Kat - we can't call out trolls, but they can just keep trolling for pages on end?
It''s quite simple. ........if no one responds to their hateful ignorant rhetoric they eventually go away. Just wish people would stop responding to the troll-in-chief.
If you support evil you are evil
Exactly! You and I think alike BP. If the world doesn't respond to the big bad evil President Trump eventually he will go away.
I like the two trolls eventually they will be proven wrong the investigation just keeps moving along as orange bafoon tries everything he can including trying to start a war with NK to deflect deflect ! So don't worry troll #1&2 your boy will go down not tomorrow or next week or even next month but he will go down and history will judge him as the worst president in our history so far !
I think it is a fair assessment for a portion of the 'perfect storm' leading to a (lol) Donald... Trump... presidential election. But I'm not thinking as optimistically as you. I'm thinking there was more stupidity at play than you are willing to concede. I mean, if a Trump voter wasn't flat out stupid to begin with... they were stupid to vote Trump in an effort to turn their nose up at the establishment.
Your argument suggests that devout democrats and neutrals found Hilary distasteful, but it fails to account for staunch republicans turned off with Trump as their nominee. Are liberals the only ones capable of voting with their conscience?
I like the two trolls eventually they will be proven wrong the investigation just keeps moving along as orange bafoon tries everything he can including trying to start a war with NK to deflect deflect ! So don't worry troll #1&2 your boy will go down not tomorrow or next week or even next month but he will go down and history will judge him as the worst president in our history so far !
I get what you're trying to say but you seriously have to tone down the boy stuff. I mean imagine if President Trump were to say those words.
Just a gentle reminder that Mueller is following the money, from Russia with love and a PTAPE, all the way to impeachment. And he'll get there before war with NK or Trump invades Venezuela.
Nikki Styxxx looked really alarmed and confused when Trump made his comments about Venezuela.
I think it is a fair assessment for a portion of the 'perfect storm' leading to a (lol) Donald... Trump... presidential election. But I'm not thinking as optimistically as you. I'm thinking there was more stupidity at play than you are willing to concede. I mean, if a Trump voter wasn't flat out stupid to begin with... they were stupid to vote Trump in an effort to turn their nose up at the establishment.
Your argument suggests that devout democrats and neutrals found Hilary distasteful, but it fails to account for staunch republicans turned off with Trump as their nominee. Are liberals the only ones capable of voting with their conscience?
Donald Trump is the president of the US.
hahahahahahahahahahaha
again your pointing at voters believing in trump I'm pointing at voters not believing Hillary. it's simply a difference of opinion.
my argument doesn't suggest anything about democrats and neutrals, I explicitly addressed avg voters and independents, those that historically decide presidential elections. those can be registered dems republicans or third party.
why would I address staunch republicans turned off by trump when I'm pointing about the obvious reasons why Hillary lost? what do they have to do with Hilliary losing? if you want, we can apply your viewpoint as we discussed earlier that staunch republicans did stay home with the first time voter and or rarely ever voter filling the vote total gap.
don't understand your last question about liberals either? maybe you're assuming the stay home avg voter and indys are liberal, your assumption, not mine. I would argue by not voting at all liberals did vote their conscience. if my memory serves me correctly wasn't there an unusual amount of down ticket voting without a vote for president being cast? if so, doesn't that partly support my argument?
It's as if you two get some sadistic fucking joy out of this mess.
really, how so? what mess? haven't your health insurance contributions dropped, your deductibles and co pays lower along with increased coverage
My insurance premiums are much much less and I have better coverage than I did 8 years ago.
if this is true and the 8 years ago isn't the devil whereby you had increases for the last 7 years, I'll guess (since you like that word) one of these are true 1. you are domiciled somewhere outside of the US say Greece etc if based in US 2. you are currently covered on someone else's plan, parent spouse etc unlike 8 years ago 2. you receive government assisted subsidised health insurance unlike 8 years ago 2a. you are currently a sitting US senator 3. you work for a multi national company and your plan is based overseas say in France
if none of those apply then let the rest of us, I'm again guessing 99.9888888888888888888% in on the secret to lower premiums co pays and increased coverage.
