inthe00s
The Pop Culture Information Society...

These are the messages that have been posted on inthe00s over the past few years.

Check out the messageboard archive index for a complete list of topic areas.

This archive is periodically refreshed with the latest messages from the current messageboard.




Check for new replies or respond here...

Subject: A Romney presidency

Written By: mxcrashxm on 11/12/16 at 10:54 am

So, I was thinking about the events that have took place in these last 4 years and wonder if they happened because Obama was president. All these shootings, bombings, extreme PC etc. have made headlines giving this period a dark atmosphere.

If Romney had won in 2012 instead, would all these things have occurred? Would the country be in a much better position than it is now? Just think about it for a second. There most likely would have been:

Less incidents

Better economy

More jobs

Affordable education

Affordable healthcare

Less PC

NO ISIS

Affordable housing and more

So, I want you all to think about it, would the vibe be more positive and upbeat had Romney won instead of Obama?




Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: #Infinity on 11/12/16 at 12:31 pm

If Romney had won in 2012 instead, would all these things have occurred? Would the country be in a much better position than it is now? Just think about it for a second. There most likely would have been:

Less incidents

Better economy

More jobs

Affordable education

Affordable healthcare

Less PC

NO ISIS

Affordable housing and more


That's a huge exaggeration of how positive a Romney presidency would've been. Maybe he would have fended off ISIS a bit more effectively than Obama, I'm not sure, but his inconsistent platform hardly would have been able to get America out of its rut during the mid-2010s.

The only truly good thing about a Romney administration is that Trump never would have run in 2016 and thus would not have been elected President of the United States. It's also likely Bernie Sanders would have won the Democratic nomination in 2016 instead of Hillary Clinton, since he would have had Romney backlash to leverage his extreme positions to wider popularity, and, assuming a Romney administration would've been disjunctive, Sanders would have won the 2016 election by a fairly large margin and become the next FDR.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/12/16 at 1:17 pm

Romney ran a campaign on religious values, a return to neo-conservative foreign policy and conservative economic principles.

LGBT revolution most likely not happening is the only sure thing I can say about his potential presidency.

Planned Parenthood would have been crippled.

Also, ironically enough, Obamacare would still be very much in tact under Romney because Romneycare was largely the same thing with superficial changes. Right now, the future of Obamacare is a bit uncertain.

"Less incidents" =  wishful thinking.
"Better economy/more jobs"= and you know this how?
"Affordable education" = ??? Wrong candidate.
"Affordable healthcare"= Maybe for the wealthy.
"Less PC" = 2016 isn't any more or less PC than 2012 LOL. Do people seriously think this a new, fresh and original complaint?
"NO ISIS" = ISIS was formed early 2013 before Obama's second term started and has nothing to do with US presidential election.
"Affordable housing and more" = maybe fish will fly too and Lady Gaga will have another successful album.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: Baltimoreian on 11/12/16 at 1:49 pm

Actually, I wouldn't have to worry about Trump being elected if Romney won the 2012 election. He would've been successful on getting reelected as well, since he would at least have a better campaign by then.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: Baltimoreian on 11/12/16 at 2:07 pm


Romney ran a campaign on religious values, a return to neo-conservative foreign policy and conservative economic principles.


Isn't that obvious, since he's a Republican? I mean, a lot of Christians in America would go for the Republican side, since most of them believe that Democrats would "ruin" their religious values.

http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2016/02/FT_16.02.22_religionPoliticalAffiliation_640px1.png

LGBT revolution most likely not happening is the only sure thing I can say about his potential presidency.

Frankly, that wouldn't be a huge difference towards the country if Romney won. I wouldn't give a crap personally, since there were several states that had gay marriage legalized by then.

Planned Parenthood would have been crippled.

We already had a few Republican presidents since the Roe v. Wade decision, and they probably done crap to Planned Parenthood that would've been the same if Romney was elected.  :P

Also, ironically enough, Obamacare would still be very much in tact under Romney because Romneycare was largely the same thing with superficial changes. Right now, the future of Obamacare is a bit uncertain.

Another reason why Romney should've got elected in 2012, tbh.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/12/16 at 2:25 pm


Isn't that obvious, since he's a Republican? I mean, a lot of Christians in America would go for the Republican side, since most of them believe that Democrats would "ruin" their religious values.


I believe in secularism and separation of church and state. Every country with a religious government is a borderline failed state or trends towards one over time, because religion is based on faith and not reason. We need evidence based policy.


Frankly, that wouldn't be a huge difference towards the country if Romney won. I wouldn't give a crap personally, since there were several states that had gay marriage legalized by then.


That's disappointing that you'd say that. But it was not just gay marriage, it was DADT, employment protections, civil rights protections and many other things that the LGBT community has made massive gains on.


We already had a few Republican presidents since the Roe v. Wade decision, and they probably done crap to Planned Parenthood that would've been the same if Romney was elected.  :P


That's not a very informed thing to say, and it's your country, you should know more about it than I do. But you are pretty young so I'll give you the benefit doubt. Every time and every place that has a Republican got elected, maternal mortality rates have went up, access to health care for women has been restricted, and many operations and services of Planned Parenthood got severely curtailed. Were you not paying attention at all to Wendy Davis's 2014 filibuster or your Vice President-elect's history in his home state?


Another reason why Romney should've got elected in 2012, tbh.


It makes no difference, so he should have got elected? OK.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: Baltimoreian on 11/12/16 at 2:40 pm




I believe in secularism and separation of church and state. Every country with a religious government is a borderline failed state or trends towards one over time, because religion is based on faith and not reason. We need evidence based policy.


That doesn't mean I actually agree with them. I don't like a lot of their views, especially since I'm an Independent.


