Hide the Pain Harold

Theyll be ridin around at three am stuffin wads o ballots in boxes too

Only in the swing states, though.

Because there isn't any chance a swing state would legitimately vote for Biden. 🙄

Gums,
You're not seriously suggesting people ACTUALLY vote FOR Biden and not just for the party are you? I mean, seriously who in the he'll is actually a fan of that old race duping racist formerly clever system working typical politician that dried his brain as a China virus vaccine booster guinea pig? Surely there's a couple of honest brain cells left in Democrat world that survived covid fog that will admit they're strictly voting on party line. The opposite is true with Trump. He has genuine fans and backers despite the R by his name THAT WILL BE ON THE BALLOT IN COLORADO by the way🤣🤣🤣. Most Trump supporters actually reject the Republican party and see through party establishment BS. That's why yell always get a candidate picked for yall that you HAVE to vote for. Yalls establishment and own party conspire against yall and thwart YOUR WILL. why you got stuck with hilarious Clinton, the least likable and charismatic candidate ever and Biden and were TWICE denied the candidate that had true grass roots support and a lot of energy, BERNIE SANDERS. Who proved himself, despite all his commie bravado, to be just another higher office better car n house seeking typical politician when he's bought outta the way by the DNC that chose Joke Bid_on for you.

*FRIED*

It might surprise you to learn that I am a Republican. That I did vote for Biden.

It might also surprise you to learn that Trump has never won the popular vote.

That Trump lost in states that maintained or flipped red.

So, yeah. It is not impossible for a few, mind a few Republican voters voted for Biden. Myself, at least.

I’m not surprised at all that Republicans hate their own party. That’s why they will lose to Democrats in not just the Presidential election but local ones too.

To think this is a benefit that the Republican Party is divided except for their support for Trump is absurd!

Nor am I surprised that you hold a commie like Sanders in such high regard. I have a working theory, and you’re supporting it, that MAGA has far more socialists behind it than Democrats. True, lots of Freshman Democrats are open socialists and while MAGA talks a good game against socialism, it’s unsaid solutions for our higher than normal inflation, and their fierce support for more unvetted anti-establishment politicians, gives me pause for concern on which party is actually for socialism.

But, as I was saying…

Moderate voters, which makes up a large pool of voters, also voted for Biden.

What’s more unlikely is the generalization that all Democrat voters voted for Biden, or that all Republican voters voted for Trump.

Was it a significant number of party voters crossing partisan lines? No.

But again, Trump didn’t have as big of a chance to win as he and his base frequently projected. I would even admit that among the number of people who supported Trump they were far more fanatical than any of Trump’s opposition in either election.

But the group of people who voted for Trump, though fierce in their support, was much smaller than the group who either thought Biden was a better option or at the very least, (and more likely) voted for Biden just to vote against Trump.

Democrats were divided in 2016 in their support of Hillary and it gained Trump an electoral victory. The second go around, they united to keep from repeating that and it worked!

And to think that there is a significant number of people outside of MAGA that originally voted against Trump the first or second time would turn around and embrace Trump over Biden, especially with Biden’s poor approval ratings, is far more absurd than believing that Trump lost because of widespread coordinated voter fraud.

You don't understand there hasn't been a legitimate election in this country for 50 years. It's a miracle Trump made it in the first time, Hilarytried to steal at least 5 states. They made sure he didn't stand a chance the 2nd time.

I don’t put much stock in opinion.

Check the courts.

Which one?

All of them. They routinely find corruption in voting all over the country.

Hahaha
I am a republican, I did vote for Biden. 🤷‍♀️ like, for real, who cares??? How meaningless would the revelation be to you if I were to say I'm a Democrat, I voted for Reagan, Trump, Ben Carson, Herman Cain, LINCOLN, ETC?

“You're not seriously suggesting people ACTUALLY vote FOR Biden and not just for the party are you?“

It was relevant because you seem to think people only vote along party lines, my dude.

