# Please watch this video about Txxxx and the alt-right.



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 16, 2016)

I posted the following on Facebook, and I hope everyone will watch it and spread it around.

It's several degrees more frightening than I realized. - NB


The following video is about a press conference held by a bunch of disgusting alt-right pigs. Txxxx's campaign "CEO" runs the best known of their websites.

It is really, really alarming. PLEASE watch it. This is fucking serious.

<http://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.msnbc.com%2Frachel-maddow%2Fwatch%2Fracist-groups-encouraged-by-trump-campaign-767297091796&h=eAQFaYq23>

You have to let it play through the second video about the frog symbol.

I don't normally watch Rachel Maddow (slow delivery several times), but my wife recorded it for me to watch - it's that important. More than that, I don't normally like to link videos, because they demand too much time. And I apologize for the commercial you have to sit through.

This is what we're up against. It raises the whole thing to a new level.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 17, 2016)

This is by far the worst thing I've seen this election, and that's saying a lot.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 17, 2016)

Thank God Liberals have the Panthers and Cop killers to balance out extreme racists of the Alt Right.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 17, 2016)

This is deadly serious, Chim, not the time to post the same bullshit about liberals.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Sep 17, 2016)

Trump needs to be forcefully shamed in November. And the alt-right movement needs to be driven from the mainstream and back to extreme fringe status.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 17, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> This is what we're up against. It raises the whole thing to a new level.


That is what the Conservatives in the GOP (many of whom have now left the party) have been up against since the primaries. #NeverTrumpers in the Twitter world deal with this sentiment daily. It's disgusting and vile. Just this morning I was thinking that the worst part of a Trump victory might not be Trump himself. It might be the influence and power of those of his followers who are Alt-Right. the insane, racist, Jew-hating Alt-Right.
I know many conservatives who didn't vote Trump in the primaries and are nothing like the alt-right but will vote for Trump to stop Hillary. But in my mind, that's like voting for the Devil's son to stop the Devil's daughter.


----------



## erica-grace (Sep 17, 2016)

TRUMP

The man's name is Trump. It isn't Txxxx.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 17, 2016)

Michael, yes. His closest advisor is one of these vile people. 

And erica, I won't name that obscene piece of shit publicly and give him even a tiny bit more notoriety. Anyone who votes for him is deplorable.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 17, 2016)

And by the way, Hillary is not the Devil's daughter. She's a candidate you disagree with. Fine. But she's not evil.

Txxxx is the most reprehensible asshole in the country, with the possible exception of his "campaign CEO" and his inbred sons - the one who poses with beautiful tigers he's murdered and the other one who posts Swastikas on Twitter.

Fuck the bloody lot of them. I truly despise them.


----------



## erica-grace (Sep 17, 2016)

No, HC is not the devil's daughter. I don't like her, but Satan's spawn she is not.

What Mrs. Clinton is, however, is a world class, top-notch liar.

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/hillary-clinton/statements/byruling/false/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/19/hillary-clintons-long-list-of-lies/

Not to mention the email situation, her health situation, and lying to the faces of the Benghazi families - literally over their dead bodies in the hangar that day. I for one, am voting Trump.

People that speak the way you do tend to be really hateful people. In a general sense, that is. Not liking Mr. Trump is fine, but when you call him an obscene piece of shit, call people who vote for him deplorable, and attack his children, well, that's going beyond loathing someone - that's downright hate speech, and shows a bloodthirsty malice which is reminiscent of some of the worst leaders this world has known. And personally, I find that type of language disgusting and repugnant. Especially on a music forum... even if this sub-forum is for OT things.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Sep 17, 2016)

erica-grace said:


> What Mrs. Clinton is, however, is a world class, top-notch liar.



Trump out-lies her daily. 

You might as well criticize her for having bad, orange hair.

Then again, this is typical. Trump's policies suck, so their campaign isn't a sales job; it's a hit job.


----------



## muk (Sep 18, 2016)

erica-grace said:


> What Mrs. Clinton is, however, is a world class, top-notch liar.



She is not anywhere near the same league as Trump though, according to the very source you quote. According to PolitiFact 72% of Clinton's statements are half true, mostly true, or true. Trump, however, scores only 30% there. Meaning, according to Politifact, two thirds of his statements are factually wrong. And 19% of Trump's statements are classified as 'Pants on fire' - compared to Clinton's 2%. Every fifth statement PolitiFact gathered from Trump is simply bullshit.

The larger part of Clinton's statements are factually true (72%).
The larger part of Trump's statements are factually wrong (71%). And every fifth statement is pure bullshit.

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/hillary-clinton/


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 18, 2016)

Muk-the insertion of actual facts is simply unfair. Stop these brutal tactics immediately. Leave Donald alooooone!!!!!


