Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

USA Presidential Election 2016: Screams from My Father

StericaSterica Wow!That was shit.Registered User, Moderator mod
edited June 2016 in Singularity Engine++
Oh boy, the country that brought you South American imperialism AND spaghetti with meatballs needs a new president! Yes, the current model, Barack Obama, is old and is prone to jumping out his office window if he has to stay a day longer in office. But that's alright! We got two...uh....awesome candidates for you. Yeah, they're um, great, you know? So just hold tight and get ready for the truthiest ride that only comes around every four years!

Things to Consider Before Posting
  • Resist the urge to dogpile unpopular sentiments. If it's really inflammatory then report it.
  • Just because somebody is/isn't voting doesn't mean they are personally responsible for the downfall of democracy.
  • This is SE++ so don't get hung up on derails, especially since this is the slow part of the election cycle.

In the Blue Corner...

NUTvCtq.png
Hillary "Hawkgirl" Clinton
68 Years Old
Former Secretary of State and Senator


Strengths: Clinton represents the very traditional and "safe" campaign: she's got a shitload of cash and connections. While admittedly most people will freely admit that her best feature is "Not Donald Trump", she does (arguably) have a few things going for her. If the primary is proof of anything, it's that Clinton is still appealing to persons of color, particular older and somewhat more conservative black Americans that see her as an ally during the 90s. She has been a part of the two most popular presidencies in the last twenty years, one of which being the current administration. One also can't forget that she's the first woman candidate, something that could motivate women to vote in higher numbers than normal. Clinton's large warchest also gives her a considerable platform to constantly and loudly call her opponent out on his bullshit. While this tactic didn't stand a prayer during the primary, it's more likely to work during the general where people aren't quite as taken in by Trumpian rhetoric.

Weaknesses: Being a very traditional candidate means that Clinton also has very flexible positions and a grave full of scandals of varying veracity. It doesn't help that she comes off a fairly cold and seemingly entitled to the presidency as if it's just her turn and nothing else matters. Younger black Americans see the 90s in a very different light, as Clinton using dogwhistles to create the horrible prison situation we're in today, and that could hurt turn out. It remains to be seen how much of her past, more right-wing views have changed: while she seems more welcoming of LGBT rights, Clinton's hawkish nature does not appear to have gone away. She was cold on the Iran deal, and she has some rather provocative ideas about Syria. It doesn't help that her primary opponent, Sanders, has led to something of a schism in the Democratic party, with a number of voters refusing to compromise once again just because Republicans keep picking the Devil as a candidate. Basically, Clinton has to pass the party purity test without alienating moderates. In other words, a very traditional campaign.

In the Red Corner...

avgxcXd.png
Donald "John Miller" Trump
70 Years Old
he's allowed to run


Strengths: Trump has become a major dark horse candidate that has basically kneecapped anyone who dared underestimate him. Fashioning himself into a demagogue of the silent majority, he's energized the Tea Party that the Republican party has been building up like dry kindling for the past eight years, and now the match has been struck. As a bonus, he appeals to more fringe camps like libertarians, the alt right, and Literal Nazis. His campaign is really hoping on a combination of getting out the white, angry racist vote while keeping his opponent's camp stifled by playing up her corruption and weaknesses. It's hard to tell what's going to happen here, as the Republican party tries very very hard to prevent candidates like this from moving upwards, but at the same time Trump is the monster to their Frankenstein. Just because the white population is going down doesn't mean they aren't a powerful voting bloc. If people are feeling cold about Clinton and the Mad Men come out in droves, then Trump could pull it off. If he wins, then expect all future elections to get...interesting.

Weaknesses: Trump is poison to just about everyone outside his base. His campaign started with him burning whatever bridges the GOP was trying to mend with Hispanics, and gosh Muslims ain't keen on him either. Much like Clinton, he has fractured the party but even worse than the Sanders/Clinton divide. Leaders like Ryan offer only tepid endorsements, and he's missing out on campaign contributions a Republican would normally enjoy. Since he isn't paying for his own campaign, this means he loses the money war by default. It's possible that Republican holdouts will do an about-face in the coming months, like they tend to do regardless of who gets picked. Nevertheless, Trump is running a huge gamble here, deliberately pissing off the rest of the world for that sweet, sweet base.

