The Official Primary Thread

[Atlrocafella]

^^^^Crying ass nicca #1

 

[MrSinnister]

^^^^Crying ass nicca #1

You really want those daps huh?

You do know you're pointing at your own post right?

Just hang em up jr, and stop being a regressive. Assignment is to go find anything Hillary has said against police killing Black men before this year. And that was right before the primaries . Since ya'll claim to know so much about the bytch to troll her opponents.

Actually do some work for her. Regressives are worst than the GOP, to me. Regressive Blacks want all the ducking attention, without earning a lick, but trying to shot on any progress, because you aren't intellectually able to process it. You want it to be all about you, and your bullshyt opinions, without earning any consideration on how the fukk you feel.

Contribute.

 

[Harry B]

Support corruption and think that works out well for Blacks brehs...

It's not like you haven't had the last 40 years for evidence.

Who is supporting who?

I'm just laughing at the faux environmental activists in this thread.

 

[MrSinnister]

We seriously got to get rid of all the regressive Blacks in the progressive movement and left. They win both ways. They don't have to contribute, at all, but steady crying and want to be placated or acknowledged, without laying down one brick for innovation. They usually expect the status quo (White woman/man) to do it all for them, and whichever side wins, they want to be the first to eat or say "I told you".



I know they're popular because they run their mouths the most and are the most forceful, but you passive nikkas need to force them to use their brains more. This free riding bullshyt has got to go.

 

[MrSinnister]

Who is supporting who?

I'm just laughing at the faux environmental activists in this thread.

For what alternative? The alternative is corruption. So you are trolling for corruption. No need to get defensive. Just own the shyt and keep it moving.

 

[Harry B]

For what alternative? The alternative is corruption. So you are trolling for corruption. No need to get defensive. Just own the shyt and keep it moving.

What the fukk are you talking about? Stop trolling, it's Saturday.

 

[ADevilYouKhow]

 

[MrSinnister]

What the fukk are you talking about? Stop trolling, it's Saturday.

Ad hominems? And a debate is now trolling? You know it's Saturday for all of ya'll too ?

Like it said, ya'll aren't Democrats or Republicans, just regressives. Hillary has some decent stances, but you won't find them here, because you trolls aren't even for her. You're too lazy to find them, but just want to troll people. I don't find Bernie to be perfect, but I want a fair debate. You lot believe in corruption.

Questioning people's sincerity is like looking at a man's dikk in the stall, and openly comparing his to yours. Now if you want to do that fakkit shyt, you should at least be bigger. To be bigger, I want you to go out and find sources to support your own claims and tell us what YOU believe in, not just sit on the sidelines and shyt on the efforts of others. You mentally lazy Coli nikkas have been spoiled by the Coliseum for too long. This is HIGHER LEARNING.

I fully believe that climate change is real, and caused the Syrian crisis due to a drought. I am fully in favor of climate change reform. It has been proven that big oil has bought off researchers to help deny climate change. This means that money in politics has a direct behavior on what we take seriously, and it is a serious problem.

Climate change can wipe out livestock and plants, as well as cause flooding and droughts in other places. The effects are extremely unpredictable and real. I don't want them to affect the US, China, Europe, or Africa anymore than they have, because it will cause famine and then wars.

That's the size of my dikk...what's yours? Do you want to really debate, or throw ad hominems and collect easy daps from other regressives? What do YOU stand for, or are you just against people doing (or trying to do) positive shyt?

After a while, you regressives have to know that the avg. IQ's of your posts are 75 range, and you're essentially only laughing at each others farts, because you're pretending it pisses off the Berns. I just feel sorry for you.

 

[MrSinnister]

But what do I know, is you regressives already seem to support Hillary's White supremacy (led by White women). So maybe you want to prove this page right too. 10 Countries with the Lowest Reported IQs

A good debate is fine. Ribbing each other, between good debates, is also fine. .I'm just saying to step your game up, as you're getting a bit too comfortable talking reckless and exposing yourselves, to simply piss off people. I want people to be able to look at Coli and marvel at our minds, on either side, and our humor and ability to laugh and not take shyt too seriously.

Ya'll overdosing on the sugar high of trolling.

 

[Harry B]

Ad hominems? And a debate is now trolling? You know it's Saturday for all of ya'll too ?

Like it said, ya'll aren't Democrats or Republicans, just regressives. Hillary has some decent stances, but you won't find them here, because you trolls aren't even for her. You're too lazy to find them, but just want to troll people. I don't find Bernie to be perfect, but I want a fair debate. You lot believe in corruption.

Questioning people's sincerity is like looking at a man's dikk in the stall, and openly comparing his to yours. Now if you want to do that fakkit shyt, you should at least be bigger. To be bigger, I want you to go out and find sources to support your own claims and tell us what YOU believe in, not just sit on the sidelines and shyt on the efforts of others. You mentally lazy Coli nikkas have been spoiled by the Coliseum for too long. This is HIGHER LEARNING.

I fully believe that climate change is real, and caused the Syrian crisis due to a drought. I am fully in favor of climate change reform. It has been proven that big oil has bought off researchers to help deny climate change. This means that money in politics has a direct behavior on what we take seriously, and it is a serious problem.

Climate change can wipe out livestock and plants, as well as cause flooding and droughts in other places. The effects are extremely unpredictable and real. I don't want them to affect the US, China, Europe, or Africa anymore than they have, because it will cause famine and then wars.

That's the size of my dikk...what's yours. Do you want to really debate, or throw ad hominems and collect easy daps from other regressives. What do YOU stand for, or are you just against people doing (or trying to do) positive shyt?

