The Hofoid House of Absurd & Ignorant Posts VII

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

This COULD just be about getting out before it gets ugly (Trump, midterms, etc) so that he can still launch a presidential campaign in 2024 without being too scarred.

Probably, and it leaves the irrational leftist hatred to Scalise(I'm guessing a large chunk of the #resistance wishes their crazed bernie bro finished the job)

The whole post is bad, but the part I bolded is disgusting on multiple levels.

[MasterJedi]

I don’t understand why Ryan would do this, when it seems that Republicans will
hold the House?

and

Horrid  news for the Dems. Blue wave is Dead now that Ryan cannot be used as an albatross.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

There is a concern that certain devout portions of their population might push back progress on women's rights and gay rights. I, myself, would not want to see women being shackled into their homes and being forced to wear restrictive clothing. I wouldn't want to see gay marriage and protections be rolled back. I want to be able to walk into Subway and get a ham sandwich (something increasingly difficult in places like the UK). I don't want our cities to turn into the no-go zones of Stockholm or Bradford, or Copenhagen.


...and I wouldn't want Christians pulling that crap either.

The whole thing is Islamophobic, but the ham sandwich part raises it to another level.

Wanting to eat pork (something people cannot accuse me of, btw) is Islamophobic? Okay.

Its not Islamophobic, but it is Speciesist, so it is immoral either way.

What is this word? My decision to buy chicken over beef at the market is now a f#cking “ism”?

No. No it is not.(believing that animals deserve rights is).

Am confused. I had assumed “speciesism” to be bias toward one species over another (and natural implications thereof). Apparently it’s the opposite. In any case, some D-MD has declared this belief in animal rights as immoral?

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

There is a concern that certain devout portions of their population might push back progress on women's rights and gay rights. I, myself, would not want to see women being shackled into their homes and being forced to wear restrictive clothing. I wouldn't want to see gay marriage and protections be rolled back. I want to be able to walk into Subway and get a ham sandwich (something increasingly difficult in places like the UK). I don't want our cities to turn into the no-go zones of Stockholm or Bradford, or Copenhagen.


...and I wouldn't want Christians pulling that crap either.

The whole thing is Islamophobic, but the ham sandwich part raises it to another level.

Wanting to eat pork (something people cannot accuse me of, btw) is Islamophobic? Okay.

Its not Islamophobic, but it is Speciesist, so it is immoral either way.

What is this word? My decision to buy chicken over beef at the market is now a f#cking “ism”?

No. No it is not.(believing that animals deserve rights is).

Am confused. I had assumed “speciesism” to be bias toward one species over another (and natural implications thereof). Apparently it’s the opposite. In any case, some D-MD has declared this belief in animal rights as immoral?

Any type of belief that any type of meat is acceptable to eat is speciesist, because it indicates that someone believes that humans should be allowed to discriminate against non-humans.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

There is a concern that certain devout portions of their population might push back progress on women's rights and gay rights. I, myself, would not want to see women being shackled into their homes and being forced to wear restrictive clothing. I wouldn't want to see gay marriage and protections be rolled back. I want to be able to walk into Subway and get a ham sandwich (something increasingly difficult in places like the UK). I don't want our cities to turn into the no-go zones of Stockholm or Bradford, or Copenhagen.


...and I wouldn't want Christians pulling that crap either.

The whole thing is Islamophobic, but the ham sandwich part raises it to another level.

Wanting to eat pork (something people cannot accuse me of, btw) is Islamophobic? Okay.

Its not Islamophobic, but it is Speciesist, so it is immoral either way.

What is this word? My decision to buy chicken over beef at the market is now a f#cking “ism”?

No. No it is not.(believing that animals deserve rights is).

Am confused. I had assumed “speciesism” to be bias toward one species over another (and natural implications thereof). Apparently it’s the opposite. In any case, some D-MD has declared this belief in animal rights as immoral?

Any type of belief that any type of meat is acceptable to eat is speciesist, because it indicates that someone believes that humans should be allowed to discriminate against non-humans.

Yes, we should be. Primarily because we can, but also because we should.

[WritOfCertiorari]

There is a concern that certain devout portions of their population might push back progress on women's rights and gay rights. I, myself, would not want to see women being shackled into their homes and being forced to wear restrictive clothing. I wouldn't want to see gay marriage and protections be rolled back. I want to be able to walk into Subway and get a ham sandwich (something increasingly difficult in places like the UK). I don't want our cities to turn into the no-go zones of Stockholm or Bradford, or Copenhagen.


...and I wouldn't want Christians pulling that crap either.

The whole thing is Islamophobic, but the ham sandwich part raises it to another level.

Wanting to eat pork (something people cannot accuse me of, btw) is Islamophobic? Okay.

Its not Islamophobic, but it is Speciesist, so it is immoral either way.

What is this word? My decision to buy chicken over beef at the market is now a f#cking “ism”?

No. No it is not.(believing that animals deserve rights is).

