You prove your low class with every post kap. What your last post acknowledges is that you approve of turning this place into an endless bashing of liberals rather than something constructive. And yet it's the kind fault for taking issue with it.

This **** has gone on for 2 days across 35 something threads

And yet just two days ago you posted how unfortunate it was that not enough libs participate on here. You are such a freaking joke.

(12-13-2016 01:17 AM)john01992 Wrote:  You prove your low class with every post kap. What your last post acknowledges is that you approve of turning this place into an endless bashing of liberals rather than something constructive. And yet it's the kind fault for taking issue with it.

This **** has gone on for 2 days across 35 something threads

And yet just two days ago you posted how unfortunate it was that not enough libs participate on here. You are such a freaking joke.

He is being so much milder than you and Max were being a month and two months ago.

He doesn't call people idiots either

YOU MAD BRO?

I like how these threads are being brought back up.

The posters that put them out there, insulted the intelligence of other in doing so, and acted like everybody was so out of it should be embarrsssed by what they wrote and their level of smugness.

(12-13-2016 08:32 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I like how these threads are being brought back up.

The posters that put them out there, insulted the intelligence of other in doing so, and acted like everybody was so out of it should be embarrsssed by what they wrote and their level of smugness.

And not just the intelligence... They basically played the "conservatives are racists, and sexists, and ...."

To me that's way more offensive than "you're wrong" or even "you're stupid"

(12-13-2016 08:01 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 01:17 AM)john01992 Wrote:  You prove your low class with every post kap. What your last post acknowledges is that you approve of turning this place into an endless bashing of liberals rather than something constructive. And yet it's the kind fault for taking issue with it.

This **** has gone on for 2 days across 35 something threads

And yet just two days ago you posted how unfortunate it was that not enough libs participate on here. You are such a freaking joke.

He is being so much milder than you and Max were being a month and two months ago.

You are a lying sack of S--- if you call this "mild" bumping a thread let alone 35 times and doing it to target specific posters is as "in your face" as it gets. The biggest issue I have with this whole thing is