https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6a7nHdTwu7Y

Please, I don't bear much love for a lot of your ideas, but come on, you liberals need to get out of this pathetic ditch

I didn't listen to it all but the dude comparing Europe's liberals to American's liberals was pretty funny.

Over there they're revolutionary freedom fighters and over here they're gay parade coordinators.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-inErfjTXs

Paraphrased from your words: "You can not choose who endorses you"

Also you were talking about how Clinton supports Neo-Nazi brigades in Ukraine, from where I got this. And Neo-Nazis are literally strung out across the entire political spectrum because they can't form any cohesive movement due to being unpopular, Paugers endorsed Jill Stein, you're not going to tell me that Jill Stein is a Nazi too, are you?

Edited 11/11/2016 22:30:59

Paraphrased from your words: "You can not choose who endorses you"

? I never said this? I agree somewhat, but you can choose to say "this is awful fellow/group that endorses me".

Also you were talking about how Clinton supports Neo-Nazi brigades in Ukraine, from where I got this.

The USA upholds and helps the Ukrainian government, including training for its Azov battalion. I don't uphold the USA, though.

Paugers endorsed Jill Stein

1. Paugers is not a nazi, by his own words tsh
2. it's not a matter of who they uphold, just what they uphold. a Trump upholder is not needingly a nazi but this is a low for you, going from upholding somewhat decent folk like G. Johnson to celebrating D. Trump's win.

? I never said this? I agree somewhat, but you can choose to say "this is awful fellow/group that endorses me".

You said something like it, I just don't remember fully where or what form.

The USA upholds and helps the Ukrainian government, including training for its Azov battalion. I don't uphold the USA, though.

Not accusing you of doing so

1. Paugers is not a nazi, by his own words tsh

!Paugers

going from upholding somewhat decent folk like G. Johnson to celebrating D. Trump's win.

I wanted Trump to win because he had done his campaign fairly. Clinton had done her campaign awfully, cheating and bribing along the way. She also was worse, objectively, Trump as far as I'm aware doesn't advocate more war, maybe fighting harder against ISIS, but not more war. Clinton on the other hand, orchestrated atrocities from Syria to Texas, a much more bloody career that would carry on under her presidency.

I wanted Trump to win because he had done his campaign fairly.

you can bet it won't be fair in 2021 when he has the same resources

Trump as far as I'm aware doesn't advocate more war

he advocates for more countries getting core weapons (where there's a gun, there's fun), putting boots on Syria - two things that Clinton doesn't. This is a man who said "I love war" and wants what's best said as neo-colonialism in Syria, and wants to spread "democracy and American ideals".

I have a message for the terrorists trying to kill our citizens: we will find you, we will destroy you, and we will win. This is not only a military fight, but we will also require cyberwarfare and financial warfare. It is also an ideological fight. We will confront directly the hateful ideology of Radical Islam — and promote American values, and American culture, and America’s system of government.

I hate this bloke. "Ideologic fight" reminds me of what some politicians uphold in America, just rounding everyone up that at all criticises America's wars against Islaamists as agents of the Islaamists and killing/gaoling them.

Edited 11/14/2016 03:02:44

you can bet it won't be fair in 2021 when he has the same resources

Why? It's not like every politician is as corrupt as Clinton

he advocates for more countries getting core weapons (where there's a gun, there's fun), putting boots on Syria - two things that Clinton doesn't

Not more war, one is dumb and probably something the countries themselves would reject and would be just a bargaining chip in negotiations, another is fighting a war harder.

I have a message for the terrorists trying to kill our citizens: we will find you, we will destroy you, and we will win. This is not only a military fight, but we will also require cyberwarfare and financial warfare. It is also an ideological fight. We will confront directly the hateful ideology of Radical Islam — and promote American values, and American culture, and America’s system of government.

This is a very typical thing of a politician to say, its not even calling for anything radical, just says "We will fight a war several ways and win"

It's not like every politician is as corrupt as Clinton

politicians are a corrupt breed, it's very very rare to see somebody be a big politician for any long muchness of time. That's why half of USA "Congress" have millions of $ despite not being born into it nor having enough salary to make that much.

Not more war

In his words, he's the most militaristic person ever. Also I don't think most governments would reject getting a supergun...just a hunch, and yes, growing the war more than Clinton wants. I don't see your argument at all.

This is a very typical thing of a politician to say

Clinton's said nothing so extreme, but anyhow clearly he wants to go on with the "War on Terror" and spreading folkdom.