OK, de Blasio is making no sense. Says this was an intentional act, but at this point not connected to terrorism. Must mean no connection to an organization. Also says no connection to the New Jersey bomb has been found at this time.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
I don't spend a lot of time on Facebook. No time, actually. But my mother showed me my sisters new profile pic, with a brand spanking new hashtag: #letgarydebate
Oh my fucking God my sister has gone full libertarian
Lawd in heaven above
Dr jeezy heezy mccreezy
bah gawd
I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
Trump promising to stop it, whatever it is, is Trump's promises in a nutshell.
I...I think he just said he's gonna end the world. If I'm following along with dangling modifiers and grammar and why are my eyes bleeding?
No, he's saying he's going to stop everyone from even thinking about attacking us. By being tough. And strong. So strong. And vigilant.
He will end terrorism against America. All of it. Forever. Whatever it is, he'll end it.
Unless it's some white guy with a gun or a homemade bomb going after those people. 'Cause that's not terrorism. No, that's just those people getting what's comin' to them. What they deserve.
If you weren't even more scared of a Trump presidency realize that trump has a number of buildings with his name on them not just in the US but also in other nations, making them all targets and the reaction trump might have.
I don't spend a lot of time on Facebook. No time, actually. But my mother showed me my sisters new profile pic, with a brand spanking new hashtag: #letgarydebate
Oh my fucking God my sister has gone full libertarian
Lawd in heaven above
Dr jeezy heezy mccreezy
I'm really curious on what these People think that Gary can say that Trump or Hillary haven't already dealt with in the primary.
Gary Johnson is a guy who gets booed by His own party for saying threat unlicensed4 year old shouldn't be allowed to drive drunk on public roads. His big competition in His own primary was a white supremacist who decided to strip on stage for a dare.
And this it's the guy who thinks he can bring down Hillary?
This it's the guy who thinks he can bring down trump?
Good luck trying to pull off 30 minutes what the entire GOP establishment couldn't pull off with a 25 year head start.
Schrodinger on
+1
Options
HakkekageSpace Whore Academysumma cum laudeRegistered Userregular
I don't spend a lot of time on Facebook. No time, actually. But my mother showed me my sisters new profile pic, with a brand spanking new hashtag: #letgarydebate
Oh my fucking God my sister has gone full libertarian
Lawd in heaven above
Dr jeezy heezy mccreezy
I'm really curious on what these People think that Gary can say that Trump or Hillary haven't already dealt with in the primary.
Gary Johnson is a hut whip gets bored by His own party for saying threat unlicensed4 year old shouldn't be allowed to drive drunk on public roads. His big competition in His own primary was a white supremacist who decided to strip on stage for a dare.
And this it's the guy who thinks he can bring down Hillary?
This it's the guy who thinks he can bring down trump?
Good luck trying to pull off 30 minutes what the entire GOP establishment couldn't pull off with a 25 year head start.
If I ever get into a conversation with her that doesn't turn into her accusing me of being a self righteous know it all who doesn't understand economics I will let you know what she expects Mr Johnson would say in a presidential debate that would instantly garner the support of millions of latent libertarians with less than two months left to Election Day and finally take down the two party system
As it happens I speculate her support is really a combination of a) uncritically reading atlas shrugged and absorbing objectivist philosophy to justify her own selfish behavior, b) the conviction that because the two party system is grossly blunt, inefficient and unrepresentative, the best solution is to not be a part of your system, maaaan and c) the bitch sho do love her weed
Hakkekage on
3DS: 2165 - 6538 - 3417
NNID: Hakkekage
0
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
Giving the benefit of the doubt, I don't think literally wanting another voice in the debate is that bad of a thought to have.
Giving the benefit of the doubt, I don't think literally wanting another voice in the debate is that bad of a thought to have.
If there was unlimited air time, then sure.
But a 90 minute time slot is already super brief when you consider what's at stake here. And you're going to further divide that and dilute that for people who have no shot at winning? Yeah, no.
I don't spend a lot of time on Facebook. No time, actually. But my mother showed me my sisters new profile pic, with a brand spanking new hashtag: #letgarydebate
Oh my fucking God my sister has gone full libertarian
How is trump cadence and pattern of speech okay? He talks like a fourth grader making some shit up at recess that threatens to beat up anyone who calls him on it. Even the teachers are sick of his shit, but no one is willing to tell him to shut the fuck up until he wants to act like a big boy.
