American Politics

Debate about anything going on in the world.
Please remember everyone has their own opinion

Re: American Politics

Postby UFGN » Sun May 26, 2019 12:28 am

Jedi wrote:

One of those where you have to double-check if it's a parody account. Should be used to it by now but it never ceases to amaze me that this is the real world now. Daily reminder that this guy is the most powerful man on the planet. He could cause a nuclear genocide and end all human life on Earth if he wanted to. This guy.


Who's he calling Swampman when his national security advisor is John f***ing Bolton?
Oh he is awful..... but I like him!
User avatar
UFGN
SE13
SE13
 
Posts: 18171
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 1:46 pm
Location: London, init

Re: American Politics

Postby LMAO » Sun May 26, 2019 7:56 am

Jedi wrote:


Paraphrasing Stephen Hawking: People who boast about IQ are losers.
User avatar
LMAO
Dennis Bergkamp
Dennis Bergkamp
 
Posts: 6481
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:53 pm

Re: American Politics

Postby LMAO » Thu May 30, 2019 6:12 am

If anyone is interested, here's the polling about a month out from the first Democratic primary debates (June 26 and 27 in Miami):
Biden - 38%
Sanders - 20%
Warren - 9%
Harris, Buttigieg - 7%
O'Rourke - 4%
Booker - 3%
Castro, Klobuchar, Gillibrand, Yang, Hickenlooper, Gabbard, Delaney, Inslee, Ryan, Swalwell, Williamson - ≤1%
User avatar
LMAO
Dennis Bergkamp
Dennis Bergkamp
 
Posts: 6481
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:53 pm

Re: American Politics

Postby Royal Gooner » Thu May 30, 2019 7:51 am

Biden will probably get the nomination as people will see him as a proxy for Obama.
User avatar
Royal Gooner
Bertie Mee
Bertie Mee
 
Posts: 8724
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:38 pm

Re: American Politics

Postby jayramfootball » Mon Jun 10, 2019 5:55 pm

Royal Gooner wrote:Biden will probably get the nomination as people will see him as a proxy for Obama.


My bet is that he won't.
I'm rather hoping someone new steps in - altough not likely - because the current shower are a collection of loonies (with the possible exception of Tulsi Gabbard) .
If no sane person steps up, I think it may be Kamala Harris or Bernie Sanders who wins.
Polling at this stage is not reliable.
We've got our Arsenal back
User avatar
jayramfootball
Thierry Henry
Thierry Henry
 
Posts: 1965
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:58 pm
Location: Midlands UK

Re: American Politics

Postby jayramfootball » Mon Jun 10, 2019 6:02 pm

UFGN wrote:
DiamondGooner wrote:
LMAO wrote:
Royal Gooner wrote:there are just too many Good Ol' Boys in 'Murica that will not let a "communist" into the White House.


tbf we were never going to have a black* president either.

*even though Obama is half-white but one-drop rule y'know


Why does it even matter what colour someone is?

How did that become the mark of whether a President would be good or not? that's just diversity check box ticking and its low brow politics, wheeling out the attraction for the crowd to cheer for.

You got Obama and he was as corrupt as the rest of them, surely that's the mark you should be interested in, is a bad black president better than a good white one and vice versa?

If you did get a full black President he'd be bought and paid for as much as the rest of them, at this moment I din't think it much matters who you get in, their all fked and the ones that aren't like Bernie Sanders won't be allowed through the door, that's your real issue.


It matters because otherwise what you're saying by default is, its absolutely fine that the most powerful person in the country is always a white male aged roughly 40-70 years. Statistically, what are the chances of that person always being the best for the job? Not very likely. Thats why by your own argument, it shouldn't always be a white bloke with grey hair


The US President is elected by the people, not by a diversity panel. It also has absolutely zero to do with who is best for the job.
It's based on who the people of 50 States (actually 52 electoral races) want. If they always want a white person then it should always be a white person. If they always want a black person then it should always be a black person. If the US citizenry was so racist in general, millions of white people would not have voted for Obama, but they did. Colour did not matter to them.
We've got our Arsenal back
User avatar
jayramfootball
Thierry Henry
Thierry Henry
 
Posts: 1965
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:58 pm
Location: Midlands UK

Re: American Politics

Postby Royal Gooner » Mon Jun 10, 2019 11:01 pm

jayramfootball wrote:
UFGN wrote:
DiamondGooner wrote:
LMAO wrote:
Royal Gooner wrote:there are just too many Good Ol' Boys in 'Murica that will not let a "communist" into the White House.


tbf we were never going to have a black* president either.