That's disappointing that you'd say that. But it was not just gay marriage, it was DADT, employment protections, civil rights protections and many other things that the LGBT community has made massive gains on.


As a person who's not really into the LGBT community (which might be f*cked up to say in this modern age), I would at least feel sorry for them.

That's not a very informed thing to say, and it's your country, you should know more about it than I do. But you are pretty young so I'll give you the benefit doubt. Every time and every place that has a Republican got elected, maternal mortality rates have went up, access to health care for women has been restricted, and many operations and services of Planned Parenthood got severely curtailed.


Honestly, I'm not that informed over politics since I feel like it doesn't affect me so much. Unless it might have to deal with interracial relationships (which wasn't an issue since the 80s) and disability/autism civil rights.

Were you not paying attention at all to Wendy Davis's 2014 filibuster or your Vice President-elect's history in his home state?

I... don't think I was ever informed on that, since I wasn't that attentive over politics at the time.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: Zelek3 on 11/12/16 at 2:55 pm

It would've been weak and inoffensive like Romney is.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: BornIn86 on 11/12/16 at 3:58 pm


So, I was thinking about the events that have took place in these last 4 years and wonder if they happened because Obama was president. All these shootings, bombings, extreme PC etc. have made headlines giving this period a dark atmosphere.

If Romney had won in 2012 instead, would all these things have occurred? Would the country be in a much better position than it is now? Just think about it for a second. There most likely would have been:

Less incidents

Better economy

More jobs

Affordable education

Affordable healthcare

Less PC

NO ISIS

Affordable housing and more

So, I want you all to think about it, would the vibe be more positive and upbeat had Romney won instead of Obama?


I'm sure now that Republicans have the majority of gubernatorial seats, house seats, senate seats, (as they all had since 2011) and now they have the presidency and Supreme Court, we'll all be living in money. Till the bubble burst, then they'll say..."Thanks, Obama."

I guess the grass is always greener to the opposition out of power. In this case...out of executive power and in power of near everything else.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 80sfan on 11/12/16 at 5:10 pm




I believe in secularism and separation of church and state. Every country with a religious government is a borderline failed state or trends towards one over time, because religion is based on faith and not reason. We need evidence based policy.


That's disappointing that you'd say that. But it was not just gay marriage, it was DADT, employment protections, civil rights protections and many other things that the LGBT community has made massive gains on.


That's not a very informed thing to say, and it's your country, you should know more about it than I do. But you are pretty young so I'll give you the benefit doubt. Every time and every place that has a Republican got elected, maternal mortality rates have went up, access to health care for women has been restricted, and many operations and services of Planned Parenthood got severely curtailed. Were you not paying attention at all to Wendy Davis's 2014 filibuster or your Vice President-elect's history in his home state?

It makes no difference, so he should have got elected? OK.


Ignoring all the important political stuff, I drew a french girl once. It turned out to look like a stick figure with two red balloons stapled to its midsection.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/12/16 at 5:14 pm


Ignoring all the important political stuff, I drew a french girl once. It turned out to look like a stick figure with two red balloons stapled to its midsection.


I've literally drawn a French girl before. It was in Grade 8 art class, we had to draw each other's faces, the person sitting beside us. She was half French half Lebanese, lol.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 80sfan on 11/12/16 at 5:15 pm


I've literally drawn a French girl before. It was in Grade 8 art class, we had to draw each other's faces, the person sitting beside us. She was half French half Lebanese, lol.


I'm not sure Trump likes pink people. Just saying.  :(

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/12/16 at 5:18 pm


I'm not sure Trump likes pink people. Just saying.  :(


Didn't 58% of pink people vote for him or did they all have bad fake tans too 😱

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 80sfan on 11/12/16 at 5:21 pm


Didn't 58% of pink people vote for him or did they all have bad fake tans too 😱


AHA!! So you did vote for Trump! Gotcha!! I got him everybody! Look! Looooooook!! Pinker voted for Trump!

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRWEIUECz4A__OgjlfmA8qC94J5BzDsnXfArfYCZPkkSczIPlFL

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: Howard on 11/12/16 at 5:35 pm


I'm not sure Trump likes pink people. Just saying.  :(


What the hell is a pink person?  ???

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/12/16 at 5:36 pm


AHA!! So you did vote for Trump! Gotcha!! I got him everybody! Look! Looooooook!! Pinker voted for Trump!

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRWEIUECz4A__OgjlfmA8qC94J5BzDsnXfArfYCZPkkSczIPlFL


Patrick Star voted for Trump but Slowpoke stayed at home. 

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 80sfan on 11/12/16 at 6:01 pm


What the hell is a pink person?  ???


Slowpoke's avatar picture, the pokemon Slowpoke, is pink.  ;D

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 80sfan on 11/12/16 at 6:03 pm


Patrick Star voted for Trump but Slowpoke stayed at home.


Spongebob!

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: LyricBoy on 11/12/16 at 6:19 pm

Romney would have kicked ass. But Trump would have denied him a second term.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: mxcrashxm on 11/12/16 at 10:52 pm


I'm sure now that Republicans have the majority of gubernatorial seats, house seats, senate seats, (as they all had since 2011) and now they have the presidency and Supreme Court, we'll all be living in money. Till the bubble burst, then they'll say..."Thanks, Obama."

I guess the grass is always greener to the opposition out of power. In this case...out of executive power and in power of near everything else.
Do you think the economy will get much better during Trumps's presidency?


That's a huge exaggeration of how positive a Romney presidency would've been. Maybe he would have fended off ISIS a bit more effectively than Obama, I'm not sure, but his inconsistent platform hardly would have been able to get America out of its rut during the mid-2010s.

