Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
turbojet

The General American Politics Thread

Recommended Posts

dear God trump supporters are fucking children sometimes. They'd rather plug their ears and blindly go with trump just cuz. He could admit to loving hitler and wanting another holacaust and some of theses guys would find a way to spin it in a defensive way and still vote for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/15/2016 at 5:58 AM, KHCast said:

dear God trump supporters are fucking children sometimes. They'd rather plug their ears and blindly go with trump just cuz. He could admit to loving hitler and wanting another holacaust and some of theses guys would find a way to spin it in a defensive way and still vote for him.

They are so brainwashed it's unbelievable. It's like Trump hypnotized his supporters to a point that even if Trump said to them, "Go f*** little pigs" like what's asked on this video, they'll still back him 100%. Do they have any self-respect? If Trump asked his supporters to jump off a cliff, some of them may actually do it.

I mean after the church service today, I asked one of my friends and she's a Trump supporter. I asked the same question I've seen in that video. It went similar like this:

Me: If Trump said to his supporters, "You all GO and have sex with pigs", would you still back him?
Friend: He'll never say that. Why are you asking a nonsense question?
Me: But if HE did?
Friend: He'll never say that but have you forgotten Clinton called me and Donald supporters homophobes and racists? 
Me: How is that got to do with anything and stop dodging the question.
Friend: If he did which he will never, but if he did [10 second pause] I'll be very upset with Donald, I'll not be jumping around for him anymore but I have backed Donald for 4 months now, I can't go back--

Me: Yes you can, didn't you see Trump's fallout with the GOP?
Friend: No you can't. Just because some of the GOP have spoken out and said they'll back out doesn't mean they'll vote for crooked Clinton. I'm not going to vote for Hillary who is disrespecting those coal miners. So if I don't vote for Donald, who can I vote for that my vote will count? I'm not going to be like you who is on the fence not voting on election day. The 1920's was a revolution for us women and even though I hate Michelle Obama she's right about us needing to vote. So I can't back down now. I'm voting Donald whatever it may be.

Which got me thinking. There are Trump supporters who were probably upset with him with the tape and such, but still back him because they have nowhere else to turn. Yes, there's "Clinton" but most Trump supporters loathe Clinton. I mean she didn't do any favors by calling them racists and such (Yes I know she backtracked, but it's too late).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of people assume active voters are these lazy, stupid sheep. But in reality, they most likely have figured it out by now: in a first past the post system, you only have two real options (sometimes a third if you're lucky). It's Clinton or Trump at this point. A third party vote is too much of a risk to be worth it; you have to assume tens if not hundreds of millions of Americans will change their vote.

If we had a requirement a candidate win the majority of the popular vote, that would change the calculus. Though of course it would be more practical to have instant runoff to avoid making the election insanely expensive and cumbersome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ming Ming Hatsune said:

Which got me thinking. There are Trump supporters who were probably upset with him with the tape and such, but still back him because they have nowhere else to turn. Yes, there's "Clinton" but most Trump supporters loathe Clinton. I mean she didn't do any favors by calling them racists and such (Yes I know she backtracked, but it's too late).

Given how unfriendly Trump supporters have shown towards minorities and such, and that racists are backing Trump who they barely berated if at all, what exactly would they have expected them to be called?

Not all Trump supporters are racist, that is true. But they've done very little to make that clear, if not worsen their case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ming Ming Hatsune said:

They are so brainwashed it's unbelievable. It's like Trump hypnotized his supporters to a point that even if Trump said to them, "Go f*** little pigs" like what's asked on this video, they'll still back him 100%. Do they have any self-respect? If Trump asked his supporters to jump off a cliff, some of them may actually do it.