*even though Obama is half-white but one-drop rule y'know


Why does it even matter what colour someone is?

How did that become the mark of whether a President would be good or not? that's just diversity check box ticking and its low brow politics, wheeling out the attraction for the crowd to cheer for.

You got Obama and he was as corrupt as the rest of them, surely that's the mark you should be interested in, is a bad black president better than a good white one and vice versa?

If you did get a full black President he'd be bought and paid for as much as the rest of them, at this moment I din't think it much matters who you get in, their all fked and the ones that aren't like Bernie Sanders won't be allowed through the door, that's your real issue.


It matters because otherwise what you're saying by default is, its absolutely fine that the most powerful person in the country is always a white male aged roughly 40-70 years. Statistically, what are the chances of that person always being the best for the job? Not very likely. Thats why by your own argument, it shouldn't always be a white bloke with grey hair


The US President is elected by the people, not by a diversity panel. It also has absolutely zero to do with who is best for the job.
It's based on who the people of 50 States (actually 52 electoral races) want. If they always want a white person then it should always be a white person. If they always want a black person then it should always be a black person. If the US citizenry was so racist in general, millions of white people would not have voted for Obama, but they did. Colour did not matter to them.


The race card was played extensively in 2008 by Obama's supporters and followed up in 2012 by more of the same. Having a black candidate is a sure fire way to motivate a large percentage of the ethnic vote who might not have otherwise voted. We know that race card beats sex card and Trump card beats sex card.

Though on the other hand it depends what was needed at the time. Obama got elected because people wanted a feel good president while Trump got elected because people wanted someone who would knuckle down and do the job. Likewise GW Bush was elected because people wanted traditional values after Clinton's sexual adventures.
User avatar
Royal Gooner
Bertie Mee
Bertie Mee
 
Posts: 8724
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:38 pm

Re: American Politics

Postby UFGN » Mon Jun 10, 2019 11:23 pm

jayramfootball wrote:
UFGN wrote:
DiamondGooner wrote:
LMAO wrote:
Royal Gooner wrote:there are just too many Good Ol' Boys in 'Murica that will not let a "communist" into the White House.


tbf we were never going to have a black* president either.

*even though Obama is half-white but one-drop rule y'know


Why does it even matter what colour someone is?

How did that become the mark of whether a President would be good or not? that's just diversity check box ticking and its low brow politics, wheeling out the attraction for the crowd to cheer for.

You got Obama and he was as corrupt as the rest of them, surely that's the mark you should be interested in, is a bad black president better than a good white one and vice versa?

If you did get a full black President he'd be bought and paid for as much as the rest of them, at this moment I din't think it much matters who you get in, their all fked and the ones that aren't like Bernie Sanders won't be allowed through the door, that's your real issue.


It matters because otherwise what you're saying by default is, its absolutely fine that the most powerful person in the country is always a white male aged roughly 40-70 years. Statistically, what are the chances of that person always being the best for the job? Not very likely. Thats why by your own argument, it shouldn't always be a white bloke with grey hair


The US President is elected by the people, not by a diversity panel. It also has absolutely zero to do with who is best for the job.
It's based on who the people of 50 States (actually 52 electoral races) want. If they always want a white person then it should always be a white person. If they always want a black person then it should always be a black person. If the US citizenry was so racist in general, millions of white people would not have voted for Obama, but they did. Colour did not matter to them.


Missing the point entirely

The point is you should aspire to have the best person in that office. If the electorate are only ever given white middle age men to choose then there is less chance of having the best possible president
Oh he is awful..... but I like him!
User avatar
UFGN
SE13
SE13
 
Posts: 18171
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 1:46 pm
Location: London, init

Re: American Politics

Postby DiamondGooner » Tue Jun 11, 2019 4:00 am

None of them are good, including Obama.