Not to mention the Massive Voter fraud nonsense which has zero concrete proof despite numerous claims, that turn out bogus, and audits that only reveal a minor but no higher than usual percentage of error. Especially when taken into account the SMALL percentage of people who voted in person AND by mail because they either A. Didn’t know if they could vote in person. B. Wanted to make sure their vote was counted. Or even in the small chance of C. intentionally trying to make their vote count twice.

Which in most cases, states pretty much understood it to be A or B, but in a few scrutinized cases it was intentional… where they voted either more than twice or multiple voting locations.

And even with those discrepancies, the overall count was unaffected on a national or state level. Even with the electoral vote.

Democrats DO only vote on party lines.

I thought it didn’t matter to you?

But, I suppose you’re relenting on that point. Good.

If Democrats only voted along party lines then we’d be in Hillary’s second term. Thank goodness we are not.

And if your claim that you are, or were, a Democrat had any merit then you should know that’s not true. But I suppose you were being facetious.

I’m not saying that a lot of people, on both sides, don’t just blindly vote along party lines but there is more to be said of the more insidious phenomena of people more willing to vote for the incumbent rather than the challenger. While some states change between Democrat and Republican slowly, by decade or more, others shift more sporadically. And those are usually how we identify swing states. And there are actually only a handful where the shift is so slow that it stays for more than decade. But just because a State is statistically more likely to vote for a Democrat or Republican President, doesn’t mean their state governments isn’t a hodgepodge of the red or blue representation.

If only Democrats voted along party lines, then they would actually hold a much stronger majority in federal representation, yet curiously they do not. There is an awful lot of red by map, but blue by the majority population. The map only meaningful by which party is more likely to control the local or federal governments.

The truth is, a majority of people tend vote for a party for their state representation and another party for the federal government. Or will vote for federal congressmen from one party but willingly choose the President from the opposition. I’ve spoken to individuals who do this and their reasons are varied with only one common denominator…

They want that kind of opposition to slow any progress. Whether it be the typical progressive left or the occasionally rare conservative reform.

Well that took balls to say.

Any woman (or man) with testicles that votes for biden needs to be kicked in those testicles repeatedly, every day.

I’m not American but I know Trump is a racist little crap

The fact he wanted to build a wall across the Mexican border is proof. The anti-immigrant stuff is proof

Ridiculous. Why do all the celebrities, entertainers, athletes, actors, POLITICIANS you worship live in gated, walled communities? So everyone that thinks the border should be walled is racist I guess.... you do realize Joke Bid-On is actually having some segments of the wall added on right? After his administration made the claim that the wall is racist and that construction would stop immediately when he took office...he's added some portions.

You do know building a wall around the entire southern border is as impossible as building a wall around the moon because of the terrain and how much of the border is actually owned by the federal government. And the parts that are, are environmentally protected (by Republican legislation) as preservations.

And probably just as expensive to build a wall around the moon.

Not to mention the maintenance.

It just seems to me that it would be easier to just turn away known terrorists and violent criminals and allow amnesty for everyone. Presume they are innocent until proven guilty.

But I understand how you might not support that.

Cheaper way? Build more military outposts at border and pay for drones and personnel to monitor and guard it.

Trump thinks we should just shoot migrants crossing illegally.

https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/trump-asked-shooting-migrants-crossing-border-legs/story?id=66003927

Just say “papers please”

The real answer is to go down to those countries flooding our borders and do some of that nation building we did in the middle east. So they won't want to come here in the first place.

I thought the whole purpose of putting America First was to be isolationist?

Also, didn’t we already try to do that in the 80s which lead to much of the destabilization happening now?

America first has nothing to do with isolationism. False equivalency.

Then what is it?

It's putting our interests over the interests of others. It is not cutting off all interaction with the outside world.

If we put our interests over the interests of others, then eventually there is no incentive for compromise with the outside world. That’s not putting our interests first. That’s stupidity.

The truth is, America First was always pro-isolationalism.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_First_(policy)

And it has some pretty sticky history associated with it.

Oh so lets get rid of border check points altogether. They must be racist too!
Try again...

