Conyers: “There is no one more disappointed than I am in Barack Obama.”

Watermark said:
Give people a choice between a fake Republican and a real Republican and they'll choose the real Republican every time. The problem is that if this healthcare reform goes down, it's going to hit Democrats across the board, and the Democrats who voted against it are going to get hit the hardest.
Click to expand...

nope. The democrats voting against it will be local heroes. Sorry tardo.
 
AssHatZombie said:
It's a call for justice for all individuals. Even white ones. White people also deserve not to be discriminated against based on skin color.
Click to expand...

Unlike black people and hispanics, I am not discriminated against because of my skin color. I would see no reason to form a white caucus. The only groups in America that would see the need to form a "white caucus" would not be those interested in DEFENDING their ethnic group, it would be those interested in FURTHER ASSERTING THEIR DOMINANCE over minority ethnic groups. There is a difference when you are talking about minority and dominant ethnic groups.
 
AssHatZombie said:
nope. The democrats voting against it will be local heroes. Sorry tardo.
Click to expand...

The ones in competitive districts are going to lose their seats if the Democratic brand is damaged when health care costs go through the roof because we didn't pass this. The ones in competitive districts are the conservatives. They aren't going to be "local heroes". The districts will be like "thanks, now give us a Republican".
 
Watermark said:
The ones in competitive districts are going to lose their seats if the Democratic brand is damaged when health care costs go through the roof because we didn't pass this. The ones in competitive districts are the conservatives. They aren't going to be "local heroes". The districts will be like "thanks, now give us a Republican".
Click to expand...

Mmmmkay. Not. sorry.
 
Watermark said:
Unlike black people and hispanics, I am not discriminated against because of my skin color. I would see no reason to form a white caucus. The only groups in America that would see the need to form a "white caucus" would not be those interested in DEFENDING their ethnic group, it would be those interested in FURTHER ASSERTING THEIR DOMINANCE over minority ethnic groups. There is a difference when you are talking about minority and dominant ethnic groups.
Click to expand...

You're not in the workforce.

Racial discrimination agaisnt white individuals is ongoing. They actually need to band together MORE as elitists in the establishment deny the discrimination is actually occuring.

White indiviuals need to make a loud noise.
 
Watermark said:
Unlike black people and hispanics, I am not discriminated against because of my skin color. I would see no reason to form a white caucus. The only groups in America that would see the need to form a "white caucus" would not be those interested in DEFENDING their ethnic group, it would be those interested in FURTHER ASSERTING THEIR DOMINANCE over minority ethnic groups. There is a difference when you are talking about minority and dominant ethnic groups.
Click to expand...

do you actually believe that shit?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
do you actually believe that shit?
Click to expand...

He knows he's full of shit. It's just tres chic to be a white race traitor these days. It's considered enlightened.

The only good white person is one who agrees to destroy his own kind, according to New Age Noahide dogmatism. They're like the black slave traders of the coast who kidnapped other blacks for the slave trade.
 
uscitizen said:
A white race traitor?

Sheesh. Obviously you are not one of those taking antidepressants.
Click to expand...
I read an article that they are now diagnosing children as young as 3 with depression, previous to recent years they insisted that you would have to be older than 6 in order to have the emotional maturity to have clinical depression...

The article about the increase in anti-depressants... Not impressive.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Safety is an illusion.
Click to expand...

I don't know how to state this strongly enough.

Say you're talking about a conservative politician who won the last election 51-49, and a liberal one in an urban district who won 65-35. Democrats go down 5% across the board. The conservative politician has to have a swing of one point to lose. The liberal one has to have a double digit swing. Who do you think is more likely to lose? This is common sense. Those in safe districts are likely to be the most extreme, and those in swing districts are likely to be the most moderate. The moderates are always the first to lose their seat.
 
Watermark said:
I don't know how to state this strongly enough.

Say you're talking about a conservative politician who won the last election 51-49, and a liberal one in an urban district who won 65-35. Democrats go down 5% across the board. The conservative politician has to have a swing of one point to lose. The liberal one has to have a double digit swing. Who do you think is more likely to lose? This is common sense. Those in safe districts are likely to be the most extreme, and those in swing districts are likely to be the most moderate. The moderates are always the first to lose their seat.
Click to expand...

Don't go into politics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top