I mean after the church service today, I asked one of my friends and she's a Trump supporter. I asked the same question I've seen in that video. It went similar like this:

Me: If Trump said to his supporters, "You all GO and have sex with pigs", would you still back him?
Friend: He'll never say that. Why are you asking a nonsense question?
Me: But if HE did?
Friend: He'll never say that but have you forgotten Clinton called me and Donald supporters homophobes and racists? 
Me: How is that got to do with anything and stop dodging the question.
Friend: If he did which he will never, but if he did [10 second pause] I'll be very upset with Donald, I'll not be jumping around for him anymore but I have backed Donald for 4 months now, I can't go back--

Me: Yes you can, didn't you see Trump's fallout with the GOP?
Friend: No you can't. Just because some of the GOP have spoken out and said they'll back out doesn't mean they'll vote for crooked Clinton. I'm not going to vote for Hillary who is disrespecting those coal miners. So if I don't vote for Donald, who can I vote for that my vote will count? I'm not going to be like you who is on the fence not voting on election day. The 1920's was a revolution for us women and even though I hate Michelle Obama she's right about us needing to vote. So I can't back down now. I'm voting Donald whatever it may be.

Which got me thinking. There are Trump supporters who were probably upset with him with the tape and such, but still back him because they have nowhere else to turn. Yes, there's "Clinton" but most Trump supporters loathe Clinton. I mean she didn't do any favors by calling them racists and such (Yes I know she backtracked, but it's too late).

Yet when Trump backtracks it's expected we move on just like that according to many trump supporters. I don't understand why trump seems to get a free pass with a lot of shit that Hilary and others dont seem to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Conquering Storm's Servant said:

Given how unfriendly Trump supporters have shown towards minorities and such, and that racists are backing Trump who they barely berated if at all, what exactly would they have expected them to be called?

Not all Trump supporters are racist, that is true. But they've done very little to make that clear, if not worsen their case.

Well, yeah, but the funny thing about modern racists is that they don't like to think of themselves as being racist. To them, racism means lacking decorum, honor and intelligence. When they think racism, they think of burning crosses. lynching, and lots of killings. They see putting major restrictions on immigration as something that's important to preserving the integrity and safety of the country-- as far as they're concerned, singling out Arabs and Mexicans for these restrictions is just a matter of protecting us from people who might be infiltrators working on behalf of a country we're at war with or are hurting our economy, not being racist.

 So they take being called racist as a pretty major insult to their character as well as their morality. Even though they have more than earned the label of being racist, you'll never hear them admit it (unless they somehow realize that they're in the wrong) and they'll defend themselves to the death from anybody who so much implies such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, after all this time, I think that level of denial is them knowing full well they're being racist and they lie about it it so they can get away from being criticized for it.

It's like a child lying about something bad they know damn well they did something they shouldn't (like stealing, name-calling, or physically hurting someone) and doesn't want to be punished. I think people know better than that - even more when Democrats that do similar shit (mainly the assualt and name calling, not exactly being racist) generally own up to it. With notable exceptions (albeit, none I'm aware of), but still...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://thinkprogress.org/john-mccain-republicans-will-block-anyone-clinton-names-to-the-supreme-court-35636acca966#.roy7vla6n

Please vote next month.

They're pretty much saying that only the GOP should be allowed to appoint justices.

The Garland nomination has likely faded from many memories, but hopefully this will reinvigorate the previous sentiment that the GOP Senators need to be thrown out of office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember when they said the next President regardless of party should elect a judge versus a lame duck candidate on the way out? Pepperidge Farm remembers. Pepperidge Farm will also remember this when people complain that the incumbent can't get any shit done without accounting for a party bent on obstructionism due to waning popularity like we've done for the last eight years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what shit's funny, my friends?

When a Bernie or Buster complains about how undemocratic the superdelegates are and how they "rig" the election...

All while quietly ignoring a lot of Bernie's delegates came from undemocratic caucus states where participation is largely limited to those with free time and a strong interest in politics. Is democracy the key or not? Because let's face it, if every state was a primary, Sanders likely would have been royally destroyed.

Clinton was just a better coalition builder. How is this hard to understand? I've known who Hillary Clinton was since the days where I could first form coherent thoughts. Bernie's cool and all, but when I first saw him I was just "who the Hell is he?" Clinton is a name that resonates with many non-whites, who remember some of their best years being under Bill; Sanders, when asked about issues facing blacks, started going on about the ghetto.

