Dilbert-man is losing it

Dilbert-man is losing it.

Other urls found in this thread:

fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-distaste-for-both-trump-and-clinton-is-record-breaking/
realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/trump_favorableunfavorable-5493.html
realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/clinton_favorableunfavorable-1131.html
theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/20/donald-trump-sexual-assault-allegations-jill-harth-interview
huffingtonpost.com/lisa-bloom/why-the-new-child-rape-ca_b_10619944.html
newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/donald-trumps-ghostwriter-tells-all
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

He's been losing it for years. Classic egocentrism: he can't separate his concept of himself from his concept of the Republican party, so he'll actively vote and proselytize the way he always has even if it's not based on a rational understanding of the current situation and any reasonable bystander of any political persuasion would take a step back, because he feels that if he does take that step back even just to pause and get perspective, he'll "lose", and by extension the party will lose.

Conversely if the party loses, he'll feel personally defeated (as you would expect), but will quickly turn on those within the party (be they public figures or ordinary voters) whom he feels let the side down, and, by extension, personally failed him.

I'm sure there must be a few thousand Dilbert strips about that kind of egocentric stupidity driving thought processes.

Kind of like Marvel and the liberal/SJW/PC Agenda?

Marvel just panders shamelessly for money, Scott is actually a died in the wool believer and certified nut

He's not always funny, but to be fair he also writes a comic almost daily.

>The reason I don’t vote is because I study persuasion, and lately I write about it. As soon as you join a team, you lose objectivity – what little you ever had. So I stay unaligned. It reduces my confirmation bias. But I’m a freak. Don’t be like me. You should vote.

>losing it

lol he'd have to have it to lose first. He's been a dickless alt right cyrbaby since day one

The current political climate is so tits up that I couldn't even tell if he was being sarcastic or not.

What do you mean "alt-right"?

One of these fags

The AltGr key probably

He doesn't seem Sup Forums to me.

Scott Adams is the last sane man in traditional media holding out against the far left's agenda pushing. The fact that the DNC made him uncomfortable to be white is not an indicator of paranoia but rather demonstrates that he's fully aware of the agenda they are trying to push, that being that if you are white and male you need to be suppressed.

>The fact that the DNC made him uncomfortable to be white is not an indicator of paranoia but rather demonstrates that he's fully aware of the agenda they are trying to push
Their chosen nominee is white.

>a convention where people on stage announce they're in the country illegally and aren't immediately arrested and deported and where the mothers of criminals killed by those who were all legally exonerated spread their false narrative of oppression
He's right you know.

I'm anti-SJW, but I think the tweet was pretty dumb. He said he didn't watch the DNC but was complaining about a specific problem with it.

Serves him right for being on the wrong side of herstory

Hello Scott.

That was fucked up, but sadly not surprising.

"First woman president" standing up to that racist white businessman.

Democrats and Republicans are more alike than they care to admit.

Two white candidates
Two very unpopular candidates
Two liars
Two criminals

See a pattern?

>See a pattern?

White people are lying criminals?

Trump's a criminal?

Yes, they're shitheads.

Where is the anti-white agenda?

>Two criminals
???
>Two very unpopular candidates
And yet many many people are voting for them and supporting them. So are they really unpopular?

A plurality of Republicans and a majority of Democrats really like their respective candidates, but overall their unfavorables are far more than their favorables.

Lots of haters too. Probably more than usual.

Nationally they are. They each have fierce loyalty among nationally niche bases, but overall they are both despised by the majority.

Well, neither are technically. Hillary's case was dropped and I believe all of Trumps current court proceedings are all civil.

Hillary- "Whitewater" scandal
Lying under oath
Sharing classified information on an unsecured server

Trump- Trump University (possible fraud, it's still ongoing)
Miss Universe pageant
Housing discrimination lawsuit which settled with the feds after promising not to do it again.

Sounds like criminal behavior to me.

Were there any crimes that seemed likely, even if they weren't charged?

Let's show him who's boss, fellow tumblr users.

>Probably
So no statistics to back it up?
And what about the American people? Plenty of them seem to love Trump or Hilary.
>overall they are both despised by the majority
I don't think you have the numbers to back that up

>holding out against the far left's agenda pushing

lol

Don't forget the women accusing Trump of sexual harassment and the 80's accusation of violence against women.

Were they convicted? Because unless you've been convicted you are not a criminal, legally speaking.

Yeah, there is a serious case for fraud against Trump.

I was under the impression that those were all dropped or settled or what have you.

When was this?

Trump settled with both the sexual harassment claims AND the federal housing discrimination cases.

Both candidates aren't legally defined criminals but they engaged in arguably criminal behavior.

They're just very very good at covering up. And they have the cash for very very good lawyers.

>Scott is actually a died in the wool believer and certified nut

Are you implying Marvel print is not staffed and managed completely by far left Liberal PC/SJWs now? because if so you are horribly misinformed

fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-distaste-for-both-trump-and-clinton-is-record-breaking/

Lots of people do like at least one of these two candidates, or at least will defend them because they dislike the other.

