The Clintons are largely responsible for the democratic party's tolerance and enabling of fascism. They are responsible for popularizing thirdway politics in the US, and making compromise the Democrats only real priority.
Of course they are going to endorse the center right, that is the party platform that they've been building since the 90s. I honestly do not know why the conservatives demonized Hillary so much, the Clinton's basically built their empire compromise by compromise.
I think that's a massive mischaracterization of the elections in 33. Hitler mainly rose to power because the traditional nationalist party and centrist party thought they could control him and use his popularity to ward off a coalition from leftist and unionists. The centrists were among the first parties to vote in favor of the Enabling act, which granted legislative powers to Hitler's government.
It's a bit pedantic to say that Hitler rose to power without the majority because he only received 43.9% of the vote..... especially considering that over 17 million people voted for him and the next most popular candidate only received 7 million votes.
That really only makes sense if you are reviewing the election through the lens of someone used to a two party system. If we are going to evaluate it as if it were a two party system and combine the right and left into two coalitions......the Nazi, Centre, DNVP, and BVP would make up nearly 26million voters while the SPD and kpd would only make up nearly 12 million people.
Even though the Centre party was much more willing to work with the Nazi than the SPD, if we added their votes to the left coalition you'd still have 22m on the right and 16m on the left.
But I didn't just say there was a cease fire, I declared it.... What don't they understand about that?
Justice Mark Mastel agreed with defence counsel Cory Wilson that the period behind bars being sought by the Crown wasn’t necessary to send a message to other officers that police are not above the law.
Wouldn't it be nice if judges evaluated their sentencing based on the effectiveness of the penal system for people who aren't police? I've never heard of a judge claiming that sentencing a teen to jail for 10 years wouldn't be necessary to send a message to other people addicted to drugs that drugs are bad.....
Economics is basically horoscopes for old rich white dudes. They veil their practice in "scientific" language/mathematical models and then have the audacity to make claims like "future consumption should be discounted simply because it takes place in the future and people generally prefer the present to the future (inherent discounting)" or create models on the assumption that growth is forever sustainable in a closed system with inherently limited natural resources.
Really is concerning that society has yet to break free from the influence of sooth sayers. There really isn't much of a difference between the leaders of states listening to an economics major or listening to a young girl getting high on volcanic fumes at the temple of Delphi.
Lol, I didn't even notice how fat that magazine was.
Lol, I would think this picture was a complete joke if bath salts Joe Rogan cosplaying as wolverine wasn't there as well. My dude is rocking a carbine with X50 scope indoors....
Let the kids smoke, maybe enough of them will get asthma and will be able to dodge the draft.
I mean I don't think kids should actually smoke, but I always find it funny that on some things governments are willing to move heaven and earth for the sake of the children.....and then turn a blind eye to things like global warming and war. Like these are also bad for the children my dudes.
Lol, what part of her comment was an hominem, how did she infantalize anyone?
His response was inappropriate and completely avoided her points. Telling a woman to watch their tone is about as common as a misogynistic dog whistle as you can find.
Just because he didn't call her a slur doesn't mean he wasn't being an asshole. The substance of his response was more offensive than any ad hominem.
I dont respect anyone defending sexism, so throwing ad hominems at incels is fine with me. I also don't care about the opinions of misogynist, so please fuck off and go be a disappointment to your mother elsewhere, thanks.
Edit: oh I thought it was some once defending you, you were the fuckface in the original post. Yeah you can go fuck yourself, Lord knows you're never going to find someone else to do it for you.
Maybe we make an ethical compromise and say stupid people shouldn't be allowed to raise children.
Imo stupid is not really passed through genetics, it's more an issue of exposure.
Biden just followed through with what was negotiated with the Taliban by the former Trump administration. If the US doesn't follow through we lose credibility in all future negotiations with everyone.
I am skeptical of the claim that we had any credibility to lose in respect to our dealings in Afghanistan. Plus, our negotiations weren't with the Taliban, they weren't in control of the country until we extracted. Our dealings were with the former Afghan government who weren't in favour of the expedited process.
What you're complaining about is the fact that Trump et all made an agreement to pull out the troops within a certain (completely unreasonable) timeline. They had no idea WTF they were doing and obviously didn't do due diligence or any sort of logistics planning for such a withdrawal before making the agreement.
And knowing that the Biden administration still rammed through the pull out. It's not like delaying the pull out of Afghanistan didn't already have a precedent.
What do you think makes us look worse on the global stage....? A slight and understandable delay in moving our troops out, or completely abandoning our partners to a regime that everyone knew was going to hunt them and their families down in retribution?
You are pretending as if geopolitics is completely devoid of nuance.
you think that sounds like bullshit let me ask you this: Does Trump ever do due diligence on anything? During his first administration nearly all his executive orders got thrown out because they were deemed arbitrary and capricious and during his second administration it looks like we're getting the same exact situation.
Again, I fail to see how that makes the Biden administration seem competent if they chose to proceed with something they knew was going to be a shit show.
My point was that it was a shit show, and that both administrations are in some way responsible for it.
It's a bit pedantic to say that Hitler rose to power without the majority because he only received 43.9% of the vote..... especially considering that over 17 million people voted for him and the next most popular candidate only received 7 million votes.
That really only makes sense if you are reviewing the election through the lens of someone used to a two party system. If we are going to evaluate it as if it were a two party system and combine the right and left into two coalitions......the Nazi, Centre, DNVP, and BVP would make up nearly 26 million voters while the SPD and kpd would only make up nearly 12 million people.
Even though the Centre party was much more willing to work with the Nazi than the socialist, if we added their votes to the left coalition you'd still have 22m on the right and 16m on the left.
The only way you can really claim that the Nazi didn't receive the majority of the vote is if you misinterpret The Weimar Republic as a direct democracy and not a Republic.