Those profiles may be humorous, but they are not far off.
Those profiles may be humorous, but they are not far off.
My all-time favorite is the 'Fucking piece of shit that doesn't work' because I know so many people who have the worst luck with electronics malfunctioning/dying/not doing the simple fucking job that it was made to do; all of this despite buying the newest, most expensive shit. Apple products, cable receivers, TVs, printers, computers, etc.
This is interesting
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the...=homepage-lede
So, should we try and get the 2016 presidential candidates to run sessions of say, Democracy 3?
if you want to truly understand their character make them play Neptune's Pride
That would probably never work here on a national scale due to outcries of "That game was programmed by Liberal SocioCommies that don't really understand how society works!"
Personally I love this social experiment. Living near enough to RI, I hear stories of Providence's hard on for Buddy Cianci. I never really understood why a city could love someone who went to jail for corruption so much, but it does seem like he has a decent political head on his shoulders.
R
O
T
F
L
http://watchdog.org/217942/christie-nj-expense-account/Darren Rovell @darrenrovell 5h5 hours ago
Report: 23% of Chris Christie's expense account went to concessions at MetLife Stadium
Drumthwacket?
Fucking East coast.
If Jeb Bush keeps fucking around he's going to lose more of his base, lol.
He's barely ahead of Rubio in the polls (not that it really matters at this point..).
The Tragic End of the Woman Bill Clinton Exploited As Poster Child for Gutting Welfare
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-pol...utting-welfare
"These harmful legislative moves are likely to dog his wife Hillary, who has endorsed most of them in the past, on the campaign trail." lol
Yeah, probably delusional with that comment.
Yeah, not sure how this is supposed to hurt her in Republican land.
If I were to remake the political spectrum, Hillary's current alignment would make her a right-leaning moderate. I think there are very legitimate reasons to dislike Hillary as an avatar for liberal ideals. Bernie Sanders has the advantage of being a genuine liberal candidate, and he'd be left of moderate in my rewritten political spectrum.
However, Bernie Sanders' campaign would get demolished for being anti-business, gonna kill ur job, etc. and idiots all across the best nation ever would buy it, killing his chances of getting elected when compared to a moderate Republican. Hillary, despite the fact that everyone has been gunning for her for like 5 years now, is clearly the most electable candidate that calls themselves a democrat.
Well, America's mainstream political spectrum is currently ranging from Right of Moderate to Far Right. Hillary being this way is not surprising to me in the least.
yet gay marriage will likely soon be legalized nationally and marijuana acceptance is increasing at a rapid pace. characterizing the entirety of national political activity on a binary spectrum is a glib exercise, especially one experiencing such dramatically reformative trendlines in opinions and demographics. is America more ardently capitalist than say, France or Switzerland? to be sure, yet the French ban the wearing of the Burqa in public places and the Swiss have outlawed the construction of mosque minarets showing a level of legalized intolerance to Muslims that has not been enacted in this country.
in even starker contrast stands the rise of proto-fascist, anti-immigrant parties throughout continental Europe parallel to increasing American acceptance of not only legal but illegal immigrants as both parties desperately vie for growing Hispanic demographics.
to a more pertinent matter, Hilary supports repealing much of the Bush tax cuts, ratifying the Kyoto treaty + implementing cap & trade, marriage equality, has called NAFTA a mistake, voted against the Central American Free Trade Agreement on environmental grounds, has supported a national assault weapons ban for twenty years, has a 100% pro-choice Senate record, supports net neutrality, voted for stem cell research, and famously championed universal healthcare as First Lady.
against this she has been hawkish on foreign policy from Israel to Iran to Syria, supported both the Patriot Act and the Iraq war, favored intervention in Yugoslavia and Darfur and Somalia, supports the death penalty, holds about the same position on immigration reform as do moderate Republicans, and has strong personal ties to investment banks and brokerage firms making reform of the financial sector extremely unlikely.
as with any non-ideological pragmatist (which Hilldog clearly is) most of these positions are malleable and subject to the tenor of the times, but to simply cast out 'right-leaning centrist' is reduction flirting with mischaracterization. on foreign policy she is hawkish to the point of being an honorary neocon yet favors intervention on humanitarian grounds more so than for the purpose of regime change, on environmental and most social issues she is as progressive as a viable candidate can be, immigration is one of the few issues where she is actually a centrist, and on economics she has often been an opponent of free trade and is increasingly adopting a Warren-style populism yet is cozier with Wall Street than are most pro-business Republicans.