The only truly good thing about a Romney administration is that Trump never would have run in 2016 and thus would not have been elected President of the United States. It's also likely Bernie Sanders would have won the Democratic nomination in 2016 instead of Hillary Clinton, since he would have had Romney backlash to leverage his extreme positions to wider popularity, and, assuming a Romney administration would've been disjunctive, Sanders would have won the 2016 election by a fairly large margin and become the next FDR.
I know, but I was thinking how much would be different had Romney been president.

Not only those things, but even less horrific events such as the shootings which most seem to had targeted a minority audience (UCSB with women, Charleston church with blacks, club with the LGBT etc.); less police brutality; more jobs (remember that the Democrats still controlled the Senate until the 2014 midterms); less wages which means more into people's pockets and more.


Romney ran a campaign on religious values, a return to neo-conservative foreign policy and conservative economic principles.

LGBT revolution most likely not happening is the only sure thing I can say about his potential presidency.

Planned Parenthood would have been crippled.

Also, ironically enough, Obamacare would still be very much in tact under Romney because Romneycare was largely the same thing with superficial changes. Right now, the future of Obamacare is a bit uncertain.

"Less incidents" =  wishful thinking.
"Better economy/more jobs"= and you know this how?
"Affordable education" = ??? Wrong candidate.
"Affordable healthcare"= Maybe for the wealthy.
"Less PC" = 2016 isn't any more or less PC than 2012 LOL. Do people seriously think this a new, fresh and original complaint?
"NO ISIS" = ISIS was formed early 2013 before Obama's second term started and has nothing to do with US presidential election.
"Affordable housing and more" = maybe fish will fly too and Lady Gaga will have another successful album.
Yeah, it seem like most events occurred due to the extreme PCness the U.S. had with the less mainstream. If you think about it, there would be low wages during a Republican presidency considering they gravitate towards capitalism which does help people earn their own money. With that system, people would now have ONE job and would be able to afford houses/apartments, healthcare, education etc. Despite the Recession being over for the last several years, the effects of it still linger which prevented folks from affording anything.

It may have been formed, but it could have been prevented due to Romney having a better plan, and not be scared of calling it an Islamic State.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: bchris02 on 11/13/16 at 12:00 am


Romney ran a campaign on religious values, a return to neo-conservative foreign policy and conservative economic principles.

LGBT revolution most likely not happening is the only sure thing I can say about his potential presidency.

Planned Parenthood would have been crippled.

Also, ironically enough, Obamacare would still be very much in tact under Romney because Romneycare was largely the same thing with superficial changes. Right now, the future of Obamacare is a bit uncertain.

"Less incidents" =  wishful thinking.
"Better economy/more jobs"= and you know this how?
"Affordable education" = ??? Wrong candidate.
"Affordable healthcare"= Maybe for the wealthy.
"Less PC" = 2016 isn't any more or less PC than 2012 LOL. Do people seriously think this a new, fresh and original complaint?
"NO ISIS" = ISIS was formed early 2013 before Obama's second term started and has nothing to do with US presidential election.
"Affordable housing and more" = maybe fish will fly too and Lady Gaga will have another successful album.


Honestly I don't think Romney would have been as bad for LGBT rights as Trump has the potential of being.  For one, he was governor of the first state to legalize gay marriage and his running mate also wasn't the most conservative Republican.  To me, Romney seemed more like the Republican John Kerry, and less like George W. Bush or Donald Trump.

Then again, in 2012 we didn't have gay marriage yet and SJW culture was not yet in full swing, so back then there wasn't the full backlash that we are seeing today.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/13/16 at 9:29 am


Honestly I don't think Romney would have been as bad for LGBT rights as Trump has the potential of being.  For one, he was governor of the first state to legalize gay marriage and his running mate also wasn't the most conservative Republican.  To me, Romney seemed more like the Republican John Kerry, and less like George W. Bush or Donald Trump.

Then again, in 2012 we didn't have gay marriage yet and SJW culture was not yet in full swing, so back then there wasn't the full backlash that we are seeing today.


It's hard to say, really, neither would be good. But in 2012, you have to remember, even the DNC platform had no mentions at all of LGBT rights/issues. Obama came out for gay marriage in 2013. We've really come a long way since then.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: #Infinity on 11/13/16 at 9:44 am


It's hard to say, really, neither would be good. But in 2012, you have to remember, even the DNC platform had no mentions at all of LGBT rights/issues. Obama came out for gay marriage in 2013. We've really come a long way since then.


Actually, he did in fact come out in favor of gay marriage in May 2012.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQGMTPab9GQ

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: BornIn86 on 11/13/16 at 12:21 pm


It's hard to say, really, neither would be good. But in 2012, you have to remember, even the DNC platform had no mentions at all of LGBT rights/issues. Obama came out for gay marriage in 2013. We've really come a long way since then.


Mmm...http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-09-04/gay-marriage-democratic-platform/57585834/1

(edit) I see Infinity already beat. I should have scrolled down a little further. :P

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/13/16 at 1:58 pm


Actually, he did in fact come out in favor of gay marriage in May 2012.



Oh, damn it! I got mixed up with Obama/Hillary (she came out in 2013) and the 2008 DNC platform  :-[

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: BornIn86 on 11/13/16 at 9:07 pm


Do you think the economy will get much better during Trumps's presidency?
I know, but I was thinking how much would be different had Romney been president.

