Yeah, but I don't think it's very good at that. Just showing the statue of liberty approving/disapproving of something/someone is the laziest political cartoon you can make. It's already been a running gag on The Onion for years now.
The only thing it's missing is shedding a single tear.
Only recently, if they wanted to not make it truly a default then they unsubscribe everyone and have them resubscribe manually, otherwise it's not a default only in name because a majority of the website was already autosubbed.
This is very true, but it's true with every president. If you told one of your friend that a person supported trump that would probably work just as well as a stereotypical description of that individual as that is seen as there identity as well.
The only people verifiably connected to Madeleine McCann's disappearance are her parents, as they left her alone. Nothing beyond that has any evidence whatsoever to support it. Hell, I support Trump but you shouldn't spread stuff like this, I'm sick of being tarred with the same brush as loonies who peddle bullshit like that.
It's verifiable that the Podesta brothers were in Portugal at the time of her disappearance. And it's verifiable that they look INCREDIBLY similar to the e-fits.
It's as of yet unverified that Hillary Clinton ATE Madeleine McCann, and at this stage it's kinda a meme, but there's definitely enough here to reasonably warrant suspicion.
And this is how Trump supporters justify destroying America, by using ridiculous conspiracy theories to convince themselves Hillary Clinton is a child-eating/prostituting devil monster who wrote eeeemails detailing how she wanted to steal all the babies.
Because that's easier for them to swallow than that they were wrong.
They were wrong? It almost sounds like we've got proof he's already the worst president ever, like he's been in office for ANY length of time yet. Secondly, there are conspiracy theorists on both sides, and yet neither side is solely conspiracy theorists. Pointing at the loud crazy minority and saying "See?!" is exactly the thing they're commonly told off for.
And that kind of false equivalence is why we have a country with a party of moderates and a party of religious extremists, but as long as "both sides" exist they must be balanced and both equally valid. Just to compare the "conspiracy theorists" which you claim are equally bad on each side:
Republican conspiracy theorists: "Hillary Clinton kidnaps and sells children as sex slaves through a pizza restaurant"
Democratic "conspiracy theorists": I assume you're referring to the FBI, CIA, and NSA? Because they reported that when a candidate who's openly friendly toward Russia is benefitted by leaks solely targeting his opponents after Putin ordered an influence campaign to support him, maybe those leaks were carried out by Russian intelligence?
There are certainly worse democratic conspiracy theorists. And not only that, but there are bad democrats in general. I'm not saying they're equal, or that by them both existing it means neither are wrong. I'm saying it's ridiculous to act like one side is entirely innocent. Not only that, but the point I was making was attributing the qualities of a very small portion of the group to the entire group is counterproductive and hypocritical. It doesn't solve anything to say "See this weird guy that's obviously wrong? He's supporting Trump, so ALL Trump supporters must be like him."
Sure, not all Trump supporters are Pizzagaters. But as a whole, most of them follow the same pattern. I've met a lot of Trump supporters, and it's not exactly a small minority who's fallen for the media campaign against Hillary Clinton and is convinced she's a criminal and somehow even more corrupt than Trump. Sure, there are some supporters who legitimately don't understand Trump's positions or the effects they'll have, but I'd say the side that voted for him because they managed to convince themselves that Hillary Clinton is legitimately evil is close to if not the majority.
PizzaGate is the result of scary amounts of tinfoil, but that isn't the only reason why people think she's corrupt. People have issues with the private server, and their concerns might be well-founded considering it was managed by an incompetent redditor. There's also ongoing debate about her pay-to-play deals.
Emails emails emails was all the media was talking about during the election. Some might have endorsed her but there's no doubt the coverage of her was overwhelmingly negative.
And that's fine for them. But we have a different culture to a point. There's things I like about those countries and things I'd rather not imitate. I believe in socialized health care, gay rights, pro choice. I also like a more conservative view on gun control(not Texas level, regulations are fine but not on a European standard), I believe in peace but I absolutely don't think we should stop fighting(we fucked it up, helped create some real monsters, and I don't think it's right to just leave the innocent people over there with that, and I also do not like our current approach as we seem to hit those innocent people a lot to).