FAQ

When are the conventions?

Republican: July 18th-21st
Democratic: July 25th-28th

Expect running mates to be announced or leaked a week or two prior.

Isn't Clinton/Trump in legal trouble?

Clinton still has problems with the FBI, but I have no idea where it's going now. Probably still nowhere, as it seems weird (and perhaps biased) to wait until like right before the convention to force the dems into an awkward position. They will undoubtedly force Clinton to fuck off, but the question is her replacement. Sanders seems like an obvious choice, but remember that A] he's kinda been pissing them off by refusing to concede B] they didn't like him to begin with and C] technically he's not even a democrat. These leaves...Biden? Certainly not a bad pick, but it would put them on the defensive for a few months.

Trump is facing lawsuits for his crooked, fake school. It's super unlikely this will have a major impact on the election besides being fodder for attack ads.

What's a battleground?

A state that is polling more or less in the middle is considered a battleground. Because solidly Republican or Democratic states would require too much time and money to make even a dent in polls, candidates focus on the handful of states that are feasible to turn. Now, this doesn't mean that voting in a "stronghold" state is pointless. After all, many battleground states were at one point or another considered reliable votes for one party or the other, and people do pay attention to shifts in polls even if the overall outcome hasn't quite changed yet.

When are the debates?

September 26, 2016
October 4, 2016 (VP)
October 9, 2016
October 19, 2016

When is Election Day?

November 8th, 2016

How long do I have to register to vote?

It varies by state

I want to vote from a safe distance. What are my options for citizens abroad?

This should help you out.

Note that this should also be useful for people who are still in the States but will be in another state/city/etc from wherever they're registered come election day.

YL9WnCY.png
Sterica on
timspork's ghostlonelyahavaknitdanAistanDarth WaiterThe Sauce
«134567101

Posts

  • timspork's ghosttimspork's ghost Master Librarian and Ghostbuster Registered User regular
    FYI, Trump is 70 now. His birthday was a week ago.

    (Switch Friend Code) SW-4910-9735-6014(PSN) timspork (Steam) timspork


  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    He doesn't look a day over 70.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
    ShortySyphonBlueBucketmanPwnanObrienMetzger MeisterTofystedethToxShadowenA Dabble Of TheloniusZonugalLord_AsmodeuswanderingFencingsaxAistanVerminiontynicNarbuschrishallett83OlivawDarth WaiterMatevRMS OceanicCantideNijajoshofalltradesGreenEdith UpwardsPLACorehealer
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    So, rural/urban divide, the constantly reoccurring topic in these threads.

    Going to "one man, one vote" always sounds nice. What gets ignored is how that would pretty much screw over rural interests. If we went to such a system, candidates would be incentivized to focus purely on the major urban centers, as half the US population is centered in a very small group of urban centers - the top 10 MSAs by population comprise between 1/3 to 1/4 the US population. This would shift concerns towards urban centers, and make looking for rural votes a fool's errand.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
    Turkey
  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    edited June 2016
    Preacher wrote: »
    He doesn't look a day over 70.

    Nah, he looks like a week over it

    Spoit on
    steam_sig.png
  • ShortyShorty JUDGE BROSEF Registered User regular
    So, rural/urban divide, the constantly reoccurring topic in these threads.

    Going to "one man, one vote" always sounds nice. What gets ignored is how that would pretty much screw over rural interests. If we went to such a system, candidates would be incentivized to focus purely on the major urban centers, as half the US population is centered in a very small group of urban centers - the top 10 MSAs by population comprise between 1/3 to 1/4 the US population. This would shift concerns towards urban centers, and make looking for rural votes a fool's errand.

    they would still have the house of representatives if we altered the way primaries work

    Tube wrote: »
    I was legit hoping that Shorty was somehow mistaken and the world wasn't that fucked
    chrishallett83
  • -Tal-Tal Registered User regular
    what if we went one man, one vote, one woman, two votes

    paBaVtZ.jpg
    BertezBertezChallTurkeySlacker71GoldenSeducerminirhyder
  • LabelLabel Registered User regular
    For what it's worth, at the end of the last thread somebody mentioned the senate, and needing 60 votes to get something passed.