Not only those things, but even less horrific events such as the shootings which most seem to had targeted a minority audience (UCSB with women, Charleston church with blacks, club with the LGBT etc.); less police brutality; more jobs (remember that the Democrats still controlled the Senate until the 2014 midterms); less wages which means more into people's pockets and more.
Yeah, it seem like most events occurred due to the extreme PCness the U.S. had with the less mainstream. If you think about it, there would be low wages during a Republican presidency considering they gravitate towards capitalism which does help people earn their own money. With that system, people would now have ONE job and would be able to afford houses/apartments, healthcare, education etc. Despite the Recession being over for the last several years, the effects of it still linger which prevented folks from affording anything.

It may have been formed, but it could have been prevented due to Romney having a better plan, and not be scared of calling it an Islamic State.


I forgot the dems had a senate majority in the 112 US Congress.

As for the economy under Trump. Honestly, man. I don't know. All Obama did was put the train back on the railing and wherever the economy was going before the train derailed didn't seem all that promising.

As for the PCness causes domestic terrorism comment...I see incredibly little evidence of causation here. You don't like PCness. Fine. You don't like "SJWS". Fine. But c'mon, man. This whole "bringing up social issues causes problems" mentality conservatives have harken back to people's criticisms of the Civil Rights Movement. A common sentiment of those days wasn't that all blacks were bad, but black criminals and any black person who challenged the racial status quo were the "bad blacks". As for the "radical Islamic terrorist" thing. It's not like Obama hasn't drone bombed the hell outta Islamic terrorists and the non-terrorists around them. I would probably believe Republicans were better at fighting against offshore terrorism if I hadn't lived through the bush presidency.

At the end of the day, we'll never know if Romney or Clinton or Kerry or McCain or Kerry or Gore or Dole would have been better presidents. At the end of the day, we won't truly know if Trump is good or bad until sometime into his presidency.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: tv on 11/20/16 at 1:41 am


So, I was thinking about the events that have took place in these last 4 years and wonder if they happened because Obama was president. All these shootings, bombings, extreme PC etc. have made headlines giving this period a dark atmosphere.

If Romney had won in 2012 instead, would all these things have occurred? Would the country be in a much better position than it is now? Just think about it for a second. There most likely would have been:

Less incidents

Better economy

More jobs

Affordable education

Affordable healthcare

Less PC

NO ISIS

Affordable housing and more

So, I want you all to think about it, would the vibe be more positive and upbeat had Romney won instead of Obama?


Lets see take it one by one:

Less Incidents-Define Less Incidents for me:?

Better Economy-Yeah probably a bit better. Romney would have reined in overreaching regulation.

More Jobs-Maybe.

Affordable Education: Who Knows what Romney's plan was for Education.

Less PC-No.

No ISIS-Well Romney would have taken ISIS more seriously than Obama. Remember Obama called ISIS the the JV Team.

Affordable Housing-No "the market" sets housing prices not the President of the Country.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: tv on 11/20/16 at 1:49 am




That's not a very informed thing to say, and it's your country, you should know more about it than I do. But you are pretty young so I'll give you the benefit doubt. Every time and every place that has a Republican got elected, maternal mortality rates have went up, access to health care for women has been restricted, and many operations and services of Planned Parenthood got severely curtailed. Were you not paying attention at all to Wendy Davis's 2014 filibuster or your Vice President-elect's histoy in his home state?


Why do public dollars have to go to Planned Parenthood? I say the federal government should just wind down funding of Planned Parenthood till it gets enough money to run itself.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: tv on 11/20/16 at 1:51 am


Romney would have kicked ass. But Trump would have denied him a second term.
So Trump would run as a Democrat against Hillary and Bernie in the Democrat Primary to oppose Romney in the General Election? Nah.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: Baltimoreian on 11/20/16 at 8:28 am


So Trump would run as a Democrat against Hillary and Bernie in the Democrat Primary to oppose Romney in the General Election? Nah.


Wasn't Trump a Republican by the time Romney run for president in the 2012 election?

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: mxcrashxm on 11/21/16 at 2:28 pm


I forgot the dems had a senate majority in the 112 US Congress.

As for the economy under Trump. Honestly, man. I don't know. All Obama did was put the train back on the railing and wherever the economy was going before the train derailed didn't seem all that promising.

As for the PCness causes domestic terrorism comment...I see incredibly little evidence of causation here. You don't like PCness. Fine. You don't like "SJWS". Fine. But c'mon, man. This whole "bringing up social issues causes problems" mentality conservatives have harken back to people's criticisms of the Civil Rights Movement. A common sentiment of those days wasn't that all blacks were bad, but black criminals and any black person who challenged the racial status quo were the "bad blacks". As for the "radical Islamic terrorist" thing. It's not like Obama hasn't drone bombed the hell outta Islamic terrorists and the non-terrorists around them. I would probably believe Republicans were better at fighting against offshore terrorism if I hadn't lived through the bush presidency.

At the end of the day, we'll never know if Romney or Clinton or Kerry or McCain or Kerry or Gore or Dole would have been better presidents. At the end of the day, we won't truly know if Trump is good or bad until sometime into his presidency.
Well I looked his plan for the first 100 days and it seems it has some ideas.

https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/_landings/contract/O-TRU-102316-Contractv02.pdf

It does in some way. Out of all those shootings and bombings, Obama (or some of the liberals) had refused to call them terrorists (which is what the attackers pretty much were) which had caused the PC to go to the extreme.

As for the SJWs, they are people I would want to be apart of as I want to change things, but they make the real activists look bad due to their actions. Here are some prime examples.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CxCUKqBUUAA9vyd.jpg

http://67.media.tumblr.com/5df02874d545ab0521ad63908537689b/tumblr_inline_nlaa28Q9BM1s53msj.png

http://www.virtualpulp.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/shootingblame1.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/XcRsBvq.jpg

https://40.media.tumblr.com/41159453bf18d32047c4a117da9628e6/tumblr_nja56qTJpf1u9fxs1o1_1280.jpg


Lets see take it one by one:

Less Incidents-Define Less Incidents for me:?

