Jump to content
270soft Forum
NYrepublican

Forum presidents

Who would you vote for if the following forum members ran as presidential candidates?  

34 members have voted

  1. 1. Who would you vote for if the following forum members ran as presidential candidates? poll 1

  2. 2. Who would you vote for if the following forum members ran as presidential candidates? poll 2

  3. 3. Who would you vote for if the following forum members ran as presidential candidates? poll 3



Recommended Posts

Guest
12 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

MY NAME IS INIGO MANTOYA, YOU KILL MY FATHER, PREPARE TO DIE!

This is what you sound like, and I'm sorry but when you degrade one American on superficial qualities, you degrade all of us.

it doesn't change that i will always fight against you because of your inconsiderate way of describing my comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, koneke said:

it doesn't change that i will always fight against you because of your inconsiderate way of describing my comments.

And your inconsiderate comment was the reason of that. Two can play mon frer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Koneke, you seriously think that people with no children have don't have the same concern for the future? Because I have to tell you that just isn't accurate.

I don't have children, and I probably worry about the future more than most people I know. For one thing, I and most adults without children still have friends and family who do have children. But even if my entire family were dead, I still find it sad to think that humanity could end up going extinct or at the very least going through a period of fairly rapid decline sometime in the near future (which I think is a real possibility, even if it's not necessarily the most likely scenario). I certainly wouldn't weigh the consequences of my actions any less due to my lack of children than I would if I did have any.

And even if your premise were true, I think you're way, way off in using it to generalize about gays, considering how many gay couples adopt children or even carry children in the case of lesbian couples. You don't think they care about those children's futures?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
49 minutes ago, RI Democrat said:

Koneke, you seriously think that people with no children have don't have the same concern for the future? Because I have to tell you that just isn't accurate.

I don't have children, and I probably worry about the future more than most people I know. For one thing, I and most adults without children still have friends and family who do have children. But even if my entire family were dead, I still find it sad to think that humanity could end up going extinct or at the very least going through a period of fairly rapid decline sometime in the near future (which I think is a real possibility, even if it's not necessarily the most likely scenario). I certainly wouldn't weigh the consequences of my actions any less due to my lack of children than I would if I did have any.

And even if your premise were true, I think you're way, way off in using it to generalize about gays, considering how many gay couples adopt children or even carry children in the case of lesbian couples. You don't think they care about those children's futures?

I did not say that gays or childless have no concern for the future. I said that through the ages it has always been people with children that has been political leaders, and i want it to stay that way because i trust people who have something at stake than persons who have less at stake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, koneke said:

I did not say that gays or childless have no concern for the future. I said that through the ages it has always been people with children that has been political leaders, and i want it to stay that way because i trust people who have something at stake than persons who have less at stake.

It didn't sound like that @RI Democrat @koneke

"It is a problem that homosexuals have political power, because gays usually have an indifference to the future because they do not reproduce.

As an example i can point to Angela Merkel who has no children and is behind the catastrophic handling of the migrant crisis. She simply has no reason to care for the future, and this is the result. I'd want heterosexuals like Trump who have many children he truly loves which means he has a big incentive to care for the future and the lives of the next generations." - Koneke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, NYrepublican said:

"It is a problem that homosexuals have political power, because gays usually have an indifference to the future because they do not reproduce.

As an example i can point to Angela Merkel who has no children and is behind the catastrophic handling of the migrant crisis. She simply has no reason to care for the future, and this is the result. I'd want heterosexuals like Trump who have many children he truly loves which means he has a big incentive to care for the future and the lives of the next generations." - Koneke

Oh my god...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Koneke is getting stomped. Poor bloke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TFW you forget to log out of the DM account. Also, maybe if we can scrape enough people togeter, we can act as a fake "American Parliment" and come up with theoretical solutions to issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, The DM said:

Koneke is getting stomped. Poor bloke.

He also posted some stupid stuff like this

"The KKK and the National Socialists cherished it [inherited IQ based on race]? The KKK wanted to have white supremacy i dont think they cared about genetic inheritance or stuff like that.

The National Socialists thought that the races should fight each other so the best race could win.. i dont see how that is genetics and intelligence.

