Only in America

[Rayvin 5223]

1 minute ago, Gemmill said:

 

I think Trump might be done. De Santis is beating him in primary polling at the minute. Although De Santis might be what you meant by Trump on steroids. 

 

De Santis is who I meant indeed

[Gemmill 44900]

 

 

I mean if you're not reading this stuff and thinking "maybe I won't vote Republican ever again", you're either an 80 year old white man or a lunatic. 

 

 

[ewerk 30620]

47 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Can you dig me up that comment?

 

On 26/10/2016 at 16:06, Rayvin said:

This is why it makes no fucking difference who you vote for in the establishment

 

[Gemmill 44900]

Oooo it's weaker than I expected. 

[Gemmill 44900]

49 minutes of searching too. An absolute abortion from ewerk. 

[Rayvin 5223]

It's not even about Trump. That's a piss poor effort ewerk that comment is in reference to HF walking me through all the various wars and aggressions that democrat presidents had engaged in. I was comparing Clinton to Obama and her husband, following those comments.

 

I'm going to be charitable about this and help you out because while I don't think I ever said what you think I did, I had a belief that Trump might be a better alternative than Clinton because I felt that there was growing anti-establishment populism coming from the right, and that an incompetent right wing leader might be less dangerous than a competent one, and may act as a pressure release.

 

We can't know if I was right or wrong about that but De Santis might show us what a competent Trump looks like.

 

Having said all this, I had a brief scan through that thread myself and there are plenty of comments in there from me talking about how awful it would be if Trump wins.

[Gemmill 44900]

Oh shit, Rayvin refuses to take the win.

 

"Actually what I said was that Trump might be BETTER than Clinton"

 

[Gemmill 44900]

 

 

I would definitely have interrupted her with "Fewer. You woke up with FEWER rights than you had yesterday."

[Rayvin 5223]

6 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

Oh shit, Rayvin refuses to take the win.

 

"Actually what I said was that Trump might be BETTER than Clinton"

 

 

As much as I enjoy the banter, I do believe there is a place for truth in discourse, and I am not ashamed of that. I do get things wrong.

 

I would like to add this though:

 

On 08/06/2016 at 10:24, Gemmill said:

Aye she's fucking brutal. Again though, her supporters are absolutely rabid about her and I just don't get it.

 

I would prefer Trump won it to her tbf. I think he's got a chance cos he won't be shy about attacking her for some of this stuff.

 

Just came across it by chance tbf

 

 

[Gemmill 44900]

I would have been joking. 

[Rayvin 5223]

Fair. It just amused me that I saw it, I'm not going to claim you meant anything with it

[Rayvin 5223]

I also think that section of the thread came at a time before we understood fully what Trump was.

[Renton 21627]

19 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

I also think that section of the thread came at a time before we understood fully what Trump was.

 

Yeah, right. I challenge you to find anything from me that doesn't show my visceral hatred for him, even then. Although I may have avoided the thread in general. 

[Rayvin 5223]

Just now, Renton said:

 

Yeah, right. I challenge you to find anything from me that doesn't show my visceral hatred for him, even then. Although I may have avoided the thread in general. 

 

To be fair mate, you do seem to be consistent. Others, not so much. The strength of feeling against Clinton on that page I quoted Gemmill on is considerable.

 

Views change.

[Gemmill 44900]

30 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

Fair. It just amused me that I saw it, I'm not going to claim you meant anything with it

 

I don't know whether I was joking tbf.

 

[Rayvin 5223]

Just now, Gemmill said:

 

I don't know whether I was joking tbf.

 

 

 

I don't think you were but if its any consolation, you weren't alone.

 

It's why I think this must have been early on.

[Renton 21627]

5 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

To be fair mate, you do seem to be consistent. Others, not so much. The strength of feeling against Clinton on that page I quoted Gemmill on is considerable.

 

Views change.

 

Clinton and Starmer have both been treated quite shabbily imo, but especially the former. I think the World would be in a much better place had she won. I don't think Ukraine would have happened for starters. 

[Rayvin 5223]

Just now, Renton said:

 

Clinton and Starmer have both been treated quite shabbily imo, but especially the former. I think the World would be in a much better place had she won. I don't think Ukraine would have happened for starters. 

 

Well, Ukraine happened under Biden so I'm not sure exactly how you can be so sure. Crimea happened under Obama.

 

Clinton was a bad choice, as that page reveals. For all Trump was worse, Clinton was not good.

[Rayvin 5223]

Although if we were in her second term now I'd imagine we'd have boots on the ground in Ukraine, so there's that in her favour.

[Monkeys Fist 42459]

55 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

49 minutes of searching too. An absolute abortion from ewerk. 

That’s illegal in his part of the UK. 

[Renton 21627]

Just now, Rayvin said:

 

Well, Ukraine happened under Biden so I'm not sure exactly how you can be so sure. Crimea happened under Obama.

 

Clinton was a bad choice, as that page reveals. For all Trump was worse, Clinton was not good.

 

Trump was/is a Russian stooge. A lot were against Clinton because she was hawkish, but in retrospect, that was probably the right thing in certain circumstances. She wasn't the best choice though, no, and Biden is worse. 

 

Trump didn't just affect the US either. He emboldened populist arseholses throughout the World, including Johnson. 

[Rayvin 5223]

1 minute ago, Renton said:

 

Trump was/is a Russian stooge. A lot were against Clinton because she was hawkish, but in retrospect, that was probably the right thing in certain circumstances. She wasn't the best choice though, no, and Biden is worse. 

 

Trump didn't just affect the US either. He emboldened populist arseholses throughout the World, including Johnson. 

 

I disagree with absolutely none of that.

[Gemmill 44900]

 

 

A reminder that for all her 1/6 committee, anti-Trump stuff, Liz Cheney is a dyed in the wool ocean-going, copper-bottomed cunt. 

 

 

[ewerk 30620]

2 hours ago, Rayvin said:

It's not even about Trump. That's a piss poor effort ewerk that comment is in reference to HF walking me through all the various wars and aggressions that democrat presidents had engaged in. I was comparing Clinton to Obama and her husband, following those comments.

 

I'm going to be charitable about this and help you out because while I don't think I ever said what you think I did, I had a belief that Trump might be a better alternative than Clinton because I felt that there was growing anti-establishment populism coming from the right, and that an incompetent right wing leader might be less dangerous than a competent one, and may act as a pressure release.

 

We can't know if I was right or wrong about that but De Santis might show us what a competent Trump looks like.

 

Having said all this, I had a brief scan through that thread myself and there are plenty of comments in there from me talking about how awful it would be if Trump wins.

So ‘I didn’t say that…I was actually thinking something much worse’.

 

Defeat snatched from the jaws of victory right there.

[ewerk 30620]

30 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

 

 

A reminder that for all her 1/6 committee, anti-Trump stuff, Liz Cheney is a dyed in the wool ocean-going, copper-bottomed cunt. 

 

 

I mean she is a Republican after all. It’s like when the odd Tory shows a shred of decency and then you look them up and realise that nearly all their other views are that of a complete cunt.