I’m not for an open border but a wall around the southern border is both unrealistic and would quadruple the national debt annually if you wanted it done right.

You know they are doing that anyway right? Might as well use it for something useful.

A wall isn’t useful. Unless you want more foreign tourists. Ask China.

Great wall of China has huge gaps in it, just like our southern border and is not patrolled.

When it was active and in use for the purpose it was built, China’s wall was heavily fortified and patrolled. And far more effective than our current barriers even with the large gaps.

Walls are meaningless in keeping enemies out. A patrolled force is more effective. If the proposals to change the southern border barriers were for supporting patrols and not merely to give people a false sense of security, were not ludicrously expensive, or unrealistic in design; I’d be a little warmer to the idea.

But I see a lot of people claiming all these rich people have walls and fences and yada yada but it ignores that there are much more effective means to keep invaders out. Homeowners being armed, security cameras. Yes, I am FOR that. People should have guns.

The wall is merely a statement of perimeter, it’s meant to only say to people to stay out. It’s not a convincing physical statement if invaders have already made up their minds to come in. There are just much more effective and less expensive deterrents. And they don’t have to be lethal either and they can be bureaucratic as well.

My choice would be a mile of buried land mines and suicide drones patrolling, but that will never happen.

Well, yes of course it would because you don’t really care about integration or child trafficking.

Of course hurting as many people in the most practical means is your choice.

I am not surprised at all.

Why, pray-tell, does Mexico & other Latin American countries get to remain majority-Hispanic, but the US and other white-majority countries have to perpetually become more “diverse”? If we have endless immigration from Mexico, why not just annex them? Why not just bring America down there?

Good grief, what do you think Hispanic IS?

Don't want diversity? There's a solution. It's called "Don't leave Europe."

The USA increased its territory by a third by stealing half of Mexico.

America IS there. Latin America was THE America first. South America, to be specific. North America - incl Mexico - were dubbed America later. America is a hemisphere, two continents. And they had the name first.

Why does it matter that we’re becoming more diverse?

Tread carefully, cause you might sound like a racist.

Why is diversity only forced upon white people/white-majority countries? Why is it ok for people of color to be as racist/xenophobic as they want toward each other?

If the US doesn't get to have borders then nobody else should get to have them. If we're not allowed to enforce our border with Mexico, then Mexico isn't allowed to enforce their borders.

Ukraine doesn't get to enforce their border with Russia.

If Indians and Pakistanis don't have to obey the United Kingdom's borders, then they don't get to have a border between their countries.

India was occupied by England for how many centuries? Maybe the Brits should have stayed the fhuck out?
You know how many 100s of millions they killed round there? For spices that, to date, they haven't even bothered to use in their flavorless food.
Let that sink in.

“Why is diversity only forced upon white people/white-majority countries?”

Anthropologically speaking, all races have ventured forth and away from their places of origins. There are many reasons why this happens. Poverty, tyranny, and inhospitable climate. Mostly white-majority nations did this in the early 15th century on a global scale through colonization. This influx of non-whites to still pales in comparison of size of white colonization. Much like white peoples did, they are just seeking areas that they consider relatively stable. These places just so happen to have majority white populations now but I should remind you, many of the places that are being “diversity-encouraged” hardly started with a white ingenious population.

“Why is it ok for people of color to be as racist/xenophobic as they want toward each other?”

It isn’t.

“If the US doesn't get to have borders then nobody else should get to have them. If we're not allowed to enforce our border with Mexico, then Mexico isn't allowed to enforce their borders.”

The purpose of borders is to isolate countries, not people. Counties are just places with common laws, goals, and cultures. All of these things adapt and change overtime as has been the history of the world. Even borders change all the time, have been doing so since you were born, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be enforced. Especially when we’re at war.

“Ukraine doesn't get to enforce their border with Russia.”

What are you talking about? They’ve been at war for years. About a decade after the collapse of the Soviet Union they became an independent state and a decade after that Russia has been trying, and failing, to reabsorb the entire country.

It is one thing to enforce borders with a foreign country, it is another to misuse them to keep all foreigners out. Foreign people can bring trade, tourism, and yes they can influence and change a culture but this does not happen overnight unless it’s through war. And even that not only takes time but has no guarantee of success.

And yes! Ideally, people who move to another country should at least respect the laws of that country but surely you do not believe all laws to be just? As yourself if the laws concerning legal migration are for integration or segregation. Because if it’s for the latter then congratulations.

You’re a segregationist.

And if it’s to prevent foreigners, especially non-whites (or any specific race) out, then it is racist.

“It is one thing to enforce borders with a foreign country, it is another to misuse them to keep all foreigners out.”

I fundamentally disagree. All countries have every right to be as isolationist/reclusive as they please. Nobody is entitled entry into another country. I believe that taxpaying citizens of a country have every right to decline to share their territory and resources with foreigners who had no hand in building their nation.

Furthermore, yes, I do believe it is completely reasonable for a country to prefer that their people retain a certain appearance. It is completely reasonable for Ireland to prefer their countrymen to look closer to Domhnall Gleeson over Djimon Hounsou. It is completely reasonable for Germany to prefer their women to look closer to Heidi Klum or Claudia Schiffer over Leslie Jones or Sexyy Red. Likewise it is completely fine for East Asian countries to prefer their people to retain the almond-shaped eyes, sleek dark hair, honey-brown skin, and smaller builds.

“These places just so happen to have majority white populations now but I should remind you, many of the places that are being “diversity-encouraged” hardly started with a white ingenious population.”

Han Chinese are not the indigenous inhabitants of Taiwan, yet no one is calling them racist for enforcing their borders or demanding that they receive mass immigration. Japanese are not the indigenous inhabitants of Hokkaido or the Ryukyu Islands, yet no one is calling them racist or demanding that they receive mass immigration to those islands. Arabs are not the indigenous inhabitants of North Africa, but no one is calling Egypt racist for being 99% Arab or demanding they receive mass immigration. Black people are not indigenous to the Caribbean islands, yet no one is calling the Bahamas or Jamaica or Barbados racist for enforcing their borders or demanding that they receive mass immigration. Yes, there DOES seem to be anti-white bias regarding which countries have to diversify.

Ukraine has only been an independent country for 32 years. The United States has had its current border with Mexico for 175 years. The US has every right to be defensive toward Mexico for disrespecting our border and allowing drugs, crime, and illegal entrants to pour across, just as Ukraine is being toward Russia.

“Furthermore, yes, I do believe it is completely reasonable for a country to prefer that their people retain a certain appearance. It is completely reasonable for Ireland to prefer their countrymen to look closer to Domhnall Gleeson over Djimon Hounsou.”

So if the US government suddenly said you have to have blonde hair and blue eyes, have a particularly shape of eye, etc… that it was specifically legislated that people in our country who fail at these arbitrary descriptions should be forcibly removed, lose rights, and/or locked up… you’d find all this reasonable?

Surely, you jest. You must not have thought that completely through. I can’t possibly be interpreting you right.

I understand you perhaps mean you would find it reasonable for other countries are allowed this but I thought your argument was about how the US should be like other countries who have a more definitive racial identity. Therefor, you seem to imply you would be supportive of achieving such a thing here.

If the intent is only to apply now to immigrants, why should only a singular racial type be chosen. What if you were on the other side of that decision and found yourself not the government’s chosen archetypical racial preference? Maybe you mean the US could be exceptional and have many archetypical racial preference but I thought you were arguing against such diversity?

Indulge me by expanding or altering your statement so that I might understand you more accurately.

I am not saying that everyone who looks different should be automatically deported or stripped of their rights; I'm saying that if a country like Ireland wants to maintain that a certain number of redhead babies be born every year, that is reasonable.

If there was an ethnic group somewhere that had an extra finger on each hand, and they felt that that was part of their unique identity, do you think they would be unreasonable for wanting to preserve that feature? If there was an ethnic group where the men all have 2 eggplant emojis, and they liked that feature, would they be unreasonable for wanting to preserve it? If there was an ethnic group of entirely conjoined twins, and they liked it that way, would they be unreasonable for wanting to preserve that? If there was an ethnic group that had hot pink leopard-printed skin and green bioluminescent hair, are they evil racist bigots if they want to preserve those traits?

It is true that the United States doesn't have one specific ethnic identity. Russians aren't the only ethnic group that resides in Russia (and aren't native to any of the lands east of the Volga). Do ethnic Russians not have a right to their ethnic continuity?

Again, the Han Chinese are not indigenous to Taiwan. If the Dutch showed up on Taiwan again, and decided that they were going to make the island majority-Dutch, according to your view, they would have no valid argument to oppose this and have no right to feel that they're being displaced?

I believe that the current white-majority countries should remain majority-white because no other racial group has created the levels of scientific and technological advancement, and development and prosperity as whites have. And there is no evidence that becoming a more racially diverse society will solve racism. Data shows that, on average, people of color are more racist than whites. The United States was about 80% white during the lifetimes of the Founding Fathers, and they never saw it as a moral imperative to open up the immigration floodgates. Nor did they think to write copies of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution in any languages other than English.

“I'm saying that if a country like Ireland wants to maintain that a certain number of redhead babies be born every year, that is reasonable.”

That’s goal post moving.

The best argument you can possibly retreat to is that you think it’s reasonable for a country to only maintain refugee or foreign citizens numbers to not effect overall majority percentages. Which is next to impossible without banning all refugee or foreign citizens of a certain kind based on race. Which is the definition of racism.

It has always been the policy of the United States to at least admit citizens of value. Skill. Not on the color of their skin, eye color, height, etc.

Tbc

I’m neither American but I know Trump isn't a racist little crap

I think everyone is racist. Some not as much as others. It’s definitely a sliding scale or a spectrum.

Theirs “All Asians are great at math” level and then on the other end is “Genocide to an entire race” on other end.

It only becomes relevant when it effects policy, when it’s discriminatory, and how any non-discriminatory benefits, if any, outweigh the discriminatory burden.

Very intelligent well thought out observation of Trump 🙄🙄🙄🫢🫢🫢

"
NOT THAT YOUR UNAMERICAN OPINION MATTERS BUUUT,
"I don't want my kids going to school in a racial Jungle!!!"
"You can't go into a 711 or Dunkin Donuts without a slight Indian accent"
"Poor kids are just as bright as white kids"
"If you're having trouble deciding between me and Trump, you ain't Black"
-Joe Biden
Got any examples of racist remarks made by Trump?
Biden is the extremely temporary figurehead of a party that in alignment with planned parenthood has waged war on blacks in The womb for the last fifty years, resulting in the deaths of millions of blacks.
Biden was mentored by and eulogized the ExAlTeD CyClOpS of the KKK., Robert Byrd.
His crime bill was responsible for the over incarceration of blacks throughout the 90s.

I'm an American so my opinion matters a little more...

I don't know about you but I prefer an extremely temporary figurehead of a party rather than the rather disappointing and undeserved loyalty that voters have for Trump.

Here are the examples of racist remarks by Trump that you requested.

"The only guys I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes all day."
"If I were starting off today, I would love to be a well-educated black, because I believe they do have an actual advantage."
"Why do we have to allow immigrants from those shithole countries. Why can't we allow more entrants from somewhere like Norway?"
"When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people"
-Donald Trump

As for the KKK's support...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/11/01/the-kkks-official-newspaper-has-endorsed-donald-trump-for-president/

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kkk-trump-david-duke-tucker-carlson-election-2020-a9609491.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-election-trump-kkk/ku-klux-klan-newspaper-declares-support-for-trump-idUKKBN12X2I9/

While Byrd was an Exalted Cyclops of the Klan, he later left the KKK a few years after he took office in 1954.