It's as if you two get some sadistic fucking joy out of this mess.
really, how so? what mess? haven't your health insurance contributions dropped, your deductibles and co pays lower along with increased coverage
My insurance premiums are much much less and I have better coverage than I did 8 years ago.
if this is true and the 8 years ago isn't the devil whereby you had increases for the last 7 years, I'll guess (since you like that word) one of these are true 1. you are domiciled somewhere outside of the US say Greece etc if based in US 2. you are currently covered on someone else's plan, parent spouse etc unlike 8 years ago 2. you receive government assisted subsidised health insurance unlike 8 years ago 2a. you are currently a sitting US senator 3. you work for a multi national company and your plan is based overseas say in France
if none of those apply then let the rest of us, I'm again guessing 99.9888888888888888888% in on the secret to lower premiums co pays and increased coverage.
Doesn't everything go up, year over year, you know, inflation. Prior to 8 years ago healthcare costs didn't increase? Are you an economist?
I think it is a fair assessment for a portion of the 'perfect storm' leading to a (lol) Donald... Trump... presidential election. But I'm not thinking as optimistically as you. I'm thinking there was more stupidity at play than you are willing to concede. I mean, if a Trump voter wasn't flat out stupid to begin with... they were stupid to vote Trump in an effort to turn their nose up at the establishment.
Your argument suggests that devout democrats and neutrals found Hilary distasteful, but it fails to account for staunch republicans turned off with Trump as their nominee. Are liberals the only ones capable of voting with their conscience?
Donald Trump is the president of the US.
hahahahahahahahahahaha
again your pointing at voters believing in trump I'm pointing at voters not believing Hillary. it's simply a difference of opinion.
my argument doesn't suggest anything about democrats and neutrals, I explicitly addressed avg voters and independents, those that historically decide presidential elections. those can be registered dems republicans or third party.
why would I address staunch republicans turned off by trump when I'm pointing about the obvious reasons why Hillary lost? what do they have to do with Hilliary losing? if you want, we can apply your viewpoint as we discussed earlier that staunch republicans did stay home with the first time voter and or rarely ever voter filling the vote total gap.
don't understand your last question about liberals either? maybe you're assuming the stay home avg voter and indys are liberal, your assumption, not mine. I would argue by not voting at all liberals did vote their conscience. if my memory serves me correctly wasn't there an unusual amount of down ticket voting without a vote for president being cast? if so, doesn't that partly support my argument?
My last question is aimed at your assertion that people didn't believe in Hillary and that is why they preferred Trump. I am suggesting that Trump was, at a minimum, equally distrusted given his famously devious and crooked past; however, the decorum he presented campaigning left little doubt as to what your country might expect if elected- hardly impressive.
The situation was not great: I agree that Hillary was far from ideal, but Trump left people no choice... at least people with half a brain that is. It was flat out moronic to vote for such an imbecile thinking that doing so was going to make your life better (unless you're part of the 1% which, judging from a few of your posts lately, you might be).
If a Trump voter is simply stupid and thinks chocolate milk comes from brown cows (like 10% of your country)... well... what can you say? Trump said he was going to make America great again- they were all in and are still wondering when that is going to happen. If they're racists looking for a white saviour... well... at least they voted in line with their beliefs. But if a Trump voter voted because they thought he would be more appropriate than Hillary... then they haven't realized their brains aren't good brains and make up the bulk of what I have been suggesting.
I think it is a fair assessment for a portion of the 'perfect storm' leading to a (lol) Donald... Trump... presidential election. But I'm not thinking as optimistically as you. I'm thinking there was more stupidity at play than you are willing to concede. I mean, if a Trump voter wasn't flat out stupid to begin with... they were stupid to vote Trump in an effort to turn their nose up at the establishment.
Your argument suggests that devout democrats and neutrals found Hilary distasteful, but it fails to account for staunch republicans turned off with Trump as their nominee. Are liberals the only ones capable of voting with their conscience?
Donald Trump is the president of the US.
hahahahahahahahahahaha
again your pointing at voters believing in trump I'm pointing at voters not believing Hillary. it's simply a difference of opinion.
my argument doesn't suggest anything about democrats and neutrals, I explicitly addressed avg voters and independents, those that historically decide presidential elections. those can be registered dems republicans or third party.
why would I address staunch republicans turned off by trump when I'm pointing about the obvious reasons why Hillary lost? what do they have to do with Hilliary losing? if you want, we can apply your viewpoint as we discussed earlier that staunch republicans did stay home with the first time voter and or rarely ever voter filling the vote total gap.
don't understand your last question about liberals either? maybe you're assuming the stay home avg voter and indys are liberal, your assumption, not mine. I would argue by not voting at all liberals did vote their conscience. if my memory serves me correctly wasn't there an unusual amount of down ticket voting without a vote for president being cast? if so, doesn't that partly support my argument?