Am confused. I had assumed “speciesism” to be bias toward one species over another (and natural implications thereof). Apparently it’s the opposite. In any case, some D-MD has declared this belief in animal rights as immoral?

Any type of belief that any type of meat is acceptable to eat is speciesist, because it indicates that someone believes that humans should be allowed to discriminate against non-humans.

Vegetables and fungi are also species. Every species other than autotrophs has to eat or decompose other species to survive. Please take a biology class before you start spewing nonsense on this board.

[MasterJedi]

He must have seen internal polls that really spooked him.

Actually I believe since he came to realization that he won’t be able to do entitlement reform he basically lose interest for the job since that’s probably the reason he took it in the first place

he was smart for wanting to destroy the Social Security pyramid scheme. It's sad that the Republicans were too cowardly to do it.

[Dr. MB]

Randy Bryce makes Bernie Sanders look like Ted Cruz. That's how radical he is. He wants to completely do away with ICE. I'm going to go ahead and say Ryan and even that other far right wing lunatic Paul Nellehn would win at least 60-40

[RINO Tom]

He must have seen internal polls that really spooked him.

Actually I believe since he came to realization that he won’t be able to do entitlement reform he basically lose interest for the job since that’s probably the reason he took it in the first place

he was smart for wanting to destroy the Social Security pyramid scheme. It's sad that the Republicans were too cowardly to do it.

Really going to take the time to post HillGoose's posts in here...?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Trump's change in approval in one week in 5 recent polls.

Rasmussen: +4
Yougov: +5
Morning Consult: +3
Gallup: +3
Quinnipiac: +2

Clear tariff bump. Dems need to reconsider their hatred of the Rust Belt immediately.

There is already a surplus of concern trolls here, FFS.

Speaking facts about Dem collapse=Concern trolling.
"Permanent Dem Majority/The Sunbelt Billionaires will save us/White Men are Over"= Acceptable.

Atlas logic.

[MasterJedi]

He must have seen internal polls that really spooked him.

Actually I believe since he came to realization that he won’t be able to do entitlement reform he basically lose interest for the job since that’s probably the reason he took it in the first place

he was smart for wanting to destroy the Social Security pyramid scheme. It's sad that the Republicans were too cowardly to do it.

Really going to take the time to post HillGoose's posts in here...?

That one was even awful by his standards.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

There is a concern that certain devout portions of their population might push back progress on women's rights and gay rights. I, myself, would not want to see women being shackled into their homes and being forced to wear restrictive clothing. I wouldn't want to see gay marriage and protections be rolled back. I want to be able to walk into Subway and get a ham sandwich (something increasingly difficult in places like the UK). I don't want our cities to turn into the no-go zones of Stockholm or Bradford, or Copenhagen.


...and I wouldn't want Christians pulling that crap either.

The whole thing is Islamophobic, but the ham sandwich part raises it to another level.

Wanting to eat pork (something people cannot accuse me of, btw) is Islamophobic? Okay.

Its not Islamophobic, but it is Speciesist, so it is immoral either way.

What is this word? My decision to buy chicken over beef at the market is now a f#cking “ism”?

No. No it is not.(believing that animals deserve rights is).

Am confused. I had assumed “speciesism” to be bias toward one species over another (and natural implications thereof). Apparently it’s the opposite. In any case, some D-MD has declared this belief in animal rights as immoral?

Any type of belief that any type of meat is acceptable to eat is speciesist, because it indicates that someone believes that humans should be allowed to discriminate against non-humans.

I've been a vegetarian for five years and this is a bad take.

[HillGoose]

He must have seen internal polls that really spooked him.

Actually I believe since he came to realization that he won’t be able to do entitlement reform he basically lose interest for the job since that’s probably the reason he took it in the first place

he was smart for wanting to destroy the Social Security pyramid scheme. It's sad that the Republicans were too cowardly to do it.

Really going to take the time to post HillGoose's posts in here...?

That one was even awful by his standards.

its true!

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

There is a concern that certain devout portions of their population might push back progress on women's rights and gay rights. I, myself, would not want to see women being shackled into their homes and being forced to wear restrictive clothing. I wouldn't want to see gay marriage and protections be rolled back. I want to be able to walk into Subway and get a ham sandwich (something increasingly difficult in places like the UK). I don't want our cities to turn into the no-go zones of Stockholm or Bradford, or Copenhagen.


...and I wouldn't want Christians pulling that crap either.

The whole thing is Islamophobic, but the ham sandwich part raises it to another level.

Wanting to eat pork (something people cannot accuse me of, btw) is Islamophobic? Okay.

Its not Islamophobic, but it is Speciesist, so it is immoral either way.

What is this word? My decision to buy chicken over beef at the market is now a f#cking “ism”?

No. No it is not.(believing that animals deserve rights is).

Am confused. I had assumed “speciesism” to be bias toward one species over another (and natural implications thereof). Apparently it’s the opposite. In any case, some D-MD has declared this belief in animal rights as immoral?

Any type of belief that any type of meat is acceptable to eat is speciesist, because it indicates that someone believes that humans should be allowed to discriminate against non-humans.