----------



## muk (Sep 18, 2016)

Agreed, nowadays who cares about facts anyway? It's such a slippery slope. You agree to believe in facts, and all of a sudden you are supposed to believe scientists as well.

To be fair though, Erica only quoted facts. Hillary Clinton made statements that are factually wrong. Just not anywhere near as many as Trump did.


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 18, 2016)

In which case ideology, er, trumps...facts. If we're upset about lies, it would seem illogical to support the greater liar.


----------



## prodigalson (Sep 18, 2016)

@erica-grace 

you're absolutely right, it's those who object to Drumpf who are the hateful ones... 



http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/04/media/new-york-times-trump-rally-video/

http://www.vox.com/2016/9/12/12882796/trump-supporters-racist-deplorables

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/best-worst-pro-trump-mail-news-article-1.2550547


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 18, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Anyone who votes for him is deplorable.



Cut the crap, Nick. That is simply not true. I know several people who are good people and who do not like Trump at all and did not vote for him in the primaries who will reluctantly vote for him in the primaries simply because they fear Hillary is much worse. Nothing "deplorable" about that.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 18, 2016)

erica-grace said:


> No, HC is not the devil's daughter. I don't like her, but Satan's spawn she is not.
> 
> ...lying to the faces of the Benghazi families - literally over their dead bodies in the hangar that day.



And that's not evil? To flat-out lie about the reason for the attack to a victim's grieving father who is there with his dead son's casket?





erica-grace said:


> People that speak the way you do tend to be really hateful people. In a general sense, that is. Not liking Mr. Trump is fine, but when you call him an obscene piece of shit,



This man consistently insults women based on their appearance, mocked a disabled man, accused a rival's father of being involved in the JFK assassination, bragged about his affairs with married women, objectifies women by saying "young and beautiful piece of ass" and much more. Yet he's not obscene?



erica-grace said:


> that's downright hate speech, and shows a bloodthirsty malice which is reminiscent of some of the worst leaders this world has known. And personally, I find that type of language disgusting and repugnant.



Then why are you going to vote for the man who exhibits those behaviors more than anyone else in the race? Do you keep up with his tweets at all?


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 18, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> And by the way, Hillary is not the Devil's daughter. She's a candidate you disagree with. Fine. But she's not evil.


Maybe you need to remember that stance the next time you are tempted to demonize all Republicans, Nick. They are candidates and people you disagree with.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 18, 2016)

Michael and erika, let me quadrillion down on what I said:

ANYONE WHO VOTES FOR TXXXX IS FAR WORSE THAN DEPLORABLE.

I truly don't give a flying fuck what you think of that or how you rationalize it, but his number one advisor is a top leader of a movement that advocates white supremacy and fascism. They use Nazi symbols.

Ignorance of that is no excuse. I don't care if the people who vote for him are nice or not.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 18, 2016)

And yes, I totally demonize all Republicans, because that party is objectively the biggest problem facing our country.

This is at a completely different level.


----------



## Red (Sep 18, 2016)

Anyone who gets overly mad at another person for voting 1 of the 2 presidential candidates is being played by the media. 
Shouldn't more anger go towards people who don't vote at all, if any?
Is this not a pluralistic society?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 18, 2016)

Nope. You're being lazy. This is very real.


----------



## Red (Sep 18, 2016)

You assume too much.

What's not to say, I may have done more research and have more inside connections to know the truth?

Human rational is a myth. And your Voldemort like treatment of Trump is proving so. Yes paradoxical, I know.

I very much guarantee you, Hillary or Trump it doesn't matter.

I agree with you all that both Hillary and Trump are horrible people that I would never want to hang out with, let alone waste my time thinking about.

But they're not capable of screwing the country over.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 18, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Michael and erika, let me quadrillion down on what I said:
> 
> ANYONE WHO VOTES FOR TXXXX IS FAR WORSE THAN DEPLORABLE.
> 
> ...


You are the one so far up the Democrat Party butt that you can't see anything but hatred for anyone who is not. I think you are a raving lunatic.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 18, 2016)

Nope. You're the one who's being played by the media if that's what you believe. 

(Edit: this was answering Red.)


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 18, 2016)

Michael, you're mistaking extreme outrage at hatred for hatred. Totally different.

Sorry you're incapable of understanding positions more subtle than yours.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 18, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Michael, you're mistaking extreme outrage at hatred for hatred. Totally different.
> 
> Sorry you're incapable of understanding positions more subtle than yours.


I understand your position perfectly.Call it outrage all you want, but in almost every single post you make in this forum you demonize and make vicious sweeping generalizations about Republicans. That is hatred.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 18, 2016)

You've never met me.

My sweeping generalizations are all true, and I'm only calling demons what they are, not creating them.

But garden-variety Republicans are merely idiots. Contrary to what I believed before this story came out, I thought Txxxx was just a cruder manifestation. I mean, for example Bush is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths, millions of refugees, and so on.

