Nuclear family gets out of style

lol you're trying to justify your shitty family not affording a wagon

>>nuclear family gets out of style
What?

...

>implying wagons were ever not cool

But that's just homos doing homo stuff. It's not like they can procreate, so they adopt and of course the parents are going to be the same sex.
I thought you were saying that white people started behaving like niggers: fucking and then abandoning the children only to fuck some more and repeat the cycle.

It's ok OP, wagons are becoming cool again

>It's not like they can procreate
they can corrupt everything around them

Nah, you're thinking of niggers.

All these wagos remind me of National Lampoons Vacation mivies and now i got to jerk off to Beverly D'Angelo again.
Thanks OP.

>It's not like they can procreate,
actually, they can, it's just 1000 times more expensive. Many use artificial insemination and a surrogate mother.
And adoption is NOT easy for LGBT people. There's SO much red tape they have to jump through and even if everything is 100% perfect, they can be denied based solely on their sexuality.
Straight couples can have kids by accident, and then can abuse said child. LGBT people can't do that. People watch them under a microscope the entire time in addition to the fact they will often be denied adoption due to bigotry. Most straight couples will have a child by accident. LGBT couples have to plan extensively and shell out thousands to even be considered to raise a child. Every single child with LGBT parents is wanted and loved. The same can't be said about straight couples.

fuck off retard

What country are you talking about? I've never heard of such things around here.

Are hearses wagons?

murrika
And it's often bible thumpers bitching about how the gays are going to corrupt the children and the children must be protected from the gays. Because gays bleed acid or some other such religious nonsense.

As a gay person.

The average gay is extremely cancerous, it's really hard to find a reasonable gay dude who isn't an utterly retarded liberal.

Really narrows my dating pool down.

>the cts-v wagon isn't the coolest car ever

I didn't think there was enough height clearance on the express lanes for loads like that.

>utterly retarded liberal
What did he mean by this? Not american, by the way.

liberal is essentially synonymous with leftie in the states, although the actual meaning is a bit different iirc

>it's really hard to find a reasonable gay dude who isn't an utterly retarded liberal.
As a gay person in America myself, I find it hard to justify 99% of the Republican party's conservative views especially when it seems all they want to do is take away my rights, classify me as sub-human, and then send me off to be "cleansed off the planet". Particularly the religious right laws that have cropped up that make it legal to discriminate against gays (and refuse them any service) by saying it's against your religion. Georgia recently tried to pass a law like that and it would have gone through had Disney (which is run by an openly gay man), Marvel Comics (owned by Disney), Viacom, 21st Century Fox, Lionsgate, CBS, Starz, AMC Networks (megahit The Walking Dead is currently filmed in Georgia), Netflix, Time Warner, CBS, The Weinstein Company, Sony, Comcast/NBCUniversal, MGM, STX Entertainment, and Open Road Films, ALL boycotted the bill and said they would pull ALL of their companies out of Georgia if the law passed. And so the governor, who supported the bill had no choice but to veto it or condemn his state's economy to a great depression.

But things are pretty much never black and white, son. I know you have no idea what real democracy is since you've been born and raised in a representative system that calls itself democratic, but back in the day there were no political parties that further divided the people, as if they weren't divided enough already. Just because you don't support a party doesn't mean you need to go apeshit crazy and fully support the other party. There is a middle ground, and you can tell both of them to fuck off.

This is exactly what i'm talking about.

We've been told over and over the REPUBLICANS ARE OUT TO GET US! and here i am in a backwoods town of a red state, with not a single problem on my side.

No conservative wants to treat you as less than human, that's the liberals who always treat us like we're retarded children who are afraid to have our feelings hurt, and the government knows how to make our choices.

If someone doesn't want to serve me, that's fine, i don't want to give them my business either. Businesses depend on customers, customers care about who has the better and cheaper service.

Funny thing you don't see is that when the other companies start being on your side, it's not because they're nice, it's so that when later down the line they need your business you'll come to them. You people are such simpletons.

>things are pretty much never black and white
I never said that. I understand there are shades of gray. My ex-boyfriend was a republican.

My point is ALL, not some, ALL the anti-LGBT bills come from the republicans, Every single time I hear or read about some new anti-lgbt law that's catching attention, it was always started by some bible thumping Republican who thinks Sharia law is the best thing ever.

I don't have anything against Republicans. I do have a problem with religion being used as an excuse to discriminate against me. It's always religion. Not the republicans. It's religion at the root of the problem. And it shouldn't be a problem. Separation of church and state exists for a reason. It just seems like many Republicans got into politics specifically to ignore the constitution and take bribes. I'm not saying Democrats don't do it as well. Hilary Clinton is a great example... Ted Cruz and Donald Trump are more blatant and obvious examples. You don't see Democrats openly endorsing people assassinating the other candidates.

no op, chrysler just came out with the dodge caravan which was bigger, more practical, and fuel efficient.

pic related is what actually killed wagons

>You don't see Democrats openly endorsing people assassinating the other candidates.
Fucking wot?

