happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,530
|
Post by happyhoix on Mar 18, 2016 8:08:46 GMT -5
The above videos were done by Freedomain Radio which is the work of this guy: Stefan Molyneux, a Canadian radio host, blamed mothers for the violent behavior of men.
Molyneux said that because 90% of a child’s brain is formed by the experiences it has before the age of 5, and women have “an almost universal control over childhood,” violence exists in the world because of the way women treat children.
“If we could just get people to be nice to their babies for five years straight, that would be it for war, drug abuse, addiction, promiscuity, sexually transmitted diseases,” he said. “Almost all would be completely eliminated, because they all arise from dysfunctional early childhood experiences, which are all run by women.” time.com/2949435/what-i-learned-as-a-woman-at-a-mens-rights-conference/ If only Donald's mother had been nicer to him those first 5 years. Wow. Guy has a bad case of mommy issues.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,530
|
Post by happyhoix on Mar 18, 2016 8:10:02 GMT -5
Jeb!, O Jeb! $130M in 4 months and the fools still didn't love you. Now look at them. Look at the state of the Republican Party. If only they'd caught the scent of Bush biscuits wafting from the oven. If only they'd been a little bit hungrier for your famous stew, seasoned with strength, patriotism, and supply-side economic wisdom. If only they'd let their Uncle Jeb! take them into his arms to heal their wounds and shelter them from all evil. We need you now, Jeb!. The Republican Party needs you. Go to the convention. Rouse the delegates with a speech. Bring them to tears with the force of your passion. Claim the 2016 Republican nomination. It is your destiny. The road ahead will be hard, but you are Jeb!. The blood of Bushes runs through you. Your time for greatness is now. Seize it and rise above the chaos. We believe in you, Jeb!. All our hopes rest with you. Poor JEB, bless his heart.
I think he would have made a better president than his older brother did, but now we'll never know.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 18, 2016 8:20:27 GMT -5
This from the NYT: I realize the bands are blurry. I keep telling DJ to stop grinding his teeth so forcefully the ground shakes, but...
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Mar 18, 2016 10:02:19 GMT -5
reminds me a bit more of Palin every day. Well, she did endorse him! dj, any comments on post 2376? I would like to hear from you if you see any validity to how I think Trump can make it to the convention with the needed number of delegates. He actually did negate most of the loss of Ohio, with a big win in Illinois. Missouri was a large score of delegates for him by winning the vote number and basically winning all the Congressional districts, thus garnering delegate votes despite only getting 41% of the vote. ty
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,453
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 18, 2016 15:10:10 GMT -5
This from the NYT: I realize the bands are blurry. I keep telling DJ to stop grinding his teeth so forcefully the ground shakes, but... note the assumptions? move the bar for Trump down to 34%, and see what happens.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,453
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 18, 2016 15:13:16 GMT -5
reminds me a bit more of Palin every day. Well, she did endorse him! dj, any comments on post 2376? I would like to hear from you if you see any validity to how I think Trump can make it to the convention with the needed number of delegates. He actually did negate most of the loss of Ohio, with a big win in Illinois. Missouri was a large score of delegates for him by winning the vote number and basically winning all the Congressional districts, thus garnering delegate votes despite only getting 41% of the vote. ty i liked that post, so that says something, right? but your assumption about Rubio not dropping out is wrong. and the Time's assumption about Trump getting 42% is also wrong, imo. he gets way less than that, and we get a brokered convention. that is AS OF TODAY. now, if Trump can bring his numbers up, it changes the math, and maybe he does win the nomination. but maybe he doesn't if he doesn't bring them up.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 18, 2016 15:30:53 GMT -5
This from the NYT: I realize the bands are blurry. I keep telling DJ to stop grinding his teeth so forcefully the ground shakes, but... note the assumptions? move the bar for Trump down to 34%, and see what happens. He still wins, just not outright. And they chose 42% because that's the average share of he popular vote he's taken thus far. He's "won" the nomination. Please tell me you get that. The only variables left are whether or not he makes the 1237, and if not, whether the establishment ends the Republican party by handing the nomination to Sen. Cruz.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,453
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 18, 2016 15:46:15 GMT -5
note the assumptions? move the bar for Trump down to 34%, and see what happens. He still wins, just not outright. And they chose 42% because that's the average share of he popular vote he's taken thus far. He's "won" the nomination. Please tell me you get that. The only variables left are whether or not he makes the 1237, and if not, whether the establishment ends the Republican party by handing the nomination to Sen. Cruz. correction- he still MIGHT win, just not outright. there is no way of telling what happens if this goes to the convention, Virgil. if you think you know, i question your omniscience. he has not won the nomination, Virgil. he needs 1237 delegates. please tell me you get that. and no, the party doesn't end if it goes to Cruz, just as it didn't end when the nomination went to Garfield in 1880. really, Virgil. stop being so melodramatic. it is a poor servant to rational argumentation.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,453
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 18, 2016 15:50:22 GMT -5
one more thing: before you come after me for saying that my "hatred" for Trump has shaded my thinking on this, i might point out that 538 has him below target to win the nomination, as of today, by 20 delegates. he was 40 ahead last week. so, his odds are not improving. your continual claim that his odds are improving is just factually wrong. his odds were better a week ago than today. and if it continues this way, he is going to have a LOT of trouble at the convention. mark my words.