He's one of greatest innovators in political oratory that we've seen in a while, when he's in his contemporaneous speech mode.
0
Options
HakkekageSpace Whore Academysumma cum laudeRegistered Userregular
Giving the benefit of the doubt, I don't think literally wanting another voice in the debate is that bad of a thought to have.
It's not a bad thought on a shallow level but it is a painfully facile one once you get past the simplistic appeal for representation. The reasons:
1. At this point in the race presidential debates are the candidate's last chance to make their case to the electorate, not their first. If a third party candidate is not going into these debates with enough existing support to open even the slimmest of slimmest chances that their exceptional performance will garner enough additional support to shake up the race and become actually competitive, the presence of a third perspective only wastes time and attention (which is a scarce resource) on a candidate airing positions and promises that voters will never credibly have a chance to actually vote into office.
2. The debates function to persuade voters at the margins to select between the dominant advocates that have coalesced for over a year at this point, not to play at picking, a la mode, some nuanced alternatives that distract from the stark differences between the two leading candidates who actually have a chance of being elected.
3. There is an argument that the role of a third party candidate is to force the democrat and republican to confront issues on stage that their narrow corporatist allegiances would never allow them to address publicly. But this is incomplete; what third party candidates do is confront on PRIORITIES, not really new issues. Lacking any original competitive stances on the heavyweight issues most voters agree are national priorities--the economy, national security, education, etc--third party candidates only compete by demanding their pet issue(s) actually be at the top of the national agenda when there is no evidence of compelling support for those issues to be top of mind on the agenda at all. Johnson's dream of total social and economic deregulation does not exist within the universe of realistically supported policy positions by any compellingly large constituency, and even if it was, it's just an extreme amplification of what republicans are already offering. What do third party candidates really bring to the debate table then? I would do what my republican opponent said he would do, BUT HARDER?
4. The presence of a third party candidate would just turns him/her into an attack dog on both the other candidates which theoretically is the moderator's job, but without the moderator's ostensible goal of giving voters a clear sense of the candidates' positions and ability to handle scrutiny in a live setting.
5. And finally and most practically, in our odd electoral college system with most states winner take all, a hopeless third party candidate who by virtue of his current level of support and the time left to bolster that number up to even viability can only aspire to being a spoiler will risk the nightmare scenario: a President who is elected with a minority of the popular vote and a majority of the electoral vote. This is an ACTUAL realistic outcome and would qualify as a constitutional crisis. Bush v Gore settled NOTHING in terms of precedent of how to settle such a scenario--it was literally put to bed on a technicality about statutory time limits for recounts in Florida. This is obviously not a roadmap for dealing with a similar situation in the future, unless we're still ruffling through paper ballots with hanging chads these days.
Our system is far from perfect but this is the one we've got. The rules are bullshit, the pitfalls are many, the options are overly limited, the stakes are artificially inflated. But as a certain fictional Alexander Hamilton said: When you got skin in the game, you stay in the game. But you don't get a win unless you play in the game
#hamout
3DS: 2165 - 6538 - 3417
NNID: Hakkekage
+18
Options
HakkekageSpace Whore Academysumma cum laudeRegistered Userregular
I meant a la carte. That was a bit of a challenge to type up on mobile in the first place let alone attempt to edit it so my bad. You can get your personalized candidate's nuanced positions with a scoop of ice cream if you really want.
I meant a la carte. That was a bit of a challenge to type up on mobile in the first place let alone attempt to edit it so my bad. You can get your personalized candidate's nuanced positions with a scoop of ice cream if you really want.
I meant a la carte. That was a bit of a challenge to type up on mobile in the first place let alone attempt to edit it so my bad. You can get your personalized candidate's nuanced positions with a scoop of ice cream if you really want.
ooooo oooo i want strawberry please!
What is this a fucking Cold Stone? You get to choose your flavor of candidate, not your goddamn mix-ins
How is trump cadence and pattern of speech okay? He talks like a fourth grader making some shit up at recess that threatens to beat up anyone who calls him on it. Even the teachers are sick of his shit, but no one is willing to tell him to shut the fuck up until he wants to act like a big boy.
He's one of greatest innovators in political oratory that we've seen in a while, when he's in his contemporaneous speech mode.
Did you mean extemporaneous or contemptuous? Because I can see either.