    And that's wrong.

    That's only if a bill is filibustered.

    Normal (heh) operation is by simple majority, 51 votes will do just fine.

    Except the republican party decided to filibuster literally fucking everything when Obama was elected.

    So now the press says a bill needs 60 votes to "pass" because it's technically true enough and heaven forbid explaining what we need to have a functional democracy here in america.

    So please do not repeat that a bill needs 60 votes to pass in the senate. It only re-enforces the idea that the extreme shit the republican party has been doing for the past eight years is normal.

    AngelHedgieArdolFencingsaxVerminionLadaichrishallett83Slacker71OlivawZibblsnrtGoldenSeducerRainfall
  • PeasPeas Registered User regular

    tylvh4k5gys0.gif
    LabelGundiZonugalLord_AsmodeusShortydavidsdurionsVerminionGatorSlacker71The Hanged ManDarth WaiterkaceypPLACorehealer
  • masterofmetroidmasterofmetroid Have you ever looked at a world and seen it as a kind of challenge?Registered User regular
    -Tal wrote: »
    what if we went one man, one vote, one woman, two votes
    I'm listening

  • Der Waffle MousDer Waffle Mous Blame this on the misfortune of your birth. New Yark, New Yark.Registered User regular
    -Tal wrote: »
    what if we went one man, one vote, one woman, two votes
    I'm listening

    One dog, ten votes.

    zaku.png
    Steam PSN: DerWaffleMous Origin: DerWaffleMous Bnet: DerWaffle#1682
    BucketmanPwnanObrienShortyNarbusPLA
  • BucketmanBucketman Call me SkraggRegistered User regular
    a man a plan a canal panama

    ChallDracomicron
  • BertezBertezBertezBertez Registered User regular
    One Bertez 20 votes!

    ...but I would say that

    steam_sig.png
  • lonelyahavalonelyahava Mortius is correct Move to New ZealandRegistered User regular
    @Bobkins Flymo Can we get this linked into the OP?

    https://www.votefromabroad.org/vote/home.htm

    It's for any expat American citizens who want to vote in the election to register and request their absentee ballots.
    Can also be used by military stationed abroad and even if you're abroad on holiday

    Panda4YouBucketman
  • StericaSterica Wow! That was shit.Registered User, Moderator mod
    Done!

    YL9WnCY.png
    lonelyahavaBucketmanTurkeySlacker71
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited June 2016
    So, rural/urban divide, the constantly reoccurring topic in these threads.

    Going to "one man, one vote" always sounds nice. What gets ignored is how that would pretty much screw over rural interests. If we went to such a system, candidates would be incentivized to focus purely on the major urban centers, as half the US population is centered in a very small group of urban centers - the top 10 MSAs by population comprise between 1/3 to 1/4 the US population. This would shift concerns towards urban centers, and make looking for rural votes a fool's errand.

    they're incentivized to do that now (especially in primaries); disproportionate rural power is felt in the legislatures, not presidential elections so much

    I'm also not sure why rural voters are more deserving than other small constituencies of having the electoral process bent to their needs

    ed: like, if the argument is just 'narrow interest groups ought to have means of securing those interests built into the electoral system', there's a lot of groups I wanna talk about before like, farmers

    Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
    NREqxl5.jpg
    do you lack faith, brother?
    or do you believe?
    SpoitMegaMekAistanchrishallett83Slacker71The Hanged Man
  • ToxTox I kill threads Punch DimensionRegistered User regular
    Label wrote: »
    For what it's worth, at the end of the last thread somebody mentioned the senate, and needing 60 votes to get something passed.

    And that's wrong.

    That's only if a bill is filibustered.

    Normal (heh) operation is by simple majority, 51 votes will do just fine.

    Except the republican party decided to filibuster literally fucking everything when Obama was elected.

    So now the press says a bill needs 60 votes to "pass" because it's technically true enough and heaven forbid explaining what we need to have a functional democracy here in america.

    So please do not repeat that a bill needs 60 votes to pass in the senate. It only re-enforces the idea that the extreme shit the republican party has been doing for the past eight years is normal.