Better Economy-Yeah probably a bit better. Romney would have reined in overreaching regulation.

More Jobs-Maybe.

Affordable Education: Who Knows what Romney's plan was for Education.

Less PC-No.

No ISIS-Well Romney would have taken ISIS more seriously than Obama. Remember Obama called ISIS the the JV Team.

Affordable Housing-No "the market" sets housing prices not the President of the Country.


Take a look at those incidents that have occurred since late 2012. Some (or most) of them were minority motivated and then you have the police shootings. Most likely, those wouldn't have happened since they all had connections with someone's background and the country would be more united than ever. Remember that some liberals kept trying to play it safe that nothing was wrong with the country while the conservatives had truly thought that things were going horribly.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/21/16 at 2:33 pm

How are those prime examples? Those are caricatures.  ???

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: mxcrashxm on 11/21/16 at 2:42 pm


How are those prime examples? Those are caricatures.  ???
They are because to many folks, those are the typical SJWs. They stand for justice, but they sit there and DO nothing.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: mqg96 on 11/21/16 at 3:01 pm


They are because to many folks, those are the typical SJWs. They stand for justice, but they sit there and DO nothing.


Like the people who protest yet they sit down and DON'T VOTE?

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/21/16 at 3:11 pm


Why do public dollars have to go to Planned Parenthood? I say the federal government should just wind down funding of Planned Parenthood till it gets enough money to run itself.


Setting aside my belief in universal access to healthcare...

I would love to see an actual thorough academic study on the economic benefits and costs of Planned Parenthood, instead of the Republican towline, which is to defund Planned Parenthood simply because of their desire to force their religion on women.

Planned Parenthood saves the state a substantial amount of money. The abortion and other birth control services it provides prevent bringing children into this world who would be doomed to live in poverty (among the other cruelties of life that poverty and dysfunctional families bring), and would inevitably be a huge drain on government coffers, requiring increased taxes to support them through poverty. The productivity gains and opportunity costs in having less children also needs to be factored in. Instead of taking care of an unexpected child, the mother could be going to university or working, which is much more beneficial to the economy. Planned Parenthood also provides a lot in the way of STD and other disease prevention. It is an accepted truth in public policy studies that focusing on prevention is much more effective in case and cost reduction than treating the illness after it has already developed. Planned Parenthood is the only recourse for many who live in poverty to get the education, the testing, and the tools they need to prevent cancer, STDs and other illnesses before they become much costlier disasters down the line.

That is my economic and public financial case for continuing to fund Planned Parenthood. There are many social reasons to believe in it as well. If Republicans could agree to do a cost-benefit analysis on this issue I think that would be a healthy thing to bring to all sides of the debate.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/21/16 at 3:27 pm


They are because to many folks, those are the typical SJWs. They stand for justice, but they sit there and DO nothing.


But... and I repeat myself... those are not real-life examples, those are caricatures. Unless you want to argue that 'SJWs' are boogey(wo)men fabricated by the right to whip their outrage-prone base into a frenzy, which is honestly what I've been arguing all along...

You shouldn't base your political views on political cartoons of all things, much less political cartoons drawn by the white supremacist Ben Garrison

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: Baltimoreian on 11/21/16 at 6:11 pm


But... and I repeat myself... those are not real-life examples, those are caricatures. Unless you want to argue that 'SJWs' are boogey(wo)men fabricated by the right to whip their outrage-prone base into a frenzy, which is honestly what I've been arguing all along...


That's what SJWs actually do. Nobody really takes them seriously, except for themselves. Especially when they protest. A great example is where they protested near the United States Marines, just because they reacted aggressively over Trump winning.

XhTkiMFdWpI


You shouldn't base your political views on political cartoons of all things, much less political cartoons drawn by the white supremacist Ben Garrison


Ben Garrison isn't really a white supremacist, per se. He was supported by the Alt Right, while they modified his cartoons with anti-Semitic caricatures of Jewish people. I don't really support his cartoons, but I wouldn't really think he's a racist just by being a Trump supporter.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: mxcrashxm on 11/21/16 at 7:03 pm


Like the people who protest yet they sit down and DON'T VOTE?
Yep! That's them alright.


But... and I repeat myself... those are not real-life examples, those are caricatures. Unless you want to argue that 'SJWs' are boogey(wo)men fabricated by the right to whip their outrage-prone base into a frenzy, which is honestly what I've been arguing all along...

You shouldn't base your political views on political cartoons of all things, much less political cartoons drawn by the white supremacist Ben Garrison
Check out the video NYE provided and that will tell you what i'm talking about. In addition, here's more.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvsZdyUtd1U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1S8GT-ZOcVI



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vrcy0UePP-U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdfMkJVr5DY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LU_o08OyRvY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5u8QmZyd-U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1TD6VQkqXk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRuDvOPPI1g



Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/21/16 at 7:11 pm


That's what SJWs actually do. Nobody really takes them seriously, except for themselves. Especially when they protest. A great example is where they protested near the United States Marines, just because they reacted aggressively over Trump winning.

Ben Garrison isn't really a white supremacist, per se. He was supported by the Alt Right, while they modified his cartoons with anti-Semitic caricatures of Jewish people. I don't really support his cartoons, but I wouldn't really think he's a racist just by being a Trump supporter.


And what's wrong with what's going on in the video? They're expressing their First Amendment rights and not hurting anybody. If someone doesn't like that, they can turn off the TV.

