i don't waste my time voting on "the lesser of two evils." i'll vote on a ballot question i'm interested in, that's it.

that said i will be voting against hillary clinton in 2016 because i think she will be by far the worst president of all time

   

Quote: (10-22-2014 04:14 PM)Que enspastic Wrote:  

There is not enough money to cover the liabilities promised by govt. Not just in the US, most Western nations.

Everybody's got a theory, everybody's got a projection that serves their political platform.

California, we're the neo-fascist fruitcake state right?

Us members of Calpers, We have 292 Billion right now.

Money talks, rhetoric finds a soapbox and screams "The end is near!"

18%+ return this year, the diversification is worldwide, 60 pages of about 50 investments per page.

It's real nice. Gubmint jobs have been one of the only ways the unconnected non-geniuses of the world can get a decent shake.

It seems really common here to think the only right solution is being a Republican, or believing in the whole Republican platform and only criticising Republicans for not being true believer.

All political ideas for or against common issues have a set of facts you can draw on to back them up. If you are conservative, cool, fine. But being a Republican hook line and sinker just means you bought their crock. You are not more of a man because you vote one way or another. What in the world did George Bush ever do for men or at the expense of women?

Quote: (10-24-2014 01:17 AM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

It seems really common here to think the only right solution is being a Republican, or believing in the whole Republican platform and only criticising Republicans for not being true believer.

All political ideas for or against common issues have a set of facts you can draw on to back them up. If you are conservative, cool, fine. But being a Republican hook line and sinker just means you bought their crock. You are not more of a man because you vote one way or another. What in the world did George Bush ever do for men or at the expense of women?

A lot of people here have said you don't have to vote Republican. Last election Romney would have been far better for us red pill males than Obama. But Gary Johnson would have been far better than Romney for us red pill males.

There are lots of things Republicans do that are terrible for men. They just don't do as many things that hurt men as Democrats do. At this point in time, the Democrats know two facts...

- Women are the largest voter block
- They know how to pander to get women's vote

And the Democrats are fully exploiting this and it will only get worse. Which is why they are pushing the campus rape hysteria and the wage gap so much right now.

Quote: (10-23-2014 09:04 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

Quote: (10-22-2014 04:14 PM)Que enspastic Wrote:  

There is not enough money to cover the liabilities promised by govt. Not just in the US, most Western nations.

Everybody's got a theory, everybody's got a projection that serves their political platform.

California, we're the neo-fascist fruitcake state right?

Us members of Calpers, We have 292 Billion right now.

Money talks, rhetoric finds a soapbox and screams "The end is near!"

18%+ return this year, the diversification is worldwide, 60 pages of about 50 investments per page.

It's real nice. Gubmint jobs have been one of the only ways the unconnected non-geniuses of the world can get a decent shake.

California's economy is in terrible shape. It will probably be the first state to need some form of Federal bailout, and if it comes to that it will get very ugly out there.

Quote: (10-24-2014 02:48 AM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

Quote: (10-24-2014 01:17 AM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

It seems really common here to think the only right solution is being a Republican, or believing in the whole Republican platform and only criticising Republicans for not being true believer.

All political ideas for or against common issues have a set of facts you can draw on to back them up. If you are conservative, cool, fine. But being a Republican hook line and sinker just means you bought their crock. You are not more of a man because you vote one way or another. What in the world did George Bush ever do for men or at the expense of women?

A lot of people here have said you don't have to vote Republican. Last election Romney would have been far better for us red pill males than Obama. But Gary Johnson would have been far better than Romney for us red pill males.

There are lots of things Republicans do that are terrible for men. They just don't do as many things that hurt men as Democrats do. At this point in time, the Democrats know two facts...

- Women are the largest voter block
- They know how to pander to get women's vote

And the Democrats are fully exploiting this and it will only get worse. Which is why they are pushing the campus rape hysteria and the wage gap so much right now.

Good to see I wasn't the only person who voted for Gary Johnson.

The only reason a cis-het male would vote Democrat is because they want to put on their best Uncle Ruckus impersonation

Quote: (10-24-2014 01:17 AM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

It seems really common here to think the only right solution is being a Republican, or believing in the whole Republican platform and only criticising Republicans for not being true believer.

All political ideas for or against common issues have a set of facts you can draw on to back them up. If you are conservative, cool, fine. But being a Republican hook line and sinker just means you bought their crock. You are not more of a man because you vote one way or another. What in the world did George Bush ever do for men or at the expense of women?

