Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

American Politics


Boss
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 12/06/2019 at 08:08, Section_31 said:

That's the yanks all over though. Espouse patriotism when it serves their purposes but not when it doesn't. 

 

"Thank you for your service, get a free Wendy's breakfast then go and blow your own head off."

It's the same over here.

 

I've said this before on here, we're involved in conflicts I think we should be staying out of and shouldn't be there. However, if you're sending people over there to fight there should be no way at all that someone who ends up mentally affected or physically injured should be relying on a fucking charity to look after them. They have shit like Help For Heroes going to Downing Street because of a charity event, but no fucker holding the twats in power to account for the fact there should be no need whatsoever for it even to exist. 

 

If the government can afford to send them over there to fight they can afford to look after them if something bad happens. 

 

Say we shouldn't be there and you're a terrorist sympathiser who hates the benign and mighty Great Britain, but sending people to die and get injured and not helping them afterwards is just fine and dandy. 

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, chevettehs said:

It's the same over here.

 

I've said this before on here, we're involved in conflicts I think we should be staying out of and shouldn't be there. However, if you're sending people over there to fight there should be no way at all that someone who ends up mentally affected or physically injured should be relying on a fucking charity to look after them. They have shit like Help For Heroes going to Downing Street because of a charity event, but no fucker holding the twats in power to account for the fact there should be no need whatsoever for it even to exist. 

 

If the government can afford to send them over there to fight they can afford to look after them if something bad happens. 

 

Say we shouldn't be there and you're a terrorist sympathiser who hates the benign and mighty Great Britain, but sending people to die and get injured and not helping them afterwards is just fine and dandy. 

As it ever was and forever shall be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 4 weeks later...

Has anyone watched The Family on Netflix ? I’ve just watched the first episode. I’ve always said America has more weirdos than any other country in the world. The biggest weirdos in America are middle to upper class white Caucasians. Mental mental country. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rep. Michael McCaul does not have to be here, at Carl's BBQ on the side of a highway, in a wood-paneled backroom, seated at a bare table in front of a stuffed, life-size buck whose antlers hold a sign saying, "NEVER moon a werewolf."

 

To win, McCaul has to, for the first time, actually try; His once-safe district stretching from Austin to Houston is changing faster than he expected, threatening to throw him out.

 

"I decided if I'm going to do this again, I'm going to work it hard, maybe harder than I ever have," McCaul told CNN.

 

 

 

FUCK YEA!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Sick how the media are trying to airbrush Sanders out of this race. So many articles I’ve seen today talking about “the two front runners, Biden and Warren” when Warren is pretty comfortably third in almost every poll, and Sanders is starting to move ahead of Biden in lots of cases. Bastards. 

 

Another debate tonight, which presumably will be completely dominated yet again by Sanders’ politics. He really is the best candidate by a country mile 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

I reckon it'll be a Biden/Warren ticket, I could certainly live with that.

 

Yeah a few high profile people over there don't seem to like Sanders, David Simon on Twitter for instance, which suprised me.

After last time there are far more Dems understanding we need the strongest ticket. For me Biden is a dinosaur, have said many times I wish he wasn't running. But he is electable - and as a centrist takes up alot of space that Trump is vulnerable in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we’re going to need to be far more ambitious than Biden. He’s just not going to cut it. From any perspective. Like over here they have a serious opportunity to build a lasting framework that tackles the various inequalities and corruption issues that define that society, it’s really important to get the right person in to move things forward. Biden is a step backwards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

After last time there are far more Dems understanding we need the strongest ticket. For me Biden is a dinosaur, have said many times I wish he wasn't running. But he is electable - and as a centrist takes up alot of space that Trump is vulnerable in.

Sanders destroys trump in all the head to head polls as well. Warren, not so much, but when it comes down to it i’d still fancy her in the general. Biden is genuinely terrible 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, moof said:

I think we’re going to need to be far more ambitious than Biden. He’s just not going to cut it. From any perspective. Like over here they have a serious opportunity to build a lasting framework that tackles the various inequalities and corruption issues that define that society, it’s really important to get the right person in to move things forward. Biden is a step backwards

I agree but I reckon  that will come later.

 

I think what we need after trump, as a planet, is to just simmer the fuck down. Business as usual. Just for a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

There is no framework in the US that has traction here that has Sanders at the head of it, regardless of any polls. There is a swath in the middle of reasonable people - who are already form that framework through all economic classes - tons of Independents and a fair few Republicans.

How about Medicare for all? That seems fairly popular to me. Sanders has pushed the Democratic Party to a more equitable social, economic and environmental strategy; the serious policy talk is pretty much dominated by his ideas. That he somehow is less electable than Biden is a complete myth, in my opinion 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, moof said:

I think we’re going to need to be far more ambitious than Biden. He’s just not going to cut it. From any perspective. Like over here they have a serious opportunity to build a lasting framework that tackles the various inequalities and corruption issues that define that society, it’s really important to get the right person in to move things forward. Biden is a step backwards

 

"We?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...