Cadillac Man surprised me in sincerely being afraid of what Trump may do and clearly more than Clinton.
For the checklist, both score at the top of the chart for wild narcissism. Both seem to have the same intelligence and neither will launch a rocket but they can at least do their sums without asking for help. One is wild-eyed extreme right and the other is not so far to the right. Neither has any serious chance of accomplishing anything since Congress hasn't even had a bowel movement since 1968. Mitch McConnell may not have ever had one.
Trump is a loudmouthed braggart but so what. I wouldn't want to hang out with him but I don't see anything threatening, he's just annoying. There was the 'big revelation' of his 'locker room banter' earlier today but I didn't hear anything particularly damning and he's still just a loudmouth. When he talks of how 'I tried to nail her,' he's just like every other asshole you couldn't wait to leave behind when you left high school.
That his ideas are more racist than that of the so-called Democrats is seriously in question, tho.
Did you see even the slightest kind of improvement in civil rights in the last eight years of Obama?
Right. We didn't either.
And sitting back doing nothing while the corporation plowed up the Indian graves was a landmark for human rights, wasn't it.
While Trump shoots off his mouth, Clinton never says much of anything and you couldn't get controversy out of her if you held her upside-down and shook her. Her ability to be annoying is remarkable since she doesn't seem to want to be annoying whereas Trump just doesn't care.
There's really nothing much to say about her as she's an aggressively unremarkable woman. There's nothing to say she's really good at this and neither is there anything to say she is really bad with that. There's just nothing and still her biggest campaign advantage is that she isn't Trump.
Somewhere y'all go sliding down a snake every time is regarding nuclear weapons and which one is responsible enough to manage them. The answer remains neither of them since we have heard some lip service toward reduction of nuclear weapons but there's not one scintilla of a plan to do it.
Note: Snakes 'n Ladders is a board game for kids in Australia. America has some sissy name for the same game over here, Chutes 'n Ladders, I think.
The fundamental flaw in the logic y'all use in the question isn't about entrusting the nukes to the best soldier but rather to the worst. When America holds almost five thousand live nukes, the chance of some jagoff general going off pop goes higher with each new one. Without an overt plan to end that foolhardiness, I have no reason to take anyone seriously on nuclear weapons.
Therefore I conclude Trump and Clinton are an equivalent risk toward a nuclear war since neither gives any serious respect to the problem and there's little to show they even understand it. As to which one scares me, both of them.
For the checklist, both score at the top of the chart for wild narcissism. Both seem to have the same intelligence and neither will launch a rocket but they can at least do their sums without asking for help. One is wild-eyed extreme right and the other is not so far to the right. Neither has any serious chance of accomplishing anything since Congress hasn't even had a bowel movement since 1968. Mitch McConnell may not have ever had one.
Trump is a loudmouthed braggart but so what. I wouldn't want to hang out with him but I don't see anything threatening, he's just annoying. There was the 'big revelation' of his 'locker room banter' earlier today but I didn't hear anything particularly damning and he's still just a loudmouth. When he talks of how 'I tried to nail her,' he's just like every other asshole you couldn't wait to leave behind when you left high school.
That his ideas are more racist than that of the so-called Democrats is seriously in question, tho.
Did you see even the slightest kind of improvement in civil rights in the last eight years of Obama?
Right. We didn't either.
And sitting back doing nothing while the corporation plowed up the Indian graves was a landmark for human rights, wasn't it.
While Trump shoots off his mouth, Clinton never says much of anything and you couldn't get controversy out of her if you held her upside-down and shook her. Her ability to be annoying is remarkable since she doesn't seem to want to be annoying whereas Trump just doesn't care.
There's really nothing much to say about her as she's an aggressively unremarkable woman. There's nothing to say she's really good at this and neither is there anything to say she is really bad with that. There's just nothing and still her biggest campaign advantage is that she isn't Trump.
Somewhere y'all go sliding down a snake every time is regarding nuclear weapons and which one is responsible enough to manage them. The answer remains neither of them since we have heard some lip service toward reduction of nuclear weapons but there's not one scintilla of a plan to do it.
Note: Snakes 'n Ladders is a board game for kids in Australia. America has some sissy name for the same game over here, Chutes 'n Ladders, I think.
The fundamental flaw in the logic y'all use in the question isn't about entrusting the nukes to the best soldier but rather to the worst. When America holds almost five thousand live nukes, the chance of some jagoff general going off pop goes higher with each new one. Without an overt plan to end that foolhardiness, I have no reason to take anyone seriously on nuclear weapons.
Therefore I conclude Trump and Clinton are an equivalent risk toward a nuclear war since neither gives any serious respect to the problem and there's little to show they even understand it. As to which one scares me, both of them.
2 comments:
I dont think either is a risk for nuclear war. As it takes stuidity or balls to start one. They arent stupid but do say and do many stupid things.
And as far as balls go Hillary wears them on her chin and Trump keeps his in a jar
I find his comments far more than higj lockerroom chatter. As one comment I believe was you can grab thier ass and they cant do anything about it.
I don't see either as an active risk but I don't see enough gumption in either to stand up to the Pentagon either and that crew has a bunch of certified lunatics.
I didn't hear all of what Trump said and it appears what I did hear was cut quite short. The part I heard was with 'I tried to nail her.' We can move him up from loudmouth braggart to total sleazoid and it's fine for me as he's a skank either way.
Post a Comment