Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

"I'm a better person than Donald Trump!"

*liberals swoon*

That's not precisely what I mean lol but I get it...

This isn't the thread to argue about it anyway I shouldn't have brought it up.

I appreciate that the Dems are at least trying to fight for something right now.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, BrickHorn said:

So if appealing to the grouchy toddlers that are the American voting public is the standard

IT IS ABSOLUTELY THE STANDARD and unless you are so insulated in a bubble of privilege that it doesn’t matter to you if the Republic falls, you had better make it literally the most important thing there is.

Rudyard Kipling admired those who could “walk with kings and keep the common good touch.” Lefties disdain the common touch at our national peril. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
24 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Morning Way GIF

I'm not arguing she has any obligation to do anything here but what exactly was her message and why was it the right one?

It was fundamental.

She presented as decent, honest, and not about hate.

Her party and she are for the healthcare programs that already existed to the benefit of many Americans.

She cares about the country. Trump is hardly a bug compared to her. The choice was obvious.

I will guess that you think there was some special magical code message that would have made America see that they were on a path they didn't want to be on. 

It was right there in what you saw.

America voted for the opposite of everything named above. The country identified itself absolutely by the vast majority win of the Trumpists and the acquiescent.

Tactics mattered not a damn. The Americans rejected outright basic values. Laugh at it all you want, but there was no message that would work. The right message is not always the winning message.

  • Hook 'Em 8
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Horn Dog said:

Exactly.  The filibuster is a farce.  The majority has repeatedly made exemptions whenever they really really want a law passed or a nominee confirmed.  It is a shield, that is it.  The only reason the pubs have not made an exception for it in this case is cause they think they can do what they want regardless and score some political points in the process.  Furthermore, they know the dems are such pussies and rule followers that they will let them override their entire agenda if they ever return to power with this stupid rule.   It is a way for the majority to NOT do something, and still get to blame the opposition.  So get rid of it.  It changes nothing except provides an excuse to blame the powerless for the consequences. 

This is a campaign slogan. Go man!  Serious. 

Edited by Biff Tannen
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
20 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

It was fundamental.

She presented as decent, honest, and not about hate.

Her party and she are for the healthcare programs that already existed to the benefit of many Americans.

She cares about the country. Trump is hardly a bug compared to her. The choice was obvious.

I will guess that you think there was some special magical code message that would have made America see that they were on a path they didn't want to be on. 

It was right there in what you saw.

America voted for the opposite of everything named above. The country identified itself absolutely by the vast majority win of the Trumpists and the acquiescent.

Tactics mattered not a damn. The Americans rejected outright basic values. Laugh at it all you want, but there was no message that would work. The right message is not always the winning message.

I don't disagree with most of this, but again I should not have brought it up this is the wrong thread.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
27 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

IT IS ABSOLUTELY THE STANDARD and unless you are so insulated in a bubble of privilege that it doesn’t matter to you if the Republic falls, you had better make it literally the most important thing there is.

Rudyard Kipling admired those who could “walk with kings and keep the common good touch.” Lefties disdain the common touch at our national peril. 

Mel Brooks Morons GIF

  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, Chewbacca said:

America rejected Kamala because she's black and a woman.  And she was tied too closely to Biden's policies.

But she was far and away the better candidate.  The country would be in a very different (and better) place today if she had been elected.

And here we fucking go...

Corporate showpony Dems right now...

are-they-v0-r99sx1s9lsie1.webp

Posted
7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

And here we fucking go...

Corporate showpony Dems right now...

are-they-v0-r99sx1s9lsie1.webp

You trying to tell me there isn't a shitload of misogyny and racism in America today?  Trump's made it OK to be a shitbag again.

Posted (edited)
56 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

The Rock Shut Up GIF

Her and many others threw in their lot with the Democratic establishment in an active attempt to combat actual energetic grassroots movement specifically in order to protect the wealth of massive corporatized industry. My interest in hearing from any Democratic Party power-player or 2020-primary-sellout is below 0%.

Wouldn't it be great now if there was any kind of youthful energy on the "left" side of this thing? Nah, at least she got her bite at the apple along with the other sellout losers.