please don't forget my qualification when you (or anyone else) cites this post in the future. it is rather dishonest when you do that.
note: i am not sure that it is even mathematically POSSIBLE for any candidate OTHER than Trump to win on the first ballot, so just to be clear, i am not saying that Cruz or Kasich can win outright. i am pretty sure they can't. but they absolutely could win on the 35th ballot. Mitt Romney could.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 18, 2016 16:26:58 GMT -5
He still wins, just not outright. And they chose 42% because that's the average share of he popular vote he's taken thus far. He's "won" the nomination. Please tell me you get that. The only variables left are whether or not he makes the 1237, and if not, whether the establishment ends the Republican party by handing the nomination to Sen. Cruz. correction- he still MIGHT win, just not outright. there is no way of telling what happens if this goes to the convention, Virgil. if you think you know, i question your omniscience. he has not won the nomination, Virgil. he needs 1237 delegates. please tell me you get that. and no, the party doesn't end if it goes to Cruz, just as it didn't end when the nomination went to Garfield in 1880. really, Virgil. stop being so melodramatic. it is a poor servant to rational argumentation. 2016 ain't 1880.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,453
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 18, 2016 16:51:31 GMT -5
correction- he still MIGHT win, just not outright. there is no way of telling what happens if this goes to the convention, Virgil. if you think you know, i question your omniscience. he has not won the nomination, Virgil. he needs 1237 delegates. please tell me you get that. and no, the party doesn't end if it goes to Cruz, just as it didn't end when the nomination went to Garfield in 1880. really, Virgil. stop being so melodramatic. it is a poor servant to rational argumentation. 2016 ain't 1880. WHOOSH! this is the worst i have ever seen you miss a point. my point is that 1880 was far WORSE than anything we are likely to see in 2016, and yet here we are- 136 years after that HORRIFIC CONVENTION. ERGO (i hope i am using this correctly. i am mimicking you, here), the GOP is VERY LIKELY to survive the nomination of Ted Cruz. if you don't believe that, then you are not being rational, imo.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 1, 2024 23:36:24 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2016 17:14:25 GMT -5
1880... Pre women voting? Pre social media? Nah. Sorry. I don't think you can adequately apply that sorry. Honestly, I think regardless of nominee it's evolve or die time for the GOP...
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,560
|
Post by tallguy on Mar 18, 2016 17:20:52 GMT -5
WHOOSH! this is the worst i have ever seen you miss a point. my point is that 1880 was far WORSE than anything we are likely to see in 2016, and yet here we are- 136 years after that HORRIFIC CONVENTION. ERGO (i hope i am using this correctly. i am mimicking you, here), the GOP is VERY LIKELY to survive the nomination of Ted Cruz.
if you don't believe that, then you are not being rational, imo. I am SOOOOOOO hoping they do not try to test that theory.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 18, 2016 18:09:33 GMT -5
WHOOSH! this is the worst i have ever seen you miss a point. my point is that 1880 was far WORSE than anything we are likely to see in 2016, and yet here we are- 136 years after that HORRIFIC CONVENTION. ERGO (i hope i am using this correctly. i am mimicking you, here), the GOP is VERY LIKELY to survive the nomination of Ted Cruz. if you don't believe that, then you are not being rational, imo. We shall see, shan't we?
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,240
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Mar 18, 2016 18:39:08 GMT -5
1880... Pre women voting? Pre social media? Nah. Sorry. I don't think you can adequately apply that sorry. Honestly, I think regardless of nominee it's evolve or die time for the GOP... I believe DJ was referring how the 1880 convention turned out. Which means there would be hope for Kasich or someone else.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1880_Republican_National_Convention
Of the 14 people nominated for the Republican nomination, the three strongest candidates leading up to the convention were Ulysses S. Grant, James G. Blaine, and John Sherman. Grant had served two terms as President from 1869 to 1877, and was seeking an unprecedented third term in office. He was backed by the Stalwart faction of the Republican Party, which supported political machines and patronage. Blaine was a senator and former representative from Maine who was backed by the Half-Breed faction of the Republican Party. Sherman, the brother of Civil War General William Tecumseh Sherman, was the then Secretary of the Treasury under President Rutherford B. Hayes. A former senator from Ohio, he was backed by a delegation that did not support the Stalwarts or Half-Breeds.
