't my expectations, Seb. These are blue wave expectations. My exact expectations actually materialized.
Reign in Blood wrote:You know damn well Seb is special.
That I am.
After multiple losses and massive shifts only a moron would suggest this was a good midterm for Republicans and not a worry for them.
This is definitely the most attention you've paid to a midterm election. The blue wave is non-existent here, as is the red wall. Whatever party the president is a part of during a midterm election will always consist of a favorable battleground for the opposing party. 45-60 House seats ahead of the Republicans as well as retaking the Senate by a couple of seats is a blue wave. Neither happened. They narrowly took the House and lost seats in the Senate. This is nowhere near a blue wave. Trump now has a platform to run on obstructionism and his next order of business will be replacing Ruth Bader Ginsburg when she retires in January 2019 (because I believe she has early stage Alzheimer's). It will be another female, probably center-left on politics but leans right on guns. There'll be a compromise involved in order to maybe get a few democratic senators on board. It'd be a shorter process than with Kavanaugh if it's a female nominee, by the way. Because there is no risk of the #MeToo movement blind-siding his decision.
Nonsense. You can’t set absurd expectations and then laugh when they don’t materialize
These aren't my expectations, Seb. These are blue wave expectations. My exact expectations actually materialized.