GOP apologists are getting pretty desperate these days.

>h-hey guys, just ignore those decades we spent pandering to fringe socially conservative voters and pushing legislation specifically targeting minorities, women, and homosexuals
>what do you mean we are still doing it?

rollingstone.com/politics/news/donald-trump-hints-at-hillary-clinton-assassination-w433591

There's this thing called "news". Maybe you've been keeping up with it lately?

I'm not brave nor free.

Gotta love the USA. Thanks, user.

>ignores the rates of child abuse by homosexuals
You're an idiot.

No you see Democrats openly talking about assassinating candidates, or actually attempting it.

washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/06/21/why-isnt-the-assassination-attempt-on-donald-trump-bigger-news/

And i could find a million videos of people talking about killing trump.

And the second amendment is for killing corrupt politicians, and he didn't even say that.

He said:

"...If she picks her own judges folks, there's nothing you can do." Then the crowd was booing, he added on.
"Although the second amendment people, maybe there's something, i don't know."

I like how desperate liberals are to turn this into TRUMP ENDORSES KILLING CANDIDATES! Liberals are hilarious, they always try and find the bad people on the other side, while being awful at finding their own shit heads.

>Still taking the media seriously

You should know better. Remember the comments by the people in the videos below didn't get anywhere as much coverage. Its like they're biased or something. Hell, I still remember when Matt Tabibi wrote constant editorials against Goldman Sachs's influence on govt. monetary policy only to turn around and support their candidates a few years later ;)

youtube.com/watch?v=XcyLeOm6yGc

youtube.com/watch?v=DLNFsl130_Y

>ALL the anti-LGBT bills come from the republicans
Because everything to you is anti LGBT. You have no idea how dangerous it is to allow people to use either bathrooms without any proof, or how bad for business it is to have more than two bathrooms, and that's just one issue. Democrats don't propose shit like this, because it's easier to make people feel good about themselves than it is to try and fight based on economics or reason.

And no, it's not religion, it's you and you being so full of yourself, that you only care about the needs of you.

And of course some bullshit random comment about ignoring the constitution even though the entire democratic platform is based on that, and taking bribes being something trump is doing. 10/10, absolute retardation.

You seem like a Hillary shill. Honestly Donald Trump hasn't said anything about assasination. On the other hand Hillary has suggested back in 2008 assasinating obama. Donald Trump is ok with gay rights, more so than hillary, who was against them as late as 2012. Republicans are conservative so it's natural thatconservative people vote for them, however not all conservatism is bad. Upholding your values, etc. Good things.

>Perpetrators of child abuse or neglect are most often the child’s own parents. According to NCANDS, in 2005, 79.4 percent of perpetrators were parents and 6.8 percent were other relatives. The largest remaining categories of perpetrators were the unmarried partner of a child’s parent (3.8 percent) and other perpetrators (4.1 percent). In 3.6 percent of child maltreatment cases the perpetrators were missing or unknown. In under 1 percent of child maltreatment cases the perpetrator was a foster parent, residential facility staff, the child’s daycare provider, a legal guardian, friends or neighbors, or other professionals (USDHHS, 2007).
Less than one percent, and from that less than one percent you have to take out the foster parents that are straight. So less than less than one percent.

>ignore the rates of child abuse by homosexual parents
>ignores the fact 99.9% of child abuse is committed by straight people
Just because they're gay doesn't mean they're going to abuse children. Your wife's son is more likely to be raped by your wife's boyfriend than he is to be raped by the playing with the children of the local gay couple at their house
psc.dss.ucdavis.edu/faculty_sites//rainbow/HTML/facts_molestation.html

>You seem like a Hillary shill.
nope. They're both terribad candidates. Trump is just arguably worse. His father would've made a great president, but not Trump himself.

>You have no idea how dangerous it is to allow people to use either bathrooms without any proof
I don't understand. Why is that dangerous? Whenever I can't go to the men's bathroom, I go to the bathroom for disabled people, and if that doesn't work, then I use the women's one. Never had any problem, except people looking surprised. I guess that if you don't separate it by sexes, you get problems with rapes, sexual assaults and such things?
I guess I should mention that I'm not a faggot and I'm not the person you're replying to.

Rate of homosexuals that have adopted children that abuse them versus those who have adopted but do not abuse children.

Look that up.

True, but Trump at least won't be making concious effort of making america worse, and if he will have good advisors he should be ok. Hillary on the other hand has proven herself to be incompetent in foreign policy among others. I think that wagons might make comeback in few years, new coming volvo wagons are actually pretty cool.

