696,979 posts

TRP.RED Live-update thread for the US presidential debate: #FirstDebate

Reddit View
September 26, 2016


As the rules plainly state, we're not a political sub, and we're steering clear of having the sub or users endorse a candidate one way or another.

However, that doesn't mean the presidential race doesn't affect a number of our US members, and that doesn't mean there won't be a red-pill perspective to take with the debates coming up.

If you're interested in sharing your thoughts on the debate tonight, or want to read others' red-pill perspectives on the debate tonight, join our live update thread on TRP.RED:


I will personally be weighing in as the night goes on, and I'm sure many of you will want to as well. Anybody's welcome to join the discussion, just use the hashtag #FirstDebate.

Post Information
Title TRP.RED Live-update thread for the US presidential debate: #FirstDebate
Author redpillschool
Upvotes 57
Comments 299
Date 26 September 2016 04:57 PM UTC (3 years ago)
Subreddit TheRedPill
Link https://theredarchive.com/post/63283
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/54llld/trpred_liveupdate_thread_for_the_us_presidential/
Similar Posts

Red Pill terms found in post:
the red pill-pill

[–]zedsdedforever50 points51 points  (25 children) | Copy

Regardless of who becomes president, we have a growing geopolitical situation happening in the middle east and the pacific. There is no war with Russia to come because of the issues they are also facing with the middle east. The biggest question I want answered is who is gonna be the big bull in the global playground instead of this pussyfooting that has been happening. While you guys say enjoy the decline, a big ass war is slowly brewing and seeing my friends and myself having to go fight in another one isn't appealing. I want to keep on fucking instead of shooting some asshole I don't give two shits about.

[–]p00pey18 points19 points  (10 children) | Copy

Wars are inevitable regardless of who wins this election. You know that already, come on. THe world is overpopulated, resources are dwindling, and collectively we're not dealing with the real issues. Eventually, wars will intensify, and the haves, aka us with the biggest guns, will destroy the have nots. We're in too deep to reverse this trajectory. Best bet is to get the fuck out the way, aka get out of the military. Enjoy the fucking, we'll all be dead soon...

[–]smokecheck197624 points25 points  (2 children) | Copy

The solar system, hell the galaxy, has plenty of resources. As near as we can tell the place is full of useful rocks. It's time that we invest the energy and resources into our ability to exploit what is a nearly unlimited supply of almost every resource imaginable.

[–]good_guy_submitter7 points8 points  (1 child) | Copy

So instead of killing people, we should be exporting them to Mars and Titan. Sounds good to me.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

I want to export the freaking liberals and crazy feminists that are infecting not just the US, but the world.

[–]zedsdedforever9 points10 points  (4 children) | Copy

Your right, it is inevitable. The difference is war or a conflict. I'll take a couple thousand deaths over millions. This may be me just being a bitch about the situation, but I don't believe Marcus Arelius looked at his empire with its problems and said fuck it, just as I see the problems now and say well fuck it. My fellow man may look at his surroundings with a blue pill lens, but you don't leave your brothers behind. We don't hold their hands through every problem, but we don't abandon them.

[–]good_guy_submitter2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

In the land of he blind, the one eyed man is king. None of us are perfect, but if we've swallowed the pill we can at least see enough to lead our fellow man out of this spiral of destruction. I for one want a better world for my children and their children. I will become a leader of men. The more blue pill they are the easier they are to lead, just show them compassion instead of disgust.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Ever heard the saying people get the rulers they deserve? It is pretty much too late.

[–]zedsdedforever0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I guess this is my beef with trp brothers. The defeatist (free) line of thinking of the US falling reminds me of what Charles Manson was after.

[–]JohnnyRaz1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

While most of the things you listed are true, they're nothing in comparison to those few evil unmentionables that start and fund the wars.

[–]Zachar1a 3 points3 points [recovered] | Copy

The Middle East, not so much. ISIS is constantly shrinking and might evaporate by next year sometime. There will always be Islamic extremists, but they won't have a state sponsor. Even the Saudis have come clean and admitted that they have sponsored Islamists in the past, but that it wasn't a good idea because of how it turned out. Iran's supreme leader just forbid Ahmadinejad from running for President again, leaving the moderate incumbent without a serious contender. But most of all, the USA is becoming the world's largest oil producer, giving us less reason to care about the Middle East.

China is a whole other story, however.

[–]kagetsuki230 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

civil wars is what will happen. riches vs poors and race war, in particular in the case of europe migrants.

[–]bowie7470 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Class warefare. We're already seeing the beginnings of it with the Western globalism vs nationalism divide (Brexit, Trump).

[–]1Original_Dankster-2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy

We defeat ISIS, and their membership disperses throughout the western world. Personally, I'd prefer a strategy to contain ISIS - rather than a defeat ISIS. Let them have their caliphate, and then close it off, monitor it, and put a massive conventional / nuclear deterrent nearby - just as we do with North Korea.

[–]1edwardhwhite4 points5 points  (4 children) | Copy

Russia is a big danger because they are hurting. Their economy is now smaller than Spain's. They are covering budget shortfalls with currency reserves and will be out of FOREX reserves by January.

This makes folks engage in risky moves.

[–]zedsdedforever1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy

If you watch Putin's interviews, you will see his view on the middle east. All the US vs Russia stuff is smoke and mirrors. He needs our alliance to assist with his muslim problem. Big monster is ISIS and anything left in the power vacuum when Saddam was killed. Second monster is China, but that is a slow battle behind the scenes. We are purely talking the big game players at a tactical level.

[–]1edwardhwhite7 points8 points  (2 children) | Copy

Russia's in deep shit. They are running out of money. Oil is at record lows. Every country keeps reserves of foreign currencies. You have them so you can do transactions. Russia is so economically weak that they raided those funds just to keep the government going. They spent down 18% of their foreign exchange funds in 1 month.

[–]true_detective_sf 1 points1 points [recovered] | Copy

In 10 years half the car/truck fleet will be electric and fracking will be far more efficient. I think we'll see oil drop below $20 / barrel at that point and Russia will be in very, very deep trouble.

[–]1edwardhwhite0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

They are in deep shit now.

Russia 'could run out of cash reserves over the next year'

People do not realize how much the sanctions are fucking them up because they only pay attention to what Putin says or the latest provocation from the Russian government. They spent 18% of their FOREX reserves last month. In 5 months they will be out of reserves entirely. Then they raid pension funds. When that happens and pensions go down, Putin will be out in a month or it will be World War III.

[–]Mckallidon1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Time to pull out balls out the purse.

[–]BlueFreedom4202 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy

There is a shadow war. Waged by all nation states against each other. People die in this war. All nations states will deny it's existence. The trouble in the middle east is a smoke screen. The earth cannot survive western style consumerism, and the nation states know this.

[–]dogextraordinaire92 points93 points  (53 children) | Copy

I genuinely believe (political leanings aside) that this debate was perfect evidence of the importance of maintaining frame.

Trump, for once, was forced onto the back foot and shows us how pathetic one looks when being defensive while drawn into another person's frame (this coming from a Brit who doesn't really hold an opinion on their respective politics).

[–]Momo_dollar42 points43 points  (8 children) | Copy

Exactly what I thought, especially at the moment when he started talking really fast. Also, Hilary's reactions once Trump was on the back foot were perfect she didn't get annoyed at him interrupting, lots of amused mastery etc.

[–][deleted] 25 points26 points  (7 children) | Copy

The fact that we saw Amused Mastery only from Hillary and not from the Donald who is famous for it really surprised me.
Hillary many times started her two minutes with a short ridicule of the stuff Trump just said instead of defending herself. That was Amused Mastery from the textbook.

[–]disposable_pants16 points17 points  (0 children) | Copy

Hillary many times started her two minutes with a short ridicule of the stuff Trump just said instead of defending herself. That was Amused Mastery from the textbook.

Also note how this makes responding to the criticism sound even less reasonable. If she had thrown a bunch of little jabs at the end of her statements, it would have been easier and more natural sounding for Trump to counterpunch at the start of his time. Instead, by throwing a quick jab and then talking policy for 90 seconds, she made Trump look petty and uninterested in policy if he opened with a rebuttal of the attack.

[–]1edwardhwhite16 points17 points  (4 children) | Copy

Its because he has low frame. Constantly rises to the bait. Can't control himself.

[–]Zachar1a 3 points3 points [recovered] | Copy

I agree, but do you have any examples from the debate?

[–]1edwardhwhite4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy

Every time he interrupted her with "wrong" and "not true." She owned him and he could not control himself.

[–]Mr_Andry0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I am so fucking happy that some people in this sub are finally recognizing that Drumpf is not alpha. He's a privileged, coddled, stuffed shirt and always has been. Shit talking bully is NOT alpha, though I understand why it might trick some observers occasionally.

[–]perfidiousfish0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

That was Amused Mastery from the textbook.

The Joker's textbook maybe. Amused mastery can't be obviously faked like it was with her, otherwise it just comes off as creepy.

[–]that_star_wars_guy62 points63 points  (8 children) | Copy

how pathetic one looks when being defensive while drawn into a person's frame.

If there is one thing we can agree on, it's that Clinton was excellent at maintaining frame and drawing Trump into her frame throughout the debate.

[–]_Ronaldo 10 points10 points [recovered] | Copy

A good example of this was at the beginning when Hilary baited Trump about receiving a loan when he first began.

[–]madethewrongmistake14 points15 points  (5 children) | Copy

If you've ever had PR training, Clinton was pretty much following the beginner rules of never discuss specifics, always go back to rehearsed talking points. Trump was very specific, very extemporaneous, as he always is.

Here's what I don't get: why are people drawn to politicians with meaningless talking points rather than people that talk specifics and at least try to address the complexities of real problems?

Recognizing frame is one thing, but it's really a small part of being a leader. We criticize leaders based on frame, but many got where they are with terrible frame.

