MASSIVE Erection Thread 2016 - Lizard has the advantage. Trump is spiraling towards defeat.

  • Thread starter Thread starter JU 199
  • Start date Start date
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Status
Not open for further replies.
First title
NEtitle.png


second title
title2.png


third title
US 2016 Presidential election Trump victory leaves rivals distressed and confused Kiwi Farms.png


Fourth title
trumptitle4.png


Fifth and Sixth title
new title (1).png


Seventh title
Screenshot_2016-06-07-12-33-22.png


eighth title
Apocalypse 2016.png


Ninth title
Screenshot_2016-07-25-23-47-41~2.jpg


tenth title
title10.png


All discussion of the candidates, updates and results should go here

For example- here's a video of Ted Cruz vying for world domination.


Also Hilary Clinton is a crook and nobody should have sex with her.

Discuss

(Note- The title will change as we get nearer the election, previous titles will be archived in the OP)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Click to expand...
feedtheoctopus said:
And destroying the entire republican party in the process, solely to satiate his own ego.

Not that I'm complaining, in fact I highly support The Donald's personal jihad against his own constituency.
Click to expand...
The Republican Party has lost the senate and house multiple times. And in pretty big numbers too, it takes a lot more than a lolcow candidate with a big ego to destroy a party.

Pikimon said:
Doesn't the other party also shit on women a fair bit with their restrictive women rights laws and policy proposals?
Click to expand...
I think the difference the other party isn't open about it. The Democrats openly shit on men, at least that's how I see it. Not that you're entirely wrong it's just they go about differently.
 
Pikimon said:
Doesn't the other party also shit on women a fair bit with their restrictive women rights laws and policy proposals?
Click to expand...

Kind of? The Republican party doesn't blame all the world's ills on toxic femininity though.
 
Shugo said:
To be fair only tumblr/twitter psychos are saying that about men, no one anywhere close to any high office, at least that I've heard.
Click to expand...

Elizabeth Warren
Maxine Waters
Jill Stein

Google their public statements and enjoy.
 
PortsideDave said:
The Republican Party has lost the senate and house multiple times. And in pretty big numbers too, it takes a lot more than a lolcow candidate with a big ego to destroy a party.


I think the difference the other party isn't open about it. The Democrats openly shit on men, at least that's how I see it. Not that you're entirely wrong it's just they go about differently.
Click to expand...

Most analysts are saying this is a shakeup that they haven't seen before. At least not in the past few decades. It's not really just about Trump even, this sort of thing was brewing for awhile. There's always been a tension between the country club sector of the GOP and the talk radio listening fanatic faction. The former, historically, exploits the latter and then fucks them over once in office. Hence Trump and people getting angry about "the establishment" (a broad term that seems to encompass "anybody I don't like" nowadays, though that's a different issue). The post-southern strategy coalition the republicans have relied on for decades is falling apart at the seams. If it was just a matter of one election they could probably work through this (and for sure, that's what people like Paul Ryan are banking on). But all this infighting isn't going to end anytime soon. Generally speaking when shit like this goes down in other countries that's when you see parties split and new ones pop up. Right now they're trying desperately to hold it together, but there's serious ideological differences in the GOP that are preventing them from reaching any sort of consensus.
 
PortsideDave said:
The Republican Party has lost the senate and house multiple times.
Click to expand...

No, not really. In fact, there weren't many instances of either house or senate suddenly flipping to the control of one party throughout the last 160 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_power_in_the_United_States_over_time

Over the past 100 years the Democratic party has held power nearly twice as long as the Republicans in both the Senate and the House. And the Democratic party has had control of the White House and the two Houses of Congress for 35 years, compared to 16 years for the Republican party over the last 100 years
Click to expand...
 
Shugo said:
What are some of the main "restrictive" women's rights laws apart from abortion proposed by Republicans?



Jill's only held public office was an "elected member of the Lexington Town Meeting."

The other two do hold office though.
Click to expand...

She's running for president so I felt it was high profile enough to be included.
 
Oh Long Johnson said:
Two caveats - one being southern democrats and the second being the colossus that was FDR. It doesn't even things out but it is completely unfair to use numbers like that without context.
Click to expand...

@PortsideDave made an inaccurate statement, and I've corrected him. Nothing unfair about that, and with all due respect, I fail to see what point you're trying to convey, seeing as southern dems overwhelmingly supported FDR and were much of the same.
 