They'll never let anyone "good" take power again, they had enough of that with Kennedy.

Last "good person" they let slip into the presidency they had to assassinate because he tried to create another currency so he could pay off the Fed loan and free America from the control of the banks.

........... that's why the Democrats torpedoed Bernie Sanders and they always will.

Colour has nothing to do with it, the President is purely a funded front man.
Image
User avatar
DiamondGooner
Member of the Year 2018
Member of the Year 2018
 
Posts: 18659
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:35 am
Location: At the Gucci store

Re: Mesut Özil (10)

Postby DiamondGooner » Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:51 am

LMAO wrote:
DiamondGooner wrote:
SuperTurrek wrote:Please don't talk politics, clearly you guys don't know what you are talking about.

Stick to talking about football, most of you guys have trouble with that subject as it is.


Agreed.

They throw opinions around like salt, like their sheep mentality actually matters.

Its very easy for the West to run hate campaigns against foreign leaders ............. they're not as good at hiding their corruption as the West are.

Imagine if Erdogan had poisoned his own populaces water supply like America did in Flint Michigan, or of they had a program of locking up black youths for cheap labour in Prisoner work programs, or if they blew up their own Twin Towers (which is a strong possibility based on investigations).

I mean just think if Erdogan was working his way around the Middle East starting genocidal wars for profit and stealing Oil? Libya, Syria, IraQ, Afghanistan.

The West definitely has better marketing I give them that much.

Here we bring you democracy ............ levels an entire city block killing women and children ........ on our news channels "why are they mad, we gave them democracy?" ......... then inserts puppet Gov't and strips the country of resources.

All in a days work .......... but Erdogan though.


>>>They throw opinions around like salt

>>>they blew up their own Twin Towers (which is a strong possibility based on investigations)

Oh dear :doh:

You can take this to the American Politics topic if you'd like to destroy me with FACTS and LOGIC.


Two things .............

I didn't say they did I said there are multiples of people who say they did and I mean Americans.

Secondly when someone show's me that building 3 collapsed even when it hadn't been struck by anything and when they show the steel beams melted with corrosives and a construction expert tells everyone that sort f heat isn't possible from just fire ............. then excuse me for listening.

Lots of people have said loads of dodgy stuff was happening, I wouldn't put it passed your Gov't at all.
Image
User avatar
DiamondGooner
Member of the Year 2018
Member of the Year 2018
 
Posts: 18659
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:35 am
Location: At the Gucci store

Re: Mesut Özil (10)

Postby Goonerz » Wed Jun 12, 2019 7:14 pm

DiamondGooner wrote:
SuperTurrek wrote:Please don't talk politics, clearly you guys don't know what you are talking about.

Stick to talking about football, most of you guys have trouble with that subject as it is.


Agreed.

They throw opinions around like salt, like their sheep mentality actually matters.

Its very easy for the West to run hate campaigns against foreign leaders ............. they're not as good at hiding their corruption as the West are.

Imagine if Erdogan had poisoned his own populaces water supply like America did in Flint Michigan, or of they had a program of locking up black youths for cheap labour in Prisoner work programs, or if they blew up their own Twin Towers (which is a strong possibility based on investigations).

I mean just think if Erdogan was working his way around the Middle East starting genocidal wars for profit and stealing Oil? Libya, Syria, IraQ, Afghanistan.

The West definitely has better marketing I give them that much.

Here we bring you democracy ............ levels an entire city block killing women and children ........ on our news channels "why are they mad, we gave them democracy?" ......... then inserts puppet Gov't and strips the country of resources.

All in a days work .......... but Erdogan though.

This is some Alex Jones / Info-Wars kind of territory. Pure American Right Wing paranoia stuff.

Flat Earthers. Alien Abductions. Government deep state trying to poison and eliminate us. Obama is not an American citizen (Birther movement). Michelle Obama is a man. White genocide. All Liberals are of the devil. Atheists Eat babies. Snake oil, Etc kind of territory.

