U.S. Election Day 2012

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » November 7, 2012, 3:12 pm

Winnow wrote:You've got it backwards third worlder.

http://www.veeshanvault.org/forums/view ... 13&t=25835

"Obama looks like a shoe-in for reelection. An incumbent win = 10% gain following the election over the past 12 elections."

So how much of your vast fortune did you invest in "the stock market" today?! Please let us know, you hyper-intelligent political analyst slash financial wizard!

miir · Post by **miir** » November 7, 2012, 3:12 pm

Winnow wrote:
miir wrote:Apple stock is tanking... that's what's probably bringing down the DJIA.
The algorithm that calculates NASDAQ averages was adjusted so Apple doesn't impact things as drastically as it would if their entire market cap was factored in.

Next excuse please!

I was just trolling, you fucking dipshit.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » November 7, 2012, 3:16 pm

ITT winnow disagrees with himself because he posts so much stupid fucking garbage that he has forgotten how dumb he actually is

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 7, 2012, 3:23 pm

miir wrote:
Winnow wrote:
miir wrote:Apple stock is tanking... that's what's probably bringing down the DJIA.
The algorithm that calculates NASDAQ averages was adjusted so Apple doesn't impact things as drastically as it would if their entire market cap was factored in.

Next excuse please!
I was just trolling, you fucking dipshit.

So was I asshat! I figured I'd throw in some facts along the way.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 7, 2012, 3:23 pm

miir wrote:
Winnow wrote:
miir wrote:Apple stock is tanking... that's what's probably bringing down the DJIA.
The algorithm that calculates NASDAQ averages was adjusted so Apple doesn't impact things as drastically as it would if their entire market cap was factored in.

Next excuse please!
I was just trolling, you fucking dipshit.

So was I asshat! I figured I'd throw in some facts along the way.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » November 7, 2012, 4:08 pm

I only wish I had been stockpiling ammunition, so that I could gouge the fuck out of panicky rednecks when the inevitable "NIGRA COMIN FER MAH GUNZ" panic ensues.

Leonaerd · Post by **Leonaerd** » November 7, 2012, 5:52 pm

Fox got completely Nate Silver'd. Rasmussen is a joke. Science wins and punditry is dead.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 7, 2012, 7:19 pm

kyoukan wrote:
Winnow wrote:You've got it backwards third worlder.
http://www.veeshanvault.org/forums/view ... 13&t=25835

"Obama looks like a shoe-in for reelection. An incumbent win = 10% gain following the election over the past 12 elections."

So how much of your vast fortune did you invest in "the stock market" today?! Please let us know, you hyper-intelligent political analyst slash financial wizard!

After the country recovers from the financial shock and horror of Obama being reelected, the market will most likely go up. Did you think the stock market would pop 10% the day after the candidate Wall Street wanted to oust was elected? Please tell me you're that stupid.

Obama could be so bad that the market doesn't even get the post election bounce. He sucks something fierce (kyoubama knows what I mean). If we're lucky, we'll get the bounce before the fall. Either way, expect an overall loss in the markets for at least the next couple years.

I fucking hate Hillary Clinton.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » November 7, 2012, 9:07 pm

Nate Silver's popular vote prediction:
Obama 50.8% - Romney 48.3%

The actual popular vote:
Obama 50% - Romney 48%

Spang · Post by **Spang** » November 8, 2012, 1:04 am

Asheran Mojomaster · Post by **Asheran Mojomaster** » November 8, 2012, 5:04 am

Eagles are scary ass dinosaurs. They can peel your face off with their head or legs. Wtf.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » November 8, 2012, 5:31 am

they also all live in Canada now, due to deforestation, pollution and getting shot by rednecks with small dicks like kilmoll.

america's national bird should be a sea gull choking to death on a plastic six pack holder.

Leonaerd · Post by **Leonaerd** » November 8, 2012, 1:14 pm

covered in oil

Siji · Post by **Siji** » November 9, 2012, 2:20 am

with a tramp stamp on its tail feathers.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » November 9, 2012, 4:06 am

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 9, 2012, 10:13 am

California: 70% on food stamps - voted for Obama

Keep us fed President! Can we get a free couch and cable too?

-not paid for by freeloaders for Obama 2012

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » November 9, 2012, 10:24 am

Obama implemented the food stamp program? I did not know that!

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 9, 2012, 10:39 am

It's called "CalFresh" in California because they don't want people to feel bad about themselves. Don't want them motivated to actually find a job or anything like that.

http://www.calfresh.ca.gov/

Gotta love the sugar coating. (I know there's legitimate reasons to be on the program. Save it. Not for 70%)

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » November 9, 2012, 1:17 pm

Winnow wrote:California: 70% on food stamps - voted for Obama

Keep us fed President! Can we get a free couch and cable too?