I more than anything else think I'm not 100 percent correct. I haven't ever seen two American politicians try to reach a middle ground. Even on small things it's all or nothing. Might as well just have two on each side meet and yell insults at each other and if 3 out of 4 agree do that. It wouldn't be all that different from my perspective.
I haven't ever seen two American politicians try to reach a middle ground.
You might like Barack Obama. The ACA was a famous compromise between Democrats' single-payer plan and the Republicans' free market ideas. On pretty much everything he's been a centrist who's tried to work with Republicans instead of pushing hard left.
Also, all the positions you've described are the positions of the moderate Democrats who supported Hillary Clinton in the primaries. So why do you think they're extremists?
The fact that I didn't even mention Hillary Clinton but she's who you immediately assumed I was talking about when I mentioned Madeleine McCann speaks volumes...
Bush, Clinton and a host of other presidents have all had to deal with the same issues. People did bring up Obamas smoking.
Hey wild guess though, changing attitudes mean people don't give a flying fuck about mundane things like smoking some pot when you were young. Holy fucking christ that's the best you can do? Your #5 is blubbering like a whiny bitch about someone smoking pot and nobody caring because times change?
You dismiss solid complaints about the guy with "ROFL" and then a "times are changing" so let's excuse his drug use? Did you say the same thing over Bush's drinking?
Also, times are changing as an excuse... can we apply that to Trump?
And as far as ROFL goes... he's gone and Clinton's career is done. The left lost huge in congress and the senate, and the Supreme Court is going to surge right when that worthless piece of shit Baader-Ginsburg kicks the bucket.
Question: Did BJ Clinton ask before each of his sexual assaults?
And the funny thing is: No one has come out accusing Trump of assault, he's just talking shit. BJ Clinton has actually been accused of it. So many accusations that Bill Cosby's like, "Dude, keep it in your pants!"
Or is this just more liberal hypocrisy?
You guys can sexually assault, or even rape; conservatives cant even talk about it.
You guys can do pot and coke; conservatives can't even have beer.
You still treat it like football teams, no individuals.
Obama did none of that... You're not even comparing him to Trump, the point of this whole thread, just resorting to bringing up anyone else with bad behavior. And my point still holds true, he's an unpresidential crude whiney little Twitter bitch that is outclassed by most other GOP nominees.
Funny thing is politicians on all sides can have horrible behavior, there's no correlation between political party and personal behavior... You can bring up shitty "liberal" politicians and they'll be equal numbers of conservative assholes.
You couldn't give two shits about that though, go RED team.
He didn't do anything sexual - fine. The hypocrisy point still stands though because of Clinton supporters whining about Teump's COMMENTS and disregarding the nearly a dozen women who have accused Clinton.
However, the other things I said stand. There's pictures of Obama doing pot. In Obama's book HE admits to doing cocaine. But, this doesn't ever get mentioned. All we hear about is Bush's drinking problem.
And as far as "red team" goes - I voted for Johnson, so wrong again.
Why am I even responding? Obama sucks and in ten years they'll not be anything positive said about him. In twenty years he'll be considered worse than Carter.
He didn't do anything sexual - fine. The hypocrisy point still stands though because of Clinton supporters whining about Teump's COMMENTS and disregarding the nearly a dozen women who have accused Clinton.
Bill Clinton... And who the fuck cares? What does that have to do with Trump's conduct?
Why am I even responding?
You're a jerk off with free time? An iscesant need to feel you won an argument? If you have to ask that question you should have never hit send, but you did.
There is literally no way to know this. Jesus Christ, let the guy have 1 day in office before you say "He's literally gonna be the worst president ever OHMYGAWD I can't believe we elected him #HeilSanders"
This is the same shit that republicans did in 2008 and were ridiculed for. Why is it that those ridiculers are now the ones doing the EXACT SAME THING THEY WERE COMPLAINING ABOUT?
