4 posts is a row. New record of triggered.

(10-20-2016 07:11 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 11:03 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:56 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:42 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I think educated people see how dangerous this guy really is. So they are no longer pulling punches.

Dangerous?
Far as I know no one has died on Trump's watch.
HRC can't make that claim.

Boom! Close this damn thread, oh and somebody get Mach some water for that burn, he will need it!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, nobody died under Trump's watch because thankfully he's never been in such a position of responsibility. God help us if he ever is.

Also there were dozens of consulate attacks under George W. Bush, but Dems never went so low as to politicize them. And the GOP House cut consulate security for her State Department.

GWB isn't running for President...




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(10-20-2016 07:13 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  4 posts is a row. New record of triggered.

Impossible to keep up with the bull**** from the Trump cultists on here. I'm modifying my offer btw. Concede now and it's 9 months.

(10-20-2016 07:13 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 11:10 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:43 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:41 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 08:46 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Too stupid to breed.

The truth is that both plans blow up the debt. Supposedly, Trump's plan is worse at doing that. Given his growth projections, he probably also blows a hole in the debt worse than Clinton would.

But that's not what she said, she said that she won't add a cent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sure and GWB said he'd never get into nation building either. Her "lie" is the way she structured her plan with what i'm guessing would be irrational growth projections. You can say Trump also lied about his plan. He said he'd grow us out of the deficit problems. But at 5 -6% growth over 10 years (or say even 4% annually)? NFW will the economy do that for 10 years.

Hold on... looking to see if GWB is on the ballot this year...

Nope.

Hmmm, no.

Ok, GWB isn't running for a president.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

OK, but you never addressed the rest of my replies. GWB was used as an example of someone who misrepresented reality during campaigning like Hillary did. Trump was no better. When Trump was pressed about his plan blowing up the debt, his response was basically "no it won't".

Thanks for clearing that up Donald...

(10-20-2016 05:45 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 11:19 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Yep, it's gonna take something besides Trump to beat Hillary.

Not if you RINOs get a spine.

It's the ******* Trump idiots that are the problem. WH was handed to us on a platter and these fools wanted to play idiotic childish games. **** the brain dead retards cheer leading this charlatan.

(10-19-2016 10:54 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:24 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 09:50 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 09:48 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Holy Shnitke's??? Some of you actually believe he won that? You can't possibly be that naive?

Remember these guys said the "you should be in jail" comment from debate #2 was "the best singer in debate history"

Every pundit said that was his low point of the night.

So don't take the cons on here seriously

first of all, it's a "zinger". the best singer in debate history was probably stephen douglas, who reportedly had a lovely tenor voice.

but you're both getting sand in your gavinas over what is ultimately a retarded question -- which is only slightly less retarded than fussing over what has-been "pundits" think. punditry died the day pundits started reporting on what was trending on twitter. period. their corpses have been moldering in open graves ever since. ******* dinosaurs that just haven't fallen in to a tar pit yet.

anyway, "who won the debate" is irrelevant. "who captured more undecideds" is all that matters in any election at this point, and in this particular election cycle, if you're still undecided, you're either mentally defective or clinically indecisive. whichever the case, these people aren't normal.

I don't know what would capture the undecideds at this point . . . and neither does anyone else. but here's what they're NOT doing; closely scoring televised debates. so, quit fingerbanging yourself over the niceties of forensics; it's simply not relevant.

If you can't understand why people could be undecided, you are incapable of rational thought and shouldn't really vote, no matter who you are for.

I can't understand why people that are undecided in this election aren't institutionalized. Moreover, I would like to fix that. I would like to round them all up and put them all in detention camps until after the election, because there's no telling what these retards are about to do.

Its people like you that give us Trump and Clinton and can't see how totally awful both are. And can't see how unreliable and lacking in credibility both are. How both have totalitarian tendencies that threaten our freedom. As for their position on issues, they both lie and flop so much, its hard to be certain what either one would do. The way Trump has run his campaign and the way Clinton has led her public life lead you to believe both are massively incompetent. They are both world class jerks as well and treat other human beings like trash.

You are part of the problem with America, calling people stupid for not agreeing with you, when its your own failings that explain your inability to understand. I understand people can feel strongly for one or the other. But lots of people have problems with both.

(10-19-2016 10:56 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:42 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I think educated people see how dangerous this guy really is. So they are no longer pulling punches.

just for the sake of argument, I'll entertain your utterly self absorbed and condescending concept for a moment -- I think if they were truly educated, it wouldn't have taken this long for them to figure it out.

just because they're in your teevee thingy doesn't make them "educated", sparky.