    Hi.

    Here's what I said:
    Tox wrote: »
    So the Senate is having votes on some measures after a filibuster last week.

    Except they weren't actually voting on the bills themselves. You see they were actually voting to Invoke Cloture (aka- no more filibuster, we're going to finish talking and actually vote on a bill).

    All four bills failed to meet the 60 vote threshold to Invoke, despite two of them getting 53 votes in favor. So all four bills failed. Because the GOP in the Senate isn't ready to stop talking and actually do their fucking jobs.

    Note the second line there.

    Note also that, technically, this means none of the actual bills were actually voted on.

    Also what I find particularly interesting is that two of the bills did receive 53 Yes votes for Cloture...from the GOP. So the Democrats filibustered demanding the Senate at least vote on something, then refused to invoke Cloture on two amendments because they were from the GOP.

    So...you know...a plague on both their houses, etc, et al

    Wishlists! General | Gaming | Comics | Twitter! | Dilige, et quod vis fac
  • UnbreakableVowUnbreakableVow Registered User regular
    -Tal wrote: »
    what if we went one man, one vote, one woman, two votes
    I'm listening

    One dog, ten votes.

    Only if cats receive twenty

    dzuc2en672pw.jpg
    Magic PinkJaysonFourEdith UpwardsDarmak
  • HobnailHobnail Registered User regular
    One orangutan in a smoking jacket, seven hundred and fifty million votes

    ZonugalTurkeysponoEdith Upwards
  • timspork's ghosttimspork's ghost Master Librarian and Ghostbuster Registered User regular
    Hobnail wrote: »
    One orangutan in a smoking jacket, seven hundred and fifty million votes

    Trying to convince that orangutan will take millions! It is super stoned and doesn't give a fuuuuuck.

    (Switch Friend Code) SW-4910-9735-6014(PSN) timspork (Steam) timspork


    Metzger MeisterMuddy WaterTurkeyJoeUserDouglasDangerKaplarEdith Upwards
  • VeldrinVeldrin Sham bam bamina Registered User regular
    Hey hey there America, how's it going?

    oh, what am I up to lately?

    ehh, not much

    just, you know

    voting for our new leadership early in preparation for the end of a 2 month election campaign

    tynicchrishallett83
  • ArdolArdol Registered User regular
    So, rural/urban divide, the constantly reoccurring topic in these threads.

    Going to "one man, one vote" always sounds nice. What gets ignored is how that would pretty much screw over rural interests. If we went to such a system, candidates would be incentivized to focus purely on the major urban centers, as half the US population is centered in a very small group of urban centers - the top 10 MSAs by population comprise between 1/3 to 1/4 the US population. This would shift concerns towards urban centers, and make looking for rural votes a fool's errand.

    I mean rural areas are hugely over represented in the Senate and significantly over represented in the House iirc, insisting that they must also be represented more heavily by the presidency just strikes me as bullshit.

    Maybe city issues would be less likely to be papered over if urban areas had a decent level of representation in this country.

    ShadowenGvzbgulAistanDracomicronTofystedethSlacker71Knight_MysstDouglasDangerminirhyderEdith Upwards
  • gtrmpgtrmp Registered User regular
    Over-representation of rural voters means that every affected level of government is disproportionately whiter, older, straighter, more Christian and more Republican than the overall demographic norm.

    It also means that it's much harder to affect meaningful change on a state or federal level when it come to issues like public transit that primarily affect urban residents and workers; conversely, issues that primarily affect rural voters receive preferential treatment even when doing so is net drain on state or federal coffers (e.g. corn and other farm subsidies).

    AistanDracomicronSlacker71minirhyderEdith Upwards
  • OmnipotentBagelOmnipotentBagel Shell, Teeth, Eyes, Flame, Claws, Breath, Scales, FUN!Registered User regular
    Veldrin wrote: »
    Hey hey there America, how's it going?

    oh, what am I up to lately?

    ehh, not much

    just, you know

    voting for our new leadership early in preparation for the end of a 2 month election campaign

    Does the voting happen over Facebook too?