No. This is a far more serious disaster in the making, both domestically and internationally.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 18, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> You've never met me.
> 
> My sweeping generalizations are all true, and I'm only calling demons what they are, not creating them.


Read those 2 statements together, over and over if necessary, until the hypocrisy of the 2nd statement hits you.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 18, 2016)

At the top of the Republican platform is the idea that global warming isn't caused by man. That is the definition of idiocy - saying the number one problem facing the planet doesn't exist - before you even get to the other nasty things these foul people advocate. I'm sorry for you that you feel that's hypocrisy and a generalization, but I think it's pretty specific: the Republican party is not a serious political party with a platform worth debating. Worth fighting, yes, but not debating.

That's Republicans. Now I'm talking about Txxxx, which is on another level.

Characterize it any way you want, but any person who votes for a candidate who - apart from being a vle pile of shit in general - chooses a leader of a white supremacist movement, that posts Swastikas... sorry, you don't deserve anything other than unfiltered contempt.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 18, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> I'm sorry for you that you feel that's hypocrisy and a generalization, but I think it's pretty specific: the Republican party is not a serious political party with a platform worth debating. Worth fighting, yes, but not debating.


The hypocrisy I was referring to you was your inference that I shouldn't call you insane or hateful because I "don't know you", but you - in the very next sentence - called all Republicans demons, though you don't know most of them (and by most, I mean more than 99.9%).


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 18, 2016)

What you don't understand is that it's exactly because I'm *not* filled with hate that I have no respect for mean, nasty Republican crap.

And Txxxx is 100% evil. Anyone who even considers voting for him is immoral. Period.


----------



## Baron Greuner (Sep 19, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> You've never met me.



I met you at a garden party at Buckingham Palace and introduced you to the Queen in 1987 didn't I?

You didn't say 'flying fuck' to her after I left did you?


----------



## woodsdenis (Sep 19, 2016)

I think most Trump supporters are amoral, too stupid to actually realise what they are voting for.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 19, 2016)

woodsdenis said:


> I think most Trump supporters are amoral, too stupid to actually realise what they are voting for.


Honestly, I think that many of his true supporters, those who actively promote him and voted for him in the primaries might fit that bill. But there's a whole other lot of people who don't actively support or promote him but will vote for him to stop Clinton. I know some that fit in this group. They are not amoral or stupid. They think it is a "lesser of 2 evils" situation. I have decided not to to vote lesser of 2 evils anymore. I'm going to vote for the candidate I actually want in the White House.


----------



## Baron Greuner (Sep 19, 2016)

woodsdenis said:


> I think most Trump supporters are amoral, too stupid to actually realise what they are voting for.



As opposed to Clinton Foundation supporters you mean Denis?


----------



## woodsdenis (Sep 19, 2016)

Baron Greuner said:


> As opposed to Clinton Foundation supporters you mean Denis?


Whatever HC faults are, and there are many, there is no similarity to the Alt Right influenced DT. You think whatever comes out of the Clinton Foundation maybe bad (there is nothing yet BTW ) what about Trump University, The Trump Foundation, Scamming 9/11 victims, Mafia connections Tax returns etc etc etc.

I do understand that the choice is a bleak one for many, but there is no comparison between the two when it comes to the effect that a DT presidency would have on the whole world. DT is proven liar over and over again.
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/ and I really don't want to see a country I hugely respect taken over by stupid, under educated, racist, white hicks. Do you ?

60% of DT supporters still believe that Obama was born in Kenya and a Muslim. Cmon Baron this is the low level ignorance that we are talking about, all being herded by Trump, Bannon etc. Go read Breitbart and get a sense of them.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 19, 2016)

"Do you mind if I just vent for a second? I sure do get frustrated with the way this campaign is covered.

"One candidate’s family foundation has saved countless lives around the world. The other candidate’s foundation took money other people gave to his charity and then bought a 6-foot-tall painting of himself.

"I mean, at least he had the taste not to go for the 10-foot version!"

- Barack Obama


----------



## Lawson. (Sep 19, 2016)




----------



## dpasdernick (Sep 19, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> What you don't understand is that it's exactly because I'm *not* filled with hate that I have no respect for mean, nasty Republican crap.
> 
> And Txxxx is 100% evil. Anyone who even considers voting for him is immoral. Period.



Sorry to say Nick but you are filled with hate. Anyone reading your posts here can see that plain as day.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 19, 2016)

And how right you are, dpasdernick. That's the first thing anyone who knows me says: that Batzdorf guy is totally filled with hate.

You win with that deeply persuasive post. I now have nothing but love and respect for someone who votes for white supremacist fascist leadership of my country. They're just opinions, and mine is no better than anyone else's.

