i don't mean a literal cuck, i mean being a to a degenerate woman who wants to kill his kid. trust me if she's having abortions, shes also cheating on him and walking all over him. this is how "liberal women" and feminists act...stay far away.
this is exactly what happened to one of my oldest friends in college. he is such a pushover, just abandons his friends and does what they say, including an abortion. she ended up dumping him not long after the abortion and had another guy in the bullpen, ready to shoot more loads. Sad but I've tried my best to avoid es like this.
I guess, if by "buy their votes" you mean give them a place at the table.
Really machiavellian that.
If you want to go down that line of reasoning, how many votes does the GOP "buy" with its policies that almost exclusively benefit the hyper-wealthy?
Well, the alternative is Greg Abbott, who seems to think a good use of taxpayer money is defending statues of the 10 commandments.
Supreme Court ultimately ruled it cons utional, by a narrow 5-4 margin. Thus opening the gate for the Church of Satan to propose their own statue. (not making that up)
I'm going to assume you realize that doesn't make sense.
It does, especially when one considers the quotes.
Inherent in that is that you can't "buy" someone who is hyper-wealthy, but you sure can create policies that favor them, and thus create a situation wherein you make it clear whose side you are on, thus providing impetus for getting that demographic to support you, quid pro quo.
This for that = "buy"
If the hyper-wealthy make up 1% as many dems claim what is the impetus of "buying" their votes? 1% isn't going to win you very many elections.
Random cuck isn't serious right now is he? I read that earlier and was wondering if I was the only one who noticed that. I'm not sure what he means but what he actually said and what he meant to say are two different things.
the 1%'s money buys plenty of politicians. It's the politicians who enrich the 1%, not voters.
The GOP understands buying the wealthy won't win them elections, so they rely on wedge issues and gullible morons voting against thei own financial interest by selling the unrealistic idea that anyone can be wealthy. Joe the plumber complaint about taxing people making over 250k because he believes he's going to make that someday when he owns his own plmbining company! ing morons.
This is so ignorant it is not even funny. It's called marketing, access, and influence that the very wealthy have as opposed to anyone who cannot budget 5 and 6 figure campaign contributions.
Unions are dirt poor. FuzzyFail
The State of Texas will have to appeal the school funding issue. They lost.
Abbott says they will appeal just like they do any ruling against the State.
So he is staying clear of a real opinion of how schools are overfunded until after the election.
Cmon man, you are in a red state, say it now clearly, and with conviction.
"Dietz discussed what he called the "civic, altruistic and economic" reasons for supporting public education."
https://www.texastribune.org/2014/08/28/judge-issues-school-finance-ruling/
those reasons are SOCIALISM to randian/racist/xenophobic TX Repugs.
Well that was a weekend you can never get back.
I don't believe this demographics change in texas for one minute. You know why? Most people don't care about politics. Most people just want to be accepted in whatever cultural norm they are in. If they think everyone votes republican, they'll vote republican. If they think everyone votes democrat, they'll vote democrat.
Unions are just a different type of corporate en y and is just another part of the problem. Police and teacher union actions to stong-arm legislatures are a blight.
I am not a dem, dip .
unions are the only power employees have against employers.
that's why the Repugs,VRWC have worked so hard and long to crush unions. Now, BigCorps don't "strong arm" politicians, they simply buy them, quid pro quo corruption. That's why Repugs/VRWC are trying to destroy public education, fire the unionized teachers, and hire teachers for charter scams.
For once I agree with you. I like what unions were originally intended for but I think it is ridiculous that people pay union dues and then the unions to spend so much on campaigns. And it seems like the often aren't working for their workers best interests.
Hey dip . I am a Republican. Not a Repug. And we kicked your ing ass last night.
ter McGee
The GOP since the failure of Bush 1 has made an effort to concentrate on the off year elections and try and compete on the presidential years. It was James Bakker and Roger Ailes strategy and remains to this day.
OTOH, Obama's machine has moved onto Hillary and are very openly preparing for 2016.
Between the GOP chair's strat and gerrymandering, the GOP has done well for itself but I wouldn't be too confident in taking over the WH and keeping congress if Paul and co are the best candidates you have to present the country in 2 years.
Hmm. Did you miss the part where I said that it didn't look like she would win?
It will be a few more election cycles before anything really compe ive will be seen at the state-wide level in Texas.
I will still be a bit more active in the Democratic party in the next few years.
Smiley boy strikes again.
Don't strain yourself.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
