Aisha Greyjoy
-
Posts
889 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Aisha Greyjoy
-
-
I started this election season thinking Donald and Hillary were just both awful, but Trump moreso.
After the three debates, I saw a strong woman stick to her principles and present a disciplined message onstage next to a spoiled manchild
She isn't accused of raping any children.
She didn't run a scam university that stole money from people and provided nothing of value.
She doesn't run around groping random people and believing she's entitled to do so.
She hasn't put thousands of families into bankruptcy by stiffing small business owners.
I admire her approach to politics, which you can see even when she's in friendly company. She told BLM that protests were a great way to get started, but if they wanted change, they had to elect friendly politicians and pass specific laws. She told Bernie supporters to come back to earth, any proposal would have to get through Congress, so attainable legislation was a better goal then "pie in the sky" fantasies.
Republicans have spent tens of millions of tax payer dollars investigating Hillary Clinton, and they've come up nothing. If she was as evil as Republicans seem to think, they'd have found something. Trump literally bribed attorney generals to not investigate Trump university. His charitable foundation exists solely to buy nice stuff for Trump and his family or pay his legal bills.
I'd say Hillary Clinton is not a 10. She's not even an 8. She's not my first choice. But Trump is as low as you can go. Whatever number the worst number can be, that's him. He knows nothing about anything. he's a pig. If he didn't rape the 13 year old girl, he certainly attended parties where teenage girls were being raped and enjoyed the parties. His own words support that part.
So, Hillary Clinton is the better choice, by far.
-
I always wondered about Trump being a plant to assure Clinton a win. Kasich or Bush or Rubio or even Cruz would be cleaning her clock at this point.
The thing is, he doesn't strike me as a guy who wants to lose at anything, ever. I bet if he ever plays Scrabble with Melania, he has to win, or else throws the board and pieces all over. He isn't a guy who'd sign up to lose. So I have to go with "no, he's not a plant"
And I don't think he's any kind of foreign agent or beholden to foreign agents. He may just have an alignment of interests with Putin. His suggestion that NATO has outlived its usefulness is something America should consider, not merely mock even the suggestion as somehow "empowering Russia", which it does, but really, why are we still involved in Europe's security? If the UK, France and Germany can't get their shit together and deter a country with an economy 1/7th of the combined economy of just those 3 countries, then they aren't worth saving.
What I regret about this election is that a !@#$-grabbing egomaniac is now associated with all notions of "America First". There are valid points Trump has made that now have no staying power because HE made them.
-
No. Its not the future of democracies. Mysticism, hell even basic faith, is in the decline in all democracies.
-
1
-
-
The NIH study posted was interesting
"A number of individual behaviors and susceptibilities are associated with firearm violence and injury. Impulsivity, low educational attainment, substance use, and prior history of aggression and abuse are considered risk factors for violence (for both perpetrators and victims). "
"Unauthorized gun possession or use is associated with higher rates of firearm violence than legal possession of guns. "
"In 2010, incidents involving firearms injured or killed more than 105,000 individuals in the United States.."
Holy shit, that's a lot of people"...the effectiveness of various types of control is inadequately researched. Research on the impact of imposing additional penalties for firearm use in illegal activities has also produced mixed results. Studies on the impact of right-to-carry laws on firearm violence also have inconsistent results"
"state laws designed to ameliorate the risk of firearm use by those that abuse alcohol differ, and there is a lack of data on the basis for these laws or on their effectiveness"
"It is unclear whether modifications in the physical and social environment have been effective in reducing firearm violence"
For decades, Republicans have forbidden any federal gun research. Maybe its time we actually used science. Stop presupposing the answer, and lets get some research.
Edit: This conversation got good at some point, wow, totally unexpected.
-
When I thought of how to break up the sides, it was for VE to sign with t$ and Rose to sign with Mensa.
Halfway there!
-
1
-
-
This is so wrong on so many different levels.
I think of it as admirably ironic.
-
1
-
-
It was a mistake on our part to not specify a time period initially, but it is good to see that you have accepted our request of timeframe. I do question the need to make an entire thread about it though.
To highlight how cool Steve is and how uncool you are, of course.
-
Worst part of Captcha is this...
Select munitions
Enter price
Enter quanity
Hit buy
Click stupid captcha checkbox
Hit Submit
Back to empty page..food, no price no quantity.
Can't you put &product=Munitions&price=841&quanity=732 in the URL for the captcha page and when you redirect me to the buy page, read those values back?
-
1
-
-
I would find it distasteful to kill American citizens.
Alas, that is what gun fetishists want. They spout Jefferson lines like "The tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants once a generation...", but ask them to specify and they get shy. Like "You believe the purpose of the 2nd amendment is to protect your right to have the arms to shoot at American police officers and soldiers?"
When they say yes, you've got someone who is ideologically consistent and even if the prospect of another civil war scares you, at least give them the respect they are due for being free of hypocricy on the issue. However many gun fetishists also fetishise police and the military, so it unravels for a lot of them.
I think you'll find its the "armed libertarian" types who are most "ideologically pure" on the 2nd amendment. The "don't tread on me", "every man is an island", and "get the government off our backs" types.
Edit: I argued with a relative on this point, and he was sure he'd be killing some snot-nosed liberal college kids coming to get his guns. And I'm like "No, its gonna be sheriff Joe, and if you scare him off, its gonna be the national guard with tanks, APCs and the like."