Mate, wow. :redface:
New Day, New Era, New Start. Come On You The Arsenal.
User avatar
Goonerz
Ian Wright
Ian Wright
 
Posts: 963
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2015 5:33 pm

Re: Mesut Özil (10)

Postby Goonerz » Wed Jun 12, 2019 7:35 pm

Nuggets wrote:
theHotHead wrote:You plum! No foreign Arsenal fan can tell me - a born and bred North Londoner how to feel about Tottenham when I have lived it all my life. Clown. You know f**k all about the rivalry!!

I don't see Ozil's army of followers decoupling themselves from following him on social media. Surely there would be something reported about it. But no, Ozil still has his army of fans. So tell me exactly who it is a bad look to, cos from where I am sitting, nobody but you cares about it. I didn't see him lose any sponsorship over it either.



WTF are you so aggressive ? you have the right name ....theHotHead FFS chill out a bit people can have different opinions to you without you going on one, you are becoming boring now, I used to like reading your posts but now all I read is aggression. :Peace:

Personality disorder. A bit like Trump.
New Day, New Era, New Start. Come On You The Arsenal.
User avatar
Goonerz
Ian Wright
Ian Wright
 
Posts: 963
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2015 5:33 pm

Re: Mesut Özil (10)

Postby theHotHead » Wed Jun 12, 2019 8:36 pm

DiamondGooner wrote:
Suprnova wrote:
theHotHead wrote:
Suprnova wrote:
Nuggets wrote:
theHotHead wrote:You plum! No foreign Arsenal fan can tell me - a born and bred North Londoner how to feel about Tottenham when I have lived it all my life. Clown. You know f**k all about the rivalry!!

I don't see Ozil's army of followers decoupling themselves from following him on social media. Surely there would be something reported about it. But no, Ozil still has his army of fans. So tell me exactly who it is a bad look to, cos from where I am sitting, nobody but you cares about it. I didn't see him lose any sponsorship over it either.



WTF are you so aggressive ? you have the right name ....theHotHead FFS chill out a bit people can have different opinions to you without you going on one, you are becoming boring now, I used to like reading your posts but now all I read is aggression. :Peace:


This! 100% every time i post, he starts a never ending back and forth, hes wrong 90% of the time also.

Thats because you write bare rubbish and I call it out. Nothing more, nothing less. As for being wrong 90% of the time, :rofll:

Yeah right !


Nah i just think outside the box, i'm not a black and white thinker like yourself.

There is 'absolute rubbish' and there is 'difference in opinion' but you kick off everytime someone says something you disagree with, you usually come out on top cos i just leave it (so do most others)

I really can't be bothered to go back and forth with you all day long when you think your way of thinking is the only way, like saying 'Giroud is a spearhead goal scoring number 9 who is just shit as his job' :rofll: , or your rant earlier in the year when i said 'ozil does not fit our playstyle', literally 3-4 pages, all of which got deleted by the mods, utter waste of time and energy.

After your 4th or 5th raving tirade i usually think, f**k this guy and move on to the next, cos it seems you are allowed, if not encouraged to do it, like you have some kind of forum gimmick to gob everyone off, mostly new posters.

I actually stopped using the forums for a few months cos you were on me everytime i posted, even if i backed it up with multiple links.

Crack on harassing people you sad bastard :) you should change your name from TheHotHead to 'Cancereous' cos thats what you are around here.


lolol

Post of the month.

Tbf HotHead I told you about this the other week .......... you need to calm down.

You don't win a prize for being "right" you know ........ and if you did your cupboard would be barer than Arsenals trophy cabinet.

You told me to calm down LOOOOOOOOL !!! Thats a freekin classic. coming from someone that can't win an argument on the internet then offers to meet them in public to fight them. :rofll:

Freekin classic. Just like Tony Blair being made Peace Envoy in the Middle East. You couldn't make this shit up. Ok, whatever "champ" :rofll:
User avatar
theHotHead
David Rocastle
David Rocastle
 
Posts: 5672
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 12:44 am
Location: Norf Landon

Re: Mesut Özil (10)

Postby theHotHead » Wed Jun 12, 2019 8:40 pm

Goonerz wrote:
DiamondGooner wrote:
SuperTurrek wrote:Please don't talk politics, clearly you guys don't know what you are talking about.