How is trump cadence and pattern of speech okay? He talks like a fourth grader making some shit up at recess that threatens to beat up anyone who calls him on it. Even the teachers are sick of his shit, but no one is willing to tell him to shut the fuck up until he wants to act like a big boy.
He's one of greatest innovators in political oratory that we've seen in a while, when he's in his contemporaneous speech mode.
Did you mean extemporaneous or contemptuous? Because I can see either.
OK, de Blasio is making no sense. Says this was an intentional act, but at this point not connected to terrorism. Must mean no connection to an organization. Also says no connection to the New Jersey bomb has been found at this time.
I think that just means no connection to organized terrorism. It looks pretty amateurish early on, so it's probably just some random murdering asshole or an untrained self radicalized lone terrorist.
I'm sure Trump has an answer for all that though, and he'll tell us all about it if he gets elected.
I don't spend a lot of time on Facebook. No time, actually. But my mother showed me my sisters new profile pic, with a brand spanking new hashtag: #letgarydebate
Oh my fucking God my sister has gone full libertarian
Lawd in heaven above
Dr jeezy heezy mccreezy
I'm really curious on what these People think that Gary can say that Trump or Hillary haven't already dealt with in the primary.
Gary Johnson is a hut whip gets bored by His own party for saying threat unlicensed4 year old shouldn't be allowed to drive drunk on public roads. His big competition in His own primary was a white supremacist who decided to strip on stage for a dare.
And this it's the guy who thinks he can bring down Hillary?
This it's the guy who thinks he can bring down trump?
Good luck trying to pull off 30 minutes what the entire GOP establishment couldn't pull off with a 25 year head start.
If I ever get into a conversation with her that doesn't turn into her accusing me of being a self righteous know it all who doesn't understand economics I will let you know what she expects Mr Johnson would say in a presidential debate that would instantly garner the support of millions of latent libertarians with less than two months left to Election Day and finally take down the two party system
As it happens I speculate her support is really a combination of a) uncritically reading atlas shrugged and absorbing objectivist philosophy to justify her own selfish behavior, b) the conviction that because the two party system is grossly blunt, inefficient and unrepresentative, the best solution is to not be a part of your system, maaaan and c) the bitch sho do love her weed
well it is a core tenet of objectivism that if you believe in something hard enough you can make it happen through sheer force of will
How is trump cadence and pattern of speech okay? He talks like a fourth grader making some shit up at recess that threatens to beat up anyone who calls him on it. Even the teachers are sick of his shit, but no one is willing to tell him to shut the fuck up until he wants to act like a big boy.
He's one of greatest innovators in political oratory that we've seen in a while, when he's in his contemporaneous speech mode.
Did you mean extemporaneous or contemptuous? Because I can see either.
Goddamit, the former.
Just imagine if Trump-style public speaking is done by two or more front-runners in a future campaign. Just imagine a debate with a few of them against each other.
It'll probably devolve into multiple parallel separate single-player games, rather than any kind of dialogue (let alone debate), but it's fun/mind-bending to imagine.
I don't spend a lot of time on Facebook. No time, actually. But my mother showed me my sisters new profile pic, with a brand spanking new hashtag: #letgarydebate
Oh my fucking God my sister has gone full libertarian
Lawd in heaven above
Dr jeezy heezy mccreezy
I'm really curious on what these People think that Gary can say that Trump or Hillary haven't already dealt with in the primary.
Gary Johnson is a hut whip gets bored by His own party for saying threat unlicensed4 year old shouldn't be allowed to drive drunk on public roads. His big competition in His own primary was a white supremacist who decided to strip on stage for a dare.
And this it's the guy who thinks he can bring down Hillary?
This it's the guy who thinks he can bring down trump?
Good luck trying to pull off 30 minutes what the entire GOP establishment couldn't pull off with a 25 year head start.
If I ever get into a conversation with her that doesn't turn into her accusing me of being a self righteous know it all who doesn't understand economics I will let you know what she expects Mr Johnson would say in a presidential debate that would instantly garner the support of millions of latent libertarians with less than two months left to Election Day and finally take down the two party system
As it happens I speculate her support is really a combination of a) uncritically reading atlas shrugged and absorbing objectivist philosophy to justify her own selfish behavior, b) the conviction that because the two party system is grossly blunt, inefficient and unrepresentative, the best solution is to not be a part of your system, maaaan and c) the bitch sho do love her weed
Gods, I'm all for the preservation of literature even the horrible stuff but at the very least Rand books should probably have a warning label.
