Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2016 5:45 pm
Wait until he finds out it was actually a white person, and it was really a mentally ill person.
Wait until he finds out it was actually a white person, and it was really a mentally ill person.
Shit, does this guy think Obama is responsible for 9/11 and the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, too?"[William Statom] blamed the hostile political environment on what he considers President Obama’s general “lack of respect” throughout his years in the Oval Office. He also dismissed the suggestion that this year’s presidential race has contributed to the hostility in a significant way."
Now the only question is: How does this relate to the Law of Fives?Maxus wrote:Speaking of conspiracy theories, I saw on Facebook a meme claiming that every US President has been blood related to "The Roman Empire".
Even Trump is admiting that he "might" lose.Ancient History wrote: They're going to lose this election. They're going to lose it as bad as they can plausibly lose it. They'll maybe lose the Senate too. And they aren't going to learn a goddamn thing from it.
Fortunately for them the renovated Trump University has that covered with their Rewriting History 101 and Fibbing in an Interview 101 courses.Ancient History wrote:http://pagesix.com/2016/10/22/trump-adv ... st-debate/
You ever get a feeling a lot of Trump's campaign staff are going to have a mysterious gap in their resumes going forward? Like 2016 just ceased to exist?
This.Kaelik wrote:As a non resident of California who never visits, I have less than no idea what California ballot initiatives are by number. While it's certainly possible for me to simultaneously look up what all of them are and open that up on two screens and go back and forth between the two, if your post requires an appendix to be legible at all, it has failed as a forum post.
If they both pass, it depends on which got more votes. If 68 has more votes, 62 is void. If 62 gets more votes, who knows, they both go into effect.FrankTrollman wrote:So 62 is a measure to repeal the death penalty. 68 is a measure to have moar death penalty and also put death row inmates to work in slave pits with the proceeds going to private citizens. That is not a joke. 62 is sane and 68 is insane, and I have no idea what happens if they both pass.
Yes, it allows duel-immersion classes again so that kids actually have a prayer of learning english.FrankTrollman wrote:58 is a straight repeal of a 1998 measure that made bilingual education worse in the state of California, which was terrible. So you should vote for 58.
This is the brainchild of some wealthy farmer who opposes plans to build some tunnels.FrankTrollman wrote:53 sets arbitrary procedural roadblocks in front of future measures that happen to cost more than $2 Billion dollars, which will have the longterm effect of making our shit even more complicated because big projects will have to be arbitrarily divided up into a series of $1 Billion dollar puzzle pieces that Voltron together and heaven us if we end up getting four out of five lions or something. Vote against that shit.
Interesting, I've seen a lot of doubt that it would work.FrankTrollman wrote:61 ties prescription drug payments of California State agencies to the prices paid by the Department of Veterans Affairs. Which sounds fucking bizarre until you remember that the VA is allowed to negotiate drug prices and Medicare isn't, so the VA pays a lot less for medications than other governmental agencies. Note that there are a lot of ways this can go badly, because the pharmaceutical companies quite like the current situation where they rip people off right and left and have a number of ways to take their ball and go home rather than accept a markdown. Also, if we subsequently get a Trump administration or a Republican veto proof majority that strips the VA of its negotiating power, then 61 fails outright. However, you should vote for it anyway because the most likely scenario is that drug companies say "Fine, you got me" and then people who get their medication through state programs pay less moneys. 61 would be a lot less likely to work if it wasn't the biggest state. I have every confidence that Pfizer would tell Montana that they just weren't getting drugs any more if they tried to demand unilateral markdowns. But I rather suspect that California is big enough to get in on the same deals that the VA gets for roughly the same reason that the VA is big enough to get them in the first place.
One of my problems with it is that it would allow recordings of discussion in the legislature to be used in attack ads. So, I'm torn.FrankTrollman wrote:54 is a generic procedural roadblock on all future legislation, but one I happen to support. It requires that all legislative proposals go online three days before they can be voted on in the assembly. This makes the government less agile - it'll be a 3 day wait before emergency Godzilla funds can be voted on. But it also gives groups time to fight back against "sneaky" legislation. So on the balance I'm pretty OK with it.
Also, OSHA already regulates the use of condoms in porn. This measure would see it's creator given a new cushy job which he would be almost impossible to remove from. It also allows private citizens to sue porn producers if OSHA doesn't act fast enough and pocket a portion of the winnings.FrankTrollman wrote:60 is a mandate for condoms in pornographic films, which is a terrible idea. Not that most pornographic films shouldn't have condoms, but it's not like creampie fetishes are going to go away. And the last thing we need is to drive pornography production under ground so that the workers don't get worker protections. The measure isn't going to stop any AIDS cases and it is going to make it more difficult for some people to get the law involved when there is exploitation of sex workers. It's well meaning in its symbolism, but that is fucking horrible and you should vote against it.
Very likely. But the frenzied crazies probably won't be Trump supporters. The violence thus far has been virtually all directed AT Trumpites and authorities from individuals associated with groups like Black Lives Matter.angelfromanotherpin wrote:Hm, I think he's worked enough crazies into a frenzy that there will be some election-related shooting incidents, but they'll happen whether or not Trump calls for them.
It's genuinely horrifying that you think this is true.Occluded Sun wrote:
Very likely. But the frenzied crazies probably won't be Trump supporters. The violence thus far has been virtually all directed AT Trumpites and authorities from individuals associated with groups like Black Lives Matter.