It's true, Republicans do absolutely nothing to help males. But unlike the Democrats, they do not go out of their way to make our lives a living hell. Where in a Conservative state do you see crap like "Yes means Yes" in California? When I lived in Seattle, one of my co workers told me of a fight this couple got into that lived next door to him. The wife hit her husband with a frying pan and he started bleeding. He calls the cops but they arrest HIM instead (nothing happened to the woman) because the man is always assumed as the instigator. Meanwhile, I just moved to more conservative Virginia and some woman was bitching to me in a bar recently about how hard the state making it for her to keep custody of her children because men are favored in the courts.

Quote: (10-24-2014 06:45 AM)MdWanderer Wrote:  

Quote: (10-24-2014 01:17 AM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

It seems really common here to think the only right solution is being a Republican, or believing in the whole Republican platform and only criticising Republicans for not being true believer.

All political ideas for or against common issues have a set of facts you can draw on to back them up. If you are conservative, cool, fine. But being a Republican hook line and sinker just means you bought their crock. You are not more of a man because you vote one way or another. What in the world did George Bush ever do for men or at the expense of women?

It's true, Republicans do absolutely nothing to help males. But unlike the Democrats, they do not go out of their way to make our lives a living hell. Where in a Conservative state do you see crap like "Yes means Yes" in California? When I lived in Seattle, one of my co workers told me of a fight this couple got into that lived next door to him. The wife hit her husband with a frying pan and he started bleeding. He calls the cops but they arrest HIM instead (nothing happened to the woman) because the man is always assumed as the instigator. Meanwhile, I just moved to more conservative Virginia and some woman was bitching to me in a bar recently about how hard the state making it for her to keep custody of her children because men are favored in the courts.

About a year ago I used to hear some guys here say that living in the red states was horrible. Terrible areas to game. Less single women. Etc.

As a 20 year old, this may still be true. I don't know how much the rape hysteria has caused this to no longer be true.

I do know that as you get older and start working, the blue states are far too expensive, far too over taxed and are too rigged. If your goal is to get women, it isn't red state v. blue state it is getting out of the USA. And red states offer more economic opportunities and allow you to keep more of your money, so you can use that money to travel overseas.

So the question is, what have Republicans done to help men?

They allow us to keep more of our own money and have tried to get this giant bachelor tax known as Obamacare removed. That alone makes them far better for men than Democrats.

The GOP will only stand for what its electorate responds to. So far, they've figured out their electorate talks a good game, but when the chips come down they respond to Democrat lite. Eventually all things socialist, whether sold as Democrat lite or heavy, will overburden the system to the point where it collapses.

Therefore, the only reason to vote for Democrats is to bring the inevitable end closer and faster. Let the system erupt and finally we can start all over again, perhaps with a few breakaway republics like Texas with a less massive government apparatus. Maybe then there will be another period with a smaller, less onerous big brother nation playing world policeman and lording over everyone with threats and repression under the pathetically thin masquerade of "land of the free." We can dream, anyway.

The Democrats have always hated the system and are the same reds at heart, now disguised as greens, when convenient. It should be no surprise they progressively (as progressives, after all) want to give as much power to the government as possible as they ARE the government.

With Republicans the absolute best anyone can hope for is to buy another few years time before the wheels finally come off the financial system and the government-based economy disintegrates. At least the Democrats will get us to the inevitable mercy kill faster (and faster still, with Obamacare). Admittedly, euthanasia isn't much of a reason to vote for them, but it is a reason.

Quote: (10-23-2014 09:04 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

Quote: (10-22-2014 04:14 PM)Que enspastic Wrote:  

There is not enough money to cover the liabilities promised by govt. Not just in the US, most Western nations.

Everybody's got a theory, everybody's got a projection that serves their political platform.

California, we're the neo-fascist fruitcake state right?

Us members of Calpers, We have 292 Billion right now.

Money talks, rhetoric finds a soapbox and screams "The end is near!"

18%+ return this year, the diversification is worldwide, 60 pages of about 50 investments per page.

It's real nice. Gubmint jobs have been one of the only ways the unconnected non-geniuses of the world can get a decent shake.