Caution: The views discussed within are not based on reality. Please do not use them as an excuse to be awful.
How is trump cadence and pattern of speech okay? He talks like a fourth grader making some shit up at recess that threatens to beat up anyone who calls him on it. Even the teachers are sick of his shit, but no one is willing to tell him to shut the fuck up until he wants to act like a big boy.
He's one of greatest innovators in political oratory that we've seen in a while, when he's in his contemporaneous speech mode.
Did you mean extemporaneous or contemptuous? Because I can see either.
Goddamit, the former.
Just imagine if Trump-style public speaking is done by two or more front-runners in a future campaign. Just imagine a debate with a few of them against each other.
It'll probably devolve into multiple parallel separate single-player games, rather than any kind of dialogue (let alone debate), but it's fun/mind-bending to imagine.
He's such a basket case that it's easy to miss that he's more engaging than 90% of politicians out there doing their drunken impressions of Kennedy and Reagan. And weeee willlll blah blah here you insert pregnant pause that's really a stillborn. Just put a gun in my mouth why don't you.
The Clinton ad about veterans was in pretty heavy rotation during ESPN's college football games today. At least in Michigan, but I think it's actually national.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Yeah, sorry for lack of context when I posted that, but if this is actual legit terrorism it's going to affect the election. This is going to be a thing. At this point the best we can hope for is that somebody accidentally put a hand grenade in the garbage.
Eight people were hurt in a knife rampage at a Minnesota mall in which the suspected attacker made references to Allah, authorities said.
The suspect was shot dead by an off-duty police officer, during the attack at the Crossroads Mall in St. Cloud that began at around 8 p.m. local time (9 p.m. ET), St. Cloud Police Chief Blair Anderson told reporters.
(This site lists seven incidents in the past week, with a total of 13 killed and twice that many injured, and I'm not even counting the six shootings on 9/11.)
(This site lists seven incidents in the past week, with a total of 13 killed and twice that many injured, and I'm not even counting the six shootings on 9/11.)
BUT HE SAID ALLAH!
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
(This site lists seven incidents in the past week, with a total of 13 killed and twice that many injured, and I'm not even counting the six shootings on 9/11.)
Man I tried to read Atlas Shrugged once, and I just couldn't do it. The "characters" are so shallow they make cardboard cutouts look four-dimensional, the plot is asinine and the themes, such as they are, are just flat out repugnant. It really fits right in with Donald Trump and his outlook on life, and that is just terrifying.
Donald Trump is the sort of man who will search for every single tiny flaw in a system, and then ruthlessly exploit that flaw for his own gain. He will then brag about doing so, and expect to be cheered for it. This is not the sort of man I want in charge of anything, much less the country I live in.
0
Options
knitdanIn ur baseKillin ur guysRegistered Userregular
OK, de Blasio is making no sense. Says this was an intentional act, but at this point not connected to terrorism. Must mean no connection to an organization. Also says no connection to the New Jersey bomb has been found at this time.
Until there is evidence of it being terrorism, I'm glad he's not calling it terrorism.
An intentionally set bomb is not in and of itself terrorism.
“I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
Man I tried to read Atlas Shrugged once, and I just couldn't do it. The "characters" are so shallow they make cardboard cutouts look four-dimensional, the plot is asinine and the themes, such as they are, are just flat out repugnant. It really fits right in with Donald Trump and his outlook on life, and that is just terrifying.
Donald Trump is the sort of man who will search for every single tiny flaw in a system, and then ruthlessly exploit that flaw for his own gain. He will then brag about doing so, and expect to be cheered for it. This is not the sort of man I want in charge of anything, much less the country I live in.
Trump is the ultimate Randian hero.
He puts his name on everything and acts in his own self-interest. One of the recurring themes of Atlas Shrugged is that the Gulchers name their companies after themselves to showcase human individuality.
And he does everything he can to destroy modern society, but he does it for personal gain, which somehow makes him the good guy rather than a stereotypical movie villain.
I don't spend a lot of time on Facebook. No time, actually. But my mother showed me my sisters new profile pic, with a brand spanking new hashtag: #letgarydebate
Oh my fucking God my sister has gone full libertarian
Usually libertarianism is skin deep but attacking directly gets people's back up. I've found getting the "well I don't want to get rid of that" response or showing them Libertarianism is more cartoon villain than anything noble helps.