[–]bornredd4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy

I found that Trump would reference "I could give you a whole list right now" but would focus in on one particular (often incorrect in details) case study. Instead, he should have been discussing trends, which are more applicable in a broad based discussion like a presidential debate.

[–]madethewrongmistake0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Trump had a fair bit to say about stats and trends, although maybe overshadowed by anecdotes. Hillary's totally unsubstantiated projections about saving jobs etc was infuriating to me. Admittedly I feel the same way about Trump's 'secret' ISIS plan*. Voters should expect that things will be explained in plain language.

*Side note: ISIS/Mexican gangs/etc are a very predictable result of mass emigration. So, taking refugees/illegal immigrants is about the worst thing we can do for the world. So his stance on immigration is actually good enough for me.

[–]cashcow13 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy

why are people drawn to politicians with meaningless talking points rather than people that talk specifics and at least try to address the complexities of real problems?

Most women have great difficulty thinking rationally and concretely about public policy.

Many men do as well, because they have not been taught critical thinking skills by our dogshit education system.

[–]madethewrongmistake1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I agree it's dogshit, but if anything, it takes education to prevent rational thinking.

[–][deleted] 15 points16 points  (22 children) | Copy

the only good moment Trump had was the TPP question which made Hillary backpeddle and fumble quite a bit.

The rest of the debate looked as staged as WWE wrestling. especially since most the questions favored Hillary's narrative, like the one about Obama's nationality.

[–]JillyPolla12 points13 points  (1 child) | Copy

I disagree. That cyber security question was as soft as a ball can be for Trump to rip Hillary for her emails. Yet he decided to talk about his son's computer skill instead.

[–]Wilreadit4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

True. He could have made a direct statement that when it comes to cyber security the biggest threat USA had was Hillary Clinton. She poked him with Putin. He did not react the way I had wanted.

[–]cashcow13 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

the only good moment Trump had was the TPP question which made Hillary backpeddle and fumble quite a bit.

I disagree. I think he won the first 3rd, where he really nailed her on being an establishment hack and a criminal. Then it fell apart.

[–]bornredd4 points5 points  (7 children) | Copy

Did you really expect the subject of birtherism to not be levied by the moderator? Especially given that Trump was the primary propagator of that movement?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy

I expected all the worse to come. I was hoping this debate would end up more like Alex Jones vs Piers Morgan, but it ended up with Trump being made to look like a limp dick.

[–]bornredd5 points6 points  (5 children) | Copy

Trump didn't prepare. He took "boundless confidence" too far, and didn't do the work. He's paying for it in the public perception of him right now.

[–]Zachar1a 9 points9 points [recovered] | Copy

That "boundless confidence" looks a lot like narcissism.

[–]bornredd2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

In Trump's case, I believe you are 100% correct. He was unable to back down from any perceived insult to his own detriment.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

He might come back. Remember, Romney destroyed Obama in the first debate.

[–]bornredd3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy

He might, but I'm pretty sure his inability to ignore jabs is too deeply ingrained to overcome before the next debate and Clinton has his number.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Probably. We're screwed either way.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (9 children) | Copy

Honestly, this debate was such in favor of Clinton, that it was hard for Trump to maintain frame. Also notice how many times the moderator interrupted Trump vs. Clinton. Trump was interrupted way more.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy

That said, Trump definitely wasn't ready for this debate. He had lack of preparation as he may have underestimated Hillary. I was honestly expecting Trump to win before the debate began and I think he expected to win too. Well, here is to hoping for a better debate the next time around when Trump actually knows what he is up against.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

Yeah, as much as I want Trump to win and absolutely hate Clinton, he did look rattled. Whether it's because of the fact Clinton knew questions beforehand, it being slanted in her behavior, or Trump underestimating her, she looked better.

But believe me, next debate, Trump will do better and be more prepared.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

I believe it is closer to the fact that, if both were unprepared, Trump would win. He believed there was no way for Hillary to get the upper hand and she would be too "weak" personality wise to do so.

But yes, looking forward to the next debate. Though, if Trump doesn't trump Hillary then, he does not deserve to be president. He would have no excuses at that point.

[–]bornredd17 points18 points  (5 children) | Copy

Trump was interrupting way more, so this stands to reason.

Hard to get bitched at for interrupting when you're standing there looking smug as fuck.

[–]Wilreadit0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

That was a good moment. Also when he blamed her for being in power for 30 years and not having done anything. That took her by a surprise. And it felt genuine from Trump's part.

[–]Mc_G4rn4gl319 points20 points  (6 children) | Copy

This was an incredibly "Clinton-sided" forum for debate, and while Trump didn't do himself any favors, the mediator and the quite a bit of the audience was for sure on team Hillary.

Hillary still managed to fuck it up a little bit, by looking so goddamn smug about it. Tilted me soo much when she said "Just listen to what he said!" (paraphrase) and it got some laughs. Bit of a joke the entire debate I thought

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 20 points21 points  (4 children) | Copy

It's a very common liberal debate tactic: outrage and indignation.

Common arguments are:

  • Really?
  • Do you hear what you just said?
  • It's [current year]...
  • I'm not even going to touch this one...

[–]MarriedTRP5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy

This 100%, but Trump should have been ready for that. Donald Jr should have read /pol a little more closely and got his dad ready for these traps.

She did have a script though that she kept reading from: https://imgur.com/gallery/WxsAR

[–]BlueBlus-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

Its not really cheating (based on what the caption of your image says). Im assuming they allowed Trump and Clinton some notes to have when debating eachother. Trump just wasn't as prepared and should prepare a lot more for the next debate as well as maintain frame

[–]ThereAndBlackAgain0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Don't forget their absolute favourite, the "Sarcastic Paraphrase". A form of shaming in which not only is a strawman created, but instead of being argued against it's just mocked. It's especially beloved the more social justicy a group gets, with places like tumblr and ShitRedditSays essentially spending all day crafting low-effort non arguments in this form.

[–]1edwardhwhite-2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy

The audience was cheering Trump.

[–]heelface0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy

Where can I read more about framing? (New to group somewhat overwhelmed by the amount of material).

[–]McPhatness1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Read the sidebar, it's a lot of material but that's the place to start when you're new here.

[–]jdino0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

its when the catcher tries to put the ball into the strike zone fast enough that the ump calls a ball a strike.

watch Molina

[–]heelface0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Which one you didn't name that Molina

[–]jdino0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

my bad, Yadi of course.

he's not the best at framing pitches of course but he is probably the best catcher around...next to my beautiful Salvy.

i was also making a joke. but baseball is great

[–]p00pey57 points58 points  (52 children) | Copy

There will be no war with Russia morons, stop talking nonsense seriously. Stop reading retard websites

[–]logicalthinker124 points25 points  (0 children) | Copy

Correct because there's too much to lose on either side. There will just be posturing and shoving but nothing will happen. But if Russia doesn't see pushback, they're going to keep pushing their luck to see where our true line in the sand is.

The biggest threat is the degradation of our culture from the inside. It has happened to every great empire and it will happen to us.

[–]BlueFreedom4201 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

We are at war with them right now. How naive to think wars are troops lined up shooting each other.

[–]NeoreactionSafe10 points11 points  (49 children) | Copy

I disagree.

Ignorance is no way to operate. Rather than ignore information that you think is uncomfortable it's better to learn everything and then decide.

Being unaware of reality isn't the answer. (that's precisely how the Blue Pill is configured)

A World War Three is in the plan and always has been.

The Globalist Tyranny isn't going to get this far and then say:


"Oh gee... this quest for absolute power has gotten so boring. Let's stop this long process and pick flowers instead."


P.S: Unless you are not paying attention the Russians are taking the threat very seriously as they know full well what the Globalist Tyranny has in mind. Ignorance is no utopia. However, just because you are wise to what is actually happening doesn't mean you have much control over it.

So some decide Ignorance is Bliss.

Living a life where you ignore the unpleasant truths is much easier.


[–]1StoicCrane5 points6 points  (14 children) | Copy

I disagree. Ignorance is comfortable . This corresponds perfectly with femcentric society. Women are hardwired to pursue self-gratification and comfort so it can be said that any male resistant to the experience of developing character through hardship is effeminate or Beta at heart.

In order to develop and progress towards enlightenment one must find peace in the heart of reality and discomfort. Complacency through comfort is a miserably difficult existence by contrast.Beneath the veil of bliss lies a valley of emptiness.

[–]NeoreactionSafe-1 points0 points  (13 children) | Copy

Yeah you got my point exactly.

Women ride the:

Hamster Wheel of Subjective Happiness and Progress

...and while that gives great feelz it doesn't make you have Knowledge of Truth.


[–]--Chocobo-2 points-1 points  (12 children) | Copy

It's painful. Anyway not all women. I'm a woman and it's disgustingly obvious that Hillary is using the "Woman Card" to have empathetic and yet vague and pointless answers not rooted in reality.

[–]NeoreactionSafe-1 points0 points  (11 children) | Copy

If it weren't for the media that distorts reality to serve the interests of the Globalist Tyranny I'd guess that Hillary would be behind by 20 points or more.

Essentially the entire system tries to keep the Blue Pill mythology alive and they manipulate us all the time.

But the whole global mythology is cracking.

This includes the biggest scam on earth which is Fractional Reserve Banking through the Central Banks. Once that cracks all kinds of shit will break loose. (making 2007 seem small)

Then expect a World War Three as a distraction.

The goal is a prison planet.

The reason men are less attractive to you now it that these Globalist psychopaths are turning the men into mindless beta slave drones. It's no wonder they are disgusting to you. (I don't blame you)

How can men and women wake up and ever be on the same page again?


