Let the left enjoy their day

a reply to: DBCowboy

It depends if they have been campaigning on not raising taxes and they literally don't raise enough money even in a perfect scenario to pay for things like schools and roads...

Trust me I undrstand the waste in government but don't put it past a politician to campaign for decades not raising taxes even if the intake doesn't meet core requirements.

Then focus on gay bathrooms...hey look over here.

Edit

However I also understand that raising taxes usually doesn't go to the budget deficit. It is for expanded programs.

I predicted the US would engage in another civil war regardless of whether Hilary or Donald became president, but having Donald win made it a lot easier to achieve. It's taken longer than I expected and I REALLY hope it doesn't come to civil war, but the hatred on both sides against the other is almost palpable.

a reply to: wtfatta

Maybe we can turn it into hatred OF both sides and avoid disaster.

originally posted by: kurthall
a reply to: nwtrucker


What are you going to do call us slush instead of snowflakes? We have sat for a year and listened to the likes of you, call us all kinds of names and say MAGA, over and over. When in fact, the POTUS is taking us back to the 70s, where I guess it was okay to assault women, and burn coal all day long, we are moving BACKWARD. Of coarse you don't see that.

This win is HUGE. Its been 24 years since a dem has won in that state. You go ahead and support your liar and chief, some of the alt right have woken up. There are so many reasons that this trend will continue.

I can't speak for everybody but the 'snowflake' label was addressed to the millennials that dramatized the 'trauma' of the Trump win. Tears, bewailing, low self esteem, so on.

If you view yourself in that group, then sobeit.

Even the liberal/socialist on ATS I hold in higher regard than that crowd. If I'm wrong then I will eat crow and assume your all 'snowflakes'.

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: kurthall
a reply to: nwtrucker


What are you going to do call us slush instead of snowflakes? We have sat for a year and listened to the likes of you, call us all kinds of names and say MAGA, over and over. When in fact, the POTUS is taking us back to the 70s, where I guess it was okay to assault women, and burn coal all day long, we are moving BACKWARD. Of coarse you don't see that.

This win is HUGE. Its been 24 years since a dem has won in that state. You go ahead and support your liar and chief, some of the alt right have woken up. There are so many reasons that this trend will continue.

I can't speak for everybody but the 'snowflake' label was addressed to the millennials that dramatized the 'trauma' of the Trump win. Tears, bewailing, low self esteem, so on.

If you view yourself in that group, then sobeit.

Even the liberal/socialist on ATS I hold in higher regard than that crowd. If I'm wrong then I will eat crow and assume your all 'snowflakes'.

Oh please, there are quite a few people on here who have referred to many of us on the left as snowflakes. Time and time again. They are the die hard, trump can do no wrong and the left never does anything right members.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Spacespider
Funny how that "left" group of america is so eager to destroy what left of USA and prob start ww3 against Russia.

If you want to want to get a taste of how it is.. come to any EU country and see how left thinking pans out.

The right is in charge of ALL three branches of our government and we've never been closer to WWIII and you are STILL accusing the Dems of trying to start WWIII? Unreal.

Please do explain precisely in what fashion are we now closer to WWIII than ever before? War against rebels in Syria is being wrapped in, war in Iraq is being wrapped up, situation around Israel may look worrying now but establishing who controls Jerusalem is vital first step towards establishing settlements between Israel and a Palestinian state, and the last 3 or 4 US presidents have explicitly said they will work to make Jerusalem the capital of Israel. If you're referring to the situation with Russia, well I don't think there's very much tension, but if there were I think it's pretty clear who caused it. The only thing Trump has done is try to reach out and improve relations with Russia, but when he instructs someone to communicate with Russia they get roasted for it... just look at the toxic environment this Russian hysteria has caused, politicians are afraid to have anything to do with Russia out of fears of being labelled a traitor.

originally posted by: kurthall

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: kurthall
a reply to: nwtrucker


What are you going to do call us slush instead of snowflakes? We have sat for a year and listened to the likes of you, call us all kinds of names and say MAGA, over and over. When in fact, the POTUS is taking us back to the 70s, where I guess it was okay to assault women, and burn coal all day long, we are moving BACKWARD. Of coarse you don't see that.

This win is HUGE. Its been 24 years since a dem has won in that state. You go ahead and support your liar and chief, some of the alt right have woken up. There are so many reasons that this trend will continue.

I can't speak for everybody but the 'snowflake' label was addressed to the millennials that dramatized the 'trauma' of the Trump win. Tears, bewailing, low self esteem, so on.

If you view yourself in that group, then sobeit.

Even the liberal/socialist on ATS I hold in higher regard than that crowd. If I'm wrong then I will eat crow and assume your all 'snowflakes'.