We'll smile and have a respectful disagreement over whether black people have an average IQ of 85. Lots of brilliant intellectuals agree that we need to build a wall to keep out those Mexican criminals and rapists. Txxxx is the least racist person anyone knows, in fact one of his best friends (Don King) is black.

Voting for him is a perfectly reasonable choice and there's nothing wrong with posting freaking Nazi symbols on Twitter.

Peace, man. I was so wrong to be outraged at that. Who cares about this life anyway.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 19, 2016)

And by the way, I'm not the least bit bothered that Steve Bannon - Txxxx's campaign "CEO" - didn't want his daughter going to Archer School because of all the Jews there.

Yeah, how hateful of me to think that anyone on that side is immoral. There's nothing immoral about anti-Semitism at all. Jees, everyone's so politically correct all the time.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 19, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Yeah, how hateful of me to think that anyone on that side is immoral. There's nothing immoral about anti-Semitism at all. Jees, everyone's so politically correct all the time.


Oh spare me, Mr. Martyr. You didn't say that _some people_ on that side _are immoral_. You didn't say that _anti-semites are immoral_. You said that _everyone_ who votes for Donald Trump is _far worse than deplorable_ and _deserves nothing but unfiltered contempt_. That "everyone" includes those who do not like Trump but are voting for him to stop Hillary.


Nick Batzdorf said:


> Peace, man. I was so wrong to be outraged at that. Who cares about this life anyway.


Surely you don't truly believe that here anyone disagrees with you for being outraged at racism and anti-semitism. If you do truly believe that, you need to go enroll in Comprehension 101.


----------



## G.R. Baumann (Sep 19, 2016)

Nick,

thanks for posting that! I wonder, how easy the establishment can play the public. It may be far fetched, but by having nasty creeps like DT put into political power, I can see the current 1% representing establishment having an easy game in coming elections.

We are presented with two alternatives, none of which I personally consider worth a vote, so in essence such elections are meaningless to me, as they were already meaningless 150 BC when rigged elections were performed to ensure a certain person will hold the next consul position in Rome. Not much changed....

What is of really great concern is the level of international connections these idiots have available today.


----------



## muk (Sep 20, 2016)

Begrudgingly voting for Trump to stop Hillary? That's something I just don't get.

Donald Trump wants to ban a minority from the US because of their religion -> he is a racist.

He wants to kill family members of terrorists -> no words for this. Do you really want guilt by association in the US???

He wants the US army to occupy and plunder foreign territory. -> Nevermind the Geneva Conventions. Trump believes they are holding back the US army from fighting properly.

He wants to bring back torture 'a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding'.

He doesn't rule out the use of nuclear weapons. He believes the US would be better off if Japan, South Korea, and Saudi Arabia developed nuclear weapons.


These are some atrocities you are supporting if you vote 'to stop Hillary'. What exactly has Hillary Clinton said or done that makes it worth to support racism, guilt by association, the possible use of nuclear weapons, suspension of the Geneva Conventions, and torture to stop her? Which of her policies are worse than these?

I understand that politics are usually about opinions, and a presidential election about whether you support republican or liberal policies. But in this particular case some of Trump's positions are inhuman, cruel, atrocious even. Clinton's - you may agree with them or not - are not. So, the real question for any republican this year is: are you willing to support racist positions in order to get republican policies?


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 20, 2016)

muk said:


> I understand that politics are usually about opinions, and a presidential election about whether you support republican or liberal policies. But in this particular case some of Trump's positions are inhuman, cruel, atrocious even. Clinton's - you may agree with them or not - are not. So, the real question for any republican this year is: are you willing to support racist positions in order to get republican policies?


The conservatives I know who don't like Trump but are voting for him in Nov. are doing so because they're scared to death of Hillary.
If you are of liberal political mind, you won't understand that. But believe me, Hillary is a horrible choice for pres, as far as we conservatives are concerned. I could go into detail of the reasons fr this fear, but I'll just say it boils down mainly to national security and SCOTUS. The conservatives I know are not sure what they'll get with Trump, but they know for sure what we'll get with Clinton.
I don't agree with them for choosing one bad over another bad. I tell them "If you don't want either one, vote for neither one". But they are too scared of Hillary.
I'm not going to argue over the points, or whether their fear is merited. I wrote this to help you understand why anyone who doesn't like Trump would vote for Trump. I know these people personally. Two are family members. Contrary to what Nick says, they are not racist, anti-semite or any of that. They are good people who feel boxed in.
Someone else has said he knows Clinton is corrupt, but that he will vote for her to stop Trump. Does that mean he is corrupt like Clinton? No. I respect and like this person. He feels like he has no choice.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 20, 2016)

Anyone who votes for Txxxx is supporting all those things, Michael. And being conservative is not an excuse.

Today's version of conservatism is actually a sociopathological ideology in the first place, but never mind.


