It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The Next US President Will Be Gay

page: 3
8
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Zeta Reticuli

Oh please....obvious what she is saying why twist her words?.
Met many bigots on ATS Anne ain't one.
edit on 26-10-2016 by TheKnightofDoom because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

Funny how it's never pointed out how Voting for the Rich Religious White Man just because he's a Rich Religious White Man is said to be voting with a bias.

Vote for someone because he's Black = Racist.
Vote for someone because they're Female = Sexist.
Vote for someone because he's White, Wealthy, Male = Perfectly acceptable and obviously the right choice.

As if nobody voted against Obama simply because he was black??? Come on now....

Voting or not voting for someone based on their genitalia, skin color, etc. is stupid regardless of how it's applied.


(post by Drawsoho removed for political trolling and baiting)

posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 04:00 PM
link   
a reply to: TheKnightofDoom

Obvious?
I admit that line could have two meanings, which is why i asked her to clarify instead of accusing her.
I'm not the only one.



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 04:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: scraedtosleep

Buchanan was, in all likelihood, gay. Or so some historians surmise.


Yeah, he may have been, but at this point in time, historians are so busy trying to out so much of history that I take a lot of their "surmises" with a giant grain of salt. Clearly, I'm sure at least some of the figures of history were, but at the rate we're going, half of recorded history seems to have been.



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 04:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: Tempter

Funny how it's never pointed out how Voting for the Rich Religious White Man just because he's a Rich Religious White Man is said to be voting with a bias.

Vote for someone because he's Black = Racist.
Vote for someone because they're Female = Sexist.
Vote for someone because he's White, Wealthy, Male = Perfectly acceptable and obviously the right choice.

As if nobody voted against Obama simply because he was black??? Come on now....

Voting or not voting for someone based on their genitalia, skin color, etc. is stupid regardless of how it's applied.


Um, you think it's not?!

What do you think calling half of America deplorable is all about? It's being implied you are only voting for the rich white man because you are either racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic or some mix of the above and not simply because you think the other candidate is an amoral crook backing globalist policies that will only benefit the same 1% everyone who is voting for her claims they hate and you would honestly like to see brought down, and since that same cabal sure seems to hate you for not wanting to vote for her ... well ... Michael Moore said best for once in his life.



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 05:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

The president IS gay.



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee
TextI am not voting for Hillary because she is a woman.

I am not voting for Trump because he's not qualified. And he's crazy.



If you vote for Hillary you are either crazy or unable to pay attention. I'm not
arguing with you about Trump. I hate to be manipulated by ridiculous choices.



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 05:21 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

I've never run across that particular thought... Though given what I know of Lincoln, it's not an unreasonable thought. Guess I've got some reading to do... Cool!



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 05:23 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

As I recall, the first time I ran across that idea was in my early teens, if I even was a teen yet. That was long before the trend of historical outing began...certainly before I was aware of it.



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 05:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

What do you think calling half of America deplorable is all about?


Well, first of all she didn't call "half of America" deplorable. She called "half of Trump's supporters" deplorable. Specifically the half of them that ARE Sexist, Racist, Homophobic, Xenophobic, Islamaphobic, etc.

You know, like the Trump supporters who think Hillary is unfit simply because she's a woman. Or who don't like Obama simply because he's Black. That's not all of his supporters are like that obviously, but some are and you know it just as I know it. Regardless of how you try and spin it.

With that being said I really fail to see what point you're trying make in opposition to what I said. Maybe you should try and focus more on the facts of the topic and less on your spun propaganda and personal assumptions.



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 06:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Enderdog
a reply to: Tempter

Who cares? We all know perfectly competent gay people. In fact, they tend toward better competence, overall.


Lol, I hope you are joking.



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 06:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

No, they are correct, we are perfectly competent, and yes, sometimes we have better competence



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 06:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: Tempter

Funny how it's never pointed out how Voting for the Rich Religious White Man just because he's a Rich Religious White Man is said to be voting with a bias.

Vote for someone because he's Black = Racist.
Vote for someone because they're Female = Sexist.
Vote for someone because he's White, Wealthy, Male = Perfectly acceptable and obviously the right choice.

As if nobody voted against Obama simply because he was black??? Come on now....

Voting or not voting for someone based on their genitalia, skin color, etc. is stupid regardless of how it's applied.


I think I should've written more in the OP to explain better. It's clear many of you are not following my statement.


Obama was elected because he received more than 95% of the black vote (a racist vote in itself) as well as a the typical "guilty" whites, on top of the traditional Democrats voter block. He'said truly the affirmative action POTUS.

Now we get Hillary, the only woman with deep enough pockets and the political backing of the corrupted elite and media because she's a woman. IMO you could find a worse woman to vote for. And if you tell me this isn't about her being a woman, just wait till she's elected and watch the banners and tape highlighting the first WOMAN POTUS. It will be rubbed in our faces despite the fact we are told not to consider some es gender (or gender identity) as a defining trait. Typical progressive doubkespeak...

Now, on to 2024, I believe the next great barrier to break down, JUST because it's there to break, will be an openly gay person who again will be hoisted above the rest by the media. Again, JUST because of their identity.

Why the hypocrisy from the left? We keep hearing how these identities are supposed to fade into a homogeneous nothingness, but are constantly reminded if the agenda to uphold them.


It's all rather frustrating.
edit on 26-10-2016 by Tempter because: Clarification

edit on 26-10-2016 by Tempter because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 06:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tempter

Lol, I hope you are joking.


It's not surprising that you can't comprehend the fact that a Gay person would be as competent and a straight person. This is your thread topic after all which has it's roots growing from your own fears and insecurities of competence.

The joke here is you inability to see how we're all on equal terms overall has people. Gay or Straight, Male or Female, Black or white has nothing to do with one's potential or competence in the context of being a political leader.



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 06:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: Tempter

Lol, I hope you are joking.


It's not surprising that you can't comprehend the fact that a Gay person would be as competent and a straight person. This is your thread topic after all which has it's roots growing from your own fears and insecurities of competence.

The joke here is you inability to see how we're all on equal terms overall has people. Gay or Straight, Male or Female, Black or white has nothing to do with one's potential or competence in the context of being a political leader.


Comprehend much?



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

Taking that one step further , what if the Next President was a Transgender one ? I will have a Really Hard Time hearing it Introduced ........Please Welcome Mister/Madam President .....( Insert Name ) .



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

Go on, finish the sentence



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 06:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Why? they would only use their correct pronoun. if it was a Trans-Female they would say Madam and a Trans-Male Mister



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

Obama was elected because people believed he would bring a new perspective and change to the political direction of this country.

He gave great speeches and convinced people that he was the best choice to make. It's just that simple.

There were obviously some voters who voted for him based only on the fact he was Black. But there are voters who didn't vote for him simply because he was Black. So we can probably drop both of those examples as being meaningful in the discussion as they cancel each other out and made no significant difference.

Same goes for this election. Some will vote Hillary because she's a Woman. Some will not vote her for the same reason. Both groups however not only cancel out the other but also on their own are a minority overall as well.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join