Say something bold. Propose something meaningful. Don't just pat yourself smugly on the back you fucking jackals.

*She and many others

Edited by Huckleberry
Double post somehow still possible in 2025
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

Can someone explain the sombrero thing to me? I'm assuming the answer is "It doesn't make sense but humorless fucks gonna humorless fucks". 

Posted
6 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Pennies make dollars, and defense and corporations are actually purposeful.   

Knew this was going to be the predictable response.  But it always fails.  Because everyone knows that the DOGE never looked into it.  They never bothered with the department that was failing audits.  Because, no one was actually interested in rooting out waste, fraud, or abuse.  Defense is purposeful, DARPA is a wonderful developer of technology that we all enjoy.   But feeding and educating people is also purposeful.  Tomorrows workers are not going to be here if we do not develop them.  If you think highly of the American military might, you might want people smart enough and healthy enough to fill those roles in the future, unless you want them to recruit Russian style.  

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Red Five said:

Can someone explain the sombrero thing to me? I'm assuming the answer is "It doesn't make sense but humorless fucks gonna humorless fucks". 

Racism

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
1 minute ago, Derka said:

y’all are in here arguing with people who believe that everything is fine right now, and that kamala harris being a black woman had nothing to do with her losing the presidential election to the antichrist. perhaps consider that these people are beyond redemption, and are complete lost causes. jesus christ could come down from heaven and tell them that they are completely wrong and they would just say, “when did heaven get so woke?”. maybe stop engaging these fatuous twerps.

Nope. Engage them and call them what they are. They are un-American and cucks to a fat, child raping dictator. Call balls and strikes. Keep doing it until they bow up or wilt and continue to fight for your country. They stand on the shakiest of ground. They will live a life of shame if we continue to fight for the very constitution they disavow. This is a turning point between reality and falsehoods. The rubber will hit the road at some point. Stand fast.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
11 hours ago, Derka said:

y’all are in here arguing with people who believe that everything is fine right now, and that kamala harris being a black woman had nothing to do with her losing the presidential election to the antichrist. perhaps consider that these people are beyond redemption, and are complete lost causes. jesus christ could come down from heaven and tell them that they are completely wrong and they would just say, “when did heaven get so woke?”. maybe stop engaging these fatuous twerps.

spacer.png

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

No, I said "she’s one of the most toxic and inept politicians I’ve ever seen."  Hillary Clinton is the most toxic and inept. But Warren is cancerous, because since she is positioned as a leader in the Democratic party, even though her bad habits and poor instincts matasticize into other parts of the party and cost votes. 
 

More toxic to America? Of course. More toxic politically to their own party? The only one who comes close is Ted Cruz, who I compared Warren to. She's as damaging to her party's brand as he is to the GOP. 

No, We need more people like her serving as appointees, which is why I said "She should have stayed in the appointee lane like Samantha Power." Usually the best appointees make for middling to bad candidates/elected officials.  What you are asking for is a "cultural shift" away from elections being what they have always been, in all places at all times: popularity contests. Democrats need to accept reality and treat them that way, not attempt cultural shift through tone deafness.
 


No, we need serious people who can win elections.  

Oh this is straight bullshit, you know what I meant.  She Warren and Hillary were never even in the top 10 of the 50 of the most toxic politicians in our lifetimes, which includes people responsible for manufacturing wars.   You are just falling for the right-wing misogyny bullshit that has been foisted upon the American public, targeting Hillary since her husband was elected, largely because she wasn't a passive first lady who limited herself to picking out new curtains and flatware.

Ted Cruz is not Toxic to the GOP.  He might not be likeable to the general electorate, but the fucker keeps winning in Texas and they haven't stopped inviting him to speak/show up no matter that he was caught high-fiving the fucking over of our first responders/veterans.  

Cultural shift is setting expectations for who and where.  Do I really need to explain this?

Edited by Nivek
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)

@Nivek you are missing the point. When I talk about Warren’s toxicity, I’m talking about the negative electoral drag her influence exerts on the rest of the party, and since her “leadership” on bitcoin played a decisive role in making Trump president, it’s hard to argue otherwise. And Hillary Clinton’s largely unearned influence did the same thing.  