On the first ballot, Sherman received 93 votes, while Grant and Blaine had 304 and 285, respectively. None of the candidates were close to victory, and the balloting continued in order to determine a winner. Many more ballots were taken, but no candidate prevailed. After the thirty-fifth ballot, Blaine and Sherman switched their support to the new "dark horse" candidate, James Garfield. On the next ballot, Garfield won the nomination by receiving 399 votes, 93 higher than Grant's total.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 1, 2024 23:36:24 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2016 18:42:59 GMT -5
If Trump gets the most delegates and Kasich gets the nomination, I don't see Kasich prevailing I see a revolt and at least / best? a third party run.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 18, 2016 18:52:51 GMT -5
1880... Pre women voting? Pre social media? Nah. Sorry. I don't think you can adequately apply that sorry. Honestly, I think regardless of nominee it's evolve or die time for the GOP... I believe DJ was referring how the 1880 convention turned out. Which means there would be hope for Kasich or someone else.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1880_Republican_National_Convention
Of the 14 people nominated for the Republican nomination, the three strongest candidates leading up to the convention were Ulysses S. Grant, James G. Blaine, and John Sherman. Grant had served two terms as President from 1869 to 1877, and was seeking an unprecedented third term in office. He was backed by the Stalwart faction of the Republican Party, which supported political machines and patronage. Blaine was a senator and former representative from Maine who was backed by the Half-Breed faction of the Republican Party. Sherman, the brother of Civil War General William Tecumseh Sherman, was the then Secretary of the Treasury under President Rutherford B. Hayes. A former senator from Ohio, he was backed by a delegation that did not support the Stalwarts or Half-Breeds.
On the first ballot, Sherman received 93 votes, while Grant and Blaine had 304 and 285, respectively. None of the candidates were close to victory, and the balloting continued in order to determine a winner. Many more ballots were taken, but no candidate prevailed. After the thirty-fifth ballot, Blaine and Sherman switched their support to the new "dark horse" candidate, James Garfield. On the next ballot, Garfield won the nomination by receiving 399 votes, 93 higher than Grant's total.
ibid.: Maybe it's just me, but I don't see Mr. Trump running his campaign from his front porch with the other candidates lining up to support him. Also, I don't even want to know what America looks like on the day after Pres. Trump is shot by a supporter of one of political rivals.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,453
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 19, 2016 2:02:07 GMT -5
I believe DJ was referring how the 1880 convention turned out. Which means there would be hope for Kasich or someone else.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1880_Republican_National_Convention
Of the 14 people nominated for the Republican nomination, the three strongest candidates leading up to the convention were Ulysses S. Grant, James G. Blaine, and John Sherman. Grant had served two terms as President from 1869 to 1877, and was seeking an unprecedented third term in office. He was backed by the Stalwart faction of the Republican Party, which supported political machines and patronage. Blaine was a senator and former representative from Maine who was backed by the Half-Breed faction of the Republican Party. Sherman, the brother of Civil War General William Tecumseh Sherman, was the then Secretary of the Treasury under President Rutherford B. Hayes. A former senator from Ohio, he was backed by a delegation that did not support the Stalwarts or Half-Breeds.
On the first ballot, Sherman received 93 votes, while Grant and Blaine had 304 and 285, respectively. None of the candidates were close to victory, and the balloting continued in order to determine a winner. Many more ballots were taken, but no candidate prevailed. After the thirty-fifth ballot, Blaine and Sherman switched their support to the new "dark horse" candidate, James Garfield. On the next ballot, Garfield won the nomination by receiving 399 votes, 93 higher than Grant's total.
ibid.: Maybe it's just me, but I don't see Mr. Trump running his campaign from his front porch with the other candidates lining up to support him. Also, I don't even want to know what America looks like on the day after Pres. Trump is shot by a supporter of one of political rivals. you have a different view of republics than i do, apparently.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,453
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 19, 2016 2:03:44 GMT -5
WHOOSH! this is the worst i have ever seen you miss a point. my point is that 1880 was far WORSE than anything we are likely to see in 2016, and yet here we are- 136 years after that HORRIFIC CONVENTION. ERGO (i hope i am using this correctly. i am mimicking you, here), the GOP is VERY LIKELY to survive the nomination of Ted Cruz. if you don't believe that, then you are not being rational, imo. We shall see, shan't we? no, we MIGHT see. the most LIKELY outcome is that Trump wins the nomination, but not outright. but as of TODAY it is not going to be a cakewalk. he is trailing his delegate target.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,453
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 19, 2016 2:04:52 GMT -5
1880... Pre women voting? Pre social media? Nah. Sorry. I don't think you can adequately apply that sorry. Honestly, I think regardless of nominee it's evolve or die time for the GOP... oped- i wasn't comparing 2016 to 1880, for the second time. i was saying that the GOP SURVIVED 1880.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,212
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 19, 2016 9:45:55 GMT -5
1880... Pre women voting? Pre social media? Nah. Sorry. I don't think you can adequately apply that sorry. Honestly, I think regardless of nominee it's evolve or die time for the GOP... oped- i wasn't comparing 2016 to 1880, for the second time. i was saying that the GOP SURVIVED 1880. The GOP also survived 1881, 1897, 1915 and 1937, not to mention quite a few more randomly typed years I could select. There was no reason to post they survived 1880 at this point in time unless one is assigning that specific year some special significance.