    9m1sgpgi7202.gif
    Zoel
  • valhalla130valhalla130 13 Dark Shield Perceives the GodsRegistered User regular
    Looking back at the OP, how is it that Clinton fractured the Democratic base? Seems to me that was more Bernie, not Clinton .

    BreakfastPMXaquinEdith Upwards
  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    Label wrote: »
    For what it's worth, at the end of the last thread somebody mentioned the senate, and needing 60 votes to get something passed.

    And that's wrong.

    That's only if a bill is filibustered.

    Normal (heh) operation is by simple majority, 51 votes will do just fine.

    Except the republican party decided to filibuster literally fucking everything when Obama was elected.

    So now the press says a bill needs 60 votes to "pass" because it's technically true enough and heaven forbid explaining what we need to have a functional democracy here in america.

    So please do not repeat that a bill needs 60 votes to pass in the senate. It only re-enforces the idea that the extreme shit the republican party has been doing for the past eight years is normal.

    I mean, if it's almost a decade, it could be argued that it is the new normal.

    steam_sig.png
  • ZoelZoel I suppose... I'd put it on Registered User regular
    Only in America can intolerance refer both to discrimination and the effectiveness of a sometimes irresponsible method of ignoring elections.

    A magician gives you a ring that, when worn, will let you see the world as it truly is.
    However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
  • UnbreakableVowUnbreakableVow Registered User regular
    Is the OP's assertion that Clinton is more than likely gonna be prevented from running by her investigation founded on anything?

    It seems like they've had years to build a case against her and continually come up with nothing

    dzuc2en672pw.jpg
    XaquinMarathonTurkeyMagic PinkMuddypawsKwoaruRainfallEdith Upwards
  • PwnanObrienPwnanObrien He's right, life sucks. Registered User regular
    edited June 2016
    Looking back at the OP, how is it that Clinton fractured the Democratic base? Seems to me that was more Bernie, not Clinton .

    I feel like this is one of those linguistic things where we're assigning blame to something that just sort of happened. It's not "he fractured the Democratic base" or "she fractured the Democratic base." The Democratic base fractured between people who feel strongly about campaign finance reform, pushing more progressive ideas and those who are more centrist established Democrats. Sanders and Clinton are just the right people to put faces to those movements at the right time. If instead it were Elizabeth Warren and Joe Biden a lot of the same sentiment would have surfaced.

    PwnanObrien on
    WrIiiPW.png
    ZoelgtrmpHermanoBloodsheed
  • I needed a gnome to post.I needed a gnome to post. Registered User regular
    Is the OP's assertion that Clinton is more than likely gonna be prevented from running by her investigation founded on anything?

    It seems like they've had years to build a case against her and continually come up with nothing

    i believe rorus' intention was to describe the things that would happen in the event that clinton was unable to run, not to assert that it would happen

    7UVunkN.jpg
    milskiQanamil
  • NiryaNirya My name's Bo Rida and I'm here to sayRegistered User regular
    Looking back at the OP, how is it that Clinton fractured the Democratic base? Seems to me that was more Bernie, not Clinton .

    I feel like this is one of those linguistic things where we're assigning blame to something that just sort of happened. It's not "he fractured the Democratic base" or "she fractured the Democratic base." The Democratic base fractured between people who feel strongly about campaign finance reform, pushing more progressive ideas and those who are more centrist established Democrats. Sanders and Clinton are just the right people to put faces to those movements. If instead it were Elizabeth Warren and Joe Biden a lot of the same sentiment would have surfaced.

    I disagree with this assessment, because it assumes that Clinton wasn't popular with progressives, or that Sanders only drew progressives. And it also assumes that there were huge differences between both Sanders and Clinton's policies, which isn't true.

    If anything, there was more of a split along generational and racial lines than anything.

    t70pctuqq2uv.png
    3DS: 2981-5304-3227
    MarathonEdith Upwards
  • PwnanObrienPwnanObrien He's right, life sucks. Registered User regular
    Nirya wrote: »
    Looking back at the OP, how is it that Clinton fractured the Democratic base? Seems to me that was more Bernie, not Clinton .