And you seem to understand the point, but choose to ignore it, since you seem to think that Ted Cruz is liked by Republicans and R-leans, which is flatly incorrect. He’s mostly tolerated. 

So no, I am not falling for right-wing anything. What I am doing is humbling myself to the reality of the situation and what the data tells me, regardless of whether it confirms my worldview or aspirations. The fact that the Democratic Party doesn’t have the strategic discipline to do the same is the primary reason I don’t really identify with it anymore. 
Hope is great, but it’s not a strategy. Neither is disdain. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
20 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Pennies make dollars, and defense and corporations are actually purposeful.   

Another thing I failed to address.  This week Bessant was caught admitting how we fucked over American farmers with tariffs, then Argentina won that business from America, and now we are propping up their government and subsidizing their farming of soybeans at our taxpayers expense.     

Last term, Trump took $28 billion from tax money to pay the farmers for the damage he caused.   Redistribution of wealth.

This term, he is reportedly looking at sending them $10 billion from the tax money collected to pay farmers for the damage he caused.  Redistribution of wealth. 

For a party that cries about redistributing of wealth, you certainly have no qualms about stealing tax money from urban regions and using it to pay for the poor rural folks to not work, to not sell goods, to not support their own communities. 

If American farmers can't make a go of it, fuck em.  Let someone else do their job.  Or are you some sort of commie?  

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Nivek said:

Another thing I failed to address.  This week Bessant was caught admitting how we fucked over American farmers with tariffs, then Argentina won that business from America, and now we are propping up their government and subsidizing their farming of soybeans at our taxpayers expense.     

Last term, Trump took $28 billion from tax money to pay the farmers for the damage he caused.   Redistribution of wealth.

This term, he is reportedly looking at sending them $10 billion from the tax money collected to pay farmers for the damage he caused.  Redistribution of wealth. 

For a party that cries about redistributing of wealth, you certainly have no qualms about stealing tax money from urban regions and using it to pay for the poor rural folks to not work, to not sell goods, to not support their own communities. 

If American farmers can't make a go of it, fuck em.  Let someone else do their job.  Or are you some sort of commie?  

Fatty votes on an exclusively tribal basis, Most Republicans do. 
can we talk about the shutdown on the shutdown thread?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

When I talk about Warren’s toxicity, I’m talking about the negative electoral drag her influence exerts on the rest of the party, and since her “leadership” on bitcoin played a decisive role in making Trump president, it’s hard to argue otherwise. 


Warren's stance on bitcoin made Trump president? LMAO. 99.99% of voters couldn't tell you her stance or give a shit about bitcoin. 

Edited by Covri
  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, Nivek said:

Oh this is straight bullshit, you know what I meant.  She Warren and Hillary were never even in the 10 50 of the most toxic politicians in our lifetimes, which includes people responsible for manufacturing wars.   You are just falling for the right-wing misogyny bullshit that has been foisted upon the American public, targeting Hillary since her husband was elected, largely because she wasn't a passive first lady who limited herself to picking out new curtains and flatware.

Ted Cruz is not Toxic to the GOP.  He might not be likeable to the general electorate, but the fucker keeps winning in Texas and they haven't stopped inviting him to speak/show up no matter that he was caught high-fiving the fucking over of our first responders/veterans.  

Cultural shift is setting expectations for who and where.  Do I really need to explain this?

If one wants to trace the toxin the hate engine poured into our political discourse, merely follow the campaign against Hillary Clinton. Lesbian who murdered her male lover and married Bill because she knew that was her best chance to become president herself. And that's the nice stuff that seeped from the American Spectator like pus from a bubo so the megaphones like Brother Rush could quote each as though they were credible. One report said the Bill and Hill were running lesbo gay camps in Arkansas.

For thirty years this went on. She was the origin of zero toxins but the campaign was so relentless that even intelligent people on here who have recognized and abandoned the lie of what the GOP is still can't deprogram themselves from hating her. 

So, well said. 

30 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

@Nivek you are missing the point. When I talk about Warren’s toxicity, I’m talking about the negative electoral drag her influence exerts on the rest of the party, and since her “leadership” on bitcoin played a decisive role in making Trump president, it’s hard to argue otherwise. And Hillary Clinton did the same thing.  

And you seem to understand the point, but choose to ignore it, since you seem to think that Ted Cruz is liked by Republicans and R-leans, which is flatly incorrect. He’s mostly tolerated. 

So no, I am falling for right-wing anything. What I am doing is humbling myself to the reality of the situation and what the data tells me, regardless of whether it confirms my worldview or aspirations. The fact that the Democratic Party doesn’t have the strategic discipline to do the same is the primary reason I don’t really identify with it anymore. 
Hope is great, but it’s not a strategy. Neither is disdain. 

I haven't read all the dialogue between you two, but I think I have a feel for where Bozo comes from.

In this case, toxicity refers to the impact of different individuals on the chances of success for their political party. Bozo is not right-wing. 

I would present Bozo's point (that is, if I get it) a different way. To illustrate how Warren (my favorite candidate first go 'round) or Hillary might be toxic would be to imagine what their presidencies would have been like. Nightmare and Nightmare on Elm Street, respectively. Although their policies and capabilities as leaders in a well-functioning USA would have been outstanding, the target each would present to the toxic right would be crippling.

We were fucked in 2016 because one candidate was a degenerate and the other a red flag to the bovine opposition and their rabid zombie followers. Something on a smaller scale would have happened to Warren. They're stupid cunts who don't know their place with characters besmirched by a shit river of lies flowing from FOX News and shameless GOP elected officials. The most disappointing embracers of this would be GOP white women saying it's too early for a woman.

Paint either of those women black, and you have burning crosses.

I have presumed to interpret Bozo here, I ask forgiveness if I'm off base.

And how 'bout that government shutdown and further development of executive plenary power, huh? Thank God I'm staying out of the weeds and keeping my eye on the ball!

Edited by RomaVicta
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
9 minutes ago, Covri said:


Warren's stance on bitcoin made Trump president? LMAO. 99.99% of voters couldn't tell you her stance or give a shit about bitcoin. 

The crypto industry support was crucial for funding the Trump campaign, along with aligning Musk into Trump’s orbit.  
 

I don’t know that Warren was entirely to blame here (I think @Bozo_Casanova is overlooking how unfriendly the Biden admin was coming off to the crypto industry, although that might also be attributed to Warren’s influence), but that’s the story.  

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
15 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

IT IS ABSOLUTELY THE STANDARD and unless you are so insulated in a bubble of privilege that it doesn’t matter to you if the Republic falls, you had better make it literally the most important thing there is.

For Christ’s sake. You can’t save the Republic from the brainless mob by pandering to the brainless mob. That strategy only ensures the collapse. 

Fascism has been defeated many times, but only by restoring reason and institutional safeguards to politics. It might take years or a generation of suffering. But that’s the only way. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
10 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

The crypto industry support was crucial for funding the Trump campaign, along with aligning Musk into Trump’s orbit.  

Y’all are losing the plot here. I will not dispute that scammers, robber barons, and sociopathic parasites joined forces with the ignorant right wing mob to elect Trump. But caving to their demands is not the brilliant strategy y’all seem to think it is.

You’re basically proposing the political version of the “Let the plague spread so we’ll have herd immunity” theory.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
23 minutes ago, Covri said:


Warren's stance on bitcoin made Trump president? LMAO. 99.99% of voters couldn't tell you her stance or give a shit about bitcoin. 

No, and thank you for asking because it’s a great example of how her influence damages the party. The Biden administration essentially took direction on bitcoin and crypto policy and regulatory appointments from her, and the shift of crypto owners towards Trump as a result was decisive

 

Quote

In the poll of registered voters, 15 percent said that they owned, or had previously owned, cryptocurrencies, NFTs, or similar digital products. Eighty percent of voters say that they have not owned any such assets, and 4 percent say that they don’t know what any of those things are. Crypto owners are disproportionately men (22 percent, versus 9 percent of women), young, and members of racial minority groups. Thirteen percent of white voters say that they’ve owned crypto, compared to 17 percent of Black voters and 22 percent of Hispanics.