Journalism school wasn't the place for the best and brightest.

(10-20-2016 09:45 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:54 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:24 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 09:50 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Remember these guys said the "you should be in jail" comment from debate #2 was "the best singer in debate history"

Every pundit said that was his low point of the night.

So don't take the cons on here seriously

first of all, it's a "zinger". the best singer in debate history was probably stephen douglas, who reportedly had a lovely tenor voice.

but you're both getting sand in your gavinas over what is ultimately a retarded question -- which is only slightly less retarded than fussing over what has-been "pundits" think. punditry died the day pundits started reporting on what was trending on twitter. period. their corpses have been moldering in open graves ever since. ******* dinosaurs that just haven't fallen in to a tar pit yet.

anyway, "who won the debate" is irrelevant. "who captured more undecideds" is all that matters in any election at this point, and in this particular election cycle, if you're still undecided, you're either mentally defective or clinically indecisive. whichever the case, these people aren't normal.

I don't know what would capture the undecideds at this point . . . and neither does anyone else. but here's what they're NOT doing; closely scoring televised debates. so, quit fingerbanging yourself over the niceties of forensics; it's simply not relevant.

If you can't understand why people could be undecided, you are incapable of rational thought and shouldn't really vote, no matter who you are for.

I can't understand why people that are undecided in this election aren't institutionalized. Moreover, I would like to fix that. I would like to round them all up and put them all in detention camps until after the election, because there's no telling what these retards are about to do.

Its people like you that give us Trump and Clinton and can't see how totally awful both are. And can't see how unreliable and lacking in credibility both are. How both have totalitarian tendencies that threaten our freedom. As for their position on issues, they both lie and flop so much, its hard to be certain what either one would do. The way Trump has run his campaign and the way Clinton has led her public life lead you to believe both are massively incompetent. They are both world class jerks as well and treat other human beings like trash.

You are part of the problem with America, calling people stupid for not agreeing with you, when its your own failings that explain your inability to understand. I understand people can feel strongly for one or the other. But lots of people have problems with both.

I didn't call them stupid. I called them defective. there is a difference. and I didn't call them defective because they disagree with me, I called them defective because they are disagreeing with themselves.

I'm going to assume there is some long story behind your odd defense of the undecideds in the most polarizing election since jefferson-adams.

Max seems to be avoiding posting the poll data today. I wonder why?

La Times Tie
IBD Trump +1
Rasmussen Trump +3

So what is the count on that... 2.5 for Trump, 30 for Hillary?

(10-20-2016 10:25 AM)JDTulane Wrote:  So what is the count on that... 2.5 for Trump, 30 for Hillary?

And to think How way too many more Millions of Dollars Hillary has spent on this campaign vs the few Millions comparatively speaking Trump has spent on it and He's at the Doorstep now ! DING DONG !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Hillary, I'm Home

doorstep of what?

(10-20-2016 10:14 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Max seems to be avoiding posting the poll data today. I wonder why?

La Times Tie
IBD Trump +1
Rasmussen Trump +3

(10-20-2016 10:14 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Max seems to be avoiding posting the poll data today. I wonder why?

La Times Tie
IBD Trump +1
Rasmussen Trump +3

Because I have a life?

You missed one though,

New Orleans Times-Picayune Hillary +12

(10-20-2016 12:40 PM)Max Power Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 10:14 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Max seems to be avoiding posting the poll data today. I wonder why?

La Times Tie
IBD Trump +1
Rasmussen Trump +3

Because I have a life?

You missed one though,

New Orleans Times-Picayune Hillary +12

(10-20-2016 11:06 AM)fsquid Wrote:  doorstep of what?

Trump's White House



Hillary's White house

(10-20-2016 01:16 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 11:06 AM)fsquid Wrote:  doorstep of what?

Trump's White House



Hillary's White house

Pretty sure those both belong to Obama

(10-20-2016 01:10 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 12:40 PM)Max Power Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 10:14 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Max seems to be avoiding posting the poll data today. I wonder why?

La Times Tie
IBD Trump +1
Rasmussen Trump +3

Because I have a life?

You missed one though,

New Orleans Times-Picayune Hillary +12

Did they only poll the 9th Ward?