Disgusted Face Hold said:
@PortsideDave made an inaccurate statement, and I've corrected him. Nothing unfair about that, and with all due respect, I fail to see what point you're trying to convey, seeing as southern dems overwhelmingly supported FDR and were much of the same.
Click to expand...
The point is that if you look at things like party control over the past 100 years, there is a gigantic blob where we elected FDR god emperor and a party revolt that helped usher in a massive period of democrat dominance of Congress. If you look at the past 40 instead, it is much more representative of both our current reality and the power of each party going forward.

The past 40 years should tell you things are more chaotic in Congress while the Presidency has been an 8 year gig before flipping to the opposition, Bush and likely Clinton excepted.
 
My take on everything now is whether win or lose, there's going to be a massive shit wave for a few months to a year that we can all surf on after the election.

Also a nice wikipedia article on the general history of the U.S. political system, split into 6 eras called "Party Systems". It helps put things into perspective and how this isn't the first time a massive political shit-storm has happened:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Party_System
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh Long Johnson said:
The point is that if you look at things like party control over the past 100 years, there is a gigantic blob where we elected FDR god emperor and a party revolt that helped usher in a massive period of democrat dominance of Congress. If you look at the past 40 instead, it is much more representative of both our current reality and the power of each party going forward.

The past 40 years should tell you things are more chaotic in Congress while the Presidency has been an 8 year gig before flipping to the opposition, Bush and likely Clinton excepted.
Click to expand...

I see what you mean, even thought you are only half-right. The gigantic blob you speak of simply doesn't exist; Dems have always been, on a national level, center-rightists up until the so-called Republican Revolution of 1994, after which the party went into a still ongoing self-genocidal spiral of unbridled cultural marxism.

Regardless, I can't say you are completely wrong on the 40 years assessment, seeing that many Dems overwhelmingly supported Reagan in both 1980 and 1984, and likewise, many Democratic congressmen constantly supported Reagan in spite of their party leadership (which was already run by insufferable shitlibs) telling them not to.
 
Male Idiot said:
The groups you mention has always been democrats. What I am curious about is what will happen to the poor whites whose only hero is Trump?
Will they fade into obscurity with no real party to represent them, or will they go down fighting?
Click to expand...

I can think of two possibilities:

1: The GOP splits between what used to be called the religious right (though now it's a lot more than just Christian fundamentalists) and the social/fiscal conservatives. The religious right hates the fiscals and refuses to work with them even as their power fades. The fiscals' decide their only hope is to create a new party without the baggage of the Republican brand and work to attract minority voters. Certain black, hispanic, and muslim voters are conservative, and combined with their remaining white voters they might pull it off.

2: The party completely fragments. Infighting paralyzes it to the point that even their most devoted voters give up on it. A new conservative party attracts the former Republican voters, and within a few years it rises as the Democrats' new rival.

Or maybe I'm totally wrong and the GOP will pull through. But as to your question, whites aren't going to go away so much as have to adapt to a new political reality where they are just one group of many politicians will be trying to court instead of the only group that matters. Things like the southern strategy won't work anymore.

PortsideDave said:
I think he's the most successful lolcow in the world. If he loses the election will he get a thread?
Click to expand...

It depends on how he acts. If he accepts it more or less probably not. If he chimps out bad and declares the election invalid or says something really stupid like the military should overthrow Clinton...maybe.
 
Trump has just told his supporters to remember to vote on November 28th. :story:

http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-tells-rally-crowd-to-vote-on-november-28-2016-10

Go and register. Make sure you get out and vote November 28," the GOP presidential nominee said in Panama City Beach, Florida.

Election Day is November 8.

The Manhattan mogul started the day declaring himself free from the "shackles" of his own party, coming off the mounting turmoil that is currently engulfing nearly everything in his orbit.
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/ditzkoff/status/786017457588801536/video/1
 
trombonista said:
I noticed this a long time ago, but he has such a weird way of writing tweets that if he weren't rich, famous, and the GOP nom, I'd consider making a lolcow thread on him.
Click to expand...
His profile pic is what does it for me. Politics aside, Trump makes me die laughing every time I read on of his tweets. The combination of his downright surreal statements with that hyper-serious expression is just humorous as shit.
 
An Ounce of Vagina said:
I can think of two possibilities:

1: The GOP splits between what used to be called the religious right (though now it's a lot more than just Christian fundamentalists) and the social/fiscal conservatives. The religious right hates the fiscals and refuses to work with them even as their power fades. The fiscals' decide their only hope is to create a new party without the baggage of the Republican brand and work to attract minority voters. Certain black, hispanic, and muslim voters are conservative, and combined with their remaining white voters they might pull it off.