“Historically, Republicans have had a hard time reaching young people and people of color,” said Cassino. “Support for cryptocurrencies is very much a wedge issue that could win over voters that otherwise look more like Democrats.”

Republicans are a little more likely to say that they own crypto (18 percent) than Democrats (11 percent), but the difference is not big enough to explain the 24-point swing in Presidential support between crypto owners (Trump +12) and non-owners (Harris +12). Also, self-identified liberals, moderates, conservatives, progressives and MAGA voters are all about equally likely to say that they own cryptocurrencies.

Posted
23 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

I don’t know that Warren was entirely to blame here (I think @Bozo_Casanova is overlooking how unfriendly the Biden admin was coming off to the crypto industry, although that might also be attributed to Warren’s influence), but that’s the story.

Correct. I do attribute it to her influence, but it’s beyond the industry. You can’t operate a middle class political party from a place of hostility to the savings of 20-25% of young, minority, and middle class voters. 

Posted
14 hours ago, Chewbacca said:

You trying to tell me there isn't a shitload of misogyny and racism in America today?  Trump's made it OK to be a shitbag again.

https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2025/06/26/voting-patterns-in-the-2024-election/

PP-2025.6.26_validated-voters_2-01.png?r

If we want to make things all-id.pol all-the-time ("get in there, and make it about you"), then we liberals have some very uncomfortable questions to ask.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

@Nivek you are missing the point. When I talk about Warren’s toxicity, I’m talking about the negative electoral drag her influence exerts on the rest of the party, and since her “leadership” on bitcoin played a decisive role in making Trump president, it’s hard to argue otherwise. And Hillary Clinton’s largely unearned influence did the same thing.  

And you seem to understand the point, but choose to ignore it, since you seem to think that Ted Cruz is liked by Republicans and R-leans, which is flatly incorrect. He’s mostly tolerated. 

So no, I am not falling for right-wing anything. What I am doing is humbling myself to the reality of the situation and what the data tells me, regardless of whether it confirms my worldview or aspirations. The fact that the Democratic Party doesn’t have the strategic discipline to do the same is the primary reason I don’t really identify with it anymore. 
Hope is great, but it’s not a strategy. Neither is disdain. 

Warren is not a national figure she is regional.  She isn't necessary to help someone like Jasmine or AOC to get office.  She isn't or wasn't a drag on Harris.   The bitcoin thing is silly.  It needs to be regulated, the pump/dump or rug pulls common in crypto scams are hurting younger folks and they need protection from their own gullibility.   Her biggest contribution was in the development of the CFPB which could have been great.  She did her part.  She keeps trying to do her part.  Big Tech was always going to go to the republicans, because they are arrogant, live in a bubble, and think they alone can reshape the world in their image.  They morphed and were corrupted by money which made them think their app that created face mustaches was critical to the world order, and not just another beanie baby.  They thought the cash = genius and they were seduced by authoritarianism.   It is why Musk's pivot was never really a surprise.   

I disagree with you about Ted Cruz.  He is not beloved, but he is more than tolerated.  They might not personally like him, but they side with him, help him, and allow him to show up to their events.  That is acceptance, despite what we hear. 

The DP wants the United States to prosper as a democratic state, its citizens to prosper, it is largely happy with maintaining the status quo in doing so and moves slowly, and can sometimes not realize the temperature of the pot of water it rising.  The republicans wipe their ass with the constitution and become an autocratic state.   I identify with the democratic party more than I align with the latter.  Something about tearing families apart, redistribution of wealth from the bottom to the top, and destroying the future seems to motivate me toward the opposition. 

Posted

Yes, moar, moar about how dems are at fault, how they can message better, because that will totally work, and pleeeeeease, can we get more about how bad “the liberals” are if they aren’t liberal enough? 

Posted
1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Fatty votes on an exclusively tribal basis, Most Republicans do. 
can we talk about the shutdown on the shutdown thread?

We know.  and No.  