    I feel like this is one of those linguistic things where we're assigning blame to something that just sort of happened. It's not "he fractured the Democratic base" or "she fractured the Democratic base." The Democratic base fractured between people who feel strongly about campaign finance reform, pushing more progressive ideas and those who are more centrist established Democrats. Sanders and Clinton are just the right people to put faces to those movements. If instead it were Elizabeth Warren and Joe Biden a lot of the same sentiment would have surfaced.

    I disagree with this assessment, because it assumes that Clinton wasn't popular with progressives, or that Sanders only drew progressives. And it also assumes that there were huge differences between both Sanders and Clinton's policies, which isn't true.

    If anything, there was more of a split along generational and racial lines than anything.

    There are a lot of factors that are going into both the substantive split on policy and who sides with what side but this schism in the party between establishment Democrats and populist Democrats has basically been brewing since Obama's second term started. It's just that we only really check in on these things every four years and then we act surprised that people within a party could disagree on which direction we should be moving in.

    WrIiiPW.png
  • ZoelZoel I suppose... I'd put it on Registered User regular
    The racial split was definitely there, but it wasn't there because of Sander's policies. It was just Sanders not really doing much to attract the not white part of the Democratic base.

    The generational split definitely was related to policies though. Essentially a massive chunk of the people who will be voting democrat for the next 40 years look at educational debt as a big issue.

    But I mean, those splits make sense because of racial and generational lines.

    A magician gives you a ring that, when worn, will let you see the world as it truly is.
    However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
    PwnanObriengtrmpTurkey
  • PwnanObrienPwnanObrien He's right, life sucks. Registered User regular


    That's....actually really clever.

    WrIiiPW.png
    ShadowenArdolShortyCentipede DamascusSkeithVerminion
  • ZenyatooZenyatoo Registered User regular
    Somebody tried to assassinate trump.

    It was an illegal immigrant.
    He attempted to steal a gun from a nearby security officer.

    Unfortunately Trump is probably going to never ever shut up about it.

  • ShadowenShadowen Snores in the morning Registered User regular
    Odds are he's not gonna say a word because it was a white Brit.

    I mean, it happened on Saturday and it just came out today. An attempted assassination of a major party's presidential candidate.

    OghulkMagic Pink
  • PwnanObrienPwnanObrien He's right, life sucks. Registered User regular
    Zenyatoo wrote: »
    Somebody tried to assassinate trump.

    It was an illegal immigrant.
    He attempted to steal a gun from a nearby security officer.

    Unfortunately Trump is probably going to never ever shut up about it.

    To give context it was a 19 year old from the UK who has been living in Jersey named Michael Sandford. Simply saying he's an "illegal immigrant" plays into some dangerous talking points.

    WrIiiPW.png
    EmporiumBrolomasterofmetroidShadowenlonelyahavaCellogtrmpmilskiOghulkMegaMekBlankzillaFencingsaxSkeithStiltsDer Waffle MousNyysjanVerminionBucketmantynicToxchrishallett83TofystedethBloodsheedSlacker71BertezBertezQanamilOlivawJacques L'HommeDarth WaiterFearghaillkaceypZonugalMatevJaysonFourGoldenSeducerCantideknitdanminirhyderNijaShabootyjoshofalltradesRainfallGreenEdith UpwardsCorehealer
  • ShortyShorty JUDGE BROSEF Registered User regular
    Zenyatoo wrote: »
    Somebody tried to assassinate trump.

    It was an illegal immigrant.
    He attempted to steal a gun from a nearby security officer.

    Unfortunately Trump is probably going to never ever shut up about it.

    what if it were a false flag

    what if they were really that stupid

    wouldn't that be something

    wouldn't that be amazing

    Tube wrote: »
    I was legit hoping that Shorty was somehow mistaken and the world wasn't that fucked
  • PwnanObrienPwnanObrien He's right, life sucks. Registered User regular
    So Trump should start a Kickstarter campaign?

    WrIiiPW.png
    wandering
  • vsovevsove ....also yes. Registered User regular
    A long time ago
    No one cared 'bout your hands but we've...
    kind of thought of them lately a lot

    WATCH THIS SPACE.
    ShadowenseasleepyTurkeyDracomicronDr. Flamingo
«134567101
This discussion has been closed.