And yes, socialists believe in a safety net, even for nazis & the klan. Trump should even have the right to vote from prison, which will come in handy, I’m sure.
And yes, socialists believe in a safety net, even for nazis & the klan. Trump should even have the right to vote from prison, which will come in handy, I’m sure.
Fat hurts wrote:
Yep. I'm right and you're wrong.
Any relation to Flagpole, by chance?
semsurrrrr wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
Yep. I'm right and you're wrong.
Any relation to Flagpole, by chance?
Speaking of ... it seems his repeated, time and time again, erroneous predictions have become too overwhelmingly embarrassing for the poor guy. He apparently is too embarrassed to show his pretty head here. How many times did he write "Mueller is coming" an"The Clown is done?" 20,000 times? 30,000 times? Who can overcome that? It first started with him guaranteed that Trump would lose. Flagpole 0-1. Then that Trump would serve out his term. Flagpole 0-2. Then that MUeller would bring down Trump - Flapgole 0-3. I could go on but the tally is about Flagpole 0-15. No one could endure the embarrassment of such a poor record. We can still love the guy but he is too embarrassed to show himself here.
ABC News suspended political correspondent David Wright after he is caught by Project Veritas on video identifying himself as a socialist and admitting the network spikes news important to voters.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ERtYsADWsAAd0S6?format=jpg&name=small
Sally Vix wrote:
Of course you don't. I think Global Warming is a hoax and you have bought into it hook-line-and-sinker. How many "Tipping Points" have come and gone? How many IPCC reports have been riddled with false prognostications time and time and time again? How many IPCC reports - the subsequent ones - have been forced to correct the errors in previous IPCC reports. Global Warming - what a crock.
The Left derives its strength through its holier-than-thou attitude: "you don't deserve a response from me"
Ironically, it's this very attitude that cements the echochambers that leave leftists ill-prepared to understand opponents and win meaningful elections. They had NO idea Trump would dominate the electoral in 2016 the way he did. To save face, they always parrot, "but we won the popular" as if that's some sort of feat. As if Trump didn't do 5 to 7 rallies A DAY in lesser-known areas to win, as if the electoral college hasn't existed for 200 + years...
Left,
Keep censoring, keep suppressing, keep thinking the world revolves around you. You have already cemented Trump's coming victory, and you have already guaranteed that the judiciary system will permanently remove your ideology. We will claim the White House, House and Senate - believe it.
SCREENCAP THIS
Sally Vix wrote:
Speaking of ... it seems his repeated, time and time again, erroneous predictions have become too overwhelmingly embarrassing for the poor guy. He apparently is too embarrassed to show his pretty head here. How many times did he write "Mueller is coming" an"The Clown is done?" 20,000 times? 30,000 times? Who can overcome that? It first started with him guaranteed that Trump would lose. Flagpole 0-1. Then that Trump would serve out his term. Flagpole 0-2. Then that MUeller would bring down Trump - Flapgole 0-3. I could go on but the tally is about Flagpole 0-15. No one could endure the embarrassment of such a poor record. We can still love the guy but he is too embarrassed to show himself here.
lol I've honestly always believed that the reason Flagpole hates Trump so much is because they are more similar than Flaggy would ever admit. Instead, he projects his own narcissism onto Trump, eventually looking like a total imbecile...
semsurrrrr wrote:
They had NO idea Trump would dominate the electoral in 2016 the way he did. To save face, they always parrot, "but we won the popular" as if that's some sort of feat. As if Trump didn't do 5 to 7 rallies A DAY in lesser-known areas to win, as if the electoral college hasn't existed for 200 + years...
Trump's margin of victory ranked 46th out of 58 presidential elections.
You sure have a funny definition of dominate.
Trump’s more submissive than dominant; he always let’s vlad ride him.
jesseriley wrote:
Trump’s more submissive than dominant; he always let’s vlad ride him.
Jesse - you are back on discussing your submissiveness and dominance endeavors. Best if you kept those close to your chest. Some of us might like to vicariously enjoy your past naughtiness but many of use, myself included, want nothing to do with that stuff.
Sally Vix wrote:
L L wrote:
Saying Trump has supporters that are black is like saying Kenya has white people.
Yeah, but not many.
Anyway, I don't care for the name calling, myself.
I don't see the racism, but bigoted - sure.
There are a lot of good people that voted for Trump and still support him. I can't lump them all together.
In fact, they are mostly good people that I simply don't agree with.
It's spineless Republican Congress people that I have a bigger issue with.
The Lindsey Graham type that will sell out all of his principles to get near power.
I liked some of what you said but not all of it. You are calling the Republicans in Congress who voted to not impeach in the House and voted to acquit in the Senate "spineless" and other derogatory names. Maybe instead those House members who voted against impeachment in the House are the ones who do have spines and have morals and understand that the House impeachment was a sham and partisan witch hunt that should have never got to where it did. Maybe the "spineless" ones were the Dems in the House who allowed 17 Dem witnesses and no witnesses for the defense. Maybe all those Dems in the House who voted to impeach...maybe they were the spineless ones who just went along with their corrupt leaders (Schiff, Nadler and the rest of the gang). The only one in the Senate who had the balls to go against their party was Romney. Where were the braves ones on the Democratic side who had the courage to say that the impeachment was a mockery and Trump should never have been impeached? Why did Joe Manchin or other "moderates" not have the balls to vote for acquittal. You Liberals always want the Dems to acquiesce but you never expect the same of your own brethren.
Sally, that is awful. Maybe your worst post ever.
Sally,
The Republicans in the senate said Trump was guilty with what he was charged with.
