Not voting because Harris is a woman?

[alphatop32]

5 hours ago, Erik62 said:

NO ONE COUNTRY pays into NATO, the specific ruling is that member nations should be paying 2.5% of nationl GDP, into THEIR NATIONAL defence budget. NO COIUNTRY specifically puts money DIRECTLY into NATO coffers.

  BUT wait 😳😱!!! Trump didn't even put funds into the United States, WHEN HE WAS PRESIDENT. 

Except that they were not contributing until Trump put the pressure. Sorry he toppled the freebie cart. Trump doesn’t need to put more money in the war machines in America or elsewhere. We have our own problems to worry about and not start a third world war somewhere else. 

[Erik62]

2 hours ago, alphatop32 said:

Except that they were not contributing until Trump put the pressure. Sorry he toppled the freebie cart. Trump doesn’t need to put more money in the war machines in America or elsewhere. We have our own problems to worry about and not start a third world war somewhere else. 

Can you NOT READ. NO COUNTRY contributes to NATO. NO one is free loading. Trump makes up storie & tells lies. The US pays more INTO US DEFENCE SPENDING because their 2.5% GDP is so much greater than other NATO members. Even when the TRUTH IS LAID BARE twats will still believe their idiot & false Messiah. 

[backdoorjimmy]

1 hour ago, Erik62 said:

NO COUNTRY contributes to NATO. NO one is free loading. Trump makes up storie & tells lies. The US pays more INTO US DEFENCE SPENDING because their 2.5% GDP is so much greater than other NATO members.

I did some digging and here's what I found out about NATO funding -

From Wikipedia - (link to article embedded)

NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) funding comes from two primary sources:

National Contributions: Each member country contributes to NATO's budget based on an agreed cost-sharing formula. This budget covers the costs of NATO's operations, infrastructure, and administration. The contributions are generally based on the Gross National Income (GNI) of each member state, with wealthier nations contributing more.

Common Fund: NATO has a common fund that finances certain collective activities, such as military operations, missions, and the maintenance of NATO's headquarters. This fund is supported by the national contributions of member states.

In addition to these sources, NATO also encourages member countries to spend a minimum of 2% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on defense, which helps ensure that the alliance is adequately funded for its collective defense and security initiatives. However, this 2% guideline is not a mandatory requirement, and actual defense spending varies among member states.

From ChatGPT  -

NATO Funding

NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) funding comes from two primary sources:

National Contributions: Each member country contributes to NATO's budget based on an agreed cost-sharing formula. This budget covers the costs of NATO's operations, infrastructure, and administration. The contributions are generally based on the Gross National Income (GNI) of each member state, with wealthier nations contributing more.

Common Fund: NATO has a common fund that finances certain collective activities, such as military operations, missions, and the maintenance of NATO's headquarters. This fund is supported by the national contributions of member states.

In addition to these sources, NATO also encourages member countries to spend a minimum of 2% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on defense, which helps ensure that the alliance is adequately funded for its collective defense and security initiatives. However, this 2% guideline is not a mandatory requirement, and actual defense spending varies among member states.

[alphatop32]

2 hours ago, backdoorjimmy said:

I did some digging and here's what I found out about NATO funding -

From Wikipedia - (link to article embedded)

NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) funding comes from two primary sources:

National Contributions: Each member country contributes to NATO's budget based on an agreed cost-sharing formula. This budget covers the costs of NATO's operations, infrastructure, and administration. The contributions are generally based on the Gross National Income (GNI) of each member state, with wealthier nations contributing more.

Common Fund: NATO has a common fund that finances certain collective activities, such as military operations, missions, and the maintenance of NATO's headquarters. This fund is supported by the national contributions of member states.

In addition to these sources, NATO also encourages member countries to spend a minimum of 2% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on defense, which helps ensure that the alliance is adequately funded for its collective defense and security initiatives. However, this 2% guideline is not a mandatory requirement, and actual defense spending varies among member states.

From ChatGPT  -

NATO Funding

NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) funding comes from two primary sources:

National Contributions: Each member country contributes to NATO's budget based on an agreed cost-sharing formula. This budget covers the costs of NATO's operations, infrastructure, and administration. The contributions are generally based on the Gross National Income (GNI) of each member state, with wealthier nations contributing more.