Oh please, there are quite a few people on here who have referred to many of us on the left as snowflakes. Time and time again. They are the die hard, trump can do no wrong and the left never does anything right members.

Well, I'm not one of them that has called you a snowflake and I don't recall anyone using the term as a direct label to any specific person.

I don't agree with Trump on everything. Fairly close but not all.

Snowflake, by the way, seems rather tepid when compared to Nazis, bigots, racists....shall I go on?

a reply to: nwtrucker

What the hell are you talking about?

# a side.

originally posted by: Lysergic
# a side.

You need to go back to a biology class. You're not even close.

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: nwtrucker

What the hell are you talking about?

Why the hell are you asking?

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: nwtrucker

What the hell are you talking about?

Why the hell are you asking?

I like to know that when I read something I didn't waste too many brain cells. All I got from the Op was, "Blah, blah, something else. SCREW YOU LEFTIES!"

If that was what the OP was about, I got it.

a reply to: nwtrucker

Well I'm not sure why you're saying the wedge got wider...If it had swung the other way, with all of this divisiveness you think the wedge wouldn't have gotten wider?

From what I have read, the Republicans were planning on impeaching Moore if he got elected anyways.

I would think anyone, regardless of political affiliation would be happy to keep Moore out of office until the allegations are settled. Luckily he didn't make it to a national level, in which he would have just used the slush fund already in place to make the allegations "quietly subside."

But in this day an age, a person's political leanings mean more than their character? I don't think so. I'd rather have a man in office with whom I totally disagree than have a man in office whom I cannot respect or look square in the eye.

But maybe that's just me.

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: nwtrucker

What the hell are you talking about?

Why the hell are you asking?

I like to know that when I read something I didn't waste too many brain cells. All I got from the Op was, "Blah, blah, something else. SCREW YOU LEFTIES!"

If that was what the OP was about, I got it.

I'll make it simple for you.

It acknowledged the win for the left in the Alabama election. It posed possible alternative directions things could go down the road. Either way. It also pointed out that it isn't some moral destroying event for Trump supporters. In fact, it strengthens the resolve to do better.

That there is no surrendering by the Trumpsters.

That more or less covers it, other than the usual forks threads tend to take.

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek
a reply to: nwtrucker

Well I'm not sure why you're saying the wedge got wider...If it had swung the other way, with all of this divisiveness you think the wedge wouldn't have gotten wider?

From what I have read, the Republicans were planning on impeaching Moore if he got elected anyways.

I would think anyone, regardless of political affiliation would be happy to keep Moore out of office until the allegations are settled. Luckily he didn't make it to a national level, in which he would have just used the slush fund already in place to make the allegations "quietly subside."

But in this day an age, a person's political leanings mean more than their character? I don't think so. I'd rather have a man in office with whom I totally disagree than have a man in office whom I cannot respect or look square in the eye.

But maybe that's just me.

Unfortunately, slime politics is the order of the day. From mainstream media on down. Well over 46 million was spent by various groups supporting Jones and under 10 million by the RNC.

Many have suspected the RNC didn't want Moore to win even before these 'timely' accusations appeared.

You can comfortably sit on the high road of character all you want. Without proof it is nothing but slander. Your moral high ground is relegated to swampland in my opinion.

a reply to: nwtrucker

I personally can't stand the guy because of his liberty for some not for others approach.

And his moral warrior nature would have further bogged the state down in religious legislation while ignoring fiscal duties.

The state is in shambles. Doing the Cincinnati shuffle with moral law to cover up the fiscal mess is a crime for conservatism.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: nwtrucker

I personally can't stand the guy because of his liberty for some not for others approach.

And his moral warrior nature would have further bogged the state down in religious legislation while ignoring fiscal duties.

The state is in shambles. Doing the Cincinnati shuffle with moral law to cover up the fiscal mess is a crime for conservatism.

Frankly, I don't know one way or the other about his policies. He came to my attention the same way those not connected to Alabama politics which was the allegations that the MSM magnified and the Republican Elite largely didn't want him based on his Trump support.

Next, if you have a problem with Alabama fiscal policies then address the Alabama governor and Legislature not the Federal Rep in the Senate. Not his job.

a reply to: nwtrucker

So in your opinion laws don't effect commerce or the economy...got it.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: nwtrucker

So in your opinion laws don't effect commerce or the economy...got it.

If you have some need to spin my words, have at it. If Alabama's fiscal issues are your concern-and frankly I doubt your sincerity on that- then the issue lies with the State and It's law makers.

That is 101 level understanding.

I don't know whether your a lib, a Republican establishment supporter or just a never Trumper, the difference is merely semantics.

Probably a lib though, they love twisting words to suit...

a reply to: nwtrucker

None of the above.

An independent who sees through gimmicks and conman who pretend to be outsiders.

More a rand and Ron Paul guy personally.