My last question is aimed at your assertion that people didn't believe in Hillary and that is why they preferred Trump. I am suggesting that Trump was, at a minimum, equally distrusted given his famously devious and crooked past; however, the decorum he presented campaigning left little doubt as to what your country might expect if elected- hardly impressive.
The situation was not great: I agree that Hillary was far from ideal, but Trump left people no choice... at least people with half a brain that is. It was flat out moronic to vote for such an imbecile thinking that doing so was going to make your life better (unless you're part of the 1% which, judging from a few of your posts lately, you might be).
If a Trump voter is simply stupid and thinks chocolate milk comes from brown cows (like 10% of your country)... well... what can you say? Trump said he was going to make America great again- they were all in and are still wondering when that is going to happen. If they're racists looking for a white saviour... well... at least they voted in line with their beliefs. But if a Trump voter voted because they thought he would be more appropriate than Hillary... then they haven't realized their brains aren't good brains and make up the bulk of what I have been suggesting.
You're beginning to convince me on the wildly stupid trump voter theory. your very first sentence: I never claimed people didn't believe in Hilliary and therefore voted trump. I claimed people didn't believe in Hilliary so they didn't vote at all, they stayed home. I even restated it, they voted their conscience by not voting at all. The dems were confident that their least worse candidate would win. I thought that was clear, typed in black and white.
about the polls: when I reference polls I'm talking about the polls the weeks leading up the the election, even months. when others talk of polls they reference polls the day of or days before election day. yes, the pollsters did come around eventually as election day grew closer but still 538 and the NYT gave Trump a single digit chance of winning the day before the election.
pollsters like to reference the election day polls ignoring the majority of polls the weeks leading up to the election, so they don't look completely inaccurate and incompetent. they can only report what the voters are telling them. there isn't a margin of error for those that are unwilling to be truthful about who they are voting for.
I think it is a fair assessment for a portion of the 'perfect storm' leading to a (lol) Donald... Trump... presidential election. But I'm not thinking as optimistically as you. I'm thinking there was more stupidity at play than you are willing to concede. I mean, if a Trump voter wasn't flat out stupid to begin with... they were stupid to vote Trump in an effort to turn their nose up at the establishment.
Your argument suggests that devout democrats and neutrals found Hilary distasteful, but it fails to account for staunch republicans turned off with Trump as their nominee. Are liberals the only ones capable of voting with their conscience?
Donald Trump is the president of the US.
hahahahahahahahahahaha
again your pointing at voters believing in trump I'm pointing at voters not believing Hillary. it's simply a difference of opinion.
my argument doesn't suggest anything about democrats and neutrals, I explicitly addressed avg voters and independents, those that historically decide presidential elections. those can be registered dems republicans or third party.
why would I address staunch republicans turned off by trump when I'm pointing about the obvious reasons why Hillary lost? what do they have to do with Hilliary losing? if you want, we can apply your viewpoint as we discussed earlier that staunch republicans did stay home with the first time voter and or rarely ever voter filling the vote total gap.
don't understand your last question about liberals either? maybe you're assuming the stay home avg voter and indys are liberal, your assumption, not mine. I would argue by not voting at all liberals did vote their conscience. if my memory serves me correctly wasn't there an unusual amount of down ticket voting without a vote for president being cast? if so, doesn't that partly support my argument?
My last question is aimed at your assertion that people didn't believe in Hillary and that is why they preferred Trump. I am suggesting that Trump was, at a minimum, equally distrusted given his famously devious and crooked past; however, the decorum he presented campaigning left little doubt as to what your country might expect if elected- hardly impressive.
The situation was not great: I agree that Hillary was far from ideal, but Trump left people no choice... at least people with half a brain that is. It was flat out moronic to vote for such an imbecile thinking that doing so was going to make your life better (unless you're part of the 1% which, judging from a few of your posts lately, you might be).
If a Trump voter is simply stupid and thinks chocolate milk comes from brown cows (like 10% of your country)... well... what can you say? Trump said he was going to make America great again- they were all in and are still wondering when that is going to happen. If they're racists looking for a white saviour... well... at least they voted in line with their beliefs. But if a Trump voter voted because they thought he would be more appropriate than Hillary... then they haven't realized their brains aren't good brains and make up the bulk of what I have been suggesting.