HonkHonk is this poster.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
My favorite detail of insanity in Atlas Shrugged is the guy who gives away that he's modern Aristotle because he's so extremely skillfully wiping the bar counter at the diner where he works incognito.
Okay.
PSN: Honkalot
+5
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
(This site lists seven incidents in the past week, with a total of 13 killed and twice that many injured, and I'm not even counting the six shootings on 9/11.)
BUT HE SAID ALLAH!
And thus it will be talked about...
but he didn't have a gun and no one died so maybe not
OK, de Blasio is making no sense. Says this was an intentional act, but at this point not connected to terrorism. Must mean no connection to an organization. Also says no connection to the New Jersey bomb has been found at this time.
Funny thing is, Libertarianism is despised by the Trumpian hordes. A good part of the Libertarian ethos is the free market, which implies the free movement of labor and open borders. So, a good chunk of them are former libertarians.
0
Options
jmcdonaldI voted, did you?DC(ish)Registered Userregular
OK, de Blasio is making no sense. Says this was an intentional act, but at this point not connected to terrorism. Must mean no connection to an organization. Also says no connection to the New Jersey bomb has been found at this time.
Posts
bah gawd
No, he's saying he's going to stop everyone from even thinking about attacking us. By being tough. And strong. So strong. And vigilant.
He will end terrorism against America. All of it. Forever. Whatever it is, he'll end it.
Unless it's some white guy with a gun or a homemade bomb going after those people. 'Cause that's not terrorism. No, that's just those people getting what's comin' to them. What they deserve.
I'm really curious on what these People think that Gary can say that Trump or Hillary haven't already dealt with in the primary.
Gary Johnson is a guy who gets booed by His own party for saying threat unlicensed4 year old shouldn't be allowed to drive drunk on public roads. His big competition in His own primary was a white supremacist who decided to strip on stage for a dare.
And this it's the guy who thinks he can bring down Hillary?
This it's the guy who thinks he can bring down trump?
Good luck trying to pull off 30 minutes what the entire GOP establishment couldn't pull off with a 25 year head start.
If I ever get into a conversation with her that doesn't turn into her accusing me of being a self righteous know it all who doesn't understand economics I will let you know what she expects Mr Johnson would say in a presidential debate that would instantly garner the support of millions of latent libertarians with less than two months left to Election Day and finally take down the two party system
As it happens I speculate her support is really a combination of a) uncritically reading atlas shrugged and absorbing objectivist philosophy to justify her own selfish behavior, b) the conviction that because the two party system is grossly blunt, inefficient and unrepresentative, the best solution is to not be a part of your system, maaaan and c) the bitch sho do love her weed
NNID: Hakkekage
The problem is what do you do when the T3 parties want in too
If there was unlimited air time, then sure.
But a 90 minute time slot is already super brief when you consider what's at stake here. And you're going to further divide that and dilute that for people who have no shot at winning? Yeah, no.
He's one of greatest innovators in political oratory that we've seen in a while, when he's in his contemporaneous speech mode.
It's not a bad thought on a shallow level but it is a painfully facile one once you get past the simplistic appeal for representation. The reasons:
1. At this point in the race presidential debates are the candidate's last chance to make their case to the electorate, not their first. If a third party candidate is not going into these debates with enough existing support to open even the slimmest of slimmest chances that their exceptional performance will garner enough additional support to shake up the race and become actually competitive, the presence of a third perspective only wastes time and attention (which is a scarce resource) on a candidate airing positions and promises that voters will never credibly have a chance to actually vote into office.
2. The debates function to persuade voters at the margins to select between the dominant advocates that have coalesced for over a year at this point, not to play at picking, a la mode, some nuanced alternatives that distract from the stark differences between the two leading candidates who actually have a chance of being elected.
3. There is an argument that the role of a third party candidate is to force the democrat and republican to confront issues on stage that their narrow corporatist allegiances would never allow them to address publicly. But this is incomplete; what third party candidates do is confront on PRIORITIES, not really new issues. Lacking any original competitive stances on the heavyweight issues most voters agree are national priorities--the economy, national security, education, etc--third party candidates only compete by demanding their pet issue(s) actually be at the top of the national agenda when there is no evidence of compelling support for those issues to be top of mind on the agenda at all. Johnson's dream of total social and economic deregulation does not exist within the universe of realistically supported policy positions by any compellingly large constituency, and even if it was, it's just an extreme amplification of what republicans are already offering. What do third party candidates really bring to the debate table then? I would do what my republican opponent said he would do, BUT HARDER?