@UltraGameDog, if you can point out the sections of the video you think are problematic, that would be convenient. I'm not going to watch a 30 minute InfoWars video for the same reason I'm not going to read National Enquirer from cover to cover.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: Baltimoreian on 11/21/16 at 7:15 pm


And what's wrong with what's going on in the video? They're expressing their First Amendment rights and not hurting anybody. If someone doesn't like that, they can turn off the TV.


Yeah, but the problem is that they protest constantly without any change whatsoever. Not even the country's marines, who served the United States within its military, even gives a crap about them. They were gonna show some discipline to those people, but the Tampa Bay police restrained them to. Even with that, people would still watch for interest to see what's going on.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/21/16 at 7:27 pm


Yeah, but the problem is that they protest constantly without any change whatsoever. Not even the country's marines, who served the United States within its military, even gives a crap about them. They were gonna show some discipline to those people, but the Tampa Bay police restrained them to. Even with that, people would still watch for interest to see what's going on.


Err, protesting on the street is way more effective than complaining on the Internet. Trump's approval rating is a record-low 42%. Protesting on the street keeps the public pressure up. Do you think CNN and local news is going to cover a YouTube meltdown? No. The street protestors are making headlines, they're the ones getting the interviews and they're the ones spreading their message.

And also, what is it with Americans and the blind military worship? I understand respecting the military, but just because someone is a veteran doesn't preclude them from having terrible opinions, and certainly doesn't make them above criticism as individuals.  It's not just you, I've seen so many Americans act this way, and I'm left baffled each and every time.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: mxcrashxm on 11/21/16 at 7:30 pm


And what's wrong with what's going on in the video? They're expressing their First Amendment rights and not hurting anybody. If someone doesn't like that, they can turn off the TV.

@UltraGameDog, if you can point out the sections of the video you think are problematic, that would be convenient. I'm not going to watch a 30 minute InfoWars video for the same reason I'm not going to read National Enquirer from cover to cover.


Here's some good ones

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJ-crGlxX5c



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJcqgQ-C8F8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLK-2j65das

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uM3yxD_f3RA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C39EFul1pbw

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: BornIn86 on 11/21/16 at 7:39 pm


Yeah, but the problem is that they protest constantly without any change whatsoever. Not even the country's marines, who served the United States within its military, even gives a crap about them. They were gonna show some discipline to those people, but the Tampa Bay police restrained them to. Even with that, people would still watch for interest to see what's going on.


If the protesters were rampaging through the neighborhood, that'd be one thing. But attacking people for protesting the presidential candidate you like...that's f'd. No excuse for it.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/21/16 at 7:46 pm

I only watched the first video, and it honestly looked good for the protestors. It confirmed what they were protesting, lol.

Also a digression, but did Maggie Hassan really win the New Hampshire Senate seat?  8-P Why did the worst Democrat get elected and all the other good ones lose  :\'(

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: Baltimoreian on 11/21/16 at 8:02 pm


If the protesters were rampaging through the neighborhood, that'd be one thing. But attacking people for protesting the presidential candidate you like...that's f'd. No excuse for it.


I'm not even a Trump supporter. I don't think they were going for attacking them. I think they were going for whatever they could do to make them shut up.


Do you think CNN and local news is going to cover a YouTube meltdown?


Well, they already covered crap from social media (including YouTube), so I suppose they could've done a report like that. If they could report the Alt-Right for its bizarre political beliefs, then I think they see the same with the anti-Trump protestors.


No. The street protestors are making headlines, they're the ones getting the interviews and they're the ones spreading their message.


They're getting interviews because people outside of Hillary's hugfest (to be honest, that's what I just see it as) just find them to be spoiled. Hell, even as somebody who would more likely to be related with younger Millennials would be disappointed into what they're doing. Aside from the protesting, what have they actually done successful from it? Have they gotten any political attention? Yes. But have people ever sympathize with them, just for being modern feminists? Not a lot, really.


And also, what is it with Americans and the blind military worship? I understand respecting the military, but just because someone is a veteran doesn't preclude them from having terrible opinions, and certainly doesn't make them above criticism as individuals.  It's not just you, I've seen so many Americans act this way, and I'm left baffled each and every time.


Frankly, I don't really feel proud with what the United States' military ever does. Even as somebody who had a few family relatives serve the country, it's not like I would be fascinated just by their service. But I respect for the fact that they've defended the country for America's freedom. Not as much as the Southern U.S. though, since they're more patriotic than New Yorkers.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 80sfan on 11/21/16 at 10:50 pm

I miss George W. Bush!  :\'(  :\'( 

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/21/16 at 10:52 pm


Well, they already covered crap from social media (including YouTube), so I suppose they could've done a report like that. If they could report the Alt-Right for its bizarre political beliefs, then I think they see the same with the anti-Trump protestors.


But the proof is right in front of you: there are "protests" on YouTube and I'm sure a lot of protestations at the dinner tables, and there are protests on the street. What is the media covering and giving the most attention to? They're covering the protests on the street. There's not one peep about YouTube meltdowns.

Protesting IRL is demonstrably a better way of reaching a wider audience.


They're getting interviews because people outside of Hillary's hugfest (to be honest, that's what I just see it as) just find them to be spoiled. Hell, even as somebody who would more likely to be related with younger Millennials would be disappointed into what they're doing. Aside from the protesting, what have they actually done successful from it? Have they gotten any political attention? Yes. But have people ever sympathize with them, just for being modern feminists? Not a lot, really.


They get interviews because they're there and make themselves available. I guess you think those Trump counter-protestors got interviewed because they're "spoiled" too? Just extending your logic.

