• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About kintsukuroi

  • Rank
    Veteran Member


  • MBTI


  • Gender
  1. It appears you posted this in the wrong tab. Copy and paste this post, then click the tab that reads "Stormfront - White Nationalist Community" instead, so you can post this where it belongs. Thank you.
  2. No, it's much simpler than that. They've had dirt all along, and they continue to accumulate more, but they haven't had to use it yet due to the infighting in the primary. This is all part of the status quo when it comes to electioneering. What's uncommon here is that the opposition party sat and waited so long to start the attacks. The attacks, when they come, will not be devious in any way. Subtlety and cleverness is completely lost on Trump and his base. I mean, for fuck's sake, his wife's speech rickrolled the convention and nobody there seems to have recognized it. No, the attacks will be blatant and direct. What will make them effective is that they'll be coming from Clinton. He is emotionally incapable of handling dissent as it is, but coming from a woman...? He will not handle it well. The press isn't her creature, other than they tend to share the same outlook politically. No, see, before now, he was a primary candidate, so his rallies were technically private events that he could control, and the press largely went easy on him (with few exceptions) to continue to get access and those lovely, lovely clicks on their numerous Trump stories. Now, though, he's the candidate, and that's public figure, and they don't have to play nice any more. She won't be celebrated by the entire country. She doesn't have to look good; she has to make him look worse. And while he's doing a fine job of that by himself, the DNC needs to find something that isn't based in actual fact (because his base not only does not give a single fuck about facts, they don't even know the definition of the word) to discredit him in the eyes of his base. And it's not good for the citizenry in any way whatsoever. At this point we're not looking for improvement. We're looking to elect the one who's going to do the least amount of damage. This whole thing is the biggest shitshow I've seen in my life--it's setting new precedents every single day for how low it'll go--and we haven't even kicked off the official campaigning season. The biggest surprise to me, I have to admit, is that nobody's been killed yet. We have four months to go, though. I sort of disagree. They're in this mess because they lack conviction, and they put "the good of the party" over whatever it is they call their morals and ethics. We're starting to see pushback (Kasich, that freshman senator from I don't remember who wrote that 1500 word fb post back in May, other non-endorsers) but too little too late. McConnell or Ryan needed to stand up four months ago and say, "I will never support this person. I don't care what label he tries to put on himself. He is not a Republican," and actively work to get rid of him. They didn't, and it's going to cost them dearly, particularly on the down-ballot, because they will be associated with him and his antics for a very. long. time. He is now the GOP, no matter what they say--and the GOP is a bunch of old white supremacists (you see King's "subgroup" crack on live TV?) who hate brown people, gay people, women, and anything new. Gonna take a long time to shake that off. And Jeb got his ass kicked because he doesn't know how to fight with his knees and elbows. Trump slammed his head in a locker and gave him swirlies and he had no idea how to respond. Then we get exactly what we deserve. Thank God I live in a state that practically issues a firearm with a driver's license. Might not be a bad idea to stock up on some ammunition now. Right, so they're not actually Trump supporters--they're Hillary haters. There's a difference. It'd be like calling me a Hillary supporter, but no, I'm voting against the other. She just happens to be the only one left with any real shot of beating him.
  3. Do you know any non-white, non-male people who hold this view in a non-ironic fashion? I don't, and I live in a state that's been deep red since the late 70s. But it won't matter. He'll self-destruct right after the first debate, or maybe even during. He's a misogynistic sociopathic narcissist with the attention span of a sparrow and the self-control of an Adderall'd 6-year-old. When--not if--Clinton hands him his ass (because say what you will about her policies, she's been in upper-divisional politics longer than most of y'all have been alive, and she will take him apart), he'll not only be a loser and a laughingstock in the eyes of the entire country, he'll have been beaten by a woman. And if you don't think the DNC machine has a file cabinet full of shit to trigger him and set him off, you haven't been paying attention. He is emotionally incapable of dealing with what is promising to be a for-him grueling run. Primaries are minor league, and he's never been to the show. She has. He has no fucking idea what he is in for. Kid gloves are off. Press'll be up his ass so far they'll be tickling his tonsils, and for a guy like him with the persecution complex he has... oh, my, it is going to be glorious. It's gonna take the GOP 50 years to recover from this shit. It's like 1968 all over again. Worst part, though, is she's the better choice of the two. As well ask me, "Hey, would you rather have cancer or ebola?" Well, shit, I'd take cancer, but, well... it's still cancer, dude.
  4. That video is the dumbest shit I've seen in a while, and remember, the GOP "race" is going on, for context on how dumb the shit is that I've seen recently. Here's an excellent rebuttal that says it far better than I ever could.
  5. The irony here is rich and hearty, like a good stew.
  6. No. It is simply an artifact of the basic human need to believe there is order and balance in the universe. There is not. And there never will be. The sooner you accept this--truly accept it--the more content you will be. Hope that helps.
  7. This made me laugh so hard I got a cramp. To the original question: I find people who are fixated on "right" and "wrong" to be not only extremely unpleasant to be around, but they're almost always intolerant, and it's very likely they're religious (whether "official" or "personal" is irrelevant to me, because no matter how many flavors there are, fanaticism is always bitter), so when this topic comes up, I know there is no better tactic than to avoid them. Don't engage. Ever. There is no upside with that type of person.
  8. None personally, but I don't have wealthy people in my social circles.
  9. My pleasure... but (if it ain't too nosy to ask) what happened to Keith? Seemed like y'all were gettin along like a house on fire there. :)

  10. As ever, thank you! I nearly just sent this question straight to you since I knew your feedback would be spot on.

  11. Try "I enjoyed hanging out with you, but I'm not really feeling it, and our last outing made me uncomfortable. Good luck in your search." If it were me in this situation, I would very, very much appreciate being told directly "hey, I'm not diggin you" as quickly as possible so I could stop wasting time--I ain't gettin any younger, after all. If that's too harsh for him or he takes it poorly, well, then you know your instincts were good.
  12. At best, it could be said I participate in Christmas. I put up and decorate a tree, hang lights, give and receive gifts, do the Christmas dinner with relatives, etc. I don't celebrate it, though. It's a holiday like, say, Labor Day or Independence Day--one with certain expected activities. It doesn't have any residual or additional meaning.
  13. I'm male, and this is how I define them. I imagine women might define these differently. Hot: Visceral, subjective sexual attractiveness. May or may not be objectively attractive. Only used to describe humans and, in my case, only women. Beautiful: Clinical, objective attractiveness. May or may not be sexual. Used to describe humans (men and women both), non-humans, concepts, or objects. The most overused and diluted-meaning term in this group. Cute: Categorical, adolescent or juvenile attractiveness. Pre-sexual attractiveness, largely, in humans. May be used to describe humans, non-humans, or objects. A mildly diminuitive or dismissive term when applied to humans.
  14. The transgender part has nothing to do with the neurosis. Making it part of the story unnecessarily conflates the two, which is as troubling as it is predictable.