What evidence is there that Steve Bannon is a racist?

[buckeye45_73]

Wow.. day what, 5? Still no evidence Bannon is a racist.

There's plenty of examples thru this thread! But every reply is "well that's not racist ! " or "I want an example of him saying XYZ" .

It's like anything less than a pic of Bannon wearing a granddragon outfit just wont do .

No one has addressed any of posted material concerning Bannon and they won't.

Tag me on it....i havent see any, i jad a thread for 3 weeks, no lefty posted one piece of evidence.in it.

 

[buckeye45_73]

He won and "gets away with it" precisely because he is not scripted and focus group tested. People have gotten tired of politicians saying nothing.

Have they? They keep voting for such politicians. People should think about the system of govt they want so that they can actually CHOOSE who they want, rather than this current farce of a system.

Sure, they could vote for a third party loser, but he/she would have no chance whatsoever to effect the major parties. Trump, OTOH, was exactly that, someone who didn't need party money and thus wasn't under the party's thumb. He also represented a major threat to democrat hegemony if he could actually win.

And it's working. The GOP leadership cannot ignore Trump and have to deal with him. The way the democrats dealt with Bernie was revealed and many are tired of that party's malfeasance as well. It remains to be seen, though, if the democrats will rally to hold their leadership to account or if they've become so accustomed to authoritarianism that they can't.

We need at least 3 or 4 major parties to force compromise and provide more choices for voters, but until the 2 we have now are forced to relinquish some control, we won't get them.

Yes, I agree, and the only way for real change is by changing the system. Trump's come out and said he's a "movement" which is a joke, maybe he's a bowel movement but nothing more. He doesn't stand for anything other than himself. The problem is the right have seen that the system benefits them and so don't want change.

The "right"? Hardly. Trump's biggest opposition is from the desperate democrats, fearful of losing their positions of power.

What? Did you read what I wrote? I said the right supports the SYSTEM because it benefits them. I didn't talk about Trump's opposition at all.

Its benefits the right how?

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Why don't you make an argument that he isn't? Good luck!

See, that is the very essence of PC terms like racist being used for nothing more than stifling debate, make the accusation, demand the accused prove otherwise, and to shut up until he/she does, this is exactly what PC is designed for...it needs to be destroyed and white liberals need to take the brunt of the blame for not calling for an end to it.

 

[Correll]

Why don't you make an argument that he isn't? Good luck!

See, that is the very essence of PC terms like racist being used for nothing more than stifling debate, make the accusation, demand the accused prove otherwise, and to shut up until he/she does, this is exactly what PC is designed for...it needs to be destroyed and white liberals need to take the brunt of the blame for not calling for an end to it.

While liberals are the vile assholes who MOSTLY do it.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Have they? They keep voting for such politicians. People should think about the system of govt they want so that they can actually CHOOSE who they want, rather than this current farce of a system.

Sure, they could vote for a third party loser, but he/she would have no chance whatsoever to effect the major parties. Trump, OTOH, was exactly that, someone who didn't need party money and thus wasn't under the party's thumb. He also represented a major threat to democrat hegemony if he could actually win.

And it's working. The GOP leadership cannot ignore Trump and have to deal with him. The way the democrats dealt with Bernie was revealed and many are tired of that party's malfeasance as well. It remains to be seen, though, if the democrats will rally to hold their leadership to account or if they've become so accustomed to authoritarianism that they can't.

We need at least 3 or 4 major parties to force compromise and provide more choices for voters, but until the 2 we have now are forced to relinquish some control, we won't get them.

Yes, I agree, and the only way for real change is by changing the system. Trump's come out and said he's a "movement" which is a joke, maybe he's a bowel movement but nothing more. He doesn't stand for anything other than himself. The problem is the right have seen that the system benefits them and so don't want change.

The "right"? Hardly. Trump's biggest opposition is from the desperate democrats, fearful of losing their positions of power.

What? Did you read what I wrote? I said the right supports the SYSTEM because it benefits them. I didn't talk about Trump's opposition at all.

Its benefits the right how?

Okay, since the 1990s the Republicans have won the most votes in a Presidential election ONCE. Yep, ONCE. That was 2004. They had the incumbent president and people hadn't figured out how toxic Bush's policies were at that point. He beat Kerry by 3 million votes.

However the Republicans have managed to get half of all presidents in this time. Yeah, the Democrats have won six out of the seven popular votes, and had only 4 of those as wins. Before Bush that last time this had happened was 1888 and there's no point going back that far as the country has changed beyond recognition in terms of politics.

If you take the population of each senator (so the US population would be double because each state has 2 senators) then the Republicans have a population of 285 million people, and the Democrats have a population of 353 million. Yet the Republicans have MORE senators than the Democrats, and yet represent 70 million people less (or 35 million in real figures), how's that possible? Well we all know why, and we know it benefits the right a lot more, where they have a President despite losing the popular vote, they have more power in the Senate than they should have.

Are you telling me they'd give up this power?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Sure, they could vote for a third party loser, but he/she would have no chance whatsoever to effect the major parties. Trump, OTOH, was exactly that, someone who didn't need party money and thus wasn't under the party's thumb. He also represented a major threat to democrat hegemony if he could actually win.

And it's working. The GOP leadership cannot ignore Trump and have to deal with him. The way the democrats dealt with Bernie was revealed and many are tired of that party's malfeasance as well. It remains to be seen, though, if the democrats will rally to hold their leadership to account or if they've become so accustomed to authoritarianism that they can't.

We need at least 3 or 4 major parties to force compromise and provide more choices for voters, but until the 2 we have now are forced to relinquish some control, we won't get them.

Yes, I agree, and the only way for real change is by changing the system. Trump's come out and said he's a "movement" which is a joke, maybe he's a bowel movement but nothing more. He doesn't stand for anything other than himself. The problem is the right have seen that the system benefits them and so don't want change.

The "right"? Hardly. Trump's biggest opposition is from the desperate democrats, fearful of losing their positions of power.

What? Did you read what I wrote? I said the right supports the SYSTEM because it benefits them. I didn't talk about Trump's opposition at all.

Its benefits the right how?

Okay, since the 1990s the Republicans have won the most votes in a Presidential election ONCE. Yep, ONCE. That was 2004. They had the incumbent president and people hadn't figured out how toxic Bush's policies were at that point. He beat Kerry by 3 million votes.

However the Republicans have managed to get half of all presidents in this time. Yeah, the Democrats have won six out of the seven popular votes, and had only 4 of those as wins. Before Bush that last time this had happened was 1888 and there's no point going back that far as the country has changed beyond recognition in terms of politics.

If you take the population of each senator (so the US population would be double because each state has 2 senators) then the Republicans have a population of 285 million people, and the Democrats have a population of 353 million. Yet the Republicans have MORE senators than the Democrats, and yet represent 70 million people less (or 35 million in real figures), how's that possible? Well we all know why, and we know it benefits the right a lot more, where they have a President despite losing the popular vote, they have more power in the Senate than they should have.

Are you telling me they'd give up this power?

There's 638 million people in the U.S.?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yes, I agree, and the only way for real change is by changing the system. Trump's come out and said he's a "movement" which is a joke, maybe he's a bowel movement but nothing more. He doesn't stand for anything other than himself. The problem is the right have seen that the system benefits them and so don't want change.

The "right"? Hardly. Trump's biggest opposition is from the desperate democrats, fearful of losing their positions of power.

What? Did you read what I wrote? I said the right supports the SYSTEM because it benefits them. I didn't talk about Trump's opposition at all.

Its benefits the right how?

Okay, since the 1990s the Republicans have won the most votes in a Presidential election ONCE. Yep, ONCE. That was 2004. They had the incumbent president and people hadn't figured out how toxic Bush's policies were at that point. He beat Kerry by 3 million votes.

However the Republicans have managed to get half of all presidents in this time. Yeah, the Democrats have won six out of the seven popular votes, and had only 4 of those as wins. Before Bush that last time this had happened was 1888 and there's no point going back that far as the country has changed beyond recognition in terms of politics.

If you take the population of each senator (so the US population would be double because each state has 2 senators) then the Republicans have a population of 285 million people, and the Democrats have a population of 353 million. Yet the Republicans have MORE senators than the Democrats, and yet represent 70 million people less (or 35 million in real figures), how's that possible? Well we all know why, and we know it benefits the right a lot more, where they have a President despite losing the popular vote, they have more power in the Senate than they should have.

Are you telling me they'd give up this power?

There's 638 million people in the U.S.?

READ WHAT I WROTE FOR FUCK'S SAKE!!!!!!

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

The "right"? Hardly. Trump's biggest opposition is from the desperate democrats, fearful of losing their positions of power.

What? Did you read what I wrote? I said the right supports the SYSTEM because it benefits them. I didn't talk about Trump's opposition at all.

Its benefits the right how?

Okay, since the 1990s the Republicans have won the most votes in a Presidential election ONCE. Yep, ONCE. That was 2004. They had the incumbent president and people hadn't figured out how toxic Bush's policies were at that point. He beat Kerry by 3 million votes.

However the Republicans have managed to get half of all presidents in this time. Yeah, the Democrats have won six out of the seven popular votes, and had only 4 of those as wins. Before Bush that last time this had happened was 1888 and there's no point going back that far as the country has changed beyond recognition in terms of politics.

If you take the population of each senator (so the US population would be double because each state has 2 senators) then the Republicans have a population of 285 million people, and the Democrats have a population of 353 million. Yet the Republicans have MORE senators than the Democrats, and yet represent 70 million people less (or 35 million in real figures), how's that possible? Well we all know why, and we know it benefits the right a lot more, where they have a President despite losing the popular vote, they have more power in the Senate than they should have.

Are you telling me they'd give up this power?

There's 638 million people in the U.S.?

READ WHAT I WROTE FOR FUCK'S SAKE!!!!!!

If my aunt had testicles, she'd be my uncle. Anyway, how does this prove Bannon is a racist?

 

[frigidweirdo]

What? Did you read what I wrote? I said the right supports the SYSTEM because it benefits them. I didn't talk about Trump's opposition at all.

Its benefits the right how?

Okay, since the 1990s the Republicans have won the most votes in a Presidential election ONCE. Yep, ONCE. That was 2004. They had the incumbent president and people hadn't figured out how toxic Bush's policies were at that point. He beat Kerry by 3 million votes.

However the Republicans have managed to get half of all presidents in this time. Yeah, the Democrats have won six out of the seven popular votes, and had only 4 of those as wins. Before Bush that last time this had happened was 1888 and there's no point going back that far as the country has changed beyond recognition in terms of politics.

If you take the population of each senator (so the US population would be double because each state has 2 senators) then the Republicans have a population of 285 million people, and the Democrats have a population of 353 million. Yet the Republicans have MORE senators than the Democrats, and yet represent 70 million people less (or 35 million in real figures), how's that possible? Well we all know why, and we know it benefits the right a lot more, where they have a President despite losing the popular vote, they have more power in the Senate than they should have.

Are you telling me they'd give up this power?

There's 638 million people in the U.S.?

READ WHAT I WROTE FOR FUCK'S SAKE!!!!!!

If my aunt had testicles, she'd be my uncle. Anyway, how does this prove Bannon is a racist?

JEezus Khrist.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

What? Did you read what I wrote? I said the right supports the SYSTEM because it benefits them. I didn't talk about Trump's opposition at all.

Its benefits the right how?

Okay, since the 1990s the Republicans have won the most votes in a Presidential election ONCE. Yep, ONCE. That was 2004. They had the incumbent president and people hadn't figured out how toxic Bush's policies were at that point. He beat Kerry by 3 million votes.

However the Republicans have managed to get half of all presidents in this time. Yeah, the Democrats have won six out of the seven popular votes, and had only 4 of those as wins. Before Bush that last time this had happened was 1888 and there's no point going back that far as the country has changed beyond recognition in terms of politics.

If you take the population of each senator (so the US population would be double because each state has 2 senators) then the Republicans have a population of 285 million people, and the Democrats have a population of 353 million. Yet the Republicans have MORE senators than the Democrats, and yet represent 70 million people less (or 35 million in real figures), how's that possible? Well we all know why, and we know it benefits the right a lot more, where they have a President despite losing the popular vote, they have more power in the Senate than they should have.

Are you telling me they'd give up this power?

There's 638 million people in the U.S.?

READ WHAT I WROTE FOR FUCK'S SAKE!!!!!!

If my aunt had testicles, she'd be my uncle. Anyway, how does this prove Bannon is a racist?

racism is not something that needs to be proven, like everything else about the lefts PC culture it is one of many barnacles, they attach to the hull of the opposition ship in order to slow it down, once there is enough of them they become too burdensome and they must be removed because the ship is just carrying dead weight.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Sure, they could vote for a third party loser, but he/she would have no chance whatsoever to effect the major parties. Trump, OTOH, was exactly that, someone who didn't need party money and thus wasn't under the party's thumb. He also represented a major threat to democrat hegemony if he could actually win.

And it's working. The GOP leadership cannot ignore Trump and have to deal with him. The way the democrats dealt with Bernie was revealed and many are tired of that party's malfeasance as well. It remains to be seen, though, if the democrats will rally to hold their leadership to account or if they've become so accustomed to authoritarianism that they can't.

We need at least 3 or 4 major parties to force compromise and provide more choices for voters, but until the 2 we have now are forced to relinquish some control, we won't get them.

Yes, I agree, and the only way for real change is by changing the system. Trump's come out and said he's a "movement" which is a joke, maybe he's a bowel movement but nothing more. He doesn't stand for anything other than himself. The problem is the right have seen that the system benefits them and so don't want change.

The "right"? Hardly. Trump's biggest opposition is from the desperate democrats, fearful of losing their positions of power.

What? Did you read what I wrote? I said the right supports the SYSTEM because it benefits them. I didn't talk about Trump's opposition at all.

Its benefits the right how?

Okay, since the 1990s the Republicans have won the most votes in a Presidential election ONCE. Yep, ONCE. That was 2004. They had the incumbent president and people hadn't figured out how toxic Bush's policies were at that point. He beat Kerry by 3 million votes.

However the Republicans have managed to get half of all presidents in this time. Yeah, the Democrats have won six out of the seven popular votes, and had only 4 of those as wins. Before Bush that last time this had happened was 1888 and there's no point going back that far as the country has changed beyond recognition in terms of politics.

If you take the population of each senator (so the US population would be double because each state has 2 senators) then the Republicans have a population of 285 million people, and the Democrats have a population of 353 million. Yet the Republicans have MORE senators than the Democrats, and yet represent 70 million people less (or 35 million in real figures), how's that possible? Well we all know why, and we know it benefits the right a lot more, where they have a President despite losing the popular vote, they have more power in the Senate than they should have.

Are you telling me they'd give up this power?

So by system, are you referring to the electoral college?

 

[buckeye45_73]

The "right"? Hardly. Trump's biggest opposition is from the desperate democrats, fearful of losing their positions of power.

What? Did you read what I wrote? I said the right supports the SYSTEM because it benefits them. I didn't talk about Trump's opposition at all.

Its benefits the right how?

Okay, since the 1990s the Republicans have won the most votes in a Presidential election ONCE. Yep, ONCE. That was 2004. They had the incumbent president and people hadn't figured out how toxic Bush's policies were at that point. He beat Kerry by 3 million votes.

However the Republicans have managed to get half of all presidents in this time. Yeah, the Democrats have won six out of the seven popular votes, and had only 4 of those as wins. Before Bush that last time this had happened was 1888 and there's no point going back that far as the country has changed beyond recognition in terms of politics.

If you take the population of each senator (so the US population would be double because each state has 2 senators) then the Republicans have a population of 285 million people, and the Democrats have a population of 353 million. Yet the Republicans have MORE senators than the Democrats, and yet represent 70 million people less (or 35 million in real figures), how's that possible? Well we all know why, and we know it benefits the right a lot more, where they have a President despite losing the popular vote, they have more power in the Senate than they should have.

Are you telling me they'd give up this power?

There's 638 million people in the U.S.?

READ WHAT I WROTE FOR FUCK'S SAKE!!!!!!

So you hate the constitution? You want mob rule?


What the fuck does the n population mean?
So you have 2 senators from California and ny.
You know the founders deliberately had the senators by state, somwho cares what the total population n is.
Hoise districts are done by population and the republicans have even more there, so they win the population there.....

So im not gettting your point, since the house shows republicans with more of the poulation, but even so, why vare?

 

[eflatminor]

I hear on most media that Steve Bannon is a white racist but never hear where the get that view. Is there actually something in his background that makes him one or is it just another democrat ploy to attempt to weaken President Trump's administration?

Instead of posting an ignorant OP, you could have just done a google search of racist remarks made by Bannon. And there have been plenty. Google

You know, I have done that and I found nothing but leftists interpretations of his words. Stated differently, I've found nothing clearly racists but simply conservative views which people like you claim to be racist. Two very different things.

So why don't you help us all out and back up your claim at the same time by post irrefutable evidence that the man is a racist. Then we can all see who is and who is not ignorant.

The floor is yours.

Hmm...crickets.

While we await your learned response, a little entertainment...

So you've got nothing.

Noted.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yes, I agree, and the only way for real change is by changing the system. Trump's come out and said he's a "movement" which is a joke, maybe he's a bowel movement but nothing more. He doesn't stand for anything other than himself. The problem is the right have seen that the system benefits them and so don't want change.

The "right"? Hardly. Trump's biggest opposition is from the desperate democrats, fearful of losing their positions of power.

What? Did you read what I wrote? I said the right supports the SYSTEM because it benefits them. I didn't talk about Trump's opposition at all.

Its benefits the right how?

Okay, since the 1990s the Republicans have won the most votes in a Presidential election ONCE. Yep, ONCE. That was 2004. They had the incumbent president and people hadn't figured out how toxic Bush's policies were at that point. He beat Kerry by 3 million votes.

However the Republicans have managed to get half of all presidents in this time. Yeah, the Democrats have won six out of the seven popular votes, and had only 4 of those as wins. Before Bush that last time this had happened was 1888 and there's no point going back that far as the country has changed beyond recognition in terms of politics.

If you take the population of each senator (so the US population would be double because each state has 2 senators) then the Republicans have a population of 285 million people, and the Democrats have a population of 353 million. Yet the Republicans have MORE senators than the Democrats, and yet represent 70 million people less (or 35 million in real figures), how's that possible? Well we all know why, and we know it benefits the right a lot more, where they have a President despite losing the popular vote, they have more power in the Senate than they should have.

Are you telling me they'd give up this power?

So by system, are you referring to the electoral college?

No.

 

[frigidweirdo]

What? Did you read what I wrote? I said the right supports the SYSTEM because it benefits them. I didn't talk about Trump's opposition at all.

Its benefits the right how?

Okay, since the 1990s the Republicans have won the most votes in a Presidential election ONCE. Yep, ONCE. That was 2004. They had the incumbent president and people hadn't figured out how toxic Bush's policies were at that point. He beat Kerry by 3 million votes.

However the Republicans have managed to get half of all presidents in this time. Yeah, the Democrats have won six out of the seven popular votes, and had only 4 of those as wins. Before Bush that last time this had happened was 1888 and there's no point going back that far as the country has changed beyond recognition in terms of politics.

If you take the population of each senator (so the US population would be double because each state has 2 senators) then the Republicans have a population of 285 million people, and the Democrats have a population of 353 million. Yet the Republicans have MORE senators than the Democrats, and yet represent 70 million people less (or 35 million in real figures), how's that possible? Well we all know why, and we know it benefits the right a lot more, where they have a President despite losing the popular vote, they have more power in the Senate than they should have.

Are you telling me they'd give up this power?

There's 638 million people in the U.S.?

READ WHAT I WROTE FOR FUCK'S SAKE!!!!!!

So you hate the constitution? You want mob rule?


What the fuck does the n population mean?
So you have 2 senators from California and ny.
You know the founders deliberately had the senators by state, somwho cares what the total population n is.
Hoise districts are done by population and the republicans have even more there, so they win the population there.....

So im not gettting your point, since the house shows republicans with more of the poulation, but even so, why vare?

No.

As for the rest of the post, dude, keep off the drugs.