-
Watch out that Seven Kingdoms or Valyria doesn't annex you.
-
Good sources include
- Breitbart
- Infowars
- Express
- Crunchyroll
- Daily Mail
- Fox News
- Conservapedia
- /pol/
- Anime News Network
Most of these are credible.
Bad sources
- BBC
- Nytimes
- Financial Times
- The Economist
- Wikipedia
- NASA
- ScienceDirect
- Forbes
HOW COULD YOU FORGET /r/the_donald?
-
1
-
ftfy. Snowden broke the law and is a traitor. He tried to cover himself in a veneer of a whistle blower and many people bought it
See, I generally FAVOR whistle blowers. If he had been this savior of the American people, as he would have you believe, then he would have taken specific files related to the project and released them and only them to Wikileaks. That is precisely what he should have done. He did not do that.
Here's my take on Snowden. He did a principled thing. The public needed to know what he shared. What he did was a crime. He should face a fair trial and fair punishment for the crime. He needs to "man up" and come home and get arrested and have his day in court. And if he gets a 25 year sentence to deter other whistle blowers, he needs to do the time.
To the extent we're willing to call Russia an "enemy", maybe he could be tried for Treason(Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason). I think that's a bit of a stretch though. Treason does carry the death penalty.
There are rare exceptions when it is "ok" to break the law, speaking legally. Defending your life, defending someone else's life, and the rather vague concept of Necessity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity). It isn't clear if necessity applies to federal cases or not.
-
I am SOOOO tired of hearing about NPO, Steve and Cybernations. The last two wars I've had to listen to this bullshit.
-
6
-
-
I'd say good luck getting peace, TFP, but I don't care about you, and neither does anyone else. Neutrality = indifference.
-
What was it someone used to say in this situation, oh yeah.. "Do something about it".
Edit: I recall eventually someone did.
-
Best of luck to wherever the GPA members go. Always thought there was a place for true-neutrals in this game, but the draw to build a massive nation by not fighting and the threat of that was too great it appears. Last few months have been pretty brutal after Mensa kicked off the age of anti-neutrals.
I just didn't like how they profited immensely from each war without having to pay the iron price..ever.
But enough people felt like I did, so they did have to pay the price...a lot.
-
1
-
-
This is starting to feel a bit like an avian encounter.
"This is what not to do if a bird shits on you..."
I was subtly implying this reminded me of DBDC vs WTF on Bob, and I threw in an Iron Maiden reference too.
-
1500 infra to 2000 infra per city has a 6 to 1 economic payout compared to city 17(and that's not even including the added costs of having another city: improvement construction and maintainance), and it really opens up your economy when you that many improvement slots. It allows you to fight AND still produce stuff.
Put another way, i'd have to lose that infra 6 times for the city to have been a better choice economically speaking. Granted, I have lost that infra several times now.
-
I like Discord. The chat history is great, not needing to re-auth after 30 days is great. Every single war I'd have to do the whole register auth get added to private channels thing.
-
1
-
-
To get back on topic, congratulations on peace, Rose.
Your attack caught Guardian by surprise, so your opsec was excellent.
Lets hope we find a way to change the dynamics of the game moving forward. Not looking forward to Rose-VE and friends vs Mensa-t$ and friends again. Its really.....overdone.
-
2
-
-
The most rigging we face in the USA is "Voter ID Laws", designed to suppress Democratic voters. And really, the impact is small. I don't think we face rigged elections.
I do worry about Russian cyber-attacks though.
-
From a libertarian standpoint, if an adult wants to do something with an adult, and both parties consent, I am sure government should get the heck out of it. Be they man and man or brother and sister or whatever.
One exception might be certain positions of trust and power, such as High School Teacher and (adult) High School Student, psychiatrist and patient, etc. I'm not sure where or how to draw those lines.
Conservatard always calling for government intervention in bedrooms need to reconsider their commitment to small government.
I mean, go ahead Donald Trump, bonk Ivanka. I might even pay to see that sex tape.
Nah, I'd just catch it for free on some site.
-
1
-
-
Way to keep it personal!
-
You're so busy trying to spin plain english you're missing the point. Here, I'll try again.
If the entire point of our existence was to acquire profit at the expense of our own security, does anything we've done in the last ten months make any sense? Why should we place good faith in the hands of those who've shown only bad faith? What value is a temporary peace if the best we can hope for us that people we already know we can't trust and who have betrayed us in the past might let us be on their side? What good is growth if it only leaves us vulnerable to being picked off later? Why shouldn't we fight this out, knowing this is internally consistent with the wishes of our membership and that the political structure of this game has nothing to appeal to us outside of it?
That's a reasonable argument. The real issue is "Why have so many of your 'so-called allies' left you in the field to fight and die without them?"
Donald Trump — Take Your Bets! How Many Americans Will Vote For Trump?
in General Debate
Posted · Edited by Aisha Greyjoy
I think Trump will get 40-45% of the vote. Not all of those are Trump supporters. Plenty just vote R. Plenty are just "pro life" and think Clinton is the worst enemy to the "unborn". Clinton will win, the Democrats will pick up the Senate and erode the House majority.
Then in 2018, the Republicans will take back the Senate and enlarge their majority in the House
.
So, the House just has to cockblock Clinton for 2 years and we can have 8 years of a do-nothing government, that only functions through executive order.