Posted
17 hours ago, LCHorn said:

I appreciate Warren really trying to bring banks to heel, but the Democrats reliance on policy solutions to all problems is partially what led us here..

This is fucking stunning to me. “Politicians talking policy is part of the problem.” I mean I don’t disagree considering the audience (ie the American electorate) but still. “We have concepts of a plan” was said by the victor during the campaign. Again, stunning.

  • Drool 1
Posted (edited)

 

On 10/1/2025 at 7:02 AM, Bozo_Casanova said:
On 10/1/2025 at 6:44 AM, Bozo_Casanova said:

Nobody dislikes Elizabeth Warren less than Democrat and D-lean unaffiliated voters in her own state. 

Correction: nobody *likes* her less 

 

1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

@Nivek you are missing the point. When I talk about Warren’s toxicity, I’m talking about the negative electoral drag her influence exerts on the rest of the party, and since her “leadership” on bitcoin played a decisive role in making Trump president, it’s hard to argue otherwise. And Hillary Clinton’s largely unearned influence did the same thing.  

And you seem to understand the point, but choose to ignore it, since you seem to think that Ted Cruz is liked by Republicans and R-leans, which is flatly incorrect. He’s mostly tolerated. 

So no, I am not falling for right-wing anything. What I am doing is humbling myself to the reality of the situation and what the data tells me, regardless of whether it confirms my worldview or aspirations. The fact that the Democratic Party doesn’t have the strategic discipline to do the same is the primary reason I don’t really identify with it anymore. 
Hope is great, but it’s not a strategy. Neither is disdain. 

 

I've gone through a ton of your verbal diarrhea about Elizabeth Warren. And as someone that lives in Massachusetts

 

You don't know what the fuck you are talking about at all.

 

Sorry we don't live in an idiot filled state. My state is full of smart people. We like having Senators that are intelligent, well spoken, and educated. GUESS WHAT? In our state she is a person of the people. And she very much represents us.

If you don't think she belongs in the Senate or isn't part of the team - you are shitting on my state in thinking that.

Edited by Captain Ron
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
31 minutes ago, Captain Ron said:

 

 

 

I've gone through a ton of your verbal diarrhea about Elizabeth Warren. And as someone that lives in Massachusetts

 

You don't know what the fuck you are talking about at all.

 

Sorry we don't live in an idiot filled state. My state is full of smart people. We like having Senators that are intelligent, well spoken, and educated. GUESS WHAT? In our state she is a person of the people. And she very much represents us.

If you don't think she belongs in the Senate or isn't part of the team - you are shitting on my state in thinking that.

She had my vote in the primary precisely because she talked policy and how to correct some of the excesses of American capitalism. It’s the same shit that every female candidate faces. Too bossy, too emotional, just plain unlikable, etc., etc., etc. It’s clear to me the next nominee has to be a straight white male. I hate it but that’s the only chance. Newsom isn’t my favorite but he’s playing the game and is also capable in my opinion of effective governance. I like Buttegeig way better, but you know, gay, and probably talks too much policy for this stupid af country.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

I’ve had several recent conversations with friends who are falling into the same trap as Bozo. “My rational, educated buddies want to support Democrats, but can’t bring themselves to do it because of [insert anti-woke propagandist canard of the week].”

The problem isn’t Democrats. The problem is your friends are fucking stupid. Stop indulging them. Stop being polite. Lead. Help them understand that what they’re hearing and seeing is bullshit propaganda designed to have them doing exactly what they’re doing: staying on the sidelines while fascists take control. 

Posted
49 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Yes, moar, moar about how dems are at fault, how they can message better, because that will totally work, and pleeeeeease, can we get more about how bad “the liberals” are if they aren’t liberal enough? 

image.gif.fb2f4b2540a4e3eb62f9d7bf0cd49280.gif

Posted
2 hours ago, Covri said:


Warren's stance on bitcoin made Trump president? LMAO. 99.99% of voters couldn't tell you her stance or give a shit about bitcoin. 

I don’t know about a stance, but it’s actually Sacajawea on the coin. 



×
×
  • Create New...