-not paid for by freeloaders for Obama 2012

I would be interested to see more stats from the top 10 on both sides.

Who has more government assistance?

Teen pregnancies?

Unemployment?

Spousal abuse?

Crime rates?

Access to heath care (including mental health)?

Divorce rates?

Obesity?

Infant mortality rates?

Rape?

I think the Republican top 10 says a lot about the Republican party of today, and none if it is good. It's a black hole of willfull ignorance, blatant stupidity, and religious zealotry.

Winnow, your political party has a ton of work to do and very little to work with. I don't see a Republican in the White House for a long time.

Leonaerd · Post by **Leonaerd** » November 9, 2012, 1:47 pm

I don't see a Republican in the White House for a long time

Unfortunately, the overwhelming imbalance of stupidity coincides with hard-headed one-party voters -- who love to vote.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » November 9, 2012, 2:42 pm

The strongest republican states all receive more federal assistance of various sorts than they pay into the system. Evicting them from the union would help balance the budget in just the way the republicans say they want to.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » November 9, 2012, 2:54 pm

Fairweather Pure wrote:I don't see a Republican in the White House for a long time.

If Republicans want to have a night like the Democrats had Tuesday night, they need to stop alienating people who don't look like them, especially since people who don't look like them are becoming the majority if they aren't already. They can't shit all over people of color and women and win, it's not going to happen. Being anti-LGBT is no good, either.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » November 9, 2012, 2:55 pm

It would be almost adorable watching winnow flail around uselessly on every thread with the same made up food stamp argument if he wasn't such a disgusting person.

Republicans need to evolve or die out. As the baby boomers start to die off, they are slowly losing their stable of racist neanderthals that overcompensate for their numerous failures in life with guns that is their voting base. In 20 years it will just be really rich people still ineffectively trying to manipulate the electorate with their money instead of paying their fair share in taxes.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » November 9, 2012, 3:08 pm

Spang wrote:...people who don't look like them are becoming the majority if they aren't already

Already happened, last census says 48%. They lost the Latino vote via ongoing stupid (very conservative in a traditional - not republican context).

people of color

Really hate that term.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 9, 2012, 3:14 pm

Any chance we can stop seeing pictures of Obama with tears rolling down his face or showing emotion? The election's over. Get some shit done. Enough with the fake emotional crap.

If Obama wants to be a real president, he needs to get something accomplished.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » November 9, 2012, 3:19 pm

Aabidano wrote:
people of color
Really hate that term.

It's a term of solidarity. Loretta Ross, a woman of color, can explain it better than I can.

Leonaerd · Post by **Leonaerd** » November 9, 2012, 3:56 pm

It is a term that lumps every non-white into a single racial category, while failing to provide adequate specifics.

And it just feels dirty. I can't imagine ever using that term in conversation.

Asheran Mojomaster · Post by **Asheran Mojomaster** » November 9, 2012, 4:02 pm

Winnow wrote:It's called "CalFresh" in California because they don't want people to feel bad about themselves. Don't want them motivated to actually find a job or anything like that.

http://www.calfresh.ca.gov/

Gotta love the sugar coating. (I know there's legitimate reasons to be on the program. Save it. Not for 70%)

Honestly, I would bet that more than 70% of the people on those programs are on them for legitimate reasons, and are trying their best to get off of them as soon as they can do it on their own.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » November 9, 2012, 4:11 pm

Leonaerd wrote:It is a term that lumps every non-white...

The term "non-white" normalizes white and suggests that anyone who isn't white is different.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 9, 2012, 4:16 pm

people of color is a stupid way to say it. Using color at all is stupid. Everyone has a "color".

Make your mark in the white guilt world spang. Come up with a better phrase.

Leonaerd · Post by **Leonaerd** » November 9, 2012, 4:17 pm

Spang wrote:
Leonaerd wrote:It is a term that lumps every non-white...
The term "non-white" normalizes white and suggests that anyone who isn't white is different.

...... which I used to emphasize how stupid your term is. Troll.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » November 9, 2012, 4:19 pm

Winnow wrote:people of color is a stupid way to day it. Using color at all is stupid. Everyone has a "color".

Make your mark in the white guilt world spang. Come up with a better phrase.

You'll have to take it up with the people of color who prefer it over any other. I'm just a white guy trying to do right.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » November 9, 2012, 4:20 pm

Leonaerd wrote:...... which I used to emphasize how stupid your term is. Troll.

It's not my term, idiot.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » November 9, 2012, 4:22 pm

Spang wrote:You'll have to take it up with the people of color who prefer it over any other. I'm just a white guy trying to do right.