You have been debunked"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NYrepublican said:

He also posted some stupid stuff like this

"The KKK and the National Socialists cherished it [inherited IQ based on race]? The KKK wanted to have white supremacy i dont think they cared about genetic inheritance or stuff like that.

The National Socialists thought that the races should fight each other so the best race could win.. i dont see how that is genetics and intelligence.

You have been debunked"

Poor Bloke. It isn't nice to hurt the mentally disabled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LokiLoki22 said:

Poor Bloke. It isn't nice to hurt the mentally disabled.

Willful ignorance is not a recognized disability. I work in a government welfare office that gives assured income to those too handicapped in some way or other to work as my own profession. I know the general parameters of disability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

Willful ignorance is not a recognized disability. I work in a government welfare office that gives assured income to those too handicapped in some way or other to work as my own profession. I know the general parameters of disability.

I just snorted. All of the cookie points go to you for that good sir. All of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, koneke said:

I did not say that gays or childless have no concern for the future. I said that through the ages it has always been people with children that has been political leaders, and i want it to stay that way because i trust people who have something at stake than persons who have less at stake.

So George Washington wasn't a political leader, huh. My understanding of American history has been changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sunnymentoaddict said:

So George Washington wasn't a political leader, huh. My understanding of American history has been changed.

Washington, Madison, Jackson, Polk, Pierce (his died, causing an absence of leadership and care), Buchanan, Harding also didn't have children. 

John Tyler must have been the most caring and the greatest leader since he had 15 children! Trump is clearly superior to Lincoln as he outfathered him, and Lincoln's weak ability caused him to lose a son to illness, thus diminishing his presidential fitness even further. 

There was a peasant in Russia that reportedly had about 87 children, or so. He should have ruled the world. A veritable Christ on earth. Wait, Jesus didn't have children (Trump would probably Tweet "Loser." here). God has one son, which is one son better. 

Is the Pope a good leader? No kids. He doesn't care about the future. 

All the immigrant groups that @koneke hates foster more children than Americans of North European descent, maybe they should run the country? 

Germany's German population is declining as they are averaging a birthrate of less than 2 kids per couple. Clearly, they're losing the capability of leadership and care of the future, as has been shown at several G20 summits. 

India will soon surpass China in population, becoming the most caring country on Earth. India is a nation of leaders. 

Maybe Koneke believes in adoption as a means to gain leadership and care of the future. In this way, "the gays," as he calls them can acquire the means to run our country effectively. As many of them do have well-paying jobs, I'd imagine they could adopt at least 12 by the time they run for office. 

Prediction! Hillary Clinton adopts 5 children so that she can defeat Donald Trump in 2020! With 6 children, we won't have to worry about her emails, ties to Wall Street, or any other backroom shenanigans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Washington, Madison, Jackson, Polk, Pierce (his died, causing an absence of leadership and care), Buchanan, Harding also didn't have children. 

John Tyler must have been the most caring and the greatest leader since he had 15 children! Trump is clearly superior to Lincoln as he outfathered him, and Lincoln's weak ability caused him to lose a son to illness, thus diminishing his presidential fitness even further. 

There was a peasant in Russia that reportedly had about 87 children, or so. He should have ruled the world. A veritable Christ on earth. Wait, Jesus didn't have children (Trump would probably Tweet "Loser." here). God has one son, which is one son better. 

Is the Pope a good leader? No kids. He doesn't care about the future. 

All the immigrant groups that @koneke hates foster more children than Americans of North European descent, maybe they should run the country? 

Germany's German population is declining as they are averaging a birthrate of less than 2 kids per couple. Clearly, they're losing the capability of leadership and care of the future, as has been shown at several G20 summits. 

India will soon surpass China in population, becoming the most caring country on Earth. India is a nation of leaders. 

Maybe Koneke believes in adoption as a means to gain leadership and care of the future. In this way, "the gays," as he calls them can acquire the means to run our country effectively. As many of them do have well-paying jobs, I'd imagine they could adopt at least 12 by the time they run for office. 

Prediction! Hillary Clinton adopts 5 children so that she can defeat Donald Trump in 2020! With 6 children, we won't have to worry about her emails, ties to Wall Street, or any other backroom shenanigans. 

see Koneke response below

On 7/17/2017 at 6:40 PM, koneke said:

I want the different races to live among their own kin. Africans in Africa, Europeans in Europe and the colonies. Asia for Asians. That is the best solution. Having different races in one place will only make a lot of trouble.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Prediction! Hillary Clinton adopts 5 children so that she can defeat Donald Trump in 2020! With 6 children, we won't have to worry about her emails, ties to Wall Street, or any other backroom shenanigans. 