So the government workers get a decent shake, while the rest of us get a shake down. In any event, I wouldn't hang my hat on CALPERS so confidently. It doesn't matter whether you think government workers/union types deserve this or that, it's simply a question of arithmetic. The math will never add up to the promises.

Quote: (10-24-2014 10:26 AM)Jack198 Wrote:  

Quote: (10-23-2014 09:04 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

Quote: (10-22-2014 04:14 PM)Que enspastic Wrote:  

There is not enough money to cover the liabilities promised by govt. Not just in the US, most Western nations.

Everybody's got a theory, everybody's got a projection that serves their political platform.

California, we're the neo-fascist fruitcake state right?

Us members of Calpers, We have 292 Billion right now.

Money talks, rhetoric finds a soapbox and screams "The end is near!"

18%+ return this year, the diversification is worldwide, 60 pages of about 50 investments per page.

It's real nice. Gubmint jobs have been one of the only ways the unconnected non-geniuses of the world can get a decent shake.

So the government workers get a decent shake, while the rest of us get a shake down. In any event, I wouldn't hang my hat on CALPERS so confidently. It doesn't matter whether you think government workers/union types deserve this or that, it's simply a question of arithmetic. The math will never add up to the promises.

We are currently watching pensions go up in flames across the country. And with the shape California is in, it seems likely it will disappear as well.

If I was invested in this pension, I would be doing a lot of my own investing on the side with the mindset that "I will never see a fraction of what I am told I will see".

I'll vote Democrat when I:

1. Give my guns to the government.
2. Sit when I piss.
3. Read Jezebel.

Quote: (10-22-2014 07:19 PM)Cattle Rustler Wrote:  

Why would any man vote democrat?

Because the last thing I want is to be ruled by a bunch of war mongering neo-con Republicans.

Worse yet, Rand Paul.

Odd to hear a self proclaimed forum expert on the oil industry who frequently gives advice to others on how to get work in the petroleum business has no fucking idea how much better a Republican government is for the Patch. Would rather be led by "evil neocons" than a bunch of carbon neutral Democrats who want to shut down my livelihood.

I almost always vote for a third-party candidate. I almost always vote Libertarian as well.

I hate socialism and corporate welfare. That's reason enough to vote against the two interchangeable parties.

The only men who vote Democrat are Democratic politicians or businessmen who benefit from regulations that Democrats push forward.

All other males who vote Democrat aren't really men.

You vote the person not the party, usually as the lesser of two evils.

For example,even though I liked McCain a lot, even donated $500 to his campaign in 2000, I voted for Obama in 2008. Why? The risk of an uninformed twit like Sarah Palin being an old man's heartbeat away from the nuclear codes was too great.

It turned out that McCain himself became a demented warmonger, so I don't regret that vote, but voted for Gary Johnson in 2012. Romney seemed a little too anxious to beef wit Russia and bomb Iran.

Bottom line is too many Republicans are warmongers.

Quote: (10-24-2014 10:26 AM)Jack198 Wrote:  

Quote: (10-23-2014 09:04 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

Quote: (10-22-2014 04:14 PM)Que enspastic Wrote:  

There is not enough money to cover the liabilities promised by govt. Not just in the US, most Western nations.

Everybody's got a theory, everybody's got a projection that serves their political platform.

California, we're the neo-fascist fruitcake state right?

Us members of Calpers, We have 292 Billion right now.

Money talks, rhetoric finds a soapbox and screams "The end is near!"

18%+ return this year, the diversification is worldwide, 60 pages of about 50 investments per page.

It's real nice. Gubmint jobs have been one of the only ways the unconnected non-geniuses of the world can get a decent shake.

So the government workers get a decent shake, while the rest of us get a shake down. In any event, I wouldn't hang my hat on CALPERS so confidently. It doesn't matter whether you think government workers/union types deserve this or that, it's simply a question of arithmetic. The math will never add up to the promises.

There is also the reality that the US dollars promised to you today will be worth much, much less in the future. The US can still print all it wants to but there's only so much more the market can really bear.

Zimbabwe had the best performing stock market on the planet right up until the time they defaulted and the country imploded. Inflation + higher cost social services can be a real bitch.

So even if you get say ~$2500 per month from Social Security (which is the cap I believe) you might not be able to live off that very well. Some teacher or cop who gamed the system and are getting over $150,000 might be ok though.

Quote: (10-25-2014 04:39 AM)Akula Wrote:  

There is also the reality that the US dollars promised to you today will be worth much, much less in the future.