I'm just so disappointed several of my friends continue to buy into this bullshit that Clinton is so much more corrupt or omnipotent than any other politician out there, and it's worth letting Trump win even when Hillary's agreed to pursue a lot of the things that made Bernie stand out to begin with. I just... I just can't wrap my head around it. There's a shitload of evidence Clinton won fairly (even if there was some eyebrow-raising moments on the part of the media and superdelegates), but they continue to plug their ears, all while ignoring the points against Sanders and the fact that a vote for her is basically a vote for the bulk of what Sanders proposed.

Sigh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, the final debate has concluded.

 

Hillary beat Trump's ass. And considering the implications of "how the Founding Fathers intended" the Constitution...that makes the idea of a Trump presidency all the more horrifying. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, the last debate got really interesting, didn't it?

Clinton: She delivered a fantastic performance tonight, possibly the best of her career, taking Trump apart on issue after issue - most effectively in regards to the allegations of his groping and sexually assaulting women. Poised and unruffled throughout, she dragged him onto the defensive on multiple subjects, really getting under his skin after a little while and delivering some solid blows along the way (the Putin Puppet line really got to him). She didn't land any super-knock-out blows to him though, but she didn't need to; thanks to her masterful performance, her preparedness for every issue that might arise, and his easily manipulated mind, he did that all on his own.

Trump: To his credit, he managed to give the best debate performance of his short political life tonight; likely because he apparently prepped for this one - unlike the last two. However, he missed some glaring opportunities to attack Clinton on subjects like the leaked excerpt of a paid speech she once gave, nor did he take her to task on the economy (where he polls well) - preferring instead to use up a chunk of time rambling on about Japan and Saudi Arabia. Something to do with the nuclear proliferation issue from the previous segment. He then later confirmed to all of us watching what kind of man he truly is (the "nasty woman" remark) too, validating in one off-the-cuff remark everything Clinton had, minutes earlier, asserted about him - compounding all too well the issues he's lately had on that subject.

But the real narrative-dominating headline coming out of the debate was the fact that Trump (directly contradicting his own campaign director and daughter) refused to commit to the peaceful, uncontested transition of power, promising instead to "look at it at the time" and "leave us in suspense," as if he's still on The Apprentice, and he'll give us the thumbs up or down after another 5 minute ad break. There were audible gasps heard in the debate hall at this statement, and even now headlines are emerging that are forging a new narrative wrapped around that moment, that is sure to last at least a good week - the narrative of the man who would threaten to burn the very fabric of American democracy if he does not win the election. No candidate in living memory (possibly ever?) has done this, and I have to imagine that it'll re-ignite in a huge way the exodus of Republican political support from his campaign.

Fervent Trump supporters will likely never leave his side - as he said months ago, he could gun down innocent passers-by on the street and not lose any of their votes. But tonight wasn't about them, it was about consolidating his Republican base of support and expanding his reach into the dwindling crowds of undecided voters at a time when voting preferences are quickly solidifying. I don't see that he has achieved either of those goals, and I can see his campaign entering a new series of fatal crises before too long.

Wallace: As far as debate moderators go, Wallace was outstanding. He smacked the audience down when they became too raucous, and he didn't hesitate in slapping down both Trump and Clinton whenever it was necessary to keep order and to keep things going. His questions were as diverse as they were probing, and he never seemed to take it easy on anyone. I had, going in, feared he might be a Fox News GOP stooge, but he really proved himself to be an impartial, tough and fair mediator. Elaine Quijano and others could learn a good deal from him.

Verdict: Clinton won, more clearly than the second debate, less so than the first, with a fantastic performance that will be analysed by debate teams and political scholars for years to come. With every debate win that she has had, with every fresh revelation about Trump's behavior, she has been propelled further upward in the estimations of the public. She went into these debates with big trust issues to overcome, and to an extent they do still remain, but I think that she has done as well as anybody could have in her position, and has earned the respect (if not admiration) of many people these past few months - myself included.