4. The presence of a third party candidate would just turns him/her into an attack dog on both the other candidates which theoretically is the moderator's job, but without the moderator's ostensible goal of giving voters a clear sense of the candidates' positions and ability to handle scrutiny in a live setting.
5. And finally and most practically, in our odd electoral college system with most states winner take all, a hopeless third party candidate who by virtue of his current level of support and the time left to bolster that number up to even viability can only aspire to being a spoiler will risk the nightmare scenario: a President who is elected with a minority of the popular vote and a majority of the electoral vote. This is an ACTUAL realistic outcome and would qualify as a constitutional crisis. Bush v Gore settled NOTHING in terms of precedent of how to settle such a scenario--it was literally put to bed on a technicality about statutory time limits for recounts in Florida. This is obviously not a roadmap for dealing with a similar situation in the future, unless we're still ruffling through paper ballots with hanging chads these days.
Our system is far from perfect but this is the one we've got. The rules are bullshit, the pitfalls are many, the options are overly limited, the stakes are artificially inflated. But as a certain fictional Alexander Hamilton said: When you got skin in the game, you stay in the game. But you don't get a win unless you play in the game
#hamout
NNID: Hakkekage
NNID: Hakkekage
ooooo oooo i want strawberry please!
What is this a fucking Cold Stone? You get to choose your flavor of candidate, not your goddamn mix-ins
NNID: Hakkekage
Did you mean extemporaneous or contemptuous? Because I can see either.
Goddamit, the former.
I think that just means no connection to organized terrorism. It looks pretty amateurish early on, so it's probably just some random murdering asshole or an untrained self radicalized lone terrorist.
I'm sure Trump has an answer for all that though, and he'll tell us all about it if he gets elected.
well it is a core tenet of objectivism that if you believe in something hard enough you can make it happen through sheer force of will
Objectivism is believing that the free market is always right, unless it doesn't like something by Ayn Rand, in which case it's a giant conspiracy.
Just imagine if Trump-style public speaking is done by two or more front-runners in a future campaign. Just imagine a debate with a few of them against each other.
It'll probably devolve into multiple parallel separate single-player games, rather than any kind of dialogue (let alone debate), but it's fun/mind-bending to imagine.
Gods, I'm all for the preservation of literature even the horrible stuff but at the very least Rand books should probably have a warning label.
Caution: The views discussed within are not based on reality. Please do not use them as an excuse to be awful.
He's such a basket case that it's easy to miss that he's more engaging than 90% of politicians out there doing their drunken impressions of Kennedy and Reagan. And weeee willlll blah blah here you insert pregnant pause that's really a stillborn. Just put a gun in my mouth why don't you.
nbcnews.com/news/us-news/eight-people-taken-hospital-after-minnesota-mall-stabbings-n650081
amateur.
(This site lists seven incidents in the past week, with a total of 13 killed and twice that many injured, and I'm not even counting the six shootings on 9/11.)
BUT HE SAID ALLAH!
Donald Trump is the sort of man who will search for every single tiny flaw in a system, and then ruthlessly exploit that flaw for his own gain. He will then brag about doing so, and expect to be cheered for it. This is not the sort of man I want in charge of anything, much less the country I live in.
Until there is evidence of it being terrorism, I'm glad he's not calling it terrorism.
An intentionally set bomb is not in and of itself terrorism.
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
Trump is the ultimate Randian hero.
He puts his name on everything and acts in his own self-interest. One of the recurring themes of Atlas Shrugged is that the Gulchers name their companies after themselves to showcase human individuality.
And he does everything he can to destroy modern society, but he does it for personal gain, which somehow makes him the good guy rather than a stereotypical movie villain.
Ask her why she wants to eliminate the minimum wage
edit
Also
Usually libertarianism is skin deep but attacking directly gets people's back up. I've found getting the "well I don't want to get rid of that" response or showing them Libertarianism is more cartoon villain than anything noble helps.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Okay.
but he didn't have a gun and no one died so maybe not
Terrorism requires a political goal
until we find one it is not terrorism
baby steps
You think that the media or Trump care?