Reality is what is here now. What you're arguing is a projection, which will I think to some extent come true.

Lucky my pension is inflation indexed, huh?

It seems like some people _want_things to fuck up...so they can be right. It's couched as "I'm concerned for the future" but I don't buy it.

Quote: (10-25-2014 07:37 AM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

Quote: (10-25-2014 04:39 AM)Akula Wrote:  

There is also the reality that the US dollars promised to you today will be worth much, much less in the future.

Reality is what is here now. What you're arguing is a projection, which will I think to some extent come true.

Lucky my pension is inflation indexed, huh?

It seems like some people _want_things to fuck up...so they can be right. It's couched as "I'm concerned for the future" but I don't buy it.

This is reality. The fact that they are even considering cutting military pensions ought to make you think twice about your whatever "inflation indexed" pension you have - there are no guarantees.

While you acknowledge the truth to some extent, your safety net of indexing may not be what you think it is. Have a look at what numbers they use for indexing your plan. More than likely they rely on government published stats for inflation, which are notoriously low and conveniently exclude basic things like food and fuel. Guess that's great for those who don't plan to eat or buy gas in retirement. If your plan is indexed to the official rate, you're already falling behind in terms of actual purchasing power.

Government isn't stupid - it always leaves a back door for itself and you have no privity of contract with them, neither do social security recipients or other beneficiaries - they all stand to get cut loose when the situation warrants it best for Uncle Sam to do so. Let's not even talk about the legions of illegal immigrants who just got moved to the front of the social security line the minute they arrived, without paying one cent into the system. Which group has more votes, and for longer? Old boomers or young illegals starting to get used to government benefits?

It isn't like I want the plane to crash on takeoff but when I can see it's running out of runway and it's got way too many people on board, facts are facts - it won't make it.

Quote: (10-25-2014 07:37 AM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

Quote: (10-25-2014 04:39 AM)Akula Wrote:  

There is also the reality that the US dollars promised to you today will be worth much, much less in the future.

Reality is what is here now. What you're arguing is a projection, which will I think to some extent come true.

Lucky my pension is inflation indexed, huh?

It seems like some people _want_things to fuck up...so they can be right. It's couched as "I'm concerned for the future" but I don't buy it.

You don't seem to want to accept how bad things are financially.

I just want to let you know that pensions will become much less reliable and that you should be doing your own investing on the side. We can't borrow money forever, and to keep up those gains you would need to continue to borrow money forever.

Quote: (10-25-2014 04:13 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

You vote the person not the party, usually as the lesser of two evils.

For example,even though I liked McCain a lot, even donated $500 to his campaign in 2000, I voted for Obama in 2008. Why? The risk of an uninformed twit like Sarah Palin being an old man's heartbeat away from the nuclear codes was too great.

It turned out that McCain himself became a demented warmonger, so I don't regret that vote, but voted for Gary Johnson in 2012. Romney seemed a little too anxious to beef wit Russia and bomb Iran.

Bottom line is too many Republicans are warmongers.

After the last 6 years, the Democrats are as big, if not bigger warmongers than the Republicans.

That was probably the last thing the Democrats had going for them to reach to the middle class or to the men. They have proudly destroyed it, while the middle east goes to hell in a hand basket.

GOP= Grand "OLD" Party!

That tells you everything you need to know about Republicans. Its the party of old people that want to go back to the "good ole days," You know when there was more white people and Blacks couldn't vote, no rock music, no rap music, no weed, or coke, no sex.

Although a lot of their ideas I do agree with, like smaller government, lowering taxes to help small businesses, being pro-life and their stance on gay marriage, but as a Hispanic American I just can't get passed their racism.

If I'm a Hispanic sitting at home watching the news on tv and all of a sudden I see hear Steve King the Republican congressman from Iowa saying that the majority of Latinos are drug dealers, you think I'm going to really be for that?

and when I see photos like these at tea party rallies I just smh:








As much as I believe in conservative principles, as I proud Latino, there is just no way in hell I could ever vote Republican, A lot of Republicans are just too damn racist and I will feel very uncomfortable attending a Tea Party Rally.

George W. Bush actually talked about this in his last press conference before he left. He said that he felt like the Republican party was being to inclusive which then I interpreted as being "too white."

Just my 2 cents.

You know, man, it must suck to live a life where everything is about race.