Trump... He did great for a while in the last debate, but he totally blew it at the same time, his uncontrollable temper confirming our worst fears about him. On the policy side, he failed utterly to extend his appeal outside his core base of support within a Republican Party that his campaign has sent into civil war. Terrible loss for him, but one that was oh-so well deserved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one thing that truly stood out from this debate, the one thing that will be the talk of this week's Sunday talk shows, the one thing that Trump has truly said that destroyed himself is that he may not accept the results of the election.


Let's think about this for a moment: a major party's nominee has just said on a debate stage that he is willing to question this country's democratic process by stating he may not accept the election results. This has never happened before and it's a truly scary thing to hear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The likely media narratives for the last couple of weeks of the election:

Debate Score: Hillary Clinton, 3-0.
Donald Trump is a threat to democracy.
Donald Trump is a serial sexual predator.
Donald Trump cannot now win over voters outside his pre-existing core base, and therefore has no realistic path to victory.
Donald Trump's campaign is in a fiery tailspin death spiral.
Donald Trump enters into more Twitter wars.
Donald Trump says more nasty, disqualifying things.
The Republican Party is in danger of losing the Senate, maybe the House, if things keep getting worse.
Endangered Republican down-ballot candidates, no longer seeing any benefit to remaining loyal to their party's candidate, resume their abandonment of an increasingly erratic, hostile, belligerent, destructive Trump.


Earlier on today, he clarified his statement on making us wait and see if he would accept the election results...

https://i.imgur.com/AZ4yYvw.mp4

Yeah, that's right; instead of admitting that he was just doing that (super irritating) reality TV show thing where we must always sit through interminable ad breaks to find out who won/lost something, he's gone for the "dig the hole deeper" option. Has he completely lost his mind? It's like he's kicking journalists out of their seats worldwide so that he can write the "threat to democracy" narrative himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Patticus said:

The likely media narratives for the last couple of weeks of the election:

Debate Score: Hillary Clinton, 3-0.
Donald Trump is a threat to democracy.
Donald Trump is a serial sexual predator.
Donald Trump cannot now win over voters outside his pre-existing core base, and therefore has no realistic path to victory.
Donald Trump's campaign is in a fiery tailspin death spiral.
Donald Trump enters into more Twitter wars.
Donald Trump says more nasty, disqualifying things.
The Republican Party is in danger of losing the Senate, maybe the House, if things keep getting worse.
Endangered Republican down-ballot candidates, no longer seeing any benefit to remaining loyal to their party's candidate, resume their abandonment of an increasingly erratic, hostile, belligerent, destructive Trump.


Earlier on today, he clarified his statement on making us wait and see if he would accept the election results...

https://i.imgur.com/AZ4yYvw.mp4

Yeah, that's right; instead of admitting that he was just doing that (super irritating) reality TV show thing where we must always sit through interminable ad breaks to find out who won/lost something, he's gone for the "dig the hole deeper" option. Has he completely lost his mind? It's like he's kicking journalists out of their seats worldwide so that he can write the "threat to democracy" narrative himself.

The comments on that video you linked are gold. The deplorables are acting like schoolyard bullies do when their targets start fighting back-- trying to be tough but just looking pathetic and desperate instead. I am worried about the riots and stuff when the almost-inevitable loss for Trump occurs. I feel pretty lucky that I live in a blue state where most of the conservatives have accepted that Hilary is the most viable president at this point and are bracing for impact instead of lashing out, but that isn't the case for everybody and I do worry. Yet again, I worried when Obama was elected if the racists would riot, and it turned out that their threats of revolution and violence were just hot air as, for the most part, they did little more than obstruct where they had the power to do so and grumble. 

You are right in saying that Trump is just digging himself deeper at this point. Its kind of scary how Trump will only accept the results of the election if they favor him, but I think that also says a lot about his ego. It gives me the impression that he's become so dependent on his ego to form his identity-- a defining trait of narcissistic personality disorder, might I point out--that he either doesn't want to accept that if he loses it would be because of his mistakes and nobody else's, or literally can't accept the idea of himself losing without suffering some kind of mental breakdown and so uses this BS as a protective measure. On the other hand, he does seem like the kind of guy who would do anything for attention so he might very well be trying to fuel these articles as a way of going out with a bang. We will have to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dizcrybe said:

Side note: when do we get a punk band called The Deplorables?

