But they do enjoy being bottomed.

The Trump era has been revealing in general.

You just proved plasma's point...

no i didn't. u can either get stabbed in the liver once or 1000 paper cuts. some people live through both but the damage can still last a lifetime. i did err in saying it's not career ending, i should have said "typically no" instead of "no". as well as mentioned that it oftentimes leads to a diminished career trajectory even when it's not career suicide. but we can't get apathetic to things like that just because they're all over the place. more people today are going down for what they said in the past than has ever happened before in the past, i'd hope we can all agree on that. and as a result i'd hope we can further agree that it matters, now more than ever.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Nov 19 2018 03:04pm

plasma's point is that substance/consistency is a low priority for most voters, which is pretty true, half of them can't even name the three branches of government.

His text wasnt the right color so its all null imo.

the thing about sheep is they're not smart. one day they couldn't care less for consistency, the next a perceived lack of it can be a major scandal. I suppose Psnake is more right than wrong on that tweet, because groups like the GOP aren't often in scandals over consistency. but overall i still think consistency or lacktherof are important.

There is a big difference here that you seemingly ignore on purpose:

On the one hand, we had a campaigner trying to paint his political inexperience/outsider status as "fresh blood".
On the other hand, we had someone who made a political comment, was criticized for it, and then was being defended along the lines of "he's a war hero and apolitical and above the fray, how dare you criticize him in partisan fashion". Which obviously is bogus since the guy is a proven partisan, and his military achievements shouldnt grant his political opinion any sort of "immunity".

I really dont see the big inconsistency. The "he's hardly a non-partisan figure" was not a response to the admiral's criticism of Trump, it was a response to the attempts of the political left to lift this guy into a status of a saint. They correctly set things right and emphasized that the admiral's criticism of Trump does not carry more value than that of any other partisan just because of his military background.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Nov 19 2018 05:00pm

i'd agree with that, I was mainly making a joke. I still think there's hypocrisy in the idea that someone is apolitical when it suits them. in reality Trump has always been a political figure, as a billionaire he was vocal and heavily into working with politicians. I said when he started to run he's not a complete novice and that a lifetime of skirting building codes on the other side of the law may be a discredit to him as a candidate who's heading in to fix things and build a wall.

This article sums it up perfectly.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2018/11/19/i-served-under-commanders-chief-trump-doesnt-grasp-role/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.1d5d8c173c6d





The man is fucking disrespecting the role, which is Disrespect to America. He is insanely petty. He is not worthy of a Presidential Figure, his pettiness is not how America should be viewed. The whole world is laughing at this idiot.

The man does not respect what it means to be a leader. He is filth.

This post was edited by Crunktd on Nov 19 2018 05:53pm