And we're not talking about lying about a sex act, we are talking about abuse of power with national security issues at stake.
They said he did it.
And they acquitted him of the charges.
You know if a Democrat president did the same thing, they would vote guilty.
And I think Democrats would vote guilty as well. But that's conjecture.
The fact is they said he was guilty and voted to acquit.
Here is Lindsey Graham doing all he can to say how horrible it would be to have Donald Trump as president during the 2016 primaries:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPOOXp3S2UI
"If Donald Trump cares to be in my party, I think it taints conservatism for generations to come.
I think his campaign is opportunistic, race-baiting, religious bigotry, xenophobia.
Other than that, he'd be a good nominee."
Now this guy defends Trump like he is the next coming of Jesus.
Fat hurts wrote:
Yosingleryx wrote:
For clarification, I was referring to semserr, not Fat Hurts in my last post.
I’ll add Sally Vix, Rigged for Hillary, and Trollminator to that bunch (apologies to the others I missed). Why respond. They are just into calling names and trying to get a rise out of posters by posting preposterous things.
Ignore them and stick to sane discussions.
I don't read or respond to Sally any more. I haven't made up my mind about anyone else yet.
Good decision. :)
The lady doth protest too much. They rent you by the minute, babe.
L L wrote:
Sally,
The Republicans in the senate said Trump was guilty with what he was charged with.
And we're not talking about lying about a sex act, we are talking about abuse of power with national security issues at stake.
They said he did it.
And they acquitted him of the charges.
You know if a Democrat president did the same thing, they would vote guilty.
And I think Democrats would vote guilty as well. But that's conjecture.
The fact is they said he was guilty and voted to acquit.
Here is Lindsey Graham doing all he can to say how horrible it would be to have Donald Trump as president during the 2016 primaries:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPOOXp3S2UI"If Donald Trump cares to be in my party, I think it taints conservatism for generations to come.
I think his campaign is opportunistic, race-baiting, religious bigotry, xenophobia.
Other than that, he'd be a good nominee."
Now this guy defends Trump like he is the next coming of Jesus.
LL - I respect a lot of what you say but if a Democratic president did something similar to what Trump did - not one Democrat in the House will vote for impeachment. This is how partisan Washington has become. Hillary health insurance - had not one Repub in its drafting. Not one. Obamacare - had not one Repub in its drafting. Pelosi said it needs to be passed before we can see what is in it. Trump impeachment - not one Republ.
Are you as tired as I am of this hyper-partisan politics? It is sickening.
This is how quickly a nation can change:
https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1232768262871666692?s=20
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
I liked some of what you said but not all of it. You are calling the Republicans in Congress who voted to not impeach in the House and voted to acquit in the Senate "spineless" and other derogatory names. Maybe instead those House members who voted against impeachment in the House are the ones who do have spines and have morals and understand that the House impeachment was a sham and partisan witch hunt that should have never got to where it did. Maybe the "spineless" ones were the Dems in the House who allowed 17 Dem witnesses and no witnesses for the defense. Maybe all those Dems in the House who voted to impeach...maybe they were the spineless ones who just went along with their corrupt leaders (Schiff, Nadler and the rest of the gang). The only one in the Senate who had the balls to go against their party was Romney. Where were the braves ones on the Democratic side who had the courage to say that the impeachment was a mockery and Trump should never have been impeached? Why did Joe Manchin or other "moderates" not have the balls to vote for acquittal. You Liberals always want the Dems to acquiesce but you never expect the same of your own brethren.
Sally, that is awful. Maybe your worst post ever.
Aztec - even Michelangelo screwed up a few ceilings before the Sistine Chapel!
Sally Vix wrote:
if a Democratic president did something similar to what Trump did - not one Democrat in the House will vote for impeachment.
I simply disagree.
Al Franken was a solid Democrat in pushing legislation.
A couple of sketchy photos came out and they made him resign.
The thing is, Trump has pushed limits that no one would ever think trying to push.
We have no context for comparison.
Sally Vix wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Sally, that is awful. Maybe your worst post ever.
Aztec - even Michelangelo screwed up a few ceilings before the Sistine Chapel!
Interesting comeback. Anyway, the only defense that can be made for Trump regarding Ukraine is that he did a bad thing, but it doesn't, in your opinion. warrant removal from office. Anything else is crap,
L L wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
if a Democratic president did something similar to what Trump did - not one Democrat in the House will vote for impeachment.
I simply disagree.
Al Franken was a solid Democrat in pushing legislation.
A couple of sketchy photos came out and they made him resign.
The thing is, Trump has pushed limits that no one would ever think trying to push.
We have no context for comparison.
So why is Bob Menendez still in the Senate?
And how many Dems voted for Clinton impeachment?
Fat hurts wrote:
Yosingleryx wrote:
For clarification, I was referring to semserr, not Fat Hurts in my last post.
I’ll add Sally Vix, Rigged for Hillary, and Trollminator to that bunch (apologies to the others I missed). Why respond. They are just into calling names and trying to get a rise out of posters by posting preposterous things.
Ignore them and stick to sane discussions.
I don't read or respond to Sally any more. I haven't made up my mind about anyone else yet.
That's a good idea, because Sally shows no ability to learn from anything that is shown him to be true or false. He falls back on already disproved mantras on anything and everything from the fake greatness of the college he attended to the false idea that he never insults people to so many incorrect statements on everything from deer in headlights to the amount of the deficit to anything political or anything else for that matter. Not sure how long you have ignored Sally's posts, but I can confirm that no matter when that was, nothing but nonsense has come from that poster since.