Despite this, he later opposed and filibustered the Civil Rights act in 1964

Byrd said that he regretted opposing Civil Rights. "I thought, well now suppose I were black, and my grandson and I were on the highways in the mid-hours of the morning or midnight, and I stopped at a place to get that little grandson a glass of water or to have it go to the restroom, and there's a sign 'WHITES ONLY'... black people love their grandsons as much as I love mine, and that's not right." - Robert Byrd, former Exalted Cyclops of the KKK.

He later became a fierce supporter of Civil Rights in his final three decades. Endorsing and earning support from the NAACP. He was one of the first to publicly endorsed Barrack Obama's run for Presidency.

While Byrd's legacy as a racist is significant, and one can even make the argument that he remained racist, though tempered and more well-meaning, to ignore that he walked away from the KKK is disingenuous and ignores why Democrats lauded him when he passed.

🦗🦗🦗🦗
Hahaha ha
NONE of those comments were racist
lot of the shitholers are in our government and marching in our country right now calling for the extermination of the JEWS you pretend to care about.

Hmmmmm wonder if you give Gov Wallace that blocked the entrance to class at the University of Alabama from integration the same pass and honor because he was Democrat too

Oh? None of those comments were racist?

Okay, so I guess neither of Biden’s were either since we don’t need to be objective.

Wallace learned from his mistakes. A thoroughly repulsive man in the 60s who all but said black people were subhuman. Only to turn around and help get many black people in power in the late 70s to 80s.

I respect anyone who can realize they were wrong.

Trump use to be quite a fervent Democrat supporter, so I suppose you’re game to respecting people who switch sides.

Frankly, I’m not a fan of Democrats in general nor of the MAGA crowd.

I vote for conservative Democrats and Republicans.

Both pools getting smaller thanks to socialists Democrats and MAGA.

No, you need to understand that shith*le countries exist, similar to Chicago for instance.
People that wear yalmukes are Jewish and have a religion around being honest and carefully guarding and growing money. None of those were racist.

What’s your point?

My point is all the so called racist Trump quotes are in fact not racist at all.

And if you believe that, then it can be argued that neither are Biden’s.

Personally, I believe they’re both racist.

I draw the line at actual racist policies.

Be it banning people by any form of derivative class as opposed to banning by a legitimate accountability. Such as the Muslim Ban.

Or purposing exceptions based on any form of derivative class. Such as any of the currently proposed reparations.

Both can be done with well-meaning intentions but that doesn’t mean they are right; or there isn’t a better way to achieve the same end goal that is mutually beneficial to all.

Not really. You can look at Trumps quotes in context and realize they aren't racist. You can't do that with bidens.

The fact you need to prove Trump is not a racist after I admitted they both were and it was irrelevant to me tells me all I need to know about how serious you take politics and matters of racism.

Want to talk about racism? Go to a leftists stream. That’s all they care about, right!?

I’m here to talk policy.

Trump didn't Muslims. He banned 7 countries terrorists were cultivated. He left many Muslim countries with good relationships open. This is another lie you've been told.

Like Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan? The biggest actual sponsors of regional and exported islamic terrorism?

Trump banned countries who already were heavily sanctioned or on the shit list for not bending over properly for the US, countries whose dwindling wrecked economies collectively have less impact on America than St Kitts. It's like not inviting Crackhead Joe to the wedding. Nobody would notice or care and leftover vials in the bathroom trash don't make much of a wedding gift,,,

And the countries being made of mostly Muslims had nothing to do with it? Even though such bans were usually done when we had news that something was happening and he just did it on a whim? Making it potentially harder to actually get any bans as needed. He is lucky his travel bans during the pandemic didn’t suffer for his “boy who cried wolf” policies.

Yea, im sure you really are against racist policies🙄 You mean like paying the belligerent ANTI-SEMITIC Islamic theocracy and world's LARGEST sponsor of terrorism, Iran, BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN protection money???

Bit of a leap to call appeasement and paying protection money to a belligerent theocracy, you could annihilate with the push of a button by the way, capitalism

Bit of a leap to call capitalism anti-Semitic.

But you do you.