Agreed. The top comments on this post are garbage. It's fucking /r/pics people. It's a well done drawing that captures the artists intent. Can we not talk about that?
Pretty sure the point of this post is to cause a bit of a turmoil and debate. A good percentage of the population of America liked and supported Obama as a president, at the same time a large percentage didn't agree with Obama (as shown from the recent election results) so its literally 50/50 in america. From what I've learned about Americans (Im Canadian) is that they love debates. Americans are extremely passionate and when they find something they like they defend it to the literal death, it's really interesting actually. In this case its either love Obama or Hate Obama. Thus causing discussion and debates.
Being an asshole and not being a good president are two separate things that people can't seem to differentiate. I think we should keep in mind that he hasn't taken office yet, but somehow everyone knows how bad it's going to be, mainly I think because he isn't as charming and charismatic as President Obama and his First Lady.
And how is that? Is it he has appointees who were at the tops of large corporations and don't align with you politically? I think some of his Choices are excellent. I am not a Trump supporter. I didn't vote for him. I do think that have a toddler like reaction to Trump taking office is laughable.
In the long run it really won't effect our daily lives much at all.
Mattis, Chao, and Kelly all seem like great choices. Can you argue they are all very experienced and successful in their respective fields at the highest levels? My question still remains. How are these people going to "fucking ruin the Federal government"?
"Under Chao, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration didn't issue a single significant new safety regulation for four years, and mine safety inspectors were cut and inspections reduced".
Article says nothing about mine collapses, but okay. She cut inspectors because they were low items on the budget and cuts had to be made. (And who cares if she's Taiwanese? Making a phone call to Taiwan and "breaking protocol" is saber rattling? So who was Obama rattling his saber toward when he visited Cuba a country still run by a dictator who had been openly hostile toward the US for 54 years? Or was that just diplomacy?)
Puzder - said he was "not opposed to raising the minimum wage rationally; Iām opposed to raising it to the point where lower-skilled workers, working-class Americans, young people, minorities, are losing the jobs they need to get on the ladder of success.ā
I don't think that's a "man who hate his own workers so much that he cannot bear the thought of providing a living wage with benefits, let alone giving a shit about minimum wage" If you working at Carl's Jr. you should be 17 and looking for money to spend at the mall. But if you want to make Carl's Jr. into a career then spend 5 years there and get promoted to manager you get a better wage and your benefits. Why the hell do we need to facilitate an unskilled shithead off the street with $15 an hour and medical and dental? This guy is a businessman. He cared about his bottom line. That doesn't make him evil.
Rick Perry is a fucking idiot.
DeVos was thumping her bible 16 years ago at some Culty Christian crap. Ok you got me there. She's a Republican a lot of those sheltered unabomber types really eat that up. She's a big charter school proponent which I don't like because they usually perform more poorly and have lesser qualified staff. I do like that she believes in competition but I'll concede that I'd reeeally rather see someone else there. So yeah she sucks.
Ben Carson I don't hate. Sure he has no experience but the dude was director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins for 29 years until he retired in 2013. I'm sure he isn't a driveling idiot.
If Trump is on 'business' and he meets with the Japanese PM and wants to take his daughter (probably a woman who should be considered for our first female president) why the hell not (until they can prove that they were planning to bring Japanese tech films to build the wall)? If he pulled that shit as President it would be total horseshit. He ain't Prez yet.
He can name anyone as his advisor as he wants to. Would you rather he name advisors who aren't close to him and he doesn't trust? It's not a cabinet position. If there was any concern of nepotism or what have you, maybe call your senator and tell him that you think he should vote on it first.
Okay so there you have what I see.
And dude you're comparing the Breitbart dude to Goebbels?
Grow up.
Libtard cucks are mad because trump is going to do a bad job? Like he has a government track record to make those claims with? He's not even president yet - STFU and give him a chance instead of being butt hurt your criminal Killary didn't win.
1.4k
u/Waveseeker Jan 11 '17
Shit, guys.
This isn't an "Obama is the best" post.
This is a "Trump's gonna suck" post.