You're beginning to convince me on the wildly stupid trump voter theory. your very first sentence: I never claimed people didn't believe in Hilliary and therefore voted trump. I claimed people didn't believe in Hilliary so they didn't vote at all, they stayed home. I even restated it, they voted their conscience by not voting at all. The dems were confident that their least worse candidate would win. I thought that was clear, typed in black and white.
about the polls: when I reference polls I'm talking about the polls the weeks leading up the the election, even months. when others talk of polls they reference polls the day of or days before election day. yes, the pollsters did come around eventually as election day grew closer but still 538 and the NYT gave Trump a single digit chance of winning the day before the election.
pollsters like to reference the election day polls ignoring the majority of polls the weeks leading up to the election, so they don't look completely inaccurate and incompetent. they can only report what the voters are telling them. there isn't a margin of error for those that are unwilling to be truthful about who they are voting for.
This explanation shows you don't understand what those polls you are talking about mean.
Assuming a valid method is used, the polling is valid at the time the poll is taken. Not a week later or a month later, but the day it's taken. Not surprisingly, then, the polls within a few days of the election were accurate as to the result. Polling questions often start with some variation of "if the election were held today....". You have no evidence that the earlier polls were incorrect, because the election was not held on those days. The election was held the day it was held, and the polling results for that day were accurate with the results.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
well folks I thoroughly enjoyed todays subject matter even thou it may have expended more brain cells than I care to admit. I was hoping to hear more from my favorite multi cam video producer, very disappointing, especially after a few exchanges where he was completely talking out of the end of his large intestine. maybe next time. until then look at the bright side of things "we're still alive!"
I didn't bother to read your manifesto. I have little interest in engaging with a leninist.
I'll just say that your comment about your insurance premiums and deductibles going down since Trump was elected is complete idiocy. Maybe your numbers went down, but that has zero to do with the election.
I never commented about my insurance premiums or deductibles, I asked about someone else's. Is it at the point where we can't differentiate between statements and questions?
"really, how so? what mess? haven't your health insurance contributions dropped, your deductibles and co pays lower along with increased coverage"
I'm absolutely convinced on the trump voter stupidity theory.
I think it is a fair assessment for a portion of the 'perfect storm' leading to a (lol) Donald... Trump... presidential election. But I'm not thinking as optimistically as you. I'm thinking there was more stupidity at play than you are willing to concede. I mean, if a Trump voter wasn't flat out stupid to begin with... they were stupid to vote Trump in an effort to turn their nose up at the establishment.
Your argument suggests that devout democrats and neutrals found Hilary distasteful, but it fails to account for staunch republicans turned off with Trump as their nominee. Are liberals the only ones capable of voting with their conscience?
Donald Trump is the president of the US.
hahahahahahahahahahaha
again your pointing at voters believing in trump I'm pointing at voters not believing Hillary. it's simply a difference of opinion.
my argument doesn't suggest anything about democrats and neutrals, I explicitly addressed avg voters and independents, those that historically decide presidential elections. those can be registered dems republicans or third party.
why would I address staunch republicans turned off by trump when I'm pointing about the obvious reasons why Hillary lost? what do they have to do with Hilliary losing? if you want, we can apply your viewpoint as we discussed earlier that staunch republicans did stay home with the first time voter and or rarely ever voter filling the vote total gap.
don't understand your last question about liberals either? maybe you're assuming the stay home avg voter and indys are liberal, your assumption, not mine. I would argue by not voting at all liberals did vote their conscience. if my memory serves me correctly wasn't there an unusual amount of down ticket voting without a vote for president being cast? if so, doesn't that partly support my argument?
My last question is aimed at your assertion that people didn't believe in Hillary and that is why they preferred Trump. I am suggesting that Trump was, at a minimum, equally distrusted given his famously devious and crooked past; however, the decorum he presented campaigning left little doubt as to what your country might expect if elected- hardly impressive.
The situation was not great: I agree that Hillary was far from ideal, but Trump left people no choice... at least people with half a brain that is. It was flat out moronic to vote for such an imbecile thinking that doing so was going to make your life better (unless you're part of the 1% which, judging from a few of your posts lately, you might be).
If a Trump voter is simply stupid and thinks chocolate milk comes from brown cows (like 10% of your country)... well... what can you say? Trump said he was going to make America great again- they were all in and are still wondering when that is going to happen. If they're racists looking for a white saviour... well... at least they voted in line with their beliefs. But if a Trump voter voted because they thought he would be more appropriate than Hillary... then they haven't realized their brains aren't good brains and make up the bulk of what I have been suggesting.