I reckon such a thing could only happen if Trump were to win the election - a group whose heart-felt political protest songs would echo through the century, in much the same way as "We Shall Not Be Moved" and other songs did in the 20th.

Now, a Broadway-to-Hollywood (Book of Mormon-style) musical called Les Deplorables, chronicling Trump's rise and fall, I feel like that would be more likely. It could feature several different actors playing Trump's different personas. Also, a tense political thriller (TV series?) based in an alternative world where a Trump-esque figure wins, with all the myriad consequences for the country and the world, that would be great too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dizcrybe said:

Side note: when do we get a punk band called The Deplorables?

 

Just now, Patticus said:

I reckon such a thing could only happen if Trump were to win the election - a group whose heart-felt political protest songs would echo through the century, in much the same way as "We Shall Not Be Moved" and other songs did in the 20th.

Now, a Broadway-to-Hollywood (Book of Mormon-style) musical called Les Deplorables, chronicling Trump's rise and fall, I feel like that would be more likely. Also a tense political thriller (TV series?) based in an alternative world where a Trump-esque figure won, that would be great too.

I feel like we have the makings of the greatest band of all time with this lol. Though a musical wouldn't shock me.

Actually, now that I think of it, Trump provides the makings of a great episode of American Greed-- if you don't know what that is, its a televised documentary series about the rise and fall of con artists and other shady characters who screwed people over for personal gain. I would love it if that show talked about his rise and fall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/21/politics/early-voting-hillary-clinton-battleground-states/index.html

Over 3 million Americans have already voted early, and in most cases, the results are looking promising for Clinton, barring Iowa and Ohio. Even Utah shows signs of turning purple, as the GOP early voting lead has shrunken considerably compared to what it was in 2012. For one reason or another, Democrats are turning out in larger numbers and Republicans in fewer numbers compared to previous years, so it's not just "Democrats early vote more often."

I'll continue to cross my fingers that just enough people turn out to tip the House towards the Democratic Party. If the Democrats control both Houses and the Presidency, we might just be able to make some real progress towards universal healthcare and free tuition.

Bernie Sanders recently said in an interview that if Clinton becomes President, he's not going to just blindly obey her. He's going to keep fighting for what he fought for in the primaries, and work to make sure Clinton keeps her end of the deal. And he encourages all his supporters to likewise aggressively lobby Congress to do the same.

http://occupydemocrats.com/2016/10/14/paul-ryan-bernie-sanders-will-lead-budget-committee-democrats-win-senate/

In which Paul Ryan hilariously empowers his opposition. If the Democrats take the Senate, Bernie Sanders will be in charge of the Senate Budget Committee. If you needed any incentive to vote Democrat this election, there you have it.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/10/20/amid-rigged-election-charges-russia-wants-monitor-us-vote/92456558/

"LOL" doesn't even begin to describe my reaction to this. I guess it's no surprise an elected official of questionable democratic legitimacy is trying to make us look like hypocrites. Russia was informed that we allow plenty of countries to observe our elections, just not them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/22/2016 at 6:52 AM, Raccoon Bandit Ogilvie said:

For one reason or another, Democrats are turning out in larger numbers and Republicans in fewer numbers compared to previous years, so it's not just "Democrats early vote more often."

I think its because Republicans have been bombarded with the idea that the media is rigged and they're losing because the Democrat Party has made it impossible for them to win. The idea is to empower people to stop being complacent and try to change things, whether by overwhelming the vote with Republican support beyond the point where Democrats' cheating is effective or going out to protest. A consequence that the Republicans don't consider when making is claims is that instead of rising up in righteous rebellion, their supporters simply don't go in and vote, because they believe they can't win no matter what and see it as a wasted effort. They'd rather fume in silence (...or very loudly) or try to cheat the system themselves in hopes of balancing out what they perceive the Democrats to be doing-- the former is completely ineffective and the latter is usually ineffective at getting the candidates they like into office. Even the latter is not as effective as and more stressful than going in and casting a vote.