----------



## muk (Sep 20, 2016)

Michael I see where they are coming from. I wasn't aware of the Supreme Court debate, thanks for pointing that out.

Personally I still think it is poor judgement. Nothing that I heard of Clinton could possibly endanger the US (and the whole world) more than lax nuclear policies, occupying and plundering US forces... And contrary to what Trump is saying the national crime rate is considerably lower than in the 1990s. That would leave the question what is worse, democrat judges or a racist president?


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 20, 2016)

muk said:


> Michael I see where they are coming from. I wasn't aware of the Supreme Court debate, thanks for pointing that out.
> 
> Personally I still think it is poor judgement. Nothing that I heard of Clinton could possibly endanger the US (and the whole world) more than lax nuclear policies, occupying and plundering US forces... And contrary to what Trump is saying the national crime rate is considerably lower than in the 1990s. That would leave the question what is worse, democrat judges or a racist president?


Thnans for reading what wrote and trying to see where they come from.
It doesn't boil down just to Scotus from them. They are very concerned about National Security and that Hillary Clinton will expand and even increase important of Syrian migrants. They've seen what that's done in Germany, France, Sweden and England, and they want none of that here.
To tell you the truth, I share their concern on that issue and SCOTUS. I've just come to a differing conclusion than them; I do not trust Trump to be any different than Hillary in that respect. Therefore, I will vote 3rd party for President.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 20, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Anyone who votes for Txxxx is supporting all those things, Michael. And being conservative is not an excuse.
> 
> Today's version of conservatism is actually a sociopathological ideology in the first place, but never mind.


Ah, it's nice to see that you may have gone from "everyone who votes Trump is a racist and anti-semite" to "everyone who votes Trump supports racism and anti-semitism".
I'll afford you the same. You are no longer a trafficker of baby parts as well as Iranian nuclear/terrorism financier, you just support trafficking of baby parts as well as Iranian nuclear/terrorism financing.


----------



## Red (Sep 20, 2016)

Anyone who votes for Hxxxxxx is supporting voter fraud, perpetual war economy, government corruption and oligarchy.

Today's version of liberalism is actually a sociopathological ideology in the first place, but never mind.

Oh wait. It still doesn't matter.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 20, 2016)

Too stupid to respond to, Michael.

muk, the debate over the Supreme Court is actually much more serious. Obama nominated a justice for Supreme Court several months ago, and the Republicans are refusing to vote on him. This is yet another reason why that entire party sucks, from the top down - and that's before you get to their policies, which make normal people's blood boil.

This is a shit list. Scroll down to the stuff they believe in. If you're not up on the Supreme Court issue, you may not get the actual implications of this foul agenda. But things like "institution of traditional marriage is the foundation of our society" should be pretty blatant.

It all sounds perfectly legitimate, just as Michael seems perfectly rational - until you actually understand the reality of these policies. You know how it goes: Batzdorf is full of hate for not pretending this is sane.

https://gop.com/platform/


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 20, 2016)

James, the difference is that my position is based on reality and you're just sharting.

While it's unfortunate that a lot of Sanders supporters during the primary were not individual thinkers, liberalism isn't an ism. Conservatism is.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 20, 2016)

LOL yourself.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 20, 2016)

Look at that list of what it means to be a Republican.

Take one of their guiding isms - "small government" - at face value (although it's actually just code for eliminating aid to the needy and lowering taxes at the top).

Do liberals believe in large government as a matter of principle?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 20, 2016)

By the way, I move that LOL-ing as a response to someone be eliminated.

Insult my opinions, call me full of hate, say all liberals are ideologues, Democrats are axe murderers, whatever you want. But "LOL" is a personal attack.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 20, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> By the way, I move that LOL-ing as a response to someone be eliminated.


Wouldn't want to invade any safe spaces, would we?


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 20, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Obama nominated a justice for Supreme Court several months ago, and the Republicans are refusing to vote on him. This is yet another reason why that entire party sucks, from the top down - and that's before you get to their policies, which make normal people's blood boil.


You think that if the Dem Party had control of both houses they would vote on a SCOTUS pick of a final year Republican President? No way. Put that crack pipe down, Nick.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 20, 2016)

Yes, I absolutely do think that. This is beyond the pale, and it's unprecedented.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 20, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Yes, I absolutely do think that. This is beyond the pale, and it's unprecedented.


1992, Joe Biden certainly advocated for not voting for final year president's SCOTUS pick.
But he was just playing around, wasn't he, Nick? They wouldn't have actually done such a thing now-a-days, would they, those cherubs in the Democratic party?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 20, 2016)

You believe what you want to believe, don't you.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/u...for-delaying-supreme-court-picks-in-1992.html

And what I'm saying is that all Republicans suck and all good politicians are Democrats, not that all Democrats are cherubs. They're certainly not.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 20, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> You believe what you want to believe, don't you.



http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/u...for-delaying-supreme-court-picks-in-1992.html

That article proves what I said, and it's from the liberal NY Times, so you know it's not biased against Biden.