Stick to talking about football, most of you guys have trouble with that subject as it is.


Agreed.

They throw opinions around like salt, like their sheep mentality actually matters.

Its very easy for the West to run hate campaigns against foreign leaders ............. they're not as good at hiding their corruption as the West are.

Imagine if Erdogan had poisoned his own populaces water supply like America did in Flint Michigan, or of they had a program of locking up black youths for cheap labour in Prisoner work programs, or if they blew up their own Twin Towers (which is a strong possibility based on investigations).

I mean just think if Erdogan was working his way around the Middle East starting genocidal wars for profit and stealing Oil? Libya, Syria, IraQ, Afghanistan.

The West definitely has better marketing I give them that much.

Here we bring you democracy ............ levels an entire city block killing women and children ........ on our news channels "why are they mad, we gave them democracy?" ......... then inserts puppet Gov't and strips the country of resources.

All in a days work .......... but Erdogan though.

This is some Alex Jones / Info-Wars kind of territory. Pure American Right Wing paranoia stuff.

Flat Earthers. Alien Abductions. Government deep state trying to poison and eliminate us. Obama is not an American citizen (Birther movement). Michelle Obama is a man. White genocide. All Liberals are of the devil. Atheists Eat babies. Snake oil, Etc kind of territory.

Mate, wow. :redface:

Let me get this straight, and this is probably a question for another section, you do know 3 buildings collapsed on 9/11, right ?? and you do know that nothing hit that 3rd building for it to collapse, right ? Just making sure you know, before you stick your head further out from behind the wall and make yourself look even sillier.
User avatar
theHotHead
David Rocastle
David Rocastle
 
Posts: 5672
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 12:44 am
Location: Norf Landon

Re: American Politics

Postby jayramfootball » Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:13 pm

UFGN wrote:
jayramfootball wrote:
UFGN wrote:
DiamondGooner wrote:
LMAO wrote:
Royal Gooner wrote:there are just too many Good Ol' Boys in 'Murica that will not let a "communist" into the White House.


tbf we were never going to have a black* president either.

*even though Obama is half-white but one-drop rule y'know


Why does it even matter what colour someone is?

How did that become the mark of whether a President would be good or not? that's just diversity check box ticking and its low brow politics, wheeling out the attraction for the crowd to cheer for.

You got Obama and he was as corrupt as the rest of them, surely that's the mark you should be interested in, is a bad black president better than a good white one and vice versa?

If you did get a full black President he'd be bought and paid for as much as the rest of them, at this moment I din't think it much matters who you get in, their all fked and the ones that aren't like Bernie Sanders won't be allowed through the door, that's your real issue.


It matters because otherwise what you're saying by default is, its absolutely fine that the most powerful person in the country is always a white male aged roughly 40-70 years. Statistically, what are the chances of that person always being the best for the job? Not very likely. Thats why by your own argument, it shouldn't always be a white bloke with grey hair


The US President is elected by the people, not by a diversity panel. It also has absolutely zero to do with who is best for the job.
It's based on who the people of 50 States (actually 52 electoral races) want. If they always want a white person then it should always be a white person. If they always want a black person then it should always be a black person. If the US citizenry was so racist in general, millions of white people would not have voted for Obama, but they did. Colour did not matter to them.


Missing the point entirely

The point is you should aspire to have the best person in that office. If the electorate are only ever given white middle age men to choose then there is less chance of having the best possible president


I think you have missed the point. In the last 3 US elections, of the 6 candidates who could reasonable win, Obama ( a black man) won twice and a woman ran once and lost. Thats 3 times white male candidates (Trump, Romney, McCain), twice a black male candidate (Obama twice) and 1 woman (Clinton). So the entire premise of your argument is false.

There is also nothing wrong with always having a white male President - if that is what the people vote for. The voting makes the outcome exactly right for the country.
We've got our Arsenal back
User avatar
jayramfootball
Thierry Henry
Thierry Henry
 
Posts: 1965
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:58 pm
Location: Midlands UK

PreviousNext

Return to The Big Debate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: UFGN and 1 guest