[–]--Chocobo1 point2 points  (10 children) | Copy

That's nice of you NeoreactionSafe - to not assume that they cannot. I would like to think we can. I think it's a HUMAN quality naturally to strive for intelligence, hence curiosity and playfulness. And unfortunately in this day and age women take advantage of men's beta state. Everyone is just trying to "get by". This is why I hate the blue pill, it slowly puts people into subservience by having them say "This is okay...no, this is great, it could always be -WORSE-" (because god forbid, struggling and pushing against the status quo because you DEMAND things be better is offensive), and then justifying their inaction. The insane state of money is mind-blowing. When you hear of companies making BILLIONS of dollars and about the complete SHIT working conditions of factories overseas, it's insane to think that NAFTA or TPP weren't inspired by the ones pulling the fucking strings. That's why the espionage act is such bullshit, it is a way to put anyone going against "National interest" whatever the fuck that is (terrorism, if you are 16 or younger you have grown up in a world that has never NOT had this word), into solitary confinement(i,e, torture). Not that I am okay with ISIS, dichotimy is the virus of true logic. I am pro military sure, I believe in law and order, but I AM NOT for a military that is abused by powers acting for their OWN welfare. As for the global mythology. The younger generation feels this. That's why Bernie was such a huge success even though the media gave him 0 coverage. I have hope that we are waking up. But...we'll see. TRUMP WON ALL THE POLLS BESIDES CNN. ;)

[–]NeoreactionSafe-2 points-1 points  (9 children) | Copy

The key for all of us is to understand the Game the Blue Pill plays upon us.

That's the entry point for the Red Pill in that males (who are normally clueless about Game) begin to realize the level of manipulation going on and we typically start in the intimate sexual theater where boys are most fixated at that stage.

Later we broaden the knowledge of Game to a wider and wider scope until we see the manipulation of the media itself.

You might try viewing a few David Icke videos if you already haven't.


[–]--Chocobo0 points1 point  (8 children) | Copy

Hmm. I looked up more about David Icke and it looks like he seems to discredit the questioning of power by having some pretty bizarre alien conspiracy theories later in his life. It is one thing to link real occurrences and another to go to that level where the dots are pretty out there.

[–]zedsdedforever0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Lol NRS promotes this guy. "Connect the dots"

[–]NeoreactionSafe0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy

David Icke is definitely not for the beginner.


[–]zedsdedforever3 points4 points  (30 children) | Copy

So what's the solution? More rhetoric?

[–]NeoreactionSafe0 points1 point  (29 children) | Copy

The answer is to absorb Knowledge.

Increase your data points.

Then using free will connect the dots.

It's called "Free Thinking"... something few do these days.


[–]--Chocobo2 points3 points  (14 children) | Copy

Nice point NeoreactionSafe. This presidential debate is painful. Bernie was my only hope, now I'm not sure who to vote for. Trump is not completely bought, but I'm probably going to vote 3rd party. (Jill Stein) The U.S is an imperial nation, installing "democracy"

[–]NeoreactionSafe0 points1 point  (13 children) | Copy


You do more by getting people to "wake up" to the media distortion we call the Blue Pill than by changing a vote.

Even if Trump wins he would face the Globalist Tyranny on his own.

John F. Kennedy tried this... he ended up with a dozen bullets flying at him.



[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (4 children) | Copy

This debate, I think, showed that Trump is part of it. He could have called out Clinton a lot, but actively chose to give up his frame. It's probably a better bet to vote for him though on the chance that he's going against it.

[–]TheSilentPajority1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

fuck, this is what I realized too. the moderation was against him, but he still did terribly. he missed so many opportunities to attack her curruption and instead he lost frame and focused on stupid anecdotes. I wanted him to do well, he had every reason to be able to, but I found myself disgusted with him.

[–]RobertCarraway0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

It felt like he was pulling punches

[–]NeoreactionSafe1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

He was giving "trickle truth".

Trump knows that he can erode the "Official Narrative" in subtle ways, but if he speaks too much Truth he will be called a conspiracy theorist.

So he holds a tricky balance of waking people up "a little".


[–]--Chocobo0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

I know...but we have something different today than we did in the past, internet and the information that comes with it. Nonetheless the shift of wealth has made this situation crazier than ever. And the need for "security". Give me liberty or give me death =/.

[–]NeoreactionSafe1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

The internet sort of "by accident" allowed people to start talking and actually begin to wake up.

The Globalist Tyranny plans to censor the internet very soon. (they don't like what is happening)

In a short time all free thoughts will be declared "hate speech".

The saying:

Truth is Hate

...will apply.


[–]JohnnyRaz-1 points0 points  (5 children) | Copy

Why are people here still calling Zionist Jews / Jews "Globalists" or "Illuminati" lol.

Jews own the media, they own the federal reserve, world banks, they practically own the government and many politicians, they have openly said they want to spread poisonous shit like multiculturalism and open boarders (in white countries) in the name of globalism. Arent we all big boys here? I think we can be truthful here if nowhere else.

[–]NeoreactionSafe0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy

No, because the thing we actually face is Dark Luciferianism itself.

There are Jews who oppose Zionism (the dark side) and could be on our side in the Alt-Right.

There are guys on the Alt-Right who are White Nationalists that don't want people waking up to the Red Pill and would prefer simple slaves to act as soldiers in their hoped for race war.

The Globalist Tyranny is the group whose goal is absolute world power.

And these days it's out in the open.

No one can seriously say:

"What? There aren't people seeking world government... that's a conspiracy theory... stop thinking that and be a good little slave."


[–]JohnnyRaz0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

Thing is, not Jews are Zionists, but all Zionists ARE Jews.

[–]NeoreactionSafe0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

So that still means you should use the term Zionist instead of Jew.

Better still, just use Globalist Tyranny.

With Globalist Tyranny no one can claim it isn't true because they pretty much announce their plans. They openly say that they want power concentrated into this tyranny and nations are to disappear in order to complete their global control system.


Those of the Globalist Tyranny can be Zionists, but not all of the Globalist Tyranny are Zionists.


Muslims are part of the Globalist Tyranny and they aren't Zionists... so are Catholics because of the Pope.


[–]BassNet0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Clearly you've never heard of mutually assured destruction.

[–]zedsdedforever-1 points0 points  (11 children) | Copy

Again. What is the solution? Using my critical thinking and ability to learn is not coming to a solution. My job requires me to connect the dots to prevent bad shit. I don't have the personality to be a bystander as you offer (we are not talking white knights either)

[–]NeoreactionSafe0 points1 point  (10 children) | Copy


Using my critical thinking and ability to learn is not coming to a solution.


Why does one need an immediate solution?

Of what value is that?

There is a saying:

"Don't jump to conclusions."

...which applies.

Gather as much knowledge as possible. When a solution is necessary then you must go with the best information you have up to that point. But if new information comes in you need to reroute the old thinking and connect the dots differently.

Once you lose mental flexibility you become "dead to the world" and simply repeat your pre-existing understanding.

To continue to grow and adapt means to continue to absorb more and more.

There is no end to gaining knowledge. (and to reconnecting dots differently)


[–]zedsdedforever0 points1 point  (9 children) | Copy

There comes a point in time that action needs to be taken and sitting back learning has run its course. My job deals with gathering knowledge to a point and then taking necessary action but my timeframe is very short when it comes to be effective in my specific job. I have learned adaptability, and flexibility over the years because I had too or I would die in a shithole 3rd world country. Your answers are akin to modern politics. All words, no substance. Do not recite the esoteric shit, give me substance. You have enough time on your hands with the amount of posts you do to offer a proposed solution. What you have given me is an infinite while loop with no false criteria.

[–]NeoreactionSafe0 points1 point  (8 children) | Copy

Truth emerges from chaos to become literal.

Some people simply lack the ability to comprehend this higher level and for them I do suggest they follow some literal sort of knowledge which (hopefully) isn't too dumbed down and Blue Pill.


[–]zedsdedforever0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy

You still don't answer the question. I have met people such as yourself that were able to bridge the gaps from chaos and see events not normally visible. Their gift was also their flaw; they usually suffered from aspergers or bipolar disorder. They also were unable to take said events and present them in actionable deliverables. Your "higher level" is to complicate, mine is to simpifly. Bullshido vs short and sweet.

[–]NeoreactionSafe0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy

No, I'm both high level intellectually as well as high functioning socially.

I'm what would be described as an "extreme extrovert" socially.

Plus, I'm the type that gets projects done on time and under budget.

But most people aren't this way and need a teacher to guide them... thus the reason for a 55 year old man spending time on the internet trying to help the damaged male children become better men.


[–]p00pey0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

I disagree with your disagreement. Reading garbage propoganda will not make you wiser. Especially for the young and impressionable. Yes there is value in learning from different opinions, but of those opinions are so off the wall, the only thing you're learning is that the authors of said opinions are idiots.

If I sit here and write a 100 page book about how the world is ending on Jan 1st because the sun is going to explode, and I provide no scientific backing, other than to just say that it will happen because Hillary will become president, you aren't going to learn much from it other than to learn that I'm an idiot...

[–]NeoreactionSafe0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Ideally you would absorb everything.

What I find is I can read something and by now quickly know it's argument already. So in effect I already have (past tense) absorbed it.

But having a deep set of knowledge is easy at 55 years old like who I am.

If you are say 18 years old and barely able to figure up from down I completely understand the emotion of being overwhelmed by too much data.

But in the end... Knowledge is Best.

Ignorance has no benefit for you... Ignorance might be Bliss, but it's not helpful other than the feelz.


[–]RobertCarraway0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Ignorance is fine for those who have no ability to act on knowledge.

[–]Momo_dollar29 points30 points  (7 children) | Copy

Perspective from someone who isn't from the USA, has little knowledge of what went on before. I knew more about Trump to begin with, all I knew about Hilary was that she was recently I'll.

Trump is good at arousing emotion in the weak and downtrodden. He keeps saying this is wrong that's wrong and it's because of them and them. He has good superficial points, but it's like he can't go deeper into anything and he doesn't offer any solutions.

Hilary started weak and seemed nervous for the first 2 mins. But after a while proved to be much more intelligent and able to go deeper into things and explain complex things with simplicity, also she is the more Machiavellian of the two.

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (1 child) | Copy

I found that Hillary wasn't any deeper on lots of issues. She did a lot of circle talking but offered no real plans just a bunch of visit my website. She sounded like a twitch streamer trying to built her twitter and you tube follower numbers.

For example on the jobs issue:

Her job plan was we build jobs and generated huge numbers last year > Trumps rebuttal was those jobs are low quality and low pay. Her response was we will build more job in these areas. Then retreated to check my website for details and explained nothing.

At least trump had a plan in re-negotiating NAFTA, trashing the TPP and reducing corporate taxes/regulation in specific industries. If this is a good plan remains to be seen but it was addressed.

I would say both are very surface answer candidates neither gave any specifics on the what and barely on the how.

[–]Momo_dollar-3 points-2 points  (0 children) | Copy

To sell fruits first you have to plant seeds.

[–]bmrdriver19 points20 points  (4 children) | Copy

With Hillary they are just words she memorized, no action. She doesn't believe any of it, if she gets elected it's corruption as usual.

[–]good_guy_submitter-4 points-3 points  (3 children) | Copy

There are trusted rumors that she was wearing an ear piece during the debate.

[–]p00pey12 points13 points  (0 children) | Copy

let me guess, the same websites that tell you we're going to go to war with russia yeah?!?

[–]Snufek14 points15 points  (19 children) | Copy

Democracy is one of the most idiotic systems ever created. With the majority of people being fucking morons... Just think that a guy who sits at home all day, is morbidly obese, stuck in a dead end job, hadn't had sex once in his life, his only hobby is video games and has no clue about what life is about - he decides for you. After all, there are more of them than us.

[–]smokecheck197619 points20 points  (1 child) | Copy

That's why the founding father's created a republic, or more accurately a republic of republics. It's also why they had controls on who could and could not vote. They wanted people that voted and held office to have some skin in the game and not just anyone that would vote themselves money out of the treasury, which will be our ruin.

[–]good_guy_submitter4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

The 16th amendment was the beginning of the end. Downhill from there on.

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points  (2 children) | Copy

Democracy is one of the most idiotic systems ever created.

Jesus, the tween edginess in this subreddit these days. I know it's tempting to let your feels be the lens by which you understand politics, but put down the fucking stridex pads and pick up a history book.

Idiotic, compared to what - feudal serfdom? communism? stateless tribal anarchy? absolute monarchy? theocracy? sharia? Be specific. Which one of these really awful things do you find to be less idiotic? No cheating making your frame of reference some hypothetical thing that doesn't exist, it has to be something that actually exists in the real world.

Write us a field report after moving to a part of the world with no concept of democracy and living there. Personally I recommend North Korea and Somalia. Let us know how much less idiotic their system is.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I'm surprised parliamentary democracy is never talked about stateside. It's been the most effective so far, adopted everywhere but in Yanktown.

I'm also seeing the benefit in separating the firehead, from the head of state, much fewer demagogues running things.

Granted, slows down an already slow process of legislation, so there's that.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I'm pretty sure he meant pure democracy...

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (0 children) | Copy

Democracy is one of the most idiotic systems ever created.

One of the red pills you need to swallow about the world is that political systems are never created on a clean slate. They're always a result of compromise between the various factions that make up a state.

Democracy was the inevitable result of industrialization. Before industrialization you had an agricultural economy. The rich could afford armies and the poor could rebel with inferior equipment and organization and had very little chance of doing actual harm to the rich unless the rebellion were truly massive. The French Revolution was one such massive rebellion (which still ended with no sort of democracy, by the way), but before it hundreds of jacqueries or peasant revolts had been attempted, none with any lasting success.

But once economies became industrialized then suddenly the mass acquired much more power. Striking by even a fraction of workers (such as coal miners or train operators) could seriously damage the interests of the rich, and the army having to be turned into a mass-conscripted force put that much more power in the hands of the conscript masses. It's no coincidence that popular revolutions (i.e. revolutions chiefly sustained by the working class) became much more successful once industrialization took hold.

European elites slowly and recalcitrantly came to realize that to contain that threat they had to give in to some demands. They had to give the working class a stake in the country's governance, so that instead of rebelling outright they'd get involved in the political process and channel their grievances through it. That's how modern democracy was born: a compromise between the elites and the industrial masses, whereby the elites kept governing (with few exceptions, all Western democratic governments were made up of upper class educated men) but the working class had a way to choose between which strand of elite governance their preferred.

Over the last few decades our industrial base has been exported to other countries and workers have lost the implicit threat-powerof strike. And that's because you're now seeing democracy being effectively dismantled, with mainstream parties all converging around an ideology, globalism, that unabashedly pursues the interests of the elites and fucks over the working class. They simply don't need to fear any longer.

[–]heelface1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

"Democracy is the worst form of government..... except for all the rest." -Winston Churchill

[–]cheaperautoinsurance0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Indeed. Unfortunately, all other governments types tend to end up is despotic regimes. Be careful what you wish for.

[–]Senior Endorsed Contributormax_peenor0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

In virtually all functional democracies throughout history, there was no sitting home all day. No one fed you. No one gave you a job. There was little time for whimsy. Democracy is for hard men and women that listen, which itself is the most functional arraignment for the human race. The problem is when men get soft.

[–]-contrarian--5 points-4 points  (8 children) | Copy

Yup. It's a terrible system. Artificial intelligence is our best bet. Governance by logic and not by emotion.

[–]good_guy_submitter0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy

I have a feeling that would be worse than Nazi Germany. Execute the disabled, they are leeches who don't contribute.. Labor camps for the unintelligent persons. No rich people, all resources distributed according to duties. Execute the elderly and sterilize women 35+ due to pregnancy risks. No more food flavors, you'll now be eating Soylent green for every meal. Artwork and games illegal as a waste of time. Etc...

A world without emotion is awful.

Although I wonder what the results would be if you programmed the AI to maximize happiness for both men and women.

[–]TrumpSEXYMAN0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

you do know 'nazi' germany had one of the highest standards of living in the world and was the ahead of the rest of the world in technology?

this changed after 1943, of course. but germany was still ahead of it's time.

they were a nation-state for the people that promoted the betterment of the people.

[–]good_guy_submitter-1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy

Any idea off the top of your head of what caused them to go south? I haven't heard this side before, I always figured Germany was just so-so and then pumped all of their economy into the war.

[–]TrumpSEXYMAN1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

Germany wasn't in a full war economy until 1943. In fact, it wasn't until 1944 when they reached their highest output.

I say they had one of the highest standards of living until 1943 because that's when the allied bombing campaign began wrecking havock.

By the end of the war they had the best technology - just didn't have the people or means to use it. Whether it be the V1/V2, first jet aircraft, etc.

[–]Horus_Krishna_20 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

kind of like how the south lost to the north in civil war. numbers matter, who has the most troops wins. technology does too but well if Germany had nukes they didn't use them.

[–]-contrarian--1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy

The problem with your argument is you have had the pleasure of living in a world where there are no consequences allowed, and thus are viewing the current system through rose-colored glasses.

Sooner or later we'll all get to experiance the collective consequences of governance by emotions. Something tells me you'll end up prefering your proposed negatives of logic.

[–]good_guy_submitter2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Emotions are great but they need to be kept in check by logic and reason. If you full emotion you go full retard

[–]xx69bootyhunter69xx-2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy

To be honest, I can't wait for machines to take over us. Seriously, they'll do a far better job of ruling us than our human 'democratic' leaders. In real life I choose the red pill, but in the Matrix, I would have chosen the blue pill, choosing to get ruled by cold calculating logical devices than emotional bags of flesh and bones.

[–][deleted] 62 points63 points  (88 children) | Copy

Donald Trump = Red Pill

Hillary Clinton = Blue Pill

That's all I have to say.

[–]Whiteouter102 points103 points  (62 children) | Copy

He may be "redpill", doesn't make him less of an idiot.

I am not saying that Clinton is any better, just that Trump is not the saviour people make him out to be.

[–]1animal_one24 points25 points  (8 children) | Copy

No one is going to save us. No one can make America great again because the foundation of the country, the people, is rotten. That being said, I think Trump can give us some more time and perhaps avoid an all-out war with Russia.

[–]Senior Contributor: "The Court Jester"GayLubeOil41 points42 points  (7 children) | Copy

No one can save America from its quantative easing dollar printing extravaganza.

[–]the_calibre_cat11 points12 points  (4 children) | Copy

No, but Trump's the first person to even talk about it like it's a serious deal. He could never get anything passed for the long-term benefit of the country, because Congresspeople rely on the "infinite money" spigot to win re-election, but he IS taking about it.

[–]BananaKick10 points11 points  (3 children) | Copy

He is not the first person. Ron Paul, rand Paul, Gary Johnson, etc. have been talking about it for years. Unfortunately the American public think that they're nuts.

[–]--Chocobo1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

Bernie Sanders...Jill Stein...

[–]TheBiggestZander-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

If it was affecting the interest rate, I would be opposed to it. But interest rates are at an all-time low, and the US economy is the strongest in the world. You wouldn't call the program a success?

[–]Luckyluke2313 points14 points  (1 child) | Copy

he's not. but when the OTHER person you have to choose from his Hillary " I Will lie cheat steal and turn your country into a feminist haven" Clinton.

he looks like a saint.

we all know pollies are out for themselves and their friends... you vote for the lesser of 2 evils.

well you do where i come from (Aus). we have to vote by law.

[–]the_calibre_cat8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

he's not. but when the OTHER person you have to choose from his Hillary " I Will lie cheat steal and turn your country into a feminist haven" Clinton.

he looks like a saint.

Ba-ding. If you want to impede the pussification of America, Hillary is a mortal enemy. Unfortunately, must people in America are pussies, so the "give me free stuff my life is so saaaaad" crowd will probably emerge victorious in November.

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours0 points1 point  (45 children) | Copy

Yeah, to some extent he is better. Still lots of same old shit. Catering to the huge corporations rather than the people, but that is every politician these days. On the plus side he wouldn't be stripping us of more rights and working to make us dependent upon the government.

Hrc = war here in the states

DT = war overseas

Either way, we will be in a big fight with someone, because war is very profitable for the politicians and their owners.

[–]TheEagleAndTheSnake7 points8 points  (38 children) | Copy

Why do you think DT = war overseas? Interested (cuz I'm overseas)

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours15 points16 points  (28 children) | Copy

Both Bush's sent me to war, the second one after 8 years of a Democrat turning the other cheek. It's profitable for them to attack another country, and they'll use any justification they can. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, but it justified going in there.

Republicans are all about profit. Especially when they don't pay for it in any way. Dems are all about bigger government and more control of our personal lives.

[–][deleted] 6 points6 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

We can hope man. I've done two wars for both Bush presidents. I'm sick and tired of it, and nobody gives a fuck about what it has done to us. All we get is empty platitudes and hollow thanks. It's never been more obvious to me than now, that men are expendable. I want him to be who he says he will. We'll see.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

The Bushes were globalist neocons. Trump is not.

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I'll wait and see. If he really isn't one of them, there is no way they'd let him be elected. Call me cynical of you like. I'm down for a reset. Back it up to about 1912, or maybe back to Teddy's time.

I don't dislike him, but he has a long way to go for me to trust him.

[–]rubenbrasil1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy

Youre getting caught up in party lines.. the truth that was revealed is that Democrat and Republican were two different flavors of the same thing. Their core principle on both sides is NWO neocon shit. AKA Establishment = Neocon

Trump isnt establishment, hence the major resistance from the media. Trump doesnt want war overseas, probably with the exception of taking out ISIS. But he wont create wars to profit like Bush in Iraq or Hillary in Libya. ISIS is inevitable.. we have no choice but to fight them. Theyre bringing the fight to us, no matter what. Its like work, we hate it but its something that needs to be done.

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy

I'm outside the party lines and see then for exactly who they are. Trump appears to be outside, but it's he?

Our elections are a dog and pony show, the equivalent of bread and circus in ancient Rome. Making people think or feel like they're a part of the system, when really they're not. We have no say, no voice, and they even showed us without a doubt that is true. Bernie wins the most votes, hrc gets the delegates. They're not even trying to hide the fact we don't matter, other than production slaves.

This misdirection keeps us divided, and makes most easy to manipulate. Aka useful idiots.

So, is Trump the same old shit with a thin veneer? Gotta wait and see. I don't dislike him, but I never trust politicians, even if it's their first time,

Hillary make no effort to hide it, because she doesn't need to. She has voters based solely on party lines, her vagina, and she isn't Trump.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

That would actually be very interesting.

Obama epitomizes that sentiment on the left. He was supposed to be the chosen one, the ultimate show of the left. Trump looks to be the same version on the right, not a neocon, he's just the american dream, personified.

I wonder how americans will react if he ends up being a status quo figure. Is it going to be learned helplessness, or will americans be the sleeping giant, woke?

[–]RobertCarraway0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Is it going to be learned helplessness, or will americans be the sleeping giant, woke?

Americans will be the sleeping midget, woke. If this country had the same demographics/beliefs that it did 80 years ago it would be a different story.

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

It's obvious where she would take us, and the most amusing part of that is it's not because she's a girl. It's because of her disdain for law, the people in the country, and her at all cost, self serving, her first and only fuck everyone else mentality. She is a shit excuse for a human being, and would make an atrocious leader.

Trump, well all we really know of him is the TV shows and the act he puts on. I saw Ozzy in concert earlier this month, and the man is nothing like his character on TV. It's a fucking act. At least with Reagan we had an idea because he was the governor of California first. I'm not a huge fan, but I'd rather give him a chance than take the inevitable fuckery she will bring.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

She's not even hiding it. I'm with her.

The entire brand is based on you getting under her, and lifting her on your shoulders to greatness. At least MAGA assumes him providing value to the voter

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Careful. His rhetoric on Iran and his steadfast Israel-first stance refute this. However, that's all it may be to win voters: rhetoric. After all, he's the only candidate to extend an olive branch to Russia after years of NATO provocation. Putin played a similar game and cozied up to a lot of cronies before coming into power and imprisoning many of them.

In other words, we should vote for him, but don't be surprised if he's not as anti-establishment as you think.

[–]p00pey1 point2 points  (8 children) | Copy

Politicians on both side are about profit. To tie that into the RP narrative, it's EVO psych in its simplest form. Greed, survival of the fittest, power, etc. once people get in power, they change. It's in our DNA. So these people, once they reach that pinnacle of power, work more on accumulating more power/money than serve the populous. Hence democracies are crumbling, including th greatest in the world. Human nature is human nature, laws of men cannot ever overpower natural laws/urges. Same applies for sexual strategy, same for politics, same for race, religion, all of it.

Enjoy the decline...

[–]Endorsed ContributorInvalidity3 points4 points  (6 children) | Copy

The primary difference between Republicans and Democrats is which corporations they are supporting.

The problem with people is that they are voting for candidates on primarily every other aspect of politics other than economics. Pro-life versus pro-choice, more taxes/less taxes, gay rights, etc. None of that shit matters; if the majority of people wanted to do themselves a favor, they would be voting for candidates that look out for THEIR financial interests.

[–]p00pey3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy

they all support any corporation that allows the to stay in power or allows them to accumulate more power. There have been recent articles detailing the relationship between the clintons and goldman sachs. That org is as republican leaning as possible, yet they own the clintons because they pumped enough money their way.

Also google who writes most of the bills that come up in front of our legislature to become law. i'll clue you in, it's lobbyists that represent corporations. LITERALLY. Meaning corporations pump enough money into politicians to basically own them. Then, they push for legislation that is beneficial to them. SO what do the politicians do?!? They don't even care anymore what that legislation is. They ask those corporations to get their lobbyists to write up the bill, and they'll support it on the floor. There are many instances of politicians caught with zero knowledge of bills they sponsored. When they were challenged via debate by those that opposed the bill, those politicians basically stood there like deer staring into headlights.

The democracy is a joke. The only reason it exists is because the people are too dumb. Too caught up with what kim kardashian is doing tonight to worry about the state of the union. Sad day in america...

[–]Endorsed ContributorInvalidity2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

It's a double-edged sword: the majority of the populace is too ignorant and unintelligent to make informed decisions, yet if they were all significantly more intelligent, the world would be a much more dangerous place.

Humans are only more intelligent creatures than the primitive animals in the wild, yet we are still animals at our core. We want resources and we want to reproduce. The people at the top are all rich because they've found a way to siphon resources from the poor.

To make a significant change in this world, to assist the poor in realizing that they are being duped, is difficult because as you said, they are being inundated with unimportant and trivial media.

[–]1StoicCrane0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Dumbed down on a scale before never seen. Machines invented and sponsered by the few are enthralling the many. Tech is developing faster than the average human can account for to our collective detriment.

When or "if", at this point, future generations live to look back on this period it'll be ominously known as The Technological Dark Ages.

[–]the_calibre_cat0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

The problem with people is that they are voting for candidates on primarily every other aspect of politics other than economics. Pro-life versus pro-choice, more taxes/less taxes, gay rights, etc. None of that shit matters; if the majority of people wanted to do themselves a favor, they would be voting for candidates that look out for THEIR financial interests.

That shit DOES matter, though. You may not think it does, but somewhere out there is a voter to whom it matters. If anything, voter's economic interests are more often centered around the social rather than the economic.

Economics moves libertarians, and that's about it. Every other political group "cares about economics" insofar as they can get some other poor bastard to pay for a chunk of their lives.

[–]Endorsed ContributorInvalidity1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

It matters to someone but it is completely insignificant in comparison to economic impacts. And I believe you intended to say "voter's interests" and not "economic interests" since you mentioned social. My point isn't about what does or does not matter to people; the emphasis is on what is the most significant thing (which is what I was saying when I used the word 'matters').

[–]the_calibre_cat0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

It matters to someone but it is completely insignificant in comparison to economic impacts.

You're preaching to the choir, but the choir is not the majority.

And I believe you intended to say "voter's interests" and not "economic interests" since you mentioned social. My point isn't about what does or does not matter to people; the emphasis is on what is the most significant thing (which is what I was saying when I used the word 'matters').

And what I'm saying is that, since the dawn of time, what has held people's political sway has almost always decided political fortunes more surely than has the most logical economic path forward. It matters, and... That sucks.

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Been saying it for years, not much I can do about it. The government is owned, and not by us. It's not acting in our best interest, but for increased profit. The left goes after certain rights and makes incursions into our private life in specific areas, the right does the same in different areas, each telling the truth that the other is destroying our country.

People are easily led, Goering said it very well in Nuremberg.

[–]TheEagleAndTheSnake1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

Republicans are all about profit. Especially when they don't pay for it in any way. Dems are all about bigger government and more control of our personal lives.

This is a great way to explain both parties. However I think Trump is more of an outsider to both of them, isn't he? Republican nominated him only because he destroyed every other candidate there was...

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

He is the only one who isn't some kind of jesus freak, that had a lot to do with it, in addition to not being a career politician. He had the same aura as Reagan, but I wonder if he can pull it off like Reagan did.

[–]zaiguy0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Trump has been saying that he would stop messing in other countries' affairs. Even uber-cucked NYT called Trump the "dove" in this election.

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

Show one thing, be another. I read people, he will take no shit and go all in like Bush did. Dubya was an unassuming frat boy, look what he turned out to be.

I don't dislike Trump, but I know where we are headed.

[–]RojoEscarlata0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Trump is not the same kind of Republican, he destroyed Jeb, and partially the Bushs', I hope he destroys the Clinton as well.

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I'm in the wait and see camp. It's not easy to impress me.

[–]1StoicCrane-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy

You attest to the notion that 9/11 was an inside job?

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Hardly. A bunch of goat fuckers with box cutters exploited a weakness in our system. The government simply took advantage of it, not unlike Pearl Harbor, but since it wasn't another country doing it, only a bunch of religitards, there was no country to attack. So they picked a couple light ones and went for it.

To think our government could pull off something as audacious as that shows how ignorant of the government most people are. Ineptitude abounds in government, because they are not the smartest, only the most popular. I worked for them, and I've never met anyone more clueless about how everything works than politicians.

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (8 children) | Copy

That guy is just falling for the media narrative. He has shown that he can get along with a number of the world leaders and they will respect him.

Hillary is a different story. Her foreign policy decisions have been responsible for wars we have gotten in over the past decade. She is also a big reason why ISIS basically formed and why there is so much chaos in Europe and the Middle East.

[–]p00pey8 points9 points  (6 children) | Copy

Actually GW is the ONLY reason ISIS exists. Don't regurgitate the same old bullshit, educate yourself. The Middle East is the mess it is now mainly because of colonialism, but the recent fuel to the fire has been the unnecessary war in Iraq that made Cheney rich...

Knowledge is power, regurgitation is vomit...

[–]the_calibre_cat3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Agreed, but Hillary isn't a reversal of that neoconservative interventionism - she's a continuation of it. See: Libya. Sorry, but that was a colossal fuckup, and it shows just how desperate the media is to defeat Trump that it's not a bigger deal.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy

Well you do realize that George W. Bush wasn't the only one responsible for this. The entire government was and Hillary happened to be one of the people who voted for the war, that caused this.

[–]p00pey5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy

zero argument there, she's a hawk, much like anyone that reaches her level of power is. Because war is money. However, as a single senator, if you don't realize her power in starting that war vs. that of the president's office, well than you have an agenda, and I'll leave you to that agenda. As long as you understand your narrative doesn't align with the truth. The truth is the truth, the way men twist that truth to build that narrative has no affect on the truth. The truth doesn't care about anything but itself...

[–]1NPIF0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Hillary, as a Senator, voted for the Iraq war based on the premise that Iraq had WMDs. It was a false premise, and she was not the only Senator to fall victim to this ruse on behalf of the GWB Administration.

It should also be noted, and oft-repeated, that Trump publicly supported the Iraq war at its outset. He's flip-flopped on the issue and is lying through his teeth at every turn. It boggles the mind that so many people think Trump is more rational, reasonable, and a better candidate for the job of leader of the Free World than a woman who spent her entire career in politics.

[–]Senior Endorsed Contributormax_peenor0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Colonialism? By whom? The Turks? No one has invaded and settled in the Middle East for 500 years.

I don't think that word means what you think it means?

... be careful. There is a trap in this post.

[–]RojoEscarlata0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy

Trump doesn't cater to corporation, at least not in the way imply. His tax cuts are for everyone not just some. And the industry tax cuts are meant to encourage creation of jobs and more important preventing industry to move abroad in order to avoid taxes.

I've seen it first hand, American corporations opening here in Mexico because work force and tax are cheaper.

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy

Two of the jobs I used to work were moved to Mexico. Both technical CNC machinist jobs. Since I can write the program, I'm too expensive.

Corporate tax cuts have happened in some states, like Wisconsin. They pay zero corporate tax to the state. Who makes up the shortfall to repair roads, pay firefighters, police, and teachers? The people who live and work there. Wisconsin has roads in dire need of repair that are scheduled to get worked on in (I am not making this up) 300 years from now. Governor Walker did that. Guess what corporations did with the zero tax. They didn't invest it, didn't expand and create jobs, they gave it to the ceo and the other heads in the corporation. Meanwhile firefighters have a tiny budget, the police rely on the federal drug interdiction money, and teachers have no retirement with an included pay cut.

That is the typical Republican method. Give a break to the wealthy to increase profit without an increase in productivity, and make the average Joe pay for it. A tax break for everyone means less public services... Unless of course we tell the Federal Reserve to fuck off and we stop paying them interest on our own money. That won't happen. That is where 100% of personal income tax goes, to the Fed. Bet ya didn't know that about this country. Most of the people living here don't know that the Federal Reserve isn't part of the government or even part of the country, yet we owe them a few trillion dollars in interest because we let them sell us our currency.

So until we plug that hole, and we plug the holes that allow corporations to move production off shore and bring products in without tariffs, nothing good will happen for the people who live here. They'll remain indentured servants to the Federal Reserve, barely make enough to survive, and continue to struggle to achieve the dream of retirement that increasingly will never come.

That is what Trump is up against.

[–]RojoEscarlata0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

So until we plug that hole, and we plug the holes that allow corporations to move production off shore and bring products in without tariffs, nothing good will happen for the people who live here. They'll remain indentured servants to the Federal Reserve, barely make enough to survive, and continue to struggle to achieve the dream of retirement that increasingly will never come.

That's exactly what Trump proposed dude, he is not a typical GOP candidate, his proposal of cutting taxes and re-forming American trade deals (like the disastrous NAFTA)

Please, check his proposals in his page, you wikl definitely like it.

PS: I know your federal reserve in the way it works it's completely fucked up, but Trump proposed also to audit them, which is pretty awesome.

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

Audit, shit. The whole system is fucked up and nothing more than a way to control is and our economy. Need it gone.

I've read his ideas, and I've seen others say similar things and never even come close to getting there. Also, read my lips, no new taxes. My idealism is long gone, but it would be great to have him actually fix shit.

[–]RojoEscarlata0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

I'm with you, nihilism and cinism have made me doubt too, but I do believe Trump's intentions.

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Intentions sure, what he will do when he is there, have to wait and see.

[–]rubenbrasil-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy

Hes as close to a savior as it gets.

All of us here on redpill are aware of how political correctness has destroyed Western society.. i.e. feminism, blue pill, sexism, etc

Hes the only one that has gotten enough momentum to actually break through the rigged process of becoming a nominee.. Even past decent presidents still had their hands in some globalist NWO bullshit.

We finally have one, and whether you may like him or not hes the first one to break through the 1000 barriers they throw at genuine non-estbalishment candidates.

His message is pro-western.. fuck islam and the PC the democrats are brainwashing our kids with.. they want us to be slaves for the bluepill corporations of the future. We finally have a warrior who is putting it on the line man, im not sure what your caught up on to not see that- and think hes a baffoon.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

He may also be controlled opposition. If he were completely anti-NWO, he wouldn't be such an Israel-firster and warmongering toward Iran. Also, Muslims aren't all bad. In European ghettos and Saudi, yeah, their ideology is pretty bad, but most living in the U.S. aren't that extremist. The media has just been hosting one false-flag event after another to tarnish them.

[–]the_calibre_cat0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

He certainly isn't, but he also isn't the out and out idiot-and-only-idiot that people make him out to be, in my view, and I was definitely in the "he's a complete idiot" camp at the beginning.

[–]satanicpriest130 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

He's gonna make me money because people were too stupid to accept his presidency. That's all that matters.

[–]anihilistlol10 points11 points  (1 child) | Copy

That was red pill? Trump spent half the time trying to break out of Hillary's frame, and he never succeeded. It was like watching a mother scold her child.

[–]TRPrinny6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy

Yep, Trump is so reactive and childlike in his emotional control. There is very little in his behavior that is Red Pill.

I suppose a lot of people here circlejerking about him will keep hamstering that Trump is anything more than a played out joke.

[–]Endorsed Contributorvandaalen2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy

If you still believe that voting will change anything to the better for you, I have bad news for you regarding red and blue pills...

[–]1StoicCrane1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

At this point it my be best to renounce US citizenship an expatriate to a foreign country before all the civilian guns gets confiscated. Martial Law is looming over the next presidency.

[–]p00pey-2 points-1 points  (3 children) | Copy

Our votes mean nothing anymore. I haven't voted in 20 years. Aging myself, I know. The system is broke. It's rigged. It's about those in power staying in power, accumulating maximum wealth. The drumpf is feeding off that, claiming himself to be an outsider. It's a joke. The system is the system, no one can buck it, we need a revolution to change things. If anyone things Donald would come in and institute massive changes, you are an idiot. Remember Obama ran on 'change' WTF has changed?!? For the better anyway? The real power brokers will assassinate anyone they feel would implement real changes that would affect their power/wealth. The system is rigged, and both sides are more concerned with keeping you distracted than anything else...

[–]_the_shape_5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy

we need a revolution to change things.

Change what though? Or more to the point, change who?

Hypergamy will still rage on unfettered (no putting that paste back in the tube). Same for social media and all the addiction that comes with it. People will still prioritize (and demand) all their hedonistic, distracting little pleasures. People will still swim in a revolting pool of laziness, fear and apathy.

People themselves would have to fundamentally change. They'd have to start giving a fuck about things, taking responsibility, setting aside their self-destructive habits and devoting themselves to truth, freedom, bettering themselves and, consequently, bettering the world. They'd have to set aside their prejudices for once, stand above hatred and contempt for one another and (finally) set their cross-hairs as a unified whole against the powers that be.

If that sounds too far-fetched for you, well, it's because barring some outrageous miracle, it is.

[–]p00pey4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy

you know what, you are absolutely right. We've had thousands of revolutions through the history of man, but we end up at the same place. Because of human nature. Laws of the land can't overrule human nature, it just doesn't work. SO essentially we have to evolve for anything to really change. Otherwise, regardless of political system, economical system, whatever, the same shit will repeat itself. The rich/powerful will control the masses through whatever means possible, and the 99% will chug along obliviously. That's why it is of utmost importance to break from the matrix and carve out a space for yourself that is defined by you. If you're rugged enough, you can make a good life for yourself in most conditions, and especially if you live in america...

[–]wade26340 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Widespread culture of Islam curbs hypergamy, and so does India's culture of abstinence. These come with their own problems of course. Only when we allow the sexual market to be a free market do we get a need for TRP to the extent that we do. Women just make poor choices when it comes to sex, so we learn to take advantage of it.

[–]Wilreadit1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Hillary is the most Red Pill person on the world. Only thing is she is not out to save America. She wants the power for herself.

[–]TheEagleAndTheSnake0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy

Leaving this comment under yours. How big d you think the chance that the elections will be rigged is? Trump would win 99% if the votes were counted correctly, but if some of them just disappear? Like the Austrian presidential elections, the leftist candidate won by 'postal votes' no one has under control...

[–]BassNet3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy

I doubt Trump is going to win after this debate, he made himself look like an idiot.

[–]TheEagleAndTheSnake0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

He didn't win but neither did Hillary who was smiling like a psychopath on four grams of LSD instead of answering questions. I personally think this is his strategy, lose the first one, get back on track in the second one and complete fucking destroy her in the third one.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy

I mean to be honest, that's the thing that scares me. I do think there is a very good chance that this election might be rigged. The media has been all out against Trump and everyone knows it. Heck this video shows it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRp1CK_X_Yw

If it is rigged, you will see riots and chaos throughout the United States.

[–]TheEagleAndTheSnake5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

What in the glorious Martian fuck is that video full of SJW buzzwords? And yeah hahaha Ruffalo will reward all Clinton voters with his dick. Every single person in that video is a fucking sellout... I don't believe all of them are braindead enough to vote for Clinton. This just shows how being a celebrity = being a public puppet for those truly powerful. Cringe

[–]MasterRiku0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Hillary has all the friends in higher tiers of government, no way in hell she isn't rigging this. The electoral college is supposed to vote according to the popular vote but they can be bribed just like anyone else. Either that or Hillary will make them have an "accident" if they don't comply

[–]1animal_one-3 points-2 points  (6 children) | Copy

I'd say they're both 'red pill', they just appeal to different demographics.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (5 children) | Copy

Interesting. I guess I meant it in the sense that many or most Trump supporters think with a red pill mindset. On the other hand, you notice how a lot of Hillary Clinton supporters adopt a more "blue pill" mindset. Given how Hillary is all about this feminist bullshit.

If you are beta, you are more likely to vote for Clinton. If you are red pill, more likely to vote for Trump.

[–]1StoicCrane1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

In other words you're saying Trump is going to lose? 160k+ as opposed to millions hardly seems like a fair fight.

[–]wade26340 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

You forget about all the Chads.

[–]1animal_one0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I know what you meant and agree 100%. I was just being autistic.

[–]Momo_dollar-2 points-1 points  (1 child) | Copy

You do realise Red Pill is about sexual strategy?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Yes, but there are many posts on here that aren't just about women. Some are about finance, fitness, how to dress well, navigate the corporate world, etc.

I think it's about unplugging and looking at how society isn't completely what we were taught as kids growing up.

[–]ScalingAedes-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

Are you joking?

Trump is an insecure, thin-skinned man-child who just had his frame demolished in front of the nation.

[–]Senior Contributor: "The Court Jester"GayLubeOil21 points22 points  (27 children) | Copy

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon52 points53 points  (8 children) | Copy

Especially male people.

Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat.  - Hillary Clinton, Conference on domestic violence in San Salvador, El Salvador (17 November 1998) 

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (0 children) | Copy


What is this?

[–]1nonthaki10 points11 points  (5 children) | Copy

Oh yeah , Men lose their actual fucking lives i.e - they die in the battlefield ; while women dont lose their lives (literally and figuratively) cause they can still marry another guy and have an okay life .

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours21 points22 points  (4 children) | Copy

Shit, they don't even need the man to be killed, they'll jump to another cock while he is deployed.

[–]1nonthaki5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy

Haha :) True . Fucking True .

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

And if he died in combat, guess who normally gets that sweet $400k from SGLI?

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Yep. First thing I did was cut my first wife out of it, and set up a trust that my parents controlled, so they could provide for my kids. The ex would've blown it all on frivolous bullshit.

[–]satanicpriest134 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

And white males. She's quick to call every white racist and blame the entire country for the race divide. These guys are the epitome of blue pill, disregarding straight white males. I'm not even white but I can see she is demonizing them.

[–]p00pey-3 points-2 points  (8 children) | Copy

you're referencing Russian propaganda to make a point?



[–]Senior Contributor: "The Court Jester"GayLubeOil5 points6 points  (7 children) | Copy

Russian propaganda is in English because it's intended audience is the west. This is not Russian propaganda. This is the sincere opinion of Vladamir Zurinovski leader of Russia's second largest party LDPR and intended for domestic Russian consumption.

[–]disposable_pants3 points4 points  (4 children) | Copy

You're pretending that the Russian government doesn't also target propaganda towards their domestic population -- they do.

[–]Senior Contributor: "The Court Jester"GayLubeOil2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy

Why would the Russian Government waste their time convincing their citizenry to be pro Trump? Which is why this isn't propaganda just an opinion.

[–]disposable_pants6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy

Why would the Russian Government waste their time convincing their citizenry to be pro Trump?

I can think of at least four reasons:

  1. They think it can sway the U.S. election (and they think a Trump presidency will be favorable to Russia). Foreign citizens can donate to U.S. presidential candidates, and it's possible to use foreign approval ratings as arguments for/against a particular candidate (look at how Democrats use the fact that many foreign heads of state don't take Trump seriously as a pro-Clinton argument).
  2. They are building domestic support for Trump in the event they want to work with him in the future. If they think there's a chance of a Trump win, and he's currently unpopular in Russia, it's prudent to boost his popularity so there would be greater approval of potentially partnering on some sort of future international agreement.
  3. Russian leadership likes Trump for some reason and their propaganda merely reflects that. Maybe he has a personal or business relationship with Putin, maybe Putin/Russian leadership hates the Clintons for some real or perceived slight at some point.
  4. They want to discourage the idea that a highly unpredictable person could wind up in charge of the world's largest military and economy. Uncertainty is bad for the economy, and Trump brings uncertainty. If they can't influence the election they can at least influence the perception of him as unpredictable.

And it's not really a "waste" of time or money -- they have a state media outlet with nothing better to do. In any event, it's safer to assume that Russian media has a state-supported agenda than it is to assume it's reporting facts in a sober, neutral way.

[–]1Original_Dankster1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Quite simple actually - Trump's stance on NATO and non-interventionism abroad. Russia wants less US troops in Europe and a somewhat stable middle east even if it means leaving dictators in power. Trump wants European countries to protect themselves (i.e. fewer US troops), and opposes "regime change" abroad.

[–]good_guy_submitter0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Because CtR shills were paid to spread rumors about Russia being connected to Trump online. Russia isn't spreading propaganda in Russian for anyone to read and vote for Trump... That would just be idiotic.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

This is not Russian propaganda

He refers to Osama bin Laden as a "foreign person" and "the leader of some organization" as if Osama bin Laden was just some random guy. The absurdity of characterizing him in this way is a good indicator of how seriously a well-informed person could take this video.

[–]p00pey1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

ooooh. Ok. That makes total sense now. Thanks for setting the record straight. I now accept everything that guy says as the truth. Thanks agan GLO...

[–]Nergaal-1 points0 points  (8 children) | Copy

Blue pill, red pill, or purple pill. You don't need to choose either to cheer loudly or on the inside when Osama died. You have to be cucked serously into Russian propaganda to defend Osama.

[–]Senior Contributor: "The Court Jester"GayLubeOil4 points5 points  (7 children) | Copy

There is a distinction on defending international legal norms like state sovereignty and defending U.S government trained terrorists like Osama Bin Laden. Unfortunately that distinction is lost upon the proles.

[–]Nergaal0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy

Not really the point. US went in, took him out, suffered some negligible diplomatic backslash, done.

The TRP analogy would be to hook up with a married woman who didn't actually want to cheat, but you were such a Chad you ignored that and got what you want.

[–]Senior Contributor: "The Court Jester"GayLubeOil3 points4 points  (5 children) | Copy

A better analogy is a rich guy breaking into a poor guy's home shitting in his bed and flying away on a helicopter. Then the poor guy complains but no one gives a fuck because they are all paid off by the rich guy.

[–]Nergaal1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Neah, that is hamstering. What is the Sexual Strategy analogy?

[–]Invoker110 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

yo check ur private msg.. thanks for the help m8 :3

[–]p00pey-1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy

You are really showing your stupidity strongly here GLO. If the poor guy came to my fucking house and destroyed things, including human life, best bet I'll go shit in his house, and probably kill his kids on the way out too...

But your analogy is garbage anyway, not even sure why I engaged...

[–]Senior Contributor: "The Court Jester"GayLubeOil5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

It's the rich guy who shat in your house and you can't do anything about it because he payed everyone off. My analyogy is amazing you just have garbage reading comprehension.

[–]1nonthaki0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

GLO typed his comment correctly . You misread it . Read it again .

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy

Centipede here so not exactly unbiased but going into it I said Trump would be subdued, and he was.

I agreed with Scott Adams on it, millions of undecided voters watched the debates, they've heard non stop that Trump is the evil demonic person and literally hitler.

And they got the Trump you saw at the debate, which is nowhere near what the media has portrayed him as.

Trump had 20k plus in Florida post debate while hillary had fuck all at her post debate rally.

[–]TheSilentPajority0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I'm a centipede too, and I thought he looked crazy. he looked like he was on amphetamines or coke or something. subdued only seems to be a euphemism for lost. he could have been calm and dominant. but he was just hyper and ill-spoken while simultaneously missing a ton of easy jabs at her curruption. the blind hype on the donald right now looks delusional to me. he got mired down in stupid issues like birtherism and his taxes. he just looked petty the way he handled it.

[–]CDBaller13 points14 points  (9 children) | Copy

A Clinton presidency spells disaster for the western world and men everywhere. I'd suggest that any men in government service on here, have your escape planned and ready to execute if she's elected.

[–]logicalthinker112 points13 points  (6 children) | Copy

The more feminized the world becomes, the most advantageous it is to be red pill.

You can't run from thousands of years of evolution. You can't just "make" women be attracted to weak, placating, "I'll do all the chores honey while you spend my money" men. They'll never get the tingles for that no matter how much you brain wash them. In reality, it will take thousands of years of more evolution to lose that instinct. In the mean time, I'll be hitting the gym and the pussy. I thank all the future beta faggots for making it so much easier to slay your women.

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (0 children) | Copy

The more feminized the world becomes, the most advantageous it is to be red pill.

Up to a point. Society can get increasingly feminized and you can reap the rewards of being one of the increasingly few manly men... until your society collapses because its strength has been sapped in this process, because it no longer stands up for its interests or even knows what they are.

[–]CDBaller7 points8 points  (2 children) | Copy

Of course, that's what TRP is about. I just see Hillary doing for gender relations what Obama has done for race relations.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy

So we are looking forward to gangs of men and women killing each other and blaming the cops? Great....

[–]good_guy_submitter3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

When a woman cop kills a woman, it's because of sexism!

[–]kagetsuki23-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy

clinton will destroy the economy.

[–]logicalthinker10 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

It takes more than one person to destroy a multi-trillion dollar economy. The fact is that or economy has been heading in there wing direction for a while. We are becoming socialized more and more.

The issue is that because our economy is so fucking huge and strong in general, it can withstand short term ideas that are shit. You can spend buttloads on useless, unsustainable programs for years and it won't show the true damage of those programs. It takes decades to take down such an impressive economy.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

if she's elected.

I never doubted that she was going to win. Regardless of how people vote.

[–]king_of_red_alphas14 points15 points  (5 children) | Copy

I say this as somebody who values TRP very much for it's stated purpose. (sexual strategy)

Honestly it's not going to be any surprise that 99% of TRP'ers who are basically Trump's core demographic be Clinton's sworn enemy.

Angry white males support trump? You don't say...

PERSONALLY - I reserve my TRP principals for SEXUAL strategy and PERSONAL development, not some social movement to wage jihad against the feminist bogeymen.

In terms of who I want at the helm of government, I truly feel Clinton will basically hold status quo while Trump could essentially set the world on fire. The man is simply a fucking clown in the level of Sarah Palin. Maybe worse.

He would, at the very least, be nominating 1 or 2 SC Judges, which alone is reason for me to oppose him.

TBH, I'm kind of blue pill in my politics as I believe in the government providing free public education, Medicare, taking care of the mentally ill, etc. most TRP philosophy is closer to a social Darwinism which I just can't get behind from a government pov.

Finally, anybody that watched the debates should realize this man is anything but an example of "holding frame".

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

I reserve my TRP principals for SEXUAL strategy and PERSONAL development, not some social movement to wage jihad against the feminist bogeymen.

It would be obvious to you by our neutral stance on here that we're clearly not using this as a social movement, but it would be extremely naive to believe that the evolutionary psychology we discuss here doesn't permeate every other part of your life. Everything we build as a species is an abstraction on top of the original and core elements of survival as a species: Survival of the fittest, and sexual selection.

[–]funnydownvote2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

TRP only works for you/in our lives because the world is blue pill.

If the world were to be survival of the fittest RP style, then TRP would no longer work for any one of us.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

No, it would still work for some. But yes, generally, it would not work as well for as many.

[–]Swagzor90009 points10 points  (9 children) | Copy

However, that doesn't mean the presidential race doesn't affect a number of our US members

This election and this debate will affect every person around the globe. Especially for the countries in Europe. I will wake up at 3am to watch this peece of history and which way the world will be heading to the following years. Bluepills suppressed by the islamic state or Redpill and the return of man?

I'm dead serious about this. The Donald is the definition of Alpha and the alpha the world needs right now.

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours4 points5 points  (8 children) | Copy

He still has to deal with the legislative and judiciary branches, he can't act unilaterally. However, she will mean civil war here on the states, especially if she does what she says she will do.

[–]p00pey1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy

do tell what she's going to do that will cause a 'civil war' here in the states?!? This is news to me, and also one of the dumber things I've ever read on the interwebs...

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

It's rather complicated, but suffice it to say that there are a few hundred thousand war veterans in the US now. A large number of us will still uphold our oath to defend the Constitution. We understand how the real world works, not the white bread very low risk world that we have secured within the US. An attempt to remove our rights and our ability to personally defend them will result in a war. You probably don't see it, but the only vets I know who aren't thinking similarly had office jobs and never did anything dangerous.

I know, sounds ludicrous to the civilian mind, all conspiracy theory and illuminati bullshit. Travel the world, meet interesting and exciting people from ancient cultures, and realize they are quite like us, especially that they are being manipulated to kill for someone else just like we are, and you see the world different.

Call it stupid if you like. There are those of us who sacrificed more than you'll ever know to protect our rights, we won't easily surrender them. We know something you apparently don't.

[–]kagetsuki231 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

she will incrase the tax on workers money to give it to people that don't work. she will overtax corporations making them go bankrupt, what will prevent peoples to find jobs.

the whites will be more blamed about their privilège by other race and bullied because of it, and they will not accept to be robbed without a fight.

guns will be taken away an illegal market for guns will be born. criminality, terrorismes will increase.

she is big bad news.

[–]Serrano-0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

She wants to make us the UK, with her the Prime Minister and Queen. That means disarming the plebeians. Unfortunately for her we are not the UK.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Its fine even if he gets elected and his hands are tied.

People who say Clinton will maintain the status quo are completely deluded.

More than anything Trump has single handedly changed the overton window and trashed the mainstream media liberal narrative.

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I agree, but I will wait and see what he does. Until then he is an unknown. We can't assume he will be beneficial, but we know that she will be very detrimental. It's it enough that he simply isn't her, or vice versa? I think not, but we are not involved in the political process, even if we think we are.

[–]Jcart1051 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I'm surprised no one in this thread wants to mention how incredibly biased Lester Holt was as a debate moderator.

[–]2comment8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

Trump should just let Hillary keep yapping tonight. My god, that grating patronizing fucking screaching harpie voice for 4 years on straight. You'd think Huma would slip some lozenges up her vag to smooth it out some, but no.

I'd vote against her on that alone even if I was die hard commie.

[–]Hokuto199x2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

Donald doesn't even understand the questions. The security aspect of cyber is tough? We have to do better at cyber? Are you for real right now?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy


[–]Lsegundo-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy

I expect Trump to absolutely destroy her in the debates by dumping the pile of shit that is her public life on her head.

He will not play nice. He isn't going to be polite. I wonder if it matters or not?

The people who are more likely to get offended than to consider his points are locked in for Clinton anyway.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (3 children) | Copy

Well, let's see. We've got certain war with Russia vs. maintaining a balance of power, more statism and global government vs. capitalism and individualism, terrorism vs. safety, war for profit vs. reaching out to our traditional 'enemies', more actual racism and marginalization vs. liberty and freedom. Toughy.

[–]SatanAscending3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy

Non-American here. Why do you think it will mean war with Russia? Wouldn't it get closer to Cold War at best?

[–]smokecheck19760 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Because it's what the elite cabal that are running things want. It's why Hillary and Obama manipulated a civil war in Syria. Keep us spending billion after billion in conflicts that we have nothing to do with and nothing to benefit from. Then set us up against a country with an economy about the size of Mexico's so the world can be more easily polarized and controlled again. Maybe not a hot war, but a return to the bad old days of the proxy wars that we called the cold war.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

statism and global government vs. capitalism and individualism

There's a good argument to be made for either candidate being either side of this. I'm leaning towards Hillary being better on capitalism and individualism than Trump, although the Republicans on the whole are better on it than are usually tied with Democrats in that matter.

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]kagetsuki230 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

yep democrat = more tax. i don't even know how anyone that make cash can support them.

[–]IRC Mod-Anteros--2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy

Hillary's first answer is feelgood pablum, shocking no one.

[–]SKIANI0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

He played defense all night. I don't think she thought he would be defensive all night. She attacked him on every weak point he has and he took the attacks. Now if she does that for 2 more debates, it will be a disaster and people will notice, what else can she do now? His goal I think was to survive and advance. Take the blows quietly and continue forward. He did not win it tonight nor did he lose it. CHESS MATCH

[–]cheaperautoinsurance2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

he fucked up. call a spade a spade. this wasn't some kind of uber strategy. he was rambling and back pedaling on the defensive the whole night. fucking awful and I love the guy. he better get his shit together for round 2. i can't believe he didn't prep, wtf.

[–]kagetsuki230 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

he did not, he showed his ability to control himself. there is still other debate and it there that he will show his murdering moves.

[–]Endorsed Contributorsqerl0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Found this on GLO twitter feed. Debate was rigged. Fuck this election.


[–]StumpinToVictory-4 points-3 points  (0 children) | Copy

I believe Trump actually decided to go soft on Hillary on purpose and appear imperfect. In the end, it's all about how you finish and Trump will likely get stronger with every debate as a part of his plan. I think as the election goes on, Trump will slowly start to bring up Clinton's ties to Byrd (KKK leader) and start to act more refined.

IMO, Trump did decent in the first debate but Clinton had some highlight reels. CNN will promote Clinton as the winner but I will look at other polls too. Overall, I feel like Trump barely lost it but it doesn't really affect him all that much.

[–]ambrazura-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

Donald Trump - there are some emotions, he's clueless about many things in this world.
Hillary Clinton - somewhat experienced politician which kinda understands external policies, that is paradoxical for a woman.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

We need to keep those jobs here

[–]JohnnyRaz-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

This was basically how the debate went

Also, every poll online says Trump won, except the heavily biased mainstream media. (Over 95% of all media owned by same people)

[–]1naMlliPdeR-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

Almost all polls other than CNN have Trump winning the debate.

[–]1ShallITinder-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

Trump won but any online poll saying that is a fraud, yet CNN polls that oversample Democrats are somehow more accurate.

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2020. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter