ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP

When you wait until no nut November to humiliate yourself as a sex object. They're not sending their best.

I think Schmodderhengst deserves a ticket for
-far left hate speech
-barking without biteing
-telling others what they should do
-supporting human trafficing
-needlessly attempting to overthrow other countries governments

maybe the correct pricetag would be a 20k USd donation to one of the american estatesharks inorder to help them build livingspace for one immigrant.
We will automatically deduct the amount from your bankaccount,
thanks for your cooperation.

With kind regards
The Ministry of Benevolence of OffTopic



------------------

Q: What if women went on a sex strike
A: It would result in less sex for womens, then unhappy wifes, then wifes that don´t feel loved anymore, then selfdivorced wifes and in the end armed Combatants that want to hunt down the last MGtoW´s.

"

Xavderion wrote:

When you wait until no nut November to humiliate yourself as a sex object. They're not sending their best.

Honestly, how many of the sort of women who would go on a political "sex strike" are likely having sex with Conservative voters to begin with? =^[.]^=

Trump is doing better with female voters than the average Republican.

I guess CNN thinks that if they keep repeating a lie it may come true.

President Donald Trump URGENT Speech on New Immigration Policy

Speech starts at 1:04:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POlBkXxwZ_w&t=3840s

President Donald Trump has the balls to give the kind of speeches that virtually none of the past presidents dare to give.

He truly deserves a Nobel Prize for saving the United States of America.

It is interesting to note how dissimilar the far right are from proper conservatives, and how dissimilar the far left are from proper liberals. The spectrum as we are meant to believe it, yet the polar extremes have more in common with one another than the sides in which they supposedly reside. They are both identitarian collectivist ideologies in which an individual is representative of the group, and vice versa, according to arbitrary traits.

A group is diverse according to the number of colors contained within, as, by virtue of their color, will each act in accordance to the interests of others of that color. A person of color can be persecuted because association with their color group is more representative of them than their individual merit. Both require the same flawed foundational principle, and both appear racist to those of a more traditional ideological bent—all members of an identity group are interchangeable, and thus denied agency and liberty.

If you pay attention to who is making claims and on what basis, a pattern should emerge. There has been a widespread coming out of racists across America, and they’re desperate to pin their ideological cousins to their political opponents. Perhaps, it is because conservatives and liberals have far more in common than to the ideological anchors in their peripherals.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Availability_cascade

Another low attempt from the right:

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-46080157

( Twitter deletes anti-voting bots )

"

stkmro wrote:

President Trump is reflecting anger, not creating it.

They must have found Gingrich in Trump´s anus for the interview, no one had to hold the microphone.

That´s also low :-)

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

It´s just a shitty racist campaign from a disgusting brute and his servants, not a real issue.

Totally insane, instead the international community would need to think of real cooperative solutions for climate change and migration, while it is still possible. That actually means fairness and helping others by international coordination. That would take some time, people in need should of course get immediate help. Saying anything alse is just saying "no more help for any refugees". Well , what could be a motivation to do so ? Racism, fear and greed for example.

Better stick to the international convention relating to the status of refugees at least.

Calling mere immigrants refugees mocks the concept of being a refugee. Here are some real examples: blacks fleeing the slave plantations of the southern US; business-owners fleeing Soviet Russia; Jews and Roma fleeing Nazi Germany. I don't think it would be appropriate to call a blonde Christian fleeing Nazi Germany a refugee, unless they'd been politically active against the Reich in a demonstrable way. Those are refugees.

What you're doing is pointing at all immigrants and acting as if living in any non-Western nation is such an intolerable existence that, by that circumstance alone, it is beholden uppn us to rescue them from their suffering. In some cases I might agree to this, e.g. a homosexual fleeing the Sharia law of Middle Eastern Islamic theocracy. Who I wouldn't consider refugees are the fundamentalists who would chuck such people from rooftops.

Where I draw the line is who or what is doing the oppressing. If the source of the people's oppression is Nature, that is, they are struggling to survive economically using systems that are perhaps deeply flawed but not evil, then those aren't refugees. On the other hand, if people are being actually persecuted in a foreign country due to the malicious acts of a corrupt power, then I would welcome those so persecuted into a freer land — but emphatically NOT their persecutors.

In either case, the idea that a flow of people could be allowed into my country unregulated, without an authority to judge worthy from unworthy and/or persecuted from persecutor, is unconscionable. To casually allow refugees to be followed into your land by the very oppressors they're risking their lives to distance themselves from is an insult to refugees everywhere.

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

Real issues are the American division, Trump makes his people hate immigrants along with "enemies of the people", democrats, "globalists" and those within the media that criticize him as they should. And he makes his opponents hate him and his servants.

The destruction of the center is a real issue, and I agree with your assessment that Trump has the media dancing to Trump's tune, but you're speaking from a perspective of someone who isn't friendly to the center to begin with. For instance, Trump's actual rhetoric is for legal (merit-based) immigration and strongly against illegal immigration, but he routinely and, in my estimation, deliberately baits the media into portraying Trump's position as being against all immigration. The rhetoric on both sides has created a situation where if I praise one Trump position I'm liable to be overheard and judged, by a single comment, as a devout worshiper of the God Emperor, while if I criticize a single Trump position I'm liable to be overheard and judged, by a single comment, as a fervorent social justice warrior. Both sides are playing this game of extreme partisanship because it's essentially a game of chicken; ultimately, each side figures that the center, seeing the ground erode under them, will make the "reasonable" decision and jump to their side for secure footing.

The problem is that the Left's narrative of how crazy the "Right" is relies on a particularly nonliteral interpretation of things the anti-Left says. You do realize that claiming your opponent is dogwhistling is technically a conspiracy theory, don't you? Not an unprovable conspiracy theory necessary, but if unsupported by cited evidence quite dubious. We've got the Democrat politicians, mainstream media and Hollywood breaking Godwin's Law all over the place, but to get to how Trump says horrible and offensive things I'm going to need a translator at least, and ideally evidence that the translation is valid. Until then, Trump seems more reasonable.

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

I really hope, a lot of people are going to vote, now and 2020 and defend themselves against the rule of ignorance, racism and stupidity.

Me too!

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

Another low attempt from the right:

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-46080157

( Twitter deletes anti-voting bots )

You mean Russia collusion?