|
|
b2r
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:35:25 GMT -5
Posts: 7,257
|
Post by b2r on Mar 19, 2016 13:40:40 GMT -5
Trump protesters block streets in Fountain HillsTrump protesters were blocking vehicles leading into Fountain Hills in advance of Donald Trump’s campaign stop Saturday morning. The protesters parked their cars in the middle of the road, unfurling banners reading " Trump" and "Must Stop Trump," and chanting "Trump is hate." Traffic was backed up for miles, with drivers honking in fury. Protesters were chanting, "Donald Trump, shut it down, Phoenix is the people's town." The disruption occurred well after large crowds lined up to get into the Fountain Hills rally. Maricopa County Sheriff Deputy Joaquin Enriquez said officers will ask the protesters to move and if they don't comply, they will forcibly remove them. www.azfamily.com/story/31516829/trump-protesters-block-streets-in-fountain-hills
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 1, 2024 23:36:24 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2016 13:54:30 GMT -5
Maybe President Trump should, you know, get used to it...
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,453
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 19, 2016 14:58:07 GMT -5
oped- i wasn't comparing 2016 to 1880, for the second time. i was saying that the GOP SURVIVED 1880. The GOP also survived 1881, 1897, 1915 and 1937, not to mention quite a few more randomly typed years I could select. There was no reason to post they survived 1880 at this point in time unless one is assigning that specific year some special significance. i did, tho. and i stated precisely why. fmi: see post 2422
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,212
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 19, 2016 15:50:29 GMT -5
1880... Pre women voting? Pre social media? Nah. Sorry. I don't think you can adequately apply that sorry. Honestly, I think regardless of nominee it's evolve or die time for the GOP... oped- i wasn't comparing 2016 to 1880, for the second time. i was saying that the GOP SURVIVED 1880. The GOP also survived 1881, 1897, 1915 and 1937, not to mention quite a few more randomly typed years I could select. There was no reason to post they survived 1880 at this point in time unless one is assigning that specific year some special significance. i did, tho. and i stated precisely why. fmi: see post 2422 ... just as it didn't end when the nomination went to Garfield in 1880. ... I understand.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 1, 2024 23:36:24 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2016 17:48:03 GMT -5
1880... Pre women voting? Pre social media? Nah. Sorry. I don't think you can adequately apply that sorry. Honestly, I think regardless of nominee it's evolve or die time for the GOP... oped- i wasn't comparing 2016 to 1880, for the second time. i was saying that the GOP SURVIVED 1880.I'm not oped... but... if you aren't comparing the two, how is that relevant? If you weren't comparing the two why didn't you pick... say... 1963 (not an election year, just a random year, picked randomly), or 1912 (the year the Titanic sank), or 1941 (you should know what happened this year), or 1861 (another bad year for our country's government), or any number of other possible years?
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Mar 19, 2016 18:04:59 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 1, 2024 23:36:24 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2016 21:18:41 GMT -5
It's a response. I'm not saying it's appropriate, but if silent protesters get forcefully ejected with inciting language, and things continue to escalate, etc... These people are saying Trump won't silence them.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 19, 2016 21:58:31 GMT -5
It's a response. I'm not saying it's appropriate, but if silent protesters get forcefully ejected with inciting language, and things continue to escalate, etc... These people are saying Trump won't silence them. ...by indiscriminately blocking traffic and ticking everybody off. It's an interesting strategy, I'll give 'em that much.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 1, 2024 23:36:24 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2016 22:04:49 GMT -5
It's a response. I'm not saying it's appropriate, but if silent protesters get forcefully ejected with inciting language, and things continue to escalate, etc... These people are saying Trump won't silence them. Here's the thing... he has the right to "eject" anyone at his rallies that's being a disruptive influence. Protesters are, by the very nature of their protest, "disruptive" if they are inside, in attendance. Even someone standing silently is "disruptive" if it makes people pay more attention to them than they pay attention to the speaker.
|
|