Nick Batzdorf said:


> And what I'm saying is that all Republicans suck and all good politicians are Democrats



You believe what you want to believe, don't you?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 20, 2016)

Actually I don't want to believe that. It would be much better if we didn't have one of our two political parties completely off the rails.

And no, that article doesn't prove what you said. It proves that Biden said something that never happened, and he was suggesting it for the future.

Furthermore, the NY Times' news stories are neutral, not liberal. Their editorial positions are liberal - because they deal with reality - but not their news stories. There's this mistaken notion that both sides are equally valid. Not at all.


----------



## Baron Greuner (Sep 20, 2016)

We have an editorial here called The Independent and it is about as independent as my ass. Quotes from any newspaper is a pointless exercise because they all have winged agendas.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 20, 2016)

Well, I have no problem with winged agendas that are for good causes and aren't hidden.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 20, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> And no, that article doesn't prove what you said. It proves that Biden said something that never happened, and he was suggesting it for the future.


Which is exactly what I said; that Biden advocated to do it. Read, Nick. Read.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 20, 2016)

Gawd. You just have to go on and on, don't you.

Biden suggested it for the future years ago. He is one person. It didn't happen. This time your whole party is actually doing it.

That's the difference. 

Now just stop.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 21, 2016)

I never said the Dems had done it. I said you were smoking crack if you think the Dems wouldn't be doing it in the same situation. And nothing you have said makes me think they wouldn't.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 21, 2016)

Clinton has been selected, don't worry.
The White House is already being prepared. All Sharpton already has an office there to maintain civil disorder, historical paintings and statues, silverware and China are being warehoused so HRC can't steal or sell them.
Bill has a separate bedroom with sesperate entrances and a massive double king sized canopy waterbed.

Liberals are freaking out thinking Trump will win.
He will throw it away in exchange for billions in Swiss Francs and a new TV Show for abusing blacks, Asians, Hispanics, Indians and Jews.

100,000,000 people will watch the Trump meltdown debate.
Ratings are historical.
Our foreign owned media will make billions.

So sit back and enjoy the show.


----------



## Baron Greuner (Sep 21, 2016)

Hahahahahah!


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 21, 2016)

Nick: For what it's worth, I agree that it would be an absolute disaster for the Alt Right to take authority in the country. That is why I will vote 3rd party. But you are damned wrong when you say that even reluctant Trump voters are deplorable.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 21, 2016)

Right, it's far too mild a word.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 21, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Right, it's far too mild a word.


You are some piece of work, Nick.


----------



## Aakaash Rao (Sep 21, 2016)

“We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Sometimes we must interfere. When *human lives are endangered*, when *human dignity is in jeopardy*, national borders and sensitivities become irrelevant. Wherever men and women are persecuted because of their *race*, *religion*, or *political views*, that place must - at that moment - become the center of the universe.” -- Elie Wiesel

Trump endangering human lives? Check.
Trump endangering human dignity? Check.
Trump persecuting men and women based on their race, religion, and political views? Check.

Yes, I would characterize Trump supporters *who are fully aware of the extent of the danger he poses to minorities, women, and citizens of other countries *as deplorable.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 21, 2016)

Hillary endangers innocent human lives, and I believe she is just as evil as Trump. But I don't consider deplorable those who are voting for her simply to stop Trump. In fact, I highly respect and like one specific fellow in this forum who will be voting for her.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Sep 22, 2016)

Trump is like an iceberg. Clear signs of racism appear above the surface. Underneath is a giant mass of authoritarianism. Trump doesn't share many policies, but nation-wide stop and frisk is a glimpse of how he would rule.

These two "-isms" go hand in hand. Authoritarians want to be at the head table of the most privileged group. The rules that they advocate don't apply to themselves. The rules apply to "others."

So how do we identify these "others" upon whom the authoritarian stomps his heel? Let's look at the easy identifiers... skin color, gender, language, place of birth, disabilities, and religion. What else could one look at? It's not like we have our SAT scores inked on our foreheads.

And sure enough, Trump has disrespected ALL of these groups: blacks, women, Mexicans, immigrants, the disabled, Muslims, and Jews. Check, check, and check.

Trump is more than a racist, misogynist, and what not. He's a fascist. And deplorable is too kind a word for fascism.

One might not like Hillary. One may believe that she's acted unethically and that she is transparently ambitious. But nobody can claim that she is pushing authoritarian policies. (Yes, she supports a virtual US empire, but hey, welcome to America.)

If you like authoritarianism, Trump is your guy. If you oppose authoritarianism, vote for Hillary. The choice is crystal clear. And it you support Trump and don't like being called an authoritarian or a fascist, stop being so PC.