Common Fund: NATO has a common fund that finances certain collective activities, such as military operations, missions, and the maintenance of NATO's headquarters. This fund is supported by the national contributions of member states.

In addition to these sources, NATO also encourages member countries to spend a minimum of 2% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on defense, which helps ensure that the alliance is adequately funded for its collective defense and security initiatives. However, this 2% guideline is not a mandatory requirement, and actual defense spending varies among member states.

Exactly! Either @Erik62 is an idiot or a liar or both… Nice to be a freeloader until someone asks you to pay your fair share! 

[Poz50something]

On 10/19/2024 at 7:32 AM, Fistedmike said:

It’s got nothing to do with her being a woman. She’s a fucking idiot. 

Is that what you’ve gleaned of Harris from what must be endless tuning into Faux News? I fail to see how Comrade Conman meets anyone’s intellectual criteria,  when we all know he has his nose so far up Putin’s ass he knows who Vlad swallowed this morning. 

[Poz50something]

12 hours ago, PupBoiRapeSlut said:

I can’t vote because I’m not American but I’m a good boi I’ll vote however my daddy wants me to 

Don’t fret ….the way people are just jonesing for PP to become PM means we’re soon going to the polls. Not a matter of if, but when. 

[Poz50something]

20 hours ago, BlackDude said:

 It was totally self-serving because the same Civil Rights Bill is now used for everyone.

errrrr….there are many citizens/permanent residents/people working towards regulating their stay in the United States. You are saying that you advocate another form of separate and not equal when it comes to civil rights? That the Civil Rights Bill only applies to black people and no one else can use it to advance their people? If that were so, same sex marriage would NEVER have happened. 
 

Other “minorities” used the righteous cause and case for Black people during Jim Crow to parlay rights over to themselves. 
 

That’s where I think things are a little fuzzy. There were plenty of people fighting alongside Black civic leaders to advance the rights of brown-skinned people in the USA.
 

Dolores de la Huerta, for example, may have been a labour rights advocate, but she was fighting for the rights of farm workers who get the rotten end of the economic pie.  Or Fred Korematsu, who fought against the internment of Japanese Americans during the Second World War. Japanese Americans were put in a concentration camp by the American government. It happened alongside Jim Crow laws. 

Fighting one injustice doesn’t blunt the injustice done to others, like there’s only so many injustices that can happen. It in fact brings into focus the many other issues that are happening. 
 

 

[BlackDude]

14 hours ago, Erik62 said:

Civil rights IS FOR EVERYONE. Just because a person is an alternative colour to black does not mean that they are not entitled too civil rights & NOBODY HAS TAKEN these civil rights from black people. NO WHITE students get the privilege of having set quotas at university like blacks. Whites have to compete with ALL OTHER races. You must think yourself pretty special if you think that ONLY blacks, or is it only you, entitled to civil rights. 

You’re correct, civil right was for everyone. 
 

And let’s not talk about competition. Any mathematical or statistical study will show that it’s less than 1% chance that white Americans would have eight times the wealth more than black families (or 85% of the wealth overall) unless there are outside forces or a system that suppresses competition. The math is simple.

 

And we are black  Americans are looking for policies to remedy that equation, so the math makes sense

[BlackDude]

14 hours ago, brnbk said:

The United States is squatting on Indian lands, and is thus a major freeloader as well. Ever thought of paying the native American for his stolen lands and gold?

I believe Kamla Harris would make a great president as she embodies ALL of America: She has a black father, an Indian mother, and a Jewish husband and she chose an old(er) white man to be her vice president! Many intelligent and accomplished white women, including Liz Chaney, Melinda Gates etc,  have supported her, and the most influential black woman in America, Oprah Winfrey has given her approval as well.  Even though I am not from the US, as a person of color in Canada, I can see how much she truly loves America and does not discriminate between black and white. Far from being an airhead, she is a very accomplished and intelligent professional woman. 

As far as the Orange Man is concerned, Donald Trump needs to be put in an orange jumpsuit and sent right away to Jail. He will blend in with the rapists and thieves there. 

Hate to tell you, but Oprah Winfrey has little if no influence in the black community for anybody under 60. That’s why her TV show and her network flopped.
 

We left her and her black misandrist agenda back in the 90s. 

[BlackDude]

15 hours ago, analluv27 said:

I can see the point and the logic of what you’re saying but at the same time saddling up to a party comfortable with white supremest, nazi, And Christian nationalists in their midst with hopes of a place at the table may not be in your best interest. 
Perhaps a start of a third party consisting of black politicians but not going all out for presidential elections but staying at local elections and then building a base up from there?

I don’t think that’s necessary. The LGBT community doesn’t have a separate party neither do illegal immigrants, native Americans, or any other group. Equality can all be done within the current political structure. 
 

I don’t think this is a civics issue. This is just a reckoning of the Democratic Party.for years, they told us they can’t do anything for Black people because it will upset “moderate” voters. And we’re saying fine then you let them vote for you.

 

[viking8x6]

THIS TOPIC WILL BE TEMPORARILY LOCKED TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO COOL OFF A BIT HERE.

I'm not handing out infractions, although there are a sizable number of people who merit them. Please remember:

Abuse of other members is NOT ALLOWED.

Posting of false statements and conspiracy theories is NOT ALLOWED. This is one reason it's good to back up your assertions with some kind of sources and/or references.

Posting twaddle of the "candidate X is stupid" genre does not constructively contribute to the discussion. Please refrain. Things get contentious enough in this subforum without members displaying their own idiocy.

[BBBxCumDumpster]

Do you really think that the founding fathers intended to return to the oligarchy they had just escaped?  Trump will change the foundation of this country.  He has made it quite clear by boldly plagiarizing noted fascists.  Lately, he is talking about "blood" and "genes"  as being superior or inferior. (Incidently, it was a black physician who debunked that idea AND created the basis for the modern blood bank.) This "man" Trump wants to punish and jail late night comedians for rightfully mocking him. If you slather on clown  make up and don a clown wig, then you're asking for it. But this also points to a thin skinned man, who wants the nation to change and sway to his whims, emotional fits, his rampant lies and accusations and his rapidly declining mental health.  He has accused Harrris of the exact same things he has already done. He is counting on his voters to not fact check to not know history or government as it is. Did the dog eat his homework, his fiscal plan? He is a lazy iĺl-informed, Cliff notes student, a rapist, a convicted felon, a petulant whiner and an aesthetic punchline. I pray he will lose and reap the bitter harvest he has sown.

[BlackDude]

On 10/25/2024 at 1:36 PM, BBBxCumDumpster said:

Do you really think that the founding fathers intended to return to the oligarchy they had just escaped?  Trump will change the foundation of this country.  He has made it quite clear by boldly plagiarizing noted fascists.  Lately, he is talking about "blood" and "genes"  as being superior or inferior. (Incidently, it was a black physician who debunked that idea AND created the basis for the modern blood bank.) This "man" Trump wants to punish and jail late night comedians for rightfully mocking him. If you slather on clown  make up and don a clown wig, then you're asking for it. But this also points to a thin skinned man, who wants the nation to change and sway to his whims, emotional fits, his rampant lies and accusations and his rapidly declining mental health.  He has accused Harrris of the exact same things he has already done. He is counting on his voters to not fact check to not know history or government as it is. Did the dog eat his homework, his fiscal plan? He is a lazy iĺl-informed, Cliff notes student, a rapist, a convicted felon, a petulant whiner and an aesthetic punchline. I pray he will lose and reap the bitter harvest he has sown.

One could easily argue the founding fathers were textbook oligarchs and would have zero issue with this

[Erik62]

2 hours ago, BlackDude said:

One could easily argue the founding fathers were textbook oligarchs and would have zero issue with this

There was no way the Founding Fathers could have foreseen how social media would create potential presidents, from the idiocy of reality TV. This bizarre form of entertainment has placed many, usually totally unqualified & unsuitable, people into positions of great power & social indoctrination. Trump is the worst of these people because he has managed through his antics, his personal presentation (make up & hairstyles), his offensive characterisations, slanderous tweets of his opponents & his bullying, to attract a less educated, less politically savvy / aware & struggling to survive cohort. Trump has played very effectively on their naivety & personal circumstances. If elected he will undoubtedly be dragging the whole world into a conflict of worldwide proportions & destruction. 

[PrisonbaiT]

Besides Orange Trump, there is another danger lurking, called Elon Musk.   What is he cooking?!🥴🥴🥴🥴