-----

In other news, Trump supporters are stooping pretty low in their desperation to believe in victory. Apparently, somebody on 8chan doxxed multiple journalists and released their personal information (name, address, etc.) on the web. The anonymous person has this to say on the matter:

Quote

I don’t condone doing anything illegal with the information here. I also don’t condone sending wave after wave of fast food, holy books, gay porn catalogs, bricks, emergency plumbers, locksmiths, transgender escorts, or freeze-dried bear shit to anyone’s home.

Suspiciously specific denial, anybody? (He capped it off with a "Make the Internet Great Again," in case you weren't sure about if he was making any suggestions or not.)

But seriously, the doxxer seems like a coward. He's not willing to release as much as his name, yet he gladly releases others' personal information without permission. He doesn't even have the courage to directly admit that he wants the people he's releasing the information of to get harassed and hurt as a result of this, instead trying to be passive aggressive about it and deflecting the responsibility.

Ugh, jerk. Article here: http://www.vocativ.com/368656/trump-supporters-dox-journalists/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, oh oh! While we're talking about Trump supporters, can we talk about the fact that they want the 19th Amendment repealed to guarantee Trump's victory?

This coming from the people who accuse Clinton of rigging the election? The double standards couldn't possibly be more blatant. It's almost like they want some kind of echo chamber or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously? Are we in the 19th century again?

You know, I bet the misogynistic side of Trump's fandom probably would like being in the 19th century. Men got to do everything and embrace the prosperous side of the times, women only got to stay at home, get married to a husband who she likely lacks true passion for, take care of children, and maybe clean the house if the family couldn't afford to hire housekeepers. If the women didn't comply or seemed to complain and question too much, they could expect to have their prospects for the future robbed by being diagnosed with "women's hysteria" or "insanity" and get shipped off to an asylum or locked in a room at where they were forced to be very still and do almost nothing until they stopped being "crazy" (a rare event in its own right-- most women were actually perfectly fine until the lack of mental stimulation and socialization from the so-called cure to hysteria drove them to insanity). Nowadays, you can't do that to anymore without getting into serious trouble and being discredited, because women aren't seen as basically children, property, and/or slaves by the law and by most people. Sadly, some still struggle with treating female people like people, but in the present even most of them would agree that women are entitled to basic human rights like ability to express autonomy. And the misogynists hate that they missed the era when they could get away with that kind of stuff and didn't have to hide it, and so seek to recreate it however they can. How antiquated and pathetic the misogynists truly are would be hilarious, if their actions, words, and clear desire to get revenge on women who don't agree with them weren't so frightening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They'd probably find that fantasy less appetizing upon realizing that many of them (given Trump's appeal to blue collar workers) would be working in hazardous factories for piss poor wages if they weren't one of the lucky ones who built a homestead in the middle of nowhere. Race, gender, class. The trinity of American stratification. It may have rocked to be white and male as opposed to black and female, but it still sucked to be poor. :P They'd also find the job security they crave would be non-existent at the time, given capitalists were quite fond of using the threat of non-white laborers to break unions (not to mention, calling in private militias or the United States Army to crush strikes).

The only real "good ole days" for white men in this country is going to be the post-war period, where well-paying, unionized jobs were abundant and the social safety net was strong, and a huge middle class emerged as a result of the GI Bill (and all these benefits were pretty thoroughly racialized so privileged white people could point at non-whites, wave their finger and go, "why can't you be like us?!"). And, while women still could vote at this time, it meant about as much as Civil Rights legislation in the 1960s, as men could still legally and socially dominate them (case in point: marital rape doesn't become illegal nationwide until 1993).

Right-wing elements have an interesting tendency to forget that much of what they love is the result of what were once left-wing policies. It's only evil socialism when you don't agree with it, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.