From a policy point of view, these candidates couldn't be more alike. I could care less about "likability" and these so-called, media-hyped "scandals."

Repeat after me: "Authoritarianism is deplorable. Trump is an authoritarian. Vote for Hillary to defeat authoritarianism."


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 22, 2016)

JonFairhurst said:


> Repeat after me: "Authoritarianism is deplorable. Trump is an authoritarian. Vote for Hillary to defeat authoritarianism."


I can repeat most of that.
"Authoritarianism is deplorable. Trump is an authoritarian. I will not vote for him or for Hillary. I will not vote lesser of 2 evils, particularly because I consider them equally evil."


----------



## JonFairhurst (Sep 22, 2016)

So you don't oppose authoritarianism all that much?

You say they are equally evil. What policy is as evil as fascism?


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 22, 2016)

JonFairhurst said:


> So you don't oppose authoritarianism all that much?
> 
> You say they are equally evil. What policy is as evil as fascism?


No, I said that Trump and Hillary are equally evil. And really, I have to step that back, because I really have no idea who's worse.
And here's what I think of Trump's Authoritarianism. While I do think many of Trump's followers are looking for an authoritarian and king to lead the US into a proud Aryan future, I honestly don't think he has any intention of being president. i have long said I think he's in it to help Hillary win it. I think he's a Trojan Horse masterfully sent to destroy the wimpy and stupid GOP and pave the way for his pal Hillary. And that's what he did.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 22, 2016)

To all: NYC Composer has made some very good points about labeling and demonizing the opposition. I am convicted of my role in this and will try to do better.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 25, 2016)

So every candidate who's not anti-abortion is evil? That's your only criterion?


----------



## Baron Greuner (Sep 25, 2016)

The problem with talking about abortion is that it is typical of non-problem solving. What will happen in the future is that birth control will become mandatory and there will be no need to put women through all that stuff. That's the sad thing about abortion to me. Women tend to get forgotten in the debate.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 25, 2016)

Women are the center of the debate, actually. The reason it's legal is that it's a woman's right to choose, and Hillary is going to do everything she can to protect that right.

But if you think abortion is murder and worse than the devil, you don't see it that way.


----------



## Baron Greuner (Sep 26, 2016)

They're not the centre of the debate at all actually. It's what happens to them and all the peripheral junk around them that generally takes centre stage.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 26, 2016)

I think her putting the entire Middle East in a state of war far outweighs the usual scare tactics that continue to fail election after election.

Add her desire to please investors by bringing refugees from her failed civil war and you have example after example of incompetence due to following others orders providing insulation to the real decision makers.

Thats not leadership, thats a return on an investment not supported by Americans, but rather foreigners.
Tulsi Gabbard and others who actually served thier nation say were providing air cover for Al Queda.

Should I believe a real Liberal or a known liar?

Expect these warm and touchy I am woman, hear me roar (until I get pregnant) arguments to be swatted away like gnats by white supremacist, islamaphode, sexist, massage-o-nist, multi phobist Trump.

Wish they had both candidates in chairs with brain scan and lie detection equipment.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 26, 2016)

Baron, in the United States, Hillary's and my side of the debate - if you call it a debate, since it was settled 40 years ago - is called "pro-choice."

And if you look on this page, you'll see that she talks about protecting women's health and reproductive rights.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/womens-rights-and-opportunity/

Maybe it's different in the UK. It wasn't when I lived there, but that was a long time ago.


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Sep 26, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Baron, in the United States, Hillary's and my side of the debate - if you call it a debate, since it was settled 40 years ago - is called "pro-choice."


So, applying that same logic, that SCOTUS deciding on a case makes a debate settled, I'm sure you will agree that businesses like Hobby Lobby can't be forced to provide contraceptive coverage if it conflicts with their religious beliefs?


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 26, 2016)

I'm pro choice too.
You want an abortion go ahead.
Have the guy you fucked pay for it or your mommy.
Take the 500,000,000 given to planned parenthood and use it for job training for Liberals.


----------



## Soundhound (Sep 26, 2016)

Wow. The great danger in all this, aside from the greatest danger of having Donald Trump become president which is entirely unthinkable, is that the lunatic right fringe which now runs the republican party will seem normal after all this. Dangerous people like Ted Cruz and Paul Ryan will seem reasonable. The country has moved so far to the right, it is essentially unrecognizable.

Republicans have for the last 65 years been way better at politics and spin than the Democrats. The nonsense about Hillary Clinton being untrustworthy is the case in point. It's all a crock, they've been after her from the beginning. The latest piece of nonsense about her health to take one example. She had the flu, she's in the middle of running for president and didn't let the news out. The essentially useless ratings-happy media is complicit to say the least of course, running on about whether she should have been more upfront about it as though they were talking about whether Steph Curry has a bad ankle going into a playoff game. It's deeply, profoundly stupid. FDR hid the fact that he had polio for years, and was the greatest president in the country's history (him or Lincoln, take your pick).

If you vote for Trump, you're either a racist or a moron, you don't count. But where he'll leave the country even if he doesn't win worries me almost as much.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 26, 2016)

"So, applying that same logic, that SCOTUS deciding on a case makes a debate settled, I'm sure you will agree that businesses like Hobby Lobby can't be forced to provide contraceptive coverage if it conflicts with their religious beliefs?"

it's not so much that as that I want them to go fuck themselves.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 26, 2016)

> The country has moved so far to the right, it is essentially unrecognizable.



Soundhound, some of the country has over the past 36 years, but we're also seeing a big progressive surge. "Liberal" is no longer a dirty word, it's now a badge. If you look at the Democratic Party platform, there's cause for celebration.

Part of that may be Bernie Sanders' contribution, part of it is probably the rigged economy (although there's a lot to celebrate about it too), part of it is that the Republican crap policies have failed miserably as predicted.

But I'm not sure that Txxxx represents a move to the right as much as that it appeals to the same stupid instincts all conservatives fall prey to: the security of simple answers to the complicated problems of the world. Conservatives tend to be people who stand around waiting for someone to tell them what to do, who don't want [insert other people] around because they don't want their lives to change. That's especially true of the religious right.

So here comes the perfect guy doing what all fascists do, as I probably ranted in this thread already: stir up fear and resentment ("this country is a disaster, there's crime everywhere, Muslims = evil, Mexicans are rapists... but I'm one of the least racist people around - some of my best friends like Don King are black"); then convince stupid people that the solution is "law and order" - me tough vote for me I go brutalize them, way too much PC around.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 27, 2016)

I'll take those tired lame responses as a vote for Obamas 5 wars and 0% interest on loans to investors.
Meanwhile nothing changes for interest on Liberal student loan debt.
The Sheep cheer.


----------



## Soundhound (Sep 27, 2016)

I don't think it's Trump that moved the country to the right, I think the country moving to the right made Trump possible. It's been a progression of small mindedness, selfishness and dumbing down, from Nixon's racist southern strategy to Reagan's oversimplification as a cover for wholesale sell out to big business to W's 'the guy you want to have a beer with' who took us into the most disastrous war in the country's history (it was Bush and Cheney's doing, Jimmy Priebus, no matter how often you try to blame it on Obama and Clinton), to Palin's shrieking, incomprehensible hysteria, to Trump. What comes after that?!?


----------



## jacobthestupendous (Sep 27, 2016)

Interesting listening on the subject of Pepe:
https://gimletmedia.com/episode/77-the-grand-tapestry-of-pepe/
There's some nuance to the history of the ugly frog meme that Rachel Maddow didn't provide.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 28, 2016)

Jacob, can you summarize it?

Chim:



> I'll take those tired lame responses as a vote for Obamas 5 wars and 0% interest on loans to investors.
> Meanwhile nothing changes for interest on Liberal student loan debt.
> The Sheep cheer.



At least I attack real things, not straw men, when I insult Republicans.

Liberal sheep like me are totally in favor of being able to refinance student debt and also allowing it to be subject to bankruptcy protection. And also limiting the payments to a percentage of income, so that the brightest kids don't all go to Wall St. So who's blocking that? That's a rhetorical question, because you've heard Elizabeth Warren

And if you want the Fed to raise interest rates, are you aware that it would throw people out of work if they did that? That's by design - the idea is to balance employment and inflation, i.e. normally inflation goes up when the unemployment rate is too low and v.v.

Except that we're in a different world today, possibly permanently. Inflation isn't a risk even though the interest rates are nearly zero.

That's why liberal sheep like me are in favor of big public investment - to put everyone back to work. Things are better than they have been, but there are measures of employment (like EPOP, the employment-to-population rate) that are still below pre-crash levels.

But the Fed shouldn't raise interest rates and cause people to lose their jobs.


----------



## jacobthestupendous (Sep 28, 2016)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Jacob, can you summarize it?


Pepe was a character in an indy comic. A panel from that comic made the rounds via 4chan as a meme. It leaked out of 4chan, getting retweeted by several notable celebs; the 4chan trolls didn't like their thing being adopted by pop culture, so they started ironically associating Pepe with all the most terrible things they could think of, which Nazi-style racism is usually the poster child of. Eventually, people who actually sympathize with Nazi ideas non-ironically embraced Pepe as their mascot. That's the TLDR backstory before Rachel Maddow heard of it.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 28, 2016)

Right, I also read an article about it on Vox. Thanks.

At this point it's what it is, and the Swastika that accompanies it on Txxxx's idiot son's tweet has a pretty ugly backstory too.


----------