After a while, you regressives have to know that the avg. IQ's of your posts are 75 range, and you're essentially only laughing at each others farts, because you're pretending it pisses off the Berns. I just feel sorry for you.

I don't know what you are talking about, who are you debating? And who are "ya'll" or a Hillary supporter? Or a Bernie Supporter?
Politics is not a crazy religion, one can question factors with every single candidates intentions. The one you are leaning towards is the one you should question the most. I'm questioning the faux environmental activists in this thread, would any of them say no to a Ferrari? Do they drive fossil fueled cars instead of using public transport? If the answer to those questions are no, then I was wrong but I'm highly skeptical.

It's hard to tell if you are trolling or not, "faggit shyt", "size of my dikk", bringing up something I have said nothing about? Stop it.
Who told you that I was against environmental activism? Or that I didn't believe in climate change? I will not get into such deep discussion on the internet though.

As far as IQ-tests goes, it's highly correlated with well fare and thereby education, i.e. the wealth of the nation so that the poorest countries have the lowest "iq" doesn't tell me anything except that those countries are poor.

 

[MrSinnister]

I don't know what you are talking about, who are you debating? And who are "ya'll" or a Hillary supporter? Or a Bernie Supporter?
Politics is not a crazy religion, one can question factors with every single candidates intentions. The one you are leaning towards is the one you should question the most. I'm questioning the faux environmental activists in this thread, would any of them say no to a Ferrari? Do they drive fossil fueled cars instead of using public transport? If the answer to those questions are no, then I was wrong but I'm highly skeptical.

It's hard to tell if you are trolling or not, "faggit shyt", "size of my dikk", bringing up something I have said nothing about? Stop it.
Who told you that I was against environmental activism? Or that I didn't believe in climate change? I will not get into such deep discussion on the internet though.

I just asked what YOU believe in. Obviously nothing. I thought HIGHER LEARNING was NO BULLshyt.

You're just trolling to pick fights and get daps from the other regressives. Just say your intentions gotdamn!

 

[Harry B]

I just asked what YOU believe in. Obviously nothing. I thought HIGHER LEARNING was NO BULLshyt.

You're just trolling to pick fights and get daps from the other regressives. Just say your intentions gotdamn!

I'm against people that are acting like they stand for something,not people that stand for something.

I can't tell you what I believe, this is too complex for a few sentences.
I can conclude.

1. I believe that the climate has a cyclical trend with noise, we've hade ice ages and all types of draughts for 1000s of years.
2. I believe that the level of the climate trend might shift upwards due to fossil fuels, so we need to do something about it, which we are the western world has a downwards sloping trend in emission.
3. We have factors such as labor markets, open markets, return on investments etc that makes it difficult to not treasure the oil business, it's one of the biggest industries in the country and employs a lot of people. It's therefore important and important businesses with a huge # of employees having some political influence is expected.
4. Big energy companies (EU/Australia/US) need to be regulated like any other business that's vital to society, i.e. just like Wall Street. However it's too hard because competition would kill them. But a lot more oversight could definitely work.
5. Subsidies for alternative fuel should be a lot more aggressive, but with oil at this price level it's still extremely expensive to compete. Controlling the developed world is easy, the real problem is the developing world. Peoples welfare or the future of the earth is a difficult trade off, for people that will die before the real damage is observed.

 

[MrSinnister]

I'm against people that are acting like they stand for something,not people that stand for something.

I can't tell you what I believe, this is too complex for a few sentences.
I can conclude.

1. I believe that the climate has a cyclical trend with noise, we've hade ice ages and all types of draughts for 1000s of years.
2. I believe that the level of the climate trend might shift upwards due to fossil fuels, so we need to do something about it, which we are the western world has a downwards sloping trend in emission.
3. We have factors such as labor markets, open markets, return on investments etc that makes it difficult to not treasure the oil business, it's one of the biggest industries in the country and employs a lot of people. It's therefore important and important businesses with a huge # of employees having some political influence is expected.
4. Big energy companies (EU/Australia/US) need to be regulated like any other business that's vital to society, i.e. just like Wall Street. However it's too hard because competition would kill them. But a lot more oversight could definitely work.
5. Subsidies for alternative fuel should be a lot more aggressive, but with oil at this price level it's still extremely expensive to compete. Controlling the developed world is easy, the real problem is the developing world. Peoples welfare or the future of the earth is a difficult trade off, for people that will die before the real damage is observed.

I disagree with your conclusions, but I can respect that opinion thoroughly.

I don't think people are acting like activists, but feel more strongly that we should punish the fossil fuel industry, or at least stop letting them buy off our politicians. I want the subsidies stopped immediately, but the global job market should be considered, which I hadn't before. I did consider it's impact on the markets though. I didn't care if speculators burned. I do have friends in the oil industry and some recently laid off. It was hard to be a progressive around them.

 

[Booker T Garvey]

democrats and republicans are about to fukk over both of their core bases

trump and sanders are gonna get the popular vote and be at home chillin' come november

whoever is gonna be president is going to have 0 support from the masses....
sanders and trump will become "leaders" and will have legions of followers....watch and see

 

[MrSinnister]

democrats and republicans are about to fukk over both of their core bases

trump and sanders are gonna get the popular vote and be at home chillin' come november

whoever is gonna be president is going to have 0 support from the masses....
sanders and trump will become "leaders" and will have legions of followers....watch and see

I don't disagree with this at all. We will officially become an oligarchy at that point, and the world wouldn't take us seriously anymore . It still wouldn't affect businesses, but would our maneuvering to start new wars.