Carrot juice is murder.

[Sirius_]

Only Tiffany.  The rest, in my opinion, are complicit.  Yes Barron, you too.

[NewYorkExpress]

This entire thread:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=289496.0

For those who don't want to click the link, it's asking if the respondent would make love to President Trump to prevent World War III.

So...yeah.

[Landslide Lyndon]

This entire thread:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=289496.0

For those who don't want to click the link, it's asking if the respondent would make love to President Trump to prevent World War III.

So...yeah.

The answers were hilarious.

[Cold War Liberal]

White people were always very sympathetic to the Holocaust because they view Jews as being just like them.

[MasterJedi]

The amount of red avatars here cheering is disheartening, and a symptom of the globalism that has infected both parties.

[NewYorkExpress]

This entire thread:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=289496.0

For those who don't want to click the link, it's asking if the respondent would make love to President Trump to prevent World War III.

So...yeah.

The answers were hilarious.

You cross-post that into the hilarity thread.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Context:

I wish he'd go away.

He tried to ride on the Trump Train after he sabotaged Clinton and after his ass got fired he has been trying his latest facade as a warrior for the #Resistance.

Loser.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Context:

I wish he'd go away.

He tried to ride on the Trump Train after he sabotaged Clinton and after his ass got fired he has been trying his latest facade as a warrior for the #Resistance.

Loser.

I see nothing false about this.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Context:

I wish he'd go away.

He tried to ride on the Trump Train after he sabotaged Clinton and after his ass got fired he has been trying his latest facade as a warrior for the #Resistance.

Loser.

I see nothing false about this.

Neither do I.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Context:

I wish he'd go away.

He tried to ride on the Trump Train after he sabotaged Clinton and after his ass got fired he has been trying his latest facade as a warrior for the #Resistance.

Loser.

I see nothing false about this.

There was nothing wrong with Comey’s handling of the Clinton e-mail probe and the myth that there was is just a Clintonite attempt to deflect any blame away from folks like Mook, Podesta, Hillary, etc.  If anyone behaved inappropriately it was Loretta Lynch; her conduct was completely unacceptable.

[YE]

who was our best shot?

National Democrats liked Huffstetler the best, but they also thought Jay Hulings, Ed Meier, and Alex Triantaphyllis would be the best in Texas, soooo. Looks like he's going to be joining the rank of strong fundraisers who DC wanted but flopped when it came to getting actual votes.

Jay Hulings, Ed Meier, and Alex Triantaphyllis kind of were the best.... primary electorate isn't the general electorate.

Only if you have a strong preference for male candidates. Gina Ortiz Jones and Lizzie Fletcher were the top vote-getters for a good reason.

By that logic, Christine O'Donnell was a stronger candidate than Mike Castle.

You’re strawmanning because you don’t want to confront your biases. People on Atlas are biased against female candidates, along with much of the DC establishment, which is why they supported candidates like Alex T and ignored their serious issues, like him not even living in the district.

Or you could just...you know...be wrong and making an argument that doesn’t hold up well under scrutiny as a result.  And if you don’t like that example, how about Richard Mourdock and Todd Akin?

Hey, the site is <95% male, and it has a bias towards male candidates, I'm just pointing that out. Yes, sometimes the winners aren't the best candidates, but in the cases I pointed out above, they were the best candidates.

Alex T (he didn't live in the district), Meier (he didn't have much of a profile besides "Clinton fundraiser"), and Hulings (he had laid off a good chunk of campaign staff right before the primary, that's not a good sign) had serious issues, but the biases of Atlas users and the DC establishment caused them to overlook it.

I supported Jones in the primary.  All I’m saying is you shouldn’t assume everyone who thinks Alex T or that Levin is a better candidate than Jacobs without being a sexist.

Are you saying that there is no bias against women on the forums or among DC in general? Pointing out the bias isn’t me crying out sexism.

I’m not saying there isn’t a lot of bias, but some races where the most electable candidate happens to be a man even though he has a female primary opponent.  Supporting a male candidate over a female primary opponent b/c he’s the most electable candidate isn’t bias against women, it’s simply prioritizing retaking Congress over potentially blowing competitive races by making an empty symbolic gesture.  I support Radinovich over Phifer in MN-8 b/c he can win the GE and she can’t.  I’d support Radinovich just as strongly if the candidates’ name were Jane Radinovich and Lee Phifer.  Right now, my first choice for 2020 is a Gillibrand/Brown ticket.  I’m supporting Amy McGrath over Jim Gray in KY-6.  I’m supporting Kate Browning in NY-1.  I could go on, but the point is that you shouldn’t be so quick to assume that everyone is motivated by gender bias with this stuff.

Please do go on, because you in particular seem to be against equity in Congress, by calling it an empty gesture. I assume you don’t care whether women make up 5% or 50%, so if you really don’t care about advancing the rights of women and minorities by increasing their representation, then maybe you should reconsider your affiliation as a Democrat. The party of white men is on the other side.