Can't they just be people and you be a guy? Why do you have to emphasize things based upon color? Racist!

Leonaerd · Post by **Leonaerd** » November 9, 2012, 4:22 pm

Spang wrote:
Leonaerd wrote:...... which I used to emphasize how stupid your term is. Troll.
It's not my term, idiot.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » November 9, 2012, 4:31 pm

Aslanna wrote:Can't they just be people and you be a guy? Why do you have to emphasize things based upon color? Racist!

Because people of color are treated differently than white people. Some of the struggles are shared, especially among the poor, but many struggles are largely experienced by people of color, such as police brutality, criminal injustice, racial disparities in the incarceration rate, etc.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » November 9, 2012, 4:39 pm

I'm calling bullshit, Spang. Where are you getting that "they" prefer to be called colored people? Chuck D from public enemy is one of the most outspoken people about racism, and I'm pretty sure if you called him a colored person he'd verbally bitch slap you. Ive also never heard the term used in conversation, and I have a lot of "colored" friends. Minnesota also has huge Somalian and Mexican populations.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » November 9, 2012, 4:44 pm

Funkmasterr wrote:I'm calling bullshit, Spang. Where are you getting that "they" prefer to be called colored people? Chuck D from public enemy is one of the most outspoken people about racism, and I'm pretty sure if you called him a colored person he'd verbally bitch slap you.

People of color is not colored people. Further, I would never call Chuck D, or any person of a color, a colored person.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » November 9, 2012, 4:59 pm

Oh bull shit. I think you need to stop hanging out in spoken word clubs.

And P.S. they are grammatically the same, so they're the same, period. Dealing with the racial problems in this country is necessary, but that won't happen by tip toeing around and using ridiculous terms.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » November 9, 2012, 5:02 pm

Funkmasterr wrote:Oh bull shit. I think you need to stop hanging out in spoken word clubs.

I've never been to one. What you people think you know about me could probably fill the Grand Canyon. But what you people actually know about me could barely fill a thimble.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 9, 2012, 5:07 pm

Spang wrote: But what you people actually know about me could barely fill a thimble.

lets keep it that way

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » November 9, 2012, 5:42 pm

Do not question his wisdom on these issues. See the vegetarian thread for further clarification.

Leonaerd · Post by **Leonaerd** » November 9, 2012, 5:45 pm

Spang · Post by **Spang** » November 9, 2012, 9:19 pm

Funkmasterr wrote:And P.S. they are grammatically the same, so they're the same, period.

Colored people puts people second. People of color puts people first. We can continue to debate which word is proper, but that's ultimately not what's important here. The mistreatment of minorities (does that word meet with your approval?) is the problem.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » November 9, 2012, 10:02 pm

That's my point exactly, arguing over terminology (which you're doing) is retarded and isn't going to change shit. It shifts the focus onto the less important issue, you know, like the politicians and media do with everything.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » November 9, 2012, 10:04 pm

Funkmasterr wrote:That's my point exactly, arguing over terminology (which you're doing)...

Which we're doing. I'm not arguing with myself.

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » November 10, 2012, 3:01 am

I forgot to even look at this forum for the past 2 years. This is the first thread I clicked on. Carry on.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » November 10, 2012, 8:55 am

Spang wrote:People of color puts people first.

People who use that phrase are generally sanctimonious douchebags who'd rather be politically correct than actually accomplish something useful. Yes there are exceptions, there are also useful sociologists and likely a bigfoot someplace too.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » November 10, 2012, 12:26 pm

Aabidano wrote:
Spang wrote:People of color puts people first.
People who use that phrase are generally sanctimonious douchebags who'd rather be politically correct than actually accomplish something useful. Yes there are exceptions, there are also useful sociologists and likely a bigfoot someplace too.

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » November 10, 2012, 7:22 pm

Aabidano wrote:
Spang wrote:People of color puts people first.
People who use that phrase are generally sanctimonious douchebags who'd rather be politically correct than actually accomplish something useful. Yes there are exceptions, there are also useful sociologists and likely a bigfoot someplace too.

The "of color" part is for racists, if you're not racist then they're just "people".

Calling someone black isn't racist anyway, it's descriptive. You can tell a racist here pretty easily and it has nothing to do with the literally descriptive part of the phrase.

Question: "Whose beer is this?"
Answer 1: "The black fellah."
Answer 2: "That black cunt."

Sometimes answer 2 isn't racist either, sometimes it's another black fellah talking, or if the answerer is at the same table it's just his his friend taking the piss, or even just because they are a cunt.

I think my point here is language crusaders need to fuck off back to Oxbridge where they can circle jerk about this shit.