I think at the very least, if they get people who are just as disgusted with Trump's presidency to come out and join them and get active, that's a win for this movement. Better than complaining about feminists online, which, I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish. Especially after the men of the country knowingly elected a rapist and sexual superpredator,  I'm glad more feminists are speaking out. If only women could vote, then Hillary would be president. There's a huge sexism problem in this country and the world over.


Frankly, I don't really feel proud with what the United States' military ever does. Even as somebody who had a few family relatives serve the country, it's not like I would be fascinated just by their service. But I respect for the fact that they've defended the country for America's freedom. Not as much as the Southern U.S. though, since they're more patriotic than New Yorkers.


Well, I guess, just recognize that just because someone's from the military, it doesn't make their opinions infallible, nor does it even elevate their opinion or give them any extra authority. The exception being if we're specifically talking about military itself.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 80sfan on 11/22/16 at 12:15 am


I'm not even a Trump supporter. I don't think they were going for attacking them. I think they were going for whatever they could do to make them shut up.

Well, they already covered crap from social media (including YouTube), so I suppose they could've done a report like that. If they could report the Alt-Right for its bizarre political beliefs, then I think they see the same with the anti-Trump protestors.

They're getting interviews because people outside of Hillary's hugfest (to be honest, that's what I just see it as) just find them to be spoiled. Hell, even as somebody who would more likely to be related with younger Millennials would be disappointed into what they're doing. Aside from the protesting, what have they actually done successful from it? Have they gotten any political attention? Yes. But have people ever sympathize with them, just for being modern feminists? Not a lot, really.

Frankly, I don't really feel proud with what the United States' military ever does. Even as somebody who had a few family relatives serve the country, it's not like I would be fascinated just by their service. But I respect for the fact that they've defended the country for America's freedom. Not as much as the Southern U.S. though, since they're more patriotic than New Yorkers.


One thing I hate about older adults (around 37/38 years old, or older) is when young people speak the truth it's suddenly viewed as 'blaming'. I'll admit a good number (50%) of social justice types are annoying, but I support it when they do something that's right, moral, or that helps society. Which is why I don't hate all of them.

If you point out, even if it's in a nice way, that your parents can be jerks (if they really are) it's suddenly 'blaming.' It's a prejudiced view of young people and a lazy argument. Although it's true that there are some snotty, entitled, and even venomous young people. It's also true there are some narcissistic, or psychopathic adults.



Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: Howard on 11/22/16 at 2:47 pm


I miss George W. Bush!  :\'(  :\'(


Why do you miss him?

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: tv on 11/23/16 at 12:35 pm


Setting aside my belief in universal access to healthcare...

I would love to see an actual thorough academic study on the economic benefits and costs of Planned Parenthood, instead of the Republican towline, which is to defund Planned Parenthood simply because of their desire to force their religion on women.

Planned Parenthood saves the state a substantial amount of money. The abortion and other birth control services it provides prevent bringing children into this world who would be doomed to live in poverty (among the other cruelties of life that poverty and dysfunctional families bring), and would inevitably be a huge drain on government coffers, requiring increased taxes to support them through poverty. The productivity gains and opportunity costs in having less children also needs to be factored in. Instead of taking care of an unexpected child, the mother could be going to university or working, which is much more beneficial to the economy. Planned Parenthood also provides a lot in the way of STD and other disease prevention. It is an accepted truth in public policy studies that focusing on prevention is much more effective in case and cost reduction than treating the illness after it has already developed. Planned Parenthood is the only recourse for many who live in poverty to get the education, the testing, and the tools they need to prevent cancer, STDs and other illnesses before they become much costlier disasters down the line.

That is my economic and public financial case for continuing to fund Planned Parenthood. There are many social reasons to believe in it as well. If Republicans could agree to do a cost-benefit analysis on this issue I think that would be a healthy thing to bring to all sides of the debate.
I agree mostly with 95% of your first paragraph that you wrote in Plan Parenthood helping women.

I just think Plan Parenthood is a private enterprise and they should be funding themselves. I'm not for shutting down Planned Parenthood down at all.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: tv on 11/23/16 at 12:44 pm


They're getting interviews because people outside of Hillary's hugfest (to be honest, that's what I just see it as) just find them to be spoiled. Hell, even as somebody who would more likely to be related with younger Millennials would be disappointed into what they're doing. Aside from the protesting, what have they actually done successful from it? Have they gotten any political attention? Yes. But have people ever sympathize with them, just for being modern feminists? Not a lot, really.

Well I don't have sympathy for most of the protesters because as you said they are acting spoiled. However, I will take exception with some Hispanics who are protesting because they have families or friends where some of the friends or family members are mixed in some being here legally and some illegally. They don't want their friends or families deported. Trump did say he would deport illegal immigrants so Hispanics gave good reason to protest.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: Baltimoreian on 11/23/16 at 1:29 pm


If you point out, even if it's in a nice way, that your parents can be jerks (if they really are) it's suddenly 'blaming.' It's a prejudiced view of young people and a lazy argument. Although it's true that there are some snotty, entitled, and even venomous young people. It's also true there are some narcissistic, or psychopathic adults.


The only person in my family that could be a dick to me is my dad. But even my mom agrees with me that he could be an asshole at some sorts.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/24/16 at 8:17 pm


I agree mostly with 95% of your first paragraph that you wrote in Plan Parenthood helping women.

I just think Plan Parenthood is a private enterprise and they should be funding themselves. I'm not for shutting down Planned Parenthood down at all.


Oh, I see. If it were public or if there was a publicly-owned equivalent, would you be okay with that?

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/24/16 at 8:39 pm


Well I don't have sympathy for most of the protesters because as you said they are acting spoiled. However, I will take exception with some Hispanics who are protesting because they have families or friends where some of the friends or family members are mixed in some being here legally and some illegally. They don't want their friends or families deported. Trump did say he would deport illegal immigrants so Hispanics gave good reason to protest.


Can't white people have Hispanic friends too?

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: tv on 11/24/16 at 9:02 pm


Oh, I see. If it were public or if there was a publicly-owned equivalent, would you be okay with that?
Um yes if it was publicly owned I have no problem with Planned Parenthood taking government money. That would be like Amtrak taking government money because the Government owns Amtrak. I am for Amtrak being privatized because Amtrak is only profitable on the Northeast Corridor(Washington DC to Boston.) Its not profitable anywhere else in the country besides the Northeast Corridor.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: tv on 11/24/16 at 9:03 pm


Can't white people have Hispanic friends too?
Um yes White People can have Hispanic Friends too.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/24/16 at 9:14 pm


Um yes if it was publicly owned I have no problem with Planned Parenthood taking government money. That would be like Amtrak taking government money because the Government owns Amtrak. I am for Amtrak being privatized because Amtrak is only profitable on the Northeast Corridor(Washington DC to Boston.) Its not profitable anywhere else in the country besides the Northeast Corridor.


Yay, we agree on something  :D ;D

I don't know much about Amtrak. But like government-funded highways and roads, they can generate more economic activity even if they don't turn a direct profit.


Um yes White People can have Hispanic Friends too.


Oh, okay. You worded it "I will take exception with some Hispanics who are protesting because they have families or friends...", which made it sound like you were only okay with Hispanics protesting, because only they could have Hispanic friends/family.

So you're okay with the white and other people protesting too, if they have Hispanic friends, right?

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 80sfan on 11/24/16 at 9:17 pm


The only person in my family that could be a dick to me is my dad. But even my mom agrees with me that he could be an asshole at some sorts.


I didn't name names.  ;D

I'm just saying human beings are imperfect, overall.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 80sfan on 11/24/16 at 9:18 pm


Why do you miss him?


I was kidding!  :D

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/24/16 at 9:23 pm


I didn't name names.  ;D

I'm just saying human beings are imperfect, overall.


My tweets about my parents from 2009 when I was 16 are embarrassing to look back on. (don't you go searching them!)

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 80sfan on 11/24/16 at 9:27 pm


My tweets about my parents from 2009 when I was 16 are embarrassing to look back on. (don't you go searching them!)


Honestly, I think a lot of people disliked their parents from age 13 to about 20!  ;D

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: tv on 11/24/16 at 9:33 pm


Yay, we agree on something  :D ;D

I don't know much about Amtrak. But like government-funded highways and roads, they can generate more economic activity even if they don't turn a direct profit.

Oh, okay. You worded it "I will take exception with some Hispanics who are protesting because they have families or friends...", which made it sound like you were only okay with Hispanics protesting, because only they could have Hispanic friends/family.

So you're okay with the white and other people protesting too, if they have Hispanic friends, right?
Um yes.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/24/16 at 9:51 pm


Honestly, I think a lot of people disliked their parents from age 13 to about 20!  ;D


I lived away from my parents when I was 15/16. When I moved back, I kissed the floor they walked on! ;D

Also, >___> you made me look through my old tweets xD... I just realized I talked this... <___<;;;; with all these emoticons ^_^;; until like, late 2012. O_O

2nd term Obama killed emoticons. Could Romney prevent emojis?

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 80sfan on 11/24/16 at 9:53 pm


I lived away from my parents when I was 15/16. When I moved back, I kissed the floor they walked on! ;D

Also, >___> you made me look through my old tweets xD... I just realized I talked this... <___<;;;; with all these emoticons ^_^;; until like, late 2012. O_O

2nd term Obama killed emoticons. Could Romney prevent emojis?


;D  ;D

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 80sfan on 11/24/16 at 9:56 pm


I lived away from my parents when I was 15/16. When I moved back, I kissed the floor they walked on! ;D

Also, >___> you made me look through my old tweets xD... I just realized I talked this... <___<;;;; with all these emoticons ^_^;; until like, late 2012. O_O

2nd term Obama killed emoticons. Could Romney prevent emojis?


When did you move out permanently? What age?

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/24/16 at 11:44 pm


When did you move out permanently? What age?


I'm Asian too yo. There's no moving out, my parents move in.  ;D I can't move out, though. I have a little sister with disabilities. Someone needs to transport her, help her go to the washroom, take her places etc. and my parents are getting older/weaker (they're in their 50s) as she gets older/heavier. Not that I mind staying here, my sister in some ways is like my own daughter to me, and I like spending time with my family. I did pick up a real estate flyer at the bus stop though, to tickle my imagination, and when my mom found it she went berserk  :o

I only moved out for school in Grade 11. It was a specialized science programme. The school was far and it was expensive to get there. I was hesitant, but a family-friend who lived near the school offered their spare room. It was a miserable year tbh. I was supposed to only go back home on Saturday night and leave Monday morning, but I'd always go back on random days and skip school, and that pissed my parents off, hence the angry tweets.  ;D ;D

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: Howard on 11/25/16 at 7:08 am


Can't white people have Hispanic friends too?


I know a few Hispanic people, they're quite nice.

Subject: Re: A Romney presidency

Written By: 2001 on 11/25/16 at 3:49 pm


I know a few Hispanic people, they're quite nice.


I have half-Colombian cousins. I haven't seen them since I was a kid though.


Um yes.


Then aren't you only assuming the non-Hispanic protesters don't have any Hispanic family/friends? How can you say they're spoilt, unless you actually know?

Check for new replies or respond here...