You're beginning to convince me on the wildly stupid trump voter theory. your very first sentence: I never claimed people didn't believe in Hilliary and therefore voted trump. I claimed people didn't believe in Hilliary so they didn't vote at all, they stayed home. I even restated it, they voted their conscience by not voting at all. The dems were confident that their least worse candidate would win. I thought that was clear, typed in black and white.
about the polls: when I reference polls I'm talking about the polls the weeks leading up the the election, even months. when others talk of polls they reference polls the day of or days before election day. yes, the pollsters did come around eventually as election day grew closer but still 538 and the NYT gave Trump a single digit chance of winning the day before the election.
pollsters like to reference the election day polls ignoring the majority of polls the weeks leading up to the election, so they don't look completely inaccurate and incompetent. they can only report what the voters are telling them. there isn't a margin of error for those that are unwilling to be truthful about who they are voting for.
This explanation shows you don't understand what those polls you are talking about mean.
Assuming a valid method is used, the polling is valid at the time the poll is taken. Not a week later or a month later, but the day it's taken. Not surprisingly, then, the polls within a few days of the election were accurate as to the result. Polling questions often start with some variation of "if the election were held today....". You have no evidence that the earlier polls were incorrect, because the election was not held on those days. The election was held the day it was held, and the polling results for that day were accurate with the results.
correct but how can anyone call a poll accurate when the winner was given such a small chance of winning, then won easily? I focused more on the % of winning. Its my understanding that election polling usually more accurate, and I'm guessing maybe why they were off. its not like elections are sporting events, with one lucky punch knock outs.
I'm not certain of the exact questions, either if held today or simply who are you likely to vote for. Anyway, I see your point but my point is the polls the weeks leading up to the election gave would be Clinton voters a false sense she would win easily and maybe contributed to lower turnout. I believe that if the polls showed a tighter race and the real prospect of Trump actually becoming president, more people would have swallowed their conscience and voted least worst Hilliary. Based on your feedback I retract my phony polls comment.
Wow, first we had the Schumer referring to trump "the Intel community has 6 ways till Sunday to get back at you" Now Philip Mudd about trump "the government is gonna kill this guy"
Trump was like the New England patriots versus the Atlanta Falcons in the Super Bowl, baby, he just won it. Guess who was the Atlanta Falcons? Anyone? Anyone at all?
From that article above And while the shock of the 2016 election caused unprecedented soul-searching, tyrannophobia is blinding many to the real warnings of the election: A dysfunctional economy, not lurking tyranny, is what needs attention if recent electoral choices are to be explained — and voting patterns are to be changed in the future
"Ours is a republic that has long since taken on the trappings of a monarchy, with the president inhabiting rarified space as our king-emperor. The Brits have their woman in Buckingham Palace. We have our man in the White House."
On this downhill short hole over the Russian Collusion Pond, Trump skies his seven-iron and plops it right in the water. “Never happened, this is a witch hunt,” he says
Comments
Exactly! You and I think alike BP. If the world doesn't respond to the big bad evil President Trump eventually he will go away.
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com
I read your response. So have many others I see.
I think it is a fair assessment for a portion of the 'perfect storm' leading to a (lol) Donald... Trump... presidential election. But I'm not thinking as optimistically as you. I'm thinking there was more stupidity at play than you are willing to concede. I mean, if a Trump voter wasn't flat out stupid to begin with... they were stupid to vote Trump in an effort to turn their nose up at the establishment.
Your argument suggests that devout democrats and neutrals found Hilary distasteful, but it fails to account for staunch republicans turned off with Trump as their nominee. Are liberals the only ones capable of voting with their conscience?
Donald Trump is the president of the US.
hahahahahahahahahahaha
I get what you're trying to say but you seriously have to tone down the boy stuff. I mean imagine if President Trump were to say those words.
(which means that I want to comment, but...nope.)
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com
Just tagging you in case you missed it. It's a valid point.