LOL

10 minutes ago, NYrepublican said:

see Koneke response below

Besides the hideous outrageousness of his entire comment (specifically where he says some of my friends and family members should move "back" to a place they've never been, much less lived in, a place they're only connected to by some distant ancestors, because if they don't it'll "make a lot of trouble," whatever that means), he referred to America as "the colonies," now those are fighting words

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, NYrepublican said:

see Koneke response below

 

Should we return North American to the tribes and retreat back to Europe? What about people of mixed descent? Should we draw and quarter them and give a piece of them to each area of origin? Also, where do we draw the line? Why not have us all go back to Africa where we came from? Also, a continental group is not a race. And races or civilizations cross continental lines--see Turkey, Russia, Egypt, Panama, etc. 

Koneke is ridiculous. Anyway, I'm tired of even giving him any attention. I'd appreciate it if @NYrepublican and @Reagan04 stopped sharing Koneke's posts with me. I've ignored him, and maybe if we all ignore him, he'll go away, maybe back to Europe, where he can congregate with his own "kind."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, President Garrett Walker said:

LOL

Besides the hideous outrageousness of his entire comment (specifically where he says some of my friends and family members should move "back" to a place they've never been, much less lived in, and where they're only connected to by some distant ancestors, because if they don't it'll "make a lot of trouble," whatever that means), he referred to America as "the colonies," now those are fighting words

It originated from a PM BTW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
5 hours ago, vcczar said:

Washington, Madison, Jackson, Polk, Pierce (his died, causing an absence of leadership and care), Buchanan, Harding also didn't have children. 

John Tyler must have been the most caring and the greatest leader since he had 15 children! Trump is clearly superior to Lincoln as he outfathered him, and Lincoln's weak ability caused him to lose a son to illness, thus diminishing his presidential fitness even further. 

There was a peasant in Russia that reportedly had about 87 children, or so. He should have ruled the world. A veritable Christ on earth. Wait, Jesus didn't have children (Trump would probably Tweet "Loser." here). God has one son, which is one son better. 

Is the Pope a good leader? No kids. He doesn't care about the future. 

All the immigrant groups that @koneke hates foster more children than Americans of North European descent, maybe they should run the country? 

Germany's German population is declining as they are averaging a birthrate of less than 2 kids per couple. Clearly, they're losing the capability of leadership and care of the future, as has been shown at several G20 summits. 

India will soon surpass China in population, becoming the most caring country on Earth. India is a nation of leaders. 

Maybe Koneke believes in adoption as a means to gain leadership and care of the future. In this way, "the gays," as he calls them can acquire the means to run our country effectively. As many of them do have well-paying jobs, I'd imagine they could adopt at least 12 by the time they run for office. 

Prediction! Hillary Clinton adopts 5 children so that she can defeat Donald Trump in 2020! With 6 children, we won't have to worry about her emails, ties to Wall Street, or any other backroom shenanigans. 

You miss my point.

Homosexuals do not have biological children and adoptions doesn't count in my world as real children.

It makes sense to give power to people who has real children that will experience the world that the leader will leave so the political decisions are made with the eye of the long-term and not the short-term. A big part of the short-term sight the West has now might come from a lot of the voting population are childless and as result do not have a perspective longer than their own life. I would love if we could stop this discussion though because you seem to only misinterpret what i say and degrade me. Your examples are extreme and serves no purpose of rational discussion but rather ridicules me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
5 hours ago, President Garrett Walker said:

LOL

Besides the hideous outrageousness of his entire comment (specifically where he says some of my friends and family members should move "back" to a place they've never been, much less lived in, a place they're only connected to by some distant ancestors, because if they don't it'll "make a lot of trouble," whatever that means), he referred to America as "the colonies," now those are fighting words

If they're negroes their race has evolved to be in a Sub-Saharan climate and i don't see why it is such a big problem that people live in the climate that suits them best. Africa is 3x size of Europe and has many natural resources. They could be contributing to their own continent instead of living off Europeans in America and Europe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...