2: The party completely fragments. Infighting paralyzes it to the point that even their most devoted voters give up on it. A new conservative party attracts the former Republican voters, and within a few years it rises as the Democrats' new rival.

Or maybe I'm totally wrong and the GOP will pull through. But as to your question, whites aren't going to go away so much as have to adapt to a new political reality where they are just one group of many politicians will be trying to court instead of the only group that matters. Things like the southern strategy won't work anymore.
Click to expand...

The GOP will only pull through because of gerrymandering. If we actually took that away from them in a real and effective way, they'd fucking die out and we could begin to have multiple parties to actually cater to the citizens again, just like every sane first-world nation out there! But if that ever does happen, the Dems must go down with them. It's only fair and (most importantly/honestly) the only way.
 
Shokew said:
The GOP will only pull through because of gerrymandering. If we actually took that away from them in a real and effective way, they'd fucking die out and we could begin to have multiple parties to actually cater to the citizens again, just like every sane first-world nation out there! But if that ever does happen, the Dems must go down with them. It's only fair and (most importantly/honestly) the only way.
Click to expand...

The most likely actual outcome is the splintering of the Dems. The Democratic Party right now is a fusion of progressive/leftists (mostly young), centrist neoliberal types who would be republicans if the Republican Party stood for anything these days, and minorities who are sometimes pretty conservative but are driven away from the Republican Party by the base's white nationalism. The Republican Party has succeeded so well at driving away natural allies that they're likely to be absolutely crushed at the national level this year and for the foreseeable future, and only an intense gerrymander will save their House majority. Even that is likely to end in 2020 when the next redistricting happens because presidential year elections favor Democrats due to increased turnout.

This is not sustainable. Long term what's likely to happen is the complete disintegration of the current Republican coalition, with the white nationalists and hardcore revanchists disenfranchised. The next Trump-like candidate is going to be carpet bombed out of existence with every dirty trick the Party can come up with to prevent a recurrence of this outcome. Trump's base will either quietly fall in line with the new Republican consensus, split off into no-hoped third parties, or die off (a lot of them are old and the Baby Boomers are starting to die in real numbers).

This will leave the neocon hawks, the fiscal conservatives, the Grover Norquist types. They have natural allies in the right wing of the Democratic Party. Think Ben Nelson and the like. In my opinion the most likely vehicle for this is more conservative voters leaving the Democratic Party to vote for moderate Rs, but the Republican brand is in the toilet right now so it's possible that the reverse happens and for a while, the Democratic Primary becomes the real race in a number of swing states the way it is now in places like Massachusetts. This comes to a head the next time the Dems have to nominate a president, leaving a fissure that splits them into two parties while the old Republicans fade to rump status except maybe in the Old South. The factor that could delay this is that as long as the Republican Party keeps nominating insane old authoritarians, the people who WOULD be leaving the Democrats will be scared into staying.

Oh, and as far as the men/women thing: if it was as simple as "republicans for men, democrats for women" democrats would win every race from now until the end of time. There are more women than men in the electorate and that trend is accelerating, not reversing. There are plenty of women who vote for republican candidates, though not as many this year, and plenty of men who would rather be democrats. There are more than two categories though and if you're a black, Latino, gay, or Muslim man, you are overwhelmingly likely to support Dems because of the Republican base's open hostility. That sort of works in reverse, with white women being a traditional Republican constituency, but Clinton is on track to win them for the first time in a WHILE because of Trump.
 
Last edited:
There's a new poll out showing Trump is tied with clinton in Utah

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...l-shows-a-tie-in-utah-be-skeptical-be-amazed/
Public Policy Polling surveyed in the state in mid-August -- near Hillary Clinton's peak nationally -- and found Donald Trump leading her by 20 points. In early September, UtahPolicy.com released a survey showing Trump with a 15-point lead, and introducing independent candidates Evan McMullin, who got 9 percent. In mid-September, the Salt Lake Tribune found that Trump had a 9-point lead over Clinton, with McMullin at 12.

Twenty-15-9. McMullin at zero-9-12. You see where this is going.

On Wednesday morning, Deseret News reported on a new poll in the state from a Utah-based company called Y2 Analytics. Donald Trump's lead in this new poll is 0 percent, a tie with Clinton at 26 percent support. McMullin has jumped to 22 percent, within the margin of error, and Libertarian Gary Johnson is at 16.

There's not a lot of polling done in Utah, so it's worth remembering that this is one poll, in isolation. And that said: Dang.
Click to expand...

Hilary keeps increasing her lead over trump everywhere else. She's now 8 points ahead in Ohio. How can any major western party screw up this badly?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom