There was hope, and it was quite reasonable, that he might be able to negotiate in favor of whites. It turned out that he had little interest in doing anything populist, but it was a distinct possibility, and not one that was plausible in Hillary. You see, at that time all the pundits were uncertain as to exactly what a quantity Trump was. This is not in dispute. Who should you expect pol to be super-geniuses at divining the mind of Trump, where others were uncertain as well?
Ah, insults. It makes it rather hard to have a conversation when there are insults, don't you think?
< you're all zionist That's name-calling. It's quite difficult to have a conversation when people are calling names, don't you think?
That's a fallacy known as "hasty conclusion". While it may be supported by the facts, you don't argue that anywhere.
Aaron Lewis
lol
Benjamin Butler
Oh. You didn't know that a key theme on pol is the preservation of whites? This is ethnocentrism, not unlike that of kikes. So there are parallels. For that reason, some call Zionists Nazis, on the left, anyway.
Ethan Bailey
False premise.
Parker Baker
No it wasn't, you delusional retard. Name one thing he said that indicated that. They certainly thought they were
kekked. ahahahahahahaahahahaahahah. You don't get it. pol is about caring for the white ones, not the non-white ones. Your focus amuses me.
Of all my failings, not this one.
Appeal to ridicule.
Not in the US, it isn't. There are two parties. Zion I and Zion II.
Ryan Fisher
The average person killed in the holocaust was not political, except for the leftists. They were mostly Jews, Slavs, and the disabled. The average person killed by Stalin was a political enemy or suspected political enemy. What would be fair criticism would be to say Stalin was paranoid and therefore disappeared more people than a more rational person would. But the idea that Stalin was constantly killing people for the hell of it is nonsense western propaganda, as is the usual death toll associated with Stalinism.
