yoink

Every so often you put up a post that displays just how racist, paranoid and bigoted you are. Earlier on in this same thread you put up a post which was edited because of the levels of blatant racism it contained. Your myopic and provincial views absolutely don't represent what I consider to be the 'culture' of America. And thank God for that.

Both sides are lacking class. The entire electoral process is no better than kids in a school yard one-upping comments about each others mom.

meh. Storm in a teacup. Not even a junior staffer would be stupid enough to make a joke about an amputee on social media. It's just poorly phrased. Duckworths campaign could have laughed it off or used it to attract the medias attention to more important messages, but that becoming a focus is ridiculous. To actually seek someone to lose their job over it is equally reprehensible, imo.

"After Christy failed a series of field sobriety tests, she was arrested for drunk driving. She is next due in court in April on the misdemeanor charge." I'd think that driving with a 15ft tree sticking out of your hood would probably be a decent indication of intoxication... not convinced 'can you walk in a straight line' is entirely necessary!

But there's the rub. The president isn't elected by the majority of America. Potentially, it's less than twenty two percent of the voting population. Skip to 4:17 for the example...

The amount of detailed information you guys have tucked up inside your heads is ridiculous.

Tough question, because it's entirely based on your perspective. For the head of a weapons manufacturer or defense contracting firm maybe a good thing would be starting a new war. For average Joe citizen, not so much.... Personally I think the best thing a new leader could get done in their term would be to completely revamp the election process. Remove gerrymandering and the electoral college for a start. If they can introduce an alternative form of voting too, then I'd call them a successful president - regardless of their policies.

Exactly this. I jumped for 10 years and haven't jumped since Feb 2012. Occasionally I have skydiving dreams, but that's about all. I don't miss it enough to get back into it again right now. I've also found several other hobbies and priorities since stopping, all of which have been extremely worthwhile. Life is not skydiving.

Ours. That's precisely my point. If people start associating with labels rather than policies then it just gets out of control. My father in law is a staunch Republican. He will not ever back a democratic policy - even if it is typically conservative one simply because it's labelled as Democratic. Equally, he'll support Republican policies he doesn't agree with because it's a label he associates with. It's so very, very stupid and its why the parties are becoming caricatures of themselves. As long as they identify as 'Democrat' or 'Republican', being against the other guy is a more important message than any actual policy they might stand for.

At this point I'd take even a semi-viable 3rd party candidate...

That's the only thing I could see. Well, that and the giant snag hazard on the helmet that we're told to ignore.

So to my admittedly inexpert eye Trump seems to have come out of Super Tuesday almost as well as he could possibly hope. Best result for him would be to win everything which was unlikely. Second best would be a majority win and to keep 2 opponents in the race and that seems to be what's happened, right? I'm sure the last thing he would have wanted would be everyone to get behind a single opponent. Personally, I think the Democratic race is well over and has been for a while.

Have you ever noticed Turtle, that everything seems to be about either being Republican OR Democrat in your replies? It's always a case of being either one or the other, which is why instead of perpetuating those stereotypes I try to be fair and objective - so here's me as a mostly liberal independent standing in defense (on this occasion) of someone who I don't like, and don't agree with on just about everything. I think a large part of the problem is that there is part of human nature LIKES people to be unfair to them so that they can be righteously indignant about it. Republicans like to be SO Republican as to garner dissent and then stand on the soapbox and proclaim to all how unfair and stereotyped they are. The exact same goes for Democrats...

I actually feel like this one is a little unfair. Firstly, he was deliberately set up with spam from Mussolini quotes. Secondly, the quote itself has nothing to do with the politics of the man. Thirdly, I'm pretty sure that reprehensible people throughout history have said some things that you might agree with - it's all in the intent and execution. "Demoralize the enemy from within by surprise, terror, sabotage, assassination. This is the war of the future." - Sounds like what's going on today, yes? "How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think." Yup - I agree with that one too. "“When diplomacy ends, War begins.” Sounds about right.... ... all quotes from Adolf Hitler. Does that make me a Nazi?

That's a scarily good article. The more so because it makes Trump look good (or at least better than the alternatives), which is anathema to me.

The Sabre 2 will feel very different to the Sabre 1 - even in the same size. You might be surprised and not want to go smaller after the demo.

You use that comment so much that it's lost any meaning. Of course I don't want the government to control everything in my life. But equally I don't want there to be no control either - you understand that there CAN be a middle way, right? Not everything is one extreme or the other? 'Cause sometimes from your posts I doubt it... The juror analogy doesn't work because there are specialists in court - the lawyers and the judge who are there specifically to interpret and explain the convolutions of the legal code. It's up to a juror to make a decision based upon that expert information. Personally, I don't like people who have no understanding of a situation making a decision about it that may have far-reaching consequences. If you want the responsibility of having the ability to make that decision then I think it should be be a requirement to educate yourself about it. To do otherwise is both arrogant AND ignorant. As to moving to other countries, I would have thought that was more your type of thing. You could move to somewhere like Somalia and have no fear of people either taking your guns from you OR the government ever interfering in your life... Sounds right up your street.

The problem is that the vast majority of the voting public don't understand the Iran deal. Or economics. Or treaty regulations. Or any of the myriad things it would take to be a really good leader... they may THINK they do but the truth is that most people will vote on their limited understanding for what sounds right or sensible to them - regardless of the realities of the situation. Trump knows this. I really don't like the guy, but more than anyone else I've seen he seems to understand that the nomination race isn't about the details of your policies - it's about marketing. It's about sounding and looking good without having any substance. It's not about politics. Basically, Nevada have just voted for a slimy used-car salesman... As an aside, this is one of the reasons I'm against everyone being able to vote. I think people need to have taken a test to show at least a certain level of knowledge before they're allowed the responsibility of making a decision based on that knowledge.

I've never liked this form of reasoning. Yes, it can easily be seen as someone saying whatever is necessary at the time, but then I don't want anyone in office who is unable to change their opinions either. If new data has become available then people should be lauded for reacting to it. Absolutely not saying that's true in these particular instances, but imagine someone who said 15 years ago 'climate change is a hoax', and now says 'climate change is a real threat' because their understanding has changed. Should they be criticized for not sticking to a wrong opinion?

So to show his support for gun rights, Jeb Bush tweeted a picture of his new handgun that has his name inscribed on it, along with a single word: America. As this story suggests (http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-35594007, it's been met with mockery from cultures (real and imagined) around the world - no surprise really, but that isn't really the point of this post. I'm genuinely curious to the US reaction to this tweet. I see it as a pathetic 'Look! I Like guns! I bought a gun! Vote for me! cry for help, and am saddened that this is how a politician thinks is the best way to get votes, but then I'm not American. Does this actually do anything for you guys? Does the fact that this guy has bought a pistol and tweeted a photo of it make anyone think he's less of a tool?

I'd love the opportunity to turn some laps in with an Atom on a race track. I did one of those touristy track day events for my birthday in a Supercharged Atom. It was cracking fun. Like a giant go-cart! Windy though...

I woke up this morning with a pillow over my head. Maybe my wife is trying to kill me.... or maybe that's just how I was sleeping. How do you people function with the levels paranoia in your lives?

I predict he will forget them. And THAT'S the sort of behaviour you want to see in a president? Making threats to people and then forgetting them when he's got his own way? That's world leadership material right there. Kim Jong Un would be proud.

It kind of bothers me when people compare Trump to Hitler. Hitler was a good speaker and his motivations were different. I think Hitler was sincere. I think Trump is one of the least sincere politicians I've ever seen and all he really cares about is himself. Hmmmm Given the lies the same could be said about Obama Oh Shit! OBAMA?? Well that changes everything!

Cruz's mailing tactic is shady for sure. Trump throwing a tantrum on social media also shows he's absolutely unfit for any senior position in industry, let alone that of POTUS. Like I've said before, there are simply NO good candidates in this race. Sly. Mentally Defective. Lying and conniving. Any pick from either party is likely to be a disaster. It's just about controlling the scale of it now from my perspective. I still think Sanders is likely to do less damage than any of the others. If the only thing he gets done in his time in office is change the voting system then that'll be a big win. Hopefully there'll be some good candidates in 4 years...