I mean the left is all about hating white men these days so I get what he's saying.

>I don't think you have the numbers to back that up
Every single poll this entire year backs this up. Their hatred is fucking historic.

realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/trump_favorableunfavorable-5493.html

realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/clinton_favorableunfavorable-1131.html

Both are well above 50% nationally disliked. And these are aggregates from every major nationally recognized polling agency. You can't argue with these numbers.

theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/20/donald-trump-sexual-assault-allegations-jill-harth-interview
huffingtonpost.com/lisa-bloom/why-the-new-child-rape-ca_b_10619944.html

>they engaged in arguably criminal behavior.
Arguably, maybe. But, from a technical, legal pov, they did not.

>Everyone owning him over that "I can master anything" tweet

who knew Dilbert-man had lost it

Currently. He is currently in a civil case for fraud and he could face prison time under the RICO act.

You can jerk off to furry porn and take a Bad Dragon dildo while doing it, find the concept of fursuits horrifying and OCs to be cringingly ludicrous, but are still a furry along with yiffing sparklewolves.

see

t. Sup Forumsmblr

Hillary's email server nonsense does not require INTENT. So yes, she DID commit a crime.
The DOJ refused to call for an indictment.

There are numerous cases of individuals who went to prison for doing what she did, but they weren't high enough on the totem pole.

I don't think many people who genuinely hate whites, even though ideas like affirmative action are dumb.

Scott is like a weird mix of the Pointy Haired Boss and Dale Gribble now.

I don't think Scott Adams is fascist, sexist, or racist.

>The DOJ refused to call for an indictment
So, again, can she legally be called a criminal?

>scott adams
>not sexist
"The reality is that women are treated differently by society for exactly the same reason that children and the mentally handicapped are treated differently. It’s just easier this way for everyone. You don’t argue with a four-year old about why he shouldn’t eat candy for dinner. You don’t punch a mentally handicapped guy even if he punches you first. And you don’t argue when a women tells you she’s only making 80 cents to your dollar. It’s the path of least resistance. You save your energy for more important battles." -Scott Adams

How long until Scott Adams goes Dilbert 3 on the world?

Trump might get charged under the Logan Act for encouraging Russia to hack the Democrats

>What do you mean "alt-right"?

for years liberals on the internet had their echo chambers and most popular media was controlled by PC leftists, the conservatives where pretty much asleep at the wheel everywhere but on the various chans, and when people started voicing disagreement with the leftists on the internet they didn't know how to deal with it so they created a new classification they could use to dehumanize and dismiss these internet dissenters this term was "alt-right"
They tried to create memes to combat this growing population (see)but fail horrible and foolishly thought they could out meme Sup Forums of all places.
One of the battle grounds is here on Sup Forums while most Sup Forums posters have never been to Sup Forums they have been to tumblr and recognize their garbage here.
While Sup Forums is one of the smallest boards on Sup Forums it by far was the most heavily populated by SJWs and tumblrinas so the fights are most noticeable here.

There's also the problem that what she did isn't exclusive to her.

There's double digit numbers of currently serving members of congress who did the same thing, bringing a case against her would require an inquisition more or less of government officials.

That costs money, because it'd be drug out by every one of them.

At this point, its like illegal immigrants. There's so much its unfeasible to pursue it, you're better off starting fresh and making a line in the sand and saying "it counts from now on".

Justice is great, but justice is also expensive and currently Americans don't want to pay for it. At least not when our road systems are this badly underfunded.

He might. He might not. But he hasn't yet. And he hasn't been convicted.

This seems like defamation without any solid evidence.

>Two very unpopular candidates

Trump won the GOP nomination with more votes than any other GOP candidate in history
GOP Primary turn out was higher than any time in history
you are 1/2 right

Not to mention the man has NO mouth/brain filter.

He's getting classified information in a few weeks, there's no way he isn't going to be dropping it conversationally.

Even Paul Ryan won't be able to shrug that off.

That's not sexist, that's just common sense.

funny how everyone was sucking russia's frozen cock for hiding Snowden, but now they are literally Hitler for siding with Trump

>putting Hillary's shit on par with Trumps

Hillary should be rightfully convicted of High treason for aiding foreign enemies in return for monetary compensation (like selling America's uranium reserves to companies owned by the Russian Government), and conspiring with non-governmental bodies to profit off of disasters (Haiti). Plus minor acts of treason like sending classified information to unsanctioned bodies using a private unsupervised mail server. On top of all that she's insanely incompetent and doesn't understand technology from the past 20 years and as such is a massive security leak wherever she goes.

Trump is an asshole that pulled a handful of civil shit over his career but anyone who thinks he's as bad as Hillary should not be allowed to vote.

Cool Ranch

Can anyone fucking explain how a fucking joke is being painted as a genuine act of treason outside of the media because fucking insane? I cannot for the life of me understand the reaction this has gotten. It's like slapping someone with animal abuse charges for asking "Why did the chicken cross the road?"

There are also more GOP voters than any time in history. Population growth does not booster your argument.

GOP primary turn-out was higher, yes. However his general electorate popularity is not good compared with previous presidential candidates.

He won the GOP primary with a majority of a plurality. Not the majority of the GOP.

>boo hoo liberals are just bullying us

...

Lets have some defamation with solid evidence!

>If {Trump's Ghostwriter] were writing “The Art of the Deal” today, Schwartz said, it would be a very different book with a very different title. Asked what he would call it, he answered, “The Sociopath.”

newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/donald-trumps-ghostwriter-tells-all

This is the one guy who worked close with Trump and is not contractually bound from speaking against him.

>that being that if you are white and male you need to be suppressed.
Clinton is white.
Her running mate is both white and male.
Several speakers at the DNC were white and male.
This idea in your head is completely irrelevant respective to the DNC and Scott Adams is a tryhard moron.

Hillary won the nomination with the highest number of votes in DNC history (and actually like 5 million more votes than Trump) so that's irrelevant. It's just a result of population growth.

He also had more GOP voters against him than any other GOP candidate in history. It's a big year for the GOP but in a bad way.

Saying something and then retroactively claiming you were joking isn't a joke.

Probably because Snowden wasn't buttbuddies with Putin and there wasn't really much risk of collusion and his whole deal happened before the Ukraine invasion

He's also the single least popular candidate with independents in history, and independents outnumbered Dems and Reps in the last cycle.

>Trump might get charged under the Logan Act for encouraging Russia to hack the Democrats

Spreading that DNC meme for free are you?
what he actually said
“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,”
“I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

^^This. Population growth accounts for the total number boost for both candidates within their party's primary. It doesn't factor in their popularity with the general electorate.

Except it was obviously a fucking joke when he said it.
>"Let's see if THAT happens."

This is the same media that only reported in passing the thousands of protesters from left leaning groups outside the DNC and didn't even mention the fact that after day 2 when the states nominated Hillary Over a third of the delegates walked out and were replaced with seat fillers who were paid $50 a day to look excited

Trump actually denied Washington Post from receiving press passes to his events a while back because they refused to actually report fact and just 7 days ago a bunch of emails got leaked proving that they were colluding with the DNC to rig the primaries

>Sup Forumsmblr

In the same post.

>Now I would like to speak directly to my male readers who feel unjustly treated by the widespread suppression of men’s rights:
>Get over it, you bunch of pussies.

And
>I realize I might take some heat for lumping women, children and the mentally handicapped in the same group. So I want to be perfectly clear. I’m not saying women are similar to either group.

Basically Sup Forums

That's a highly irresponsible thing to say, especially considering Trump's constant attempts to buddy up with Putin at the expense of our current allies.

>He also had more GOP voters against him than any other GOP candidate in history

He had 16 opponents
Hillary had one "opponent"

>just 7 days ago a bunch of emails got leaked proving that they were colluding with the DNC to rig the primaries
I need to see the source on that. I believe it, but I'll never be able to argue that with people without some reliable sources.

>liberals bully us by putting a label on us
>i'll put a label on THEM to be dismissive that'll show them
When I call you a "crybaby" from this point on it is not an insult but merely an observation of behavior.

Hillary's crimes are on par with Reagan's in office.

Trump's are on par with a shitty car salesman.

I side with the one that actually knows how to politick.

It was a dig at Hillary's "missing" e-mails and the liberal press

>16 opponents
Only one or two of whom had even a ghost of a chance. And you're putting Bernie Sanders in sarcastic quotation marks when he gained more votes than those 16 "opponents"? You're out of touch.

>crybaby
>still using Sup Forumsmblr memes

In what possible way is it irresponsible? Especially when it's true. We all know the media would fucking love getting their hands on the emails, even if they hurt Clinton. Ratings and revenue are more important than ideology.

Russia wants to eradicate the mudslime parasite just like the rest of the sane civilized world. They don't have to be the enemy,

>This is the same media that only reported in passing the thousands of protesters from left leaning groups outside the DNC and didn't even mention the fact that after day 2 when the states nominated Hillary Over a third of the delegates walked out and were replaced with seat fillers who were paid $50 a day to look excited
>
>Trump actually denied Washington Post from receiving press passes to his events a while back because they refused to actually report fact and just 7 days ago a bunch of emails got leaked proving that they were colluding with the DNC to rig the primaries
Well lets see the proof for both of those statements.

>it was just a joke bro
I want my president to have a modicum of common sense when it comes to what's acceptable for a world leader to say in public. I honestly don't think that's asking too much.

Just go to wikileaks there's 20000 of them and the really bad ones are floating around but I don't have them saved.

I am saying Sanders barely put up any fight at all and the DNC was rigging the process against him from the beginning