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com
Nikki Styxxx looked really alarmed and confused when Trump made his comments about Venezuela.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
my argument doesn't suggest anything about democrats and neutrals, I explicitly addressed avg voters and independents, those that historically decide presidential elections. those can be registered dems republicans or third party.
why would I address staunch republicans turned off by trump when I'm pointing about the obvious reasons why Hillary lost? what do they have to do with Hilliary losing?
if you want, we can apply your viewpoint as we discussed earlier that staunch republicans did stay home with the first time voter and or rarely ever voter filling the vote total gap.
don't understand your last question about liberals either? maybe you're assuming the stay home avg voter and indys are liberal, your assumption, not mine. I would argue by not voting at all liberals did vote their conscience.
if my memory serves me correctly wasn't there an unusual amount of down ticket voting without a vote for president being cast? if so, doesn't that partly support my argument?
1. you are domiciled somewhere outside of the US say Greece etc
if based in US
2. you are currently covered on someone else's plan, parent spouse etc unlike 8 years ago
2. you receive government assisted subsidised health insurance unlike 8 years ago
2a. you are currently a sitting US senator
3. you work for a multi national company and your plan is based overseas say in France
if none of those apply then let the rest of us, I'm again guessing 99.9888888888888888888% in on the secret to lower premiums co pays and increased coverage.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
The situation was not great: I agree that Hillary was far from ideal, but Trump left people no choice... at least people with half a brain that is. It was flat out moronic to vote for such an imbecile thinking that doing so was going to make your life better (unless you're part of the 1% which, judging from a few of your posts lately, you might be).
If a Trump voter is simply stupid and thinks chocolate milk comes from brown cows (like 10% of your country)... well... what can you say? Trump said he was going to make America great again- they were all in and are still wondering when that is going to happen. If they're racists looking for a white saviour... well... at least they voted in line with their beliefs. But if a Trump voter voted because they thought he would be more appropriate than Hillary... then they haven't realized their brains aren't good brains and make up the bulk of what I have been suggesting.
your very first sentence:
I never claimed people didn't believe in Hilliary and therefore voted trump. I claimed people didn't believe in Hilliary so they didn't vote at all, they stayed home.
I even restated it, they voted their conscience by not voting at all.
The dems were confident that their least worse candidate would win.
I thought that was clear, typed in black and white.
about the polls: when I reference polls I'm talking about the polls the weeks leading up the the election, even months. when others talk of polls they reference polls the day of or days before election day. yes, the pollsters did come around eventually as election day grew closer but still 538 and the NYT gave Trump a single digit chance of winning the day before the election.
pollsters like to reference the election day polls ignoring the majority of polls the weeks leading up to the election, so they don't look completely inaccurate and incompetent. they can only report what the voters are telling them.
there isn't a margin of error for those that are unwilling to be truthful about who they are voting for.
This explanation shows you don't understand what those polls you are talking about mean.
Assuming a valid method is used, the polling is valid at the time the poll is taken. Not a week later or a month later, but the day it's taken. Not surprisingly, then, the polls within a few days of the election were accurate as to the result. Polling questions often start with some variation of "if the election were held today....". You have no evidence that the earlier polls were incorrect, because the election was not held on those days. The election was held the day it was held, and the polling results for that day were accurate with the results.
"really, how so? what mess? haven't your health insurance contributions dropped, your deductibles and co pays lower along with increased coverage"
I'm absolutely convinced on the trump voter stupidity theory.
I'm not certain of the exact questions, either if held today or simply who are you likely to vote for.
Anyway, I see your point but my point is the polls the weeks leading up to the election gave would be Clinton voters a false sense she would win easily and maybe contributed to lower turnout. I believe that if the polls showed a tighter race and the real prospect of Trump actually becoming president, more people would have swallowed their conscience and voted least worst Hilliary.
Based on your feedback I retract my phony polls comment.
Now Philip Mudd about trump "the government is gonna kill this guy"
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I think pjfanwnl has said this, the hysteria over trump is a greater threat than anything trump can say or tweet
From that article above And while the shock of the 2016 election caused unprecedented soul-searching, tyrannophobia is blinding many to the real warnings of the election: A dysfunctional economy, not lurking tyranny, is what needs attention if recent electoral choices are to be explained — and voting patterns are to be changed in the future
Trump is Not Cause, But Consequence
"Ours is a republic that has long since taken on the trappings of a monarchy, with the president inhabiting rarified space as our king-emperor. The Brits have their woman in Buckingham Palace. We have our man in the White House."I couldn't say it better myself...king emperor!
http://billmoyers.com/story/trump-consequence-trump-era/
haha
Hole 4, Par 3
On this downhill short hole over the Russian Collusion Pond, Trump skies his seven-iron and plops it right in the water. “Never happened, this is a witch hunt,” he says