Apropos of nothing, does your Gamergate logic explain why so many people voted for him?
OK, let me unpack it for you, because I've studied this particular pathology in depth.
First, Trump has not really gotten that many votes, as a proportion of the total electorate, or even the Republican electorate. he's gotten about 13 million votes actually cast for him so far. In those same Republican primaries, there have been over 15 million votes cast against Trump. So a couple of million more Republicans voted against Donald Trump than for him. By the way, Hillary Clinton has also gotten over 2 million more primary votes than Donald Trump.
But here's the kicker: There are about 130,000,000 people who will vote in the next presidential election. Right now, Donald Trump has captured 10% of those votes. Do you think there are a lot of people who have been saying, "I'm going to wait to see what this Donald Trump is all about before I go out and actually cast a vote for him"?
This is why you hear about how "the demographics" overwhelmingly favor whomever the Democrats run in 2016. First, there are a lot more Democrats than Republicans in the US. Second, independents have actually been breaking against Donald Trump in the primaries. Third, even Republicans voted more often against Donald Trump than for him, and finally, the dude has a 70% disapproval rating since the end of the primaries. That means his disapproval numbers have jumped 10% in one month. His approval rating is at 29%, which is about the same as the approval rating of the mosquitoes that carry Zika virus.
It's time for you to start thinking of excuses for why Donald Trump got blown out in the general election. I suggest going with the, "they robbed him" excuse. That's a favorite of mine, and it's always been effective when my sports teams lose. Plus, it's almost certainly the excuse Donald will use because he seems constitutionally lacking in self-awareness. Come up with a good conspiracy theory and you'll be good to go for the next four long years that the unpleasant Mrs Clinton will be president.
And a month earlier, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice said this:
The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly he can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.
So you can point to all the op-ed pieces you want, but there it is in GWB's own goddamn words. Also, remember "aluminum tubes"? "Yellow cake uranium"?
Nah, I don't really have a beef with Reznor's music, or industrial. I had a goth girlfriend back in the day though, and it put me off black eye shadow and tattoos permanently. She's an evangelical Christian now and posts cute sayings and bible verses on Facebook.
He is impossible to report on, like most TV celebs. It's all perception of people who don't really care about anything but style.
Fortunately, his poll numbers are dropping precipitously, which shows that the people who have avoided all the horse-race crap are finally starting to get engaged.
Dude is 70 years old and a friggin' billionaire. Doesn't it strike you as a little insecure that he's worrying about what he can and cannot "pull off"?
And regarding his hair being "real", I'm not sure that color and texture exist anywhere in nature. However, there's simply too much to unpack regarding Donald's hair. I simply chalk it up to one of those great mysteries.
Does anybody really cares about the brand of fake hair piece Trump is using?
It does say something about his judgement that he wears that thing in public and thinks it looks OK. I mean, there are expensive rugs that look really good and you can't tell. If dude is so rich and cares so much about his appearance, why would he go out looking like a troll doll with radiation poisoning? I mean, Charles Nelson-Reilly had a better hairpiece than The Donald. On the other hand, if Trump does NOT really care about his appearance, then why spend all the time and energy and expense to cover up the fact that he's bald?
Here's a great American president who didn't spend $60k on a bad weave:
Not only was he such a bad-ass that he kicked Hitler's ass, but he led this country into an era when we actually became great, and did not give one single fuck about the fact that he was losing his hair. He was like the presidential version of Dwayne Johnson. And let me tell you, 63% of American women have not said they will never vote for Dwayne Johnson the way they have about Trump. Hell, 63% of American men would probably give Dwayne Johnson an enthusiastic reach-around if he asked right now. That's how cool and manly bald-ass Dwayne Johnson is, like Ike.
The original story that set off this latest Peter Thiel tantrum is one of the best actual pieces of journalism about Trump that's been in any media outlet, anywhere. Even harsh critics of Gawker singled it out as an excellent story.
Here's what one Pulitzer-winner (Dan Fagin) said about the story:
Anyone who thinks investigative reporting is dead should pay attention as Gawker blows the 'lid' off Hairpiecegate.
David Simon, the former prize-winning journalist and screenwriter of "The Wire" said of the Gawker story:
For real, the finest work Gawker has done. Which is at once both a genuine compliment and an easy straight-line.
He also said that if the US press had done work this good on the question of WMDs and the run-up the Iraq War, that war never would have happened.
You have to admit that the story itself, meticulously sourced and thoroughly researched, is pretty impressive.
It draws a very interesting picture of the man, Donald Trump.
And Mr Harder's lawsuit? It's pretty funny reading too, since he tries to assert that his legal demand for retraction and apology is covered by copyright law.
I realize that a lot of the ACs here hate Gawker and their properties because they were harsh on #gamergate and MRAs (who even named their now-defunct gamergate forum, "Kotaku in Action" to prove that they're not mad, they're actually laughing), but I recommend reading the stories for yourself and forming your own opinion.
I've got a '95 Escort Wagon with 43,000 miles on it. One of the best cars I've ever owned. Old enough to vote, and the last major expense I had to sink into it was adding freon to the AC and a new set of tires in 2014. Looks like new except my wife put a little crack in the back bumper during a snow storm last year backing out of our parking spot in the alley. And I'm the second owner. It has zero resale value, which is just how I like 'em. I could practically leave the keys in the damn thing and not have to worry.
In Illinois, a car that old doesn't need to have emissions testing either, so I save money there. My wife gets new cars. I love my '95 Escort. I don't drive very much, but last year I took that car from Chicago to Connecticut and back. Not so quick over the hills in Pennsylvania, but it got me there. And it's so nondescript that cops leave me completely alone. I don't even get stopped for driving while old the way I do when I drive the wife's Audi.
Man, this is Texas we're talking about here. Don't nobody give no nevermind to no nanny state traffic signs down here. Hell, when we see a traffic sign here in the Lone Star State, we just shoot the bejeebus out of it. I mean really fill that bitch with lead. Just to show who's boss, you know? Sometimes, you have to water the tree of liberty with the blood of some got-damn traffic signs.
Now, if they'd hacked these traffic signs by whistling we'd have something to talk about. Or from a cyber-cafe in Bulgaria. This is just stupid vandalism.
Slashdot Mirror
FYI, your dick is not a gravity detecting sensor.
I'm pretty sure that "Crazy Crooked Bastard" applies in this case:
http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/3...
http://dailycaller.com/2016/06...
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballo...
"Crooked Crazy Bastard" is also appropriate. I'm not sure why you'd think this indicates someone who would shake up the corrupt system.
http://img2.timeinc.net/people...
Yeah, no.
http://www.bloomberg.com/polit...
OK, let me unpack it for you, because I've studied this particular pathology in depth.
First, Trump has not really gotten that many votes, as a proportion of the total electorate, or even the Republican electorate. he's gotten about 13 million votes actually cast for him so far. In those same Republican primaries, there have been over 15 million votes cast against Trump. So a couple of million more Republicans voted against Donald Trump than for him. By the way, Hillary Clinton has also gotten over 2 million more primary votes than Donald Trump.
But here's the kicker: There are about 130,000,000 people who will vote in the next presidential election. Right now, Donald Trump has captured 10% of those votes. Do you think there are a lot of people who have been saying, "I'm going to wait to see what this Donald Trump is all about before I go out and actually cast a vote for him"?
This is why you hear about how "the demographics" overwhelmingly favor whomever the Democrats run in 2016. First, there are a lot more Democrats than Republicans in the US. Second, independents have actually been breaking against Donald Trump in the primaries. Third, even Republicans voted more often against Donald Trump than for him, and finally, the dude has a 70% disapproval rating since the end of the primaries. That means his disapproval numbers have jumped 10% in one month. His approval rating is at 29%, which is about the same as the approval rating of the mosquitoes that carry Zika virus.
It's time for you to start thinking of excuses for why Donald Trump got blown out in the general election. I suggest going with the, "they robbed him" excuse. That's a favorite of mine, and it's always been effective when my sports teams lose. Plus, it's almost certainly the excuse Donald will use because he seems constitutionally lacking in self-awareness. Come up with a good conspiracy theory and you'll be good to go for the next four long years that the unpleasant Mrs Clinton will be president.
In the post-primary polls, Trump is getting crushed.
The reason Trump is so popular is that he's actually not popular at all.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelli...
It's like a zen koan for morons: "He's so popular that 70% of people can't stand him."
Gamergate logic.
The misspelling does blunt the impact a bit though.
The only place in the US that you're gonna see someone dressed as Uncle Sam is in a Pride Parade, and he'll probably have his ass cheeks exposed.
I'm actually more of a Einstürzende Neubauten kind of guy, but Red Mecca is good stuff.
Sorry, but when George W. Bush was ginning up the Iraq War with talk about WMDs, he was not talking about 30 year old canisters of mustard gas.
Here is a transcript of his speech from 2002 when he pointedly says that we should not "wait for a mushroom cloud" before invading Iraq.
http://edition.cnn.com/2002/AL...
And a month earlier, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice said this:
So you can point to all the op-ed pieces you want, but there it is in GWB's own goddamn words. Also, remember "aluminum tubes"? "Yellow cake uranium"?
Nah, I don't really have a beef with Reznor's music, or industrial. I had a goth girlfriend back in the day though, and it put me off black eye shadow and tattoos permanently. She's an evangelical Christian now and posts cute sayings and bible verses on Facebook.
I like the NIN ambient stuff, too.
Reznor should be ignored just based on that alone.
He is impossible to report on, like most TV celebs. It's all perception of people who don't really care about anything but style.
Fortunately, his poll numbers are dropping precipitously, which shows that the people who have avoided all the horse-race crap are finally starting to get engaged.
Dude is 70 years old and a friggin' billionaire. Doesn't it strike you as a little insecure that he's worrying about what he can and cannot "pull off"?
And regarding his hair being "real", I'm not sure that color and texture exist anywhere in nature. However, there's simply too much to unpack regarding Donald's hair. I simply chalk it up to one of those great mysteries.
Iron-clad logic, right there.
Trump 2016
See what I mean? They're not mad, they're actually laughing.
It does say something about his judgement that he wears that thing in public and thinks it looks OK. I mean, there are expensive rugs that look really good and you can't tell. If dude is so rich and cares so much about his appearance, why would he go out looking like a troll doll with radiation poisoning? I mean, Charles Nelson-Reilly had a better hairpiece than The Donald. On the other hand, if Trump does NOT really care about his appearance, then why spend all the time and energy and expense to cover up the fact that he's bald?
Here's a great American president who didn't spend $60k on a bad weave:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...
Not only was he such a bad-ass that he kicked Hitler's ass, but he led this country into an era when we actually became great, and did not give one single fuck about the fact that he was losing his hair. He was like the presidential version of Dwayne Johnson. And let me tell you, 63% of American women have not said they will never vote for Dwayne Johnson the way they have about Trump. Hell, 63% of American men would probably give Dwayne Johnson an enthusiastic reach-around if he asked right now. That's how cool and manly bald-ass Dwayne Johnson is, like Ike.
The original story that set off this latest Peter Thiel tantrum is one of the best actual pieces of journalism about Trump that's been in any media outlet, anywhere. Even harsh critics of Gawker singled it out as an excellent story.
Here's what one Pulitzer-winner (Dan Fagin) said about the story:
David Simon, the former prize-winning journalist and screenwriter of "The Wire" said of the Gawker story:
He also said that if the US press had done work this good on the question of WMDs and the run-up the Iraq War, that war never would have happened.
You have to admit that the story itself, meticulously sourced and thoroughly researched, is pretty impressive.
http://gawker.com/is-donald-tr...
It draws a very interesting picture of the man, Donald Trump.
And Mr Harder's lawsuit? It's pretty funny reading too, since he tries to assert that his legal demand for retraction and apology is covered by copyright law.
I realize that a lot of the ACs here hate Gawker and their properties because they were harsh on #gamergate and MRAs (who even named their now-defunct gamergate forum, "Kotaku in Action" to prove that they're not mad, they're actually laughing), but I recommend reading the stories for yourself and forming your own opinion.
http://gawker.com/now-peter-th...
Trump 2016
I've got a '95 Escort Wagon with 43,000 miles on it. One of the best cars I've ever owned. Old enough to vote, and the last major expense I had to sink into it was adding freon to the AC and a new set of tires in 2014. Looks like new except my wife put a little crack in the back bumper during a snow storm last year backing out of our parking spot in the alley. And I'm the second owner. It has zero resale value, which is just how I like 'em. I could practically leave the keys in the damn thing and not have to worry.
In Illinois, a car that old doesn't need to have emissions testing either, so I save money there. My wife gets new cars. I love my '95 Escort. I don't drive very much, but last year I took that car from Chicago to Connecticut and back. Not so quick over the hills in Pennsylvania, but it got me there. And it's so nondescript that cops leave me completely alone. I don't even get stopped for driving while old the way I do when I drive the wife's Audi.
That's easy. For men, it's
https://chrishernandezauthor.f...
and for women, it's this fetching ensemble:
https://humanbreeds.files.word...
Man, this is Texas we're talking about here. Don't nobody give no nevermind to no nanny state traffic signs down here. Hell, when we see a traffic sign here in the Lone Star State, we just shoot the bejeebus out of it. I mean really fill that bitch with lead. Just to show who's boss, you know? Sometimes, you have to water the tree of liberty with the blood of some got-damn traffic signs.
Live free or die.
Absolutely.
Now, if they'd hacked these traffic signs by whistling we'd have something to talk about. Or from a cyber-cafe in Bulgaria. This is just stupid vandalism.
Please join me on a virtual tour of poor trigger discipline. And these are all "gun enthusiasts" and "Second Amendment activists".
http://all-len-all.com/wp-cont...
http://i51.tinypic.com/derc7a....
http://www.armoryblog.com/wp-c...
https://41.media.tumblr.com/tu...
https://gunmart.files.wordpres...
Let's review:
"Hobbyists tend to be better trained than professionals".