(10-20-2016 10:14 AM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 09:45 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:54 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:24 PM)EagleX Wrote:  first of all, it's a "zinger". the best singer in debate history was probably stephen douglas, who reportedly had a lovely tenor voice.

but you're both getting sand in your gavinas over what is ultimately a retarded question -- which is only slightly less retarded than fussing over what has-been "pundits" think. punditry died the day pundits started reporting on what was trending on twitter. period. their corpses have been moldering in open graves ever since. ******* dinosaurs that just haven't fallen in to a tar pit yet.

anyway, "who won the debate" is irrelevant. "who captured more undecideds" is all that matters in any election at this point, and in this particular election cycle, if you're still undecided, you're either mentally defective or clinically indecisive. whichever the case, these people aren't normal.

I don't know what would capture the undecideds at this point . . . and neither does anyone else. but here's what they're NOT doing; closely scoring televised debates. so, quit fingerbanging yourself over the niceties of forensics; it's simply not relevant.

If you can't understand why people could be undecided, you are incapable of rational thought and shouldn't really vote, no matter who you are for.

I can't understand why people that are undecided in this election aren't institutionalized. Moreover, I would like to fix that. I would like to round them all up and put them all in detention camps until after the election, because there's no telling what these retards are about to do.

Its people like you that give us Trump and Clinton and can't see how totally awful both are. And can't see how unreliable and lacking in credibility both are. How both have totalitarian tendencies that threaten our freedom. As for their position on issues, they both lie and flop so much, its hard to be certain what either one would do. The way Trump has run his campaign and the way Clinton has led her public life lead you to believe both are massively incompetent. They are both world class jerks as well and treat other human beings like trash.

You are part of the problem with America, calling people stupid for not agreeing with you, when its your own failings that explain your inability to understand. I understand people can feel strongly for one or the other. But lots of people have problems with both.

I didn't call them stupid. I called them defective. there is a difference. and I didn't call them defective because they disagree with me, I called them defective because they are disagreeing with themselves.

I'm going to assume there is some long story behind your odd defense of the undecideds in the most polarizing election since jefferson-adams.

Its polarizing because most people despise both of them. There are lots of us Republicans who won't vote for Hillary and aren't sure whether to vote for Trump or Johnson or none of the above. Some Republicans will vote for Hillary. Trump is a life long liberal Democrat who supports using eminent domain to throw an old widow out of her house so he can have parking for his casino and who sent "love" notes to Nancy Pelosi and has written on how great Hillary Clinton is (in the last 8 years). He's a loose cannon who violates accepted standards of decent behavior in public (even if you believe all these women are paid HRC plants-which is entirely possible).

(10-20-2016 01:48 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 10:14 AM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 09:45 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:54 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 10:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  If you can't understand why people could be undecided, you are incapable of rational thought and shouldn't really vote, no matter who you are for.

I can't understand why people that are undecided in this election aren't institutionalized. Moreover, I would like to fix that. I would like to round them all up and put them all in detention camps until after the election, because there's no telling what these retards are about to do.

Its people like you that give us Trump and Clinton and can't see how totally awful both are. And can't see how unreliable and lacking in credibility both are. How both have totalitarian tendencies that threaten our freedom. As for their position on issues, they both lie and flop so much, its hard to be certain what either one would do. The way Trump has run his campaign and the way Clinton has led her public life lead you to believe both are massively incompetent. They are both world class jerks as well and treat other human beings like trash.

You are part of the problem with America, calling people stupid for not agreeing with you, when its your own failings that explain your inability to understand. I understand people can feel strongly for one or the other. But lots of people have problems with both.

I didn't call them stupid. I called them defective. there is a difference. and I didn't call them defective because they disagree with me, I called them defective because they are disagreeing with themselves.

I'm going to assume there is some long story behind your odd defense of the undecideds in the most polarizing election since jefferson-adams.

Its polarizing because most people despise both of them. There are lots of us Republicans who won't vote for Hillary and aren't sure whether to vote for Trump or Johnson or none of the above. Some Republicans will vote for Hillary. Trump is a life long liberal Democrat who supports using eminent domain to throw an old widow out of her house so he can have parking for his casino and who sent "love" notes to Nancy Pelosi and has written on how great Hillary Clinton is (in the last 8 years). He's a loose cannon who violates accepted standards of decent behavior in public (even if you believe all these women are paid HRC plants-which is entirely possible).

..and Hillary is the most viscous and corrupt politician of all time that wants to start WW3 with Russia.

Choose wisely.