Calling it now: Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2016.

[xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed)]

The operative word in my previous point is "proven".


Do you even know what QED means?

So you dispute that Obama and Bush have been nearly identical?

[Salty]

I feel sorry for making fun of Ron Paul, clearly something is deeply wrong there. Who doesn't like John Oliver? More to the point,  sorry your brain is all fucked up, Ron Paul.

[xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed)]

I feel sorry for making fun of Ron Paul, clearly something is deeply wrong there. Who doesn't like John Oliver? More to the point,  sorry your brain is all fucked up, Ron Paul.

http://www.niceme.me

[LMNO]

I dispute that you use language you actually understand.

[minuspace]

Silly me.  I always thought QED was a Feynman thing.  So I looked it up and I found this under "entanglement":



I should probably just stick to chemistry.

[xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed)]

I dispute that you use language you actually understand.

Ok so you dont actually have a point you were just correcting my grammar. Nice meme.

[LMNO]

The proof is still yours to prove, numbnuts.

[Faust]

The operative word in my previous point is "proven".


Do you even know what QED means?

So you dispute that Obama and Bush have been nearly identical?

Bush started two protracted wars that served no purpose and taken on their opening goals, were both wars lost.
Apart from small conflicts and gradually unwinding his inherited wars, Obama managed to go 8 years without getting tangled up with another one, even when Syria was dangled right in front of him.

Its a small difference, and the advent of drone technology could possibly have shaped Bushes approach differently, nevertheless it doesn't change what happened for each of them

[NeonWytch]

Silly me.  I always thought QED was a Feynman thing.  So I looked it up and I found this under "entanglement":

QED when it comes to physics is Quantum Electro Dynamics, which is the fascinating theory on how electromagnetic force works on the quantum scale. It's actually a very elegant and beautiful theory! I'd recommend you read Feynman's book on the subject, it's actually very accessible.

QED in this context is a latin abbreviation that roughly translates to "Which I have shown" or "What had to be shown" iirc. It's traditionally placed at the end of mathematical proofs.

QED, name a major policy difference between GWB and Obama.

Wat.
How does that prove anything about Clinton and Trump? Even if that was a proper or workable equivalency, they are seperate individuals who happened to have been a part of the same party. That's like saying "George W Bush ended the Civil War. QED, Abraham Lincoln."   

[xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed)]

The operative word in my previous point is "proven".


Do you even know what QED means?

So you dispute that Obama and Bush have been nearly identical?

Bush started two protracted wars that served no purpose and taken on their opening goals, were both wars lost.
Apart from small conflicts and gradually unwinding his inherited wars, Obama managed to go 8 years without getting tangled up with another one, even when Syria was dangled right in front of him.

Its a small difference, and the advent of drone technology could possibly have shaped Bushes approach differently, nevertheless it doesn't change what happened for each of them

We are currently bombing 7 different countires(as opposed to Bushs 4), one of those being Syria, and none of these count as wars? Like, shit man, I guess were just going to accept that my definition of war and your definition of war are different and leave it at that.

[xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed)]

Wat.
How does that prove anything about Clinton and Trump? Even if that was a proper or workable equivalency, they are seperate individuals who happened to have been a part of the same party. That's like saying "George W Bush ended the Civil War. QED, Abraham Lincoln."   

That the president doesnt really matter. Look at the Citigroup wikileaks I posted a ways back in the thread. Banks literally choose cabinet members. Thats why Bush and Obama have been so similar. Because they both serve the interests of the rich elite, they arent leaders theyre PR spokesmen. Trump has Goldman Sachs alumni(hurr durr r u saying GS is a college) on his ticket, Clinton came just short of felating them in her private speeches. And both of them just coincidentally have sex scandals linked to the same Wall Street blackmailing pimp, which despite them both seemingly going for the jugular with sex scandals, they have conveniently avoided even mentioning.

Clinton and Trump serve the same masters.

[LMNO]

Your understanding of "proof" is about as weak as your understanding of "QED".

[xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed)]

Your understanding of "proof" is about as weak as your understanding of "QED".

Ok.

[Vanadium Gryllz]

Why does everyone powerful have hidden sex scandals?

[MMIX]

And both of them just coincidentally have sex scandals linked to the same Wall Street blackmailing pimp, which despite them both seemingly going for the jugular with sex scandals, they have conveniently avoided even mentioning.

Clinton and Trump serve the same masters.

Hillary Clinton has a sex scandal? Wow, I think I missed that one.