>Trump at least won't be making concious effort of making america worse, and if he will have good advisors he should be ok

dfydhjjdh>You have no idea how dangerous it is to allow people to use either bathrooms without any proof,
Cases of any sexual altercation in public bathrooms by LGBT people: 0
It doesn't happen. Stop fear-mongering. Even Donald Trump has said there's no reason for this BS.
nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/04/21/donald-trump-says-transgender-people-should-use-the-bathroom-they-want/?_r=0

Prove me wrong.
>protip you porbably can't

I looked that up and I got this user's link as one of the first results. Would you mind providing proof instead of telling us to just look that up?

>You have no idea how dangerous it is to allow people to use either bathrooms without any proof

Why? Hell, there are a lot of unisex bathrooms here with just loads of stalls, there's never been a problem. Maybe you're projecting your fucked up desires and the only thing stopping you is a sign on a door? Get help man.

Hi disastrous campaign is proof enough that he doesn't know what the fuck he's doing.

I do kinda get it, but on the other hand let's not deal with everything as absolutes. Also, why can't transgender people just us disabled peoples bathrooms? It's already gender neutral.

Because they're not disabled. If I'm disabled and some motherfucker decides to use my bathroom because he/she/it/zir doesn't identify with or doesn't feel comfortable with the other bathrooms, I'd be pissed in more ways than one.

His campaign is actually brilliant, it resonates well with average low IQ american voter, I kid you not uneducated (deeply regrettable fact) people are the most important voting block in this country, Hillary is yet to appese them. He is using purpotedly such language.

except, due to the electoral college, those voters do not matter.
In America's political system, you vote for the people who vote for president. Your vote doesn't matter.

You're forgetting something more important. Charisma is what decides elections in this country. Clinton has the charisma of a paper bag compared to Trump. Its why Nixon lost to Kennedy, why Reagan won twice and ended up being immortalized in American history, why Bush won twice, and how Obama won. All of their opponents had a distinct lack of charisma in comparison.

He appeals to under-educated *white* voters, which is a voting block that is shrinking by the day.

I don't understand your point. The elections are not meant to be held 50 or 100 years from now, which is the time frame in which you could probably see a big change in population variety. Right now whites are the majority and that's what matters for these elections.

Well, for some reason some research show that uneducated white voter is replaced by conservative latino voter, still very similar.

I don't give a fuck about trannies. Bunch of loony faggots who contribute nothing and make lots of demands. Freaks tbqh. Seems easier just to tell them to get stuffed.

Posting some sick wagons.

If Clinton has the charisma of a paper bag, then Trump has the charisma of a paper bag filled with dog shit and set on fire.

yeah, but that later group isn't going to vote for Señor Trump

Yes, that's what I thought too until I saw data from cali and nevada. You'd be surprised.

All of you. Shut the fuck up. This is a wagon bread. Stop being little shits.

Considering having some sort of qualification in "gender studies" or whatever else counts as being "educated" I wouldn't put much stock into being lumped into this lot.

Guess that also explains why the female primary schoolteacher expects to be paid as much as a male private educator.

>"I took a course in Afrikan studies, I'M AN ACADEMIC, I'M A SCHOLAR LISTEN TO ME."

>LOOK AT MY DEGREE IN FEMINIST DANCE THERAPY!
>Liberals
Trump appeals to anyone who doesn't want another Obama and realizes how poisonous he was, and Anyone who's not a college student taking a useless course.

Find me a taxpayer, or engineering student and you would have found a trump supporter.

I'm not surprised about anything here. Both Clinton and Trump are polling below 2012 and 2008 vote shares because of relatively healthy portion of the votes going towards third party candidates.

That's symptomatic of the well-established fact that neither candidate is especially popular, but it hardly supports the conclusion that Latinos are siding with Trump.

spotted the high school dropout

>drift wagon

kys

>Every single child with LGBT parents is wanted and loved. The same can't be said about straight couples.
ahahahahaha

No, THIS is a wagon bread.

Not that guy but given that the homo population in America is

Assmad faggot detected.

...

I'm usually luring on pol, and just bought wagon. This is great thread

what does the wat sticker mean?

In retrospect that thing is actually quite cool.

i agree, although why the stacked headlights for 86? that's a relic of the 70s, and i believe they dont offer any better lighting.

Because more = better. And it's not like the single headlight versions looked any better.

>imblyign

wait, wrong car.

never mind

True, the Mini Van definitely over through the wagon as it phased out in the mid-late 90's.

>implying wagons ever went out of style
>buying into meme
Woodies are balla as fuck, nigga

post sexy wagon pls

...

...

...

gays up on their soapbox again, as if I don't hear it enough

wagons were never cool.

ok boy
maybe this will do ?

or this ?

or maybe this ?

except wagons have ACTUAL utility. Unlike most modern SUV's.

they were meant as cars you could fit a whole bunch of shit in for the family. My dad had a ford escort and that shit was the tits. when you folded down the back seats it was practically a small pickup truck

...

>and then JC penney announces they are closing tons of stores and downsizing

Hey, politifags, why don't we all just try some freedom and hop in a bush ready volvo 960 wagon and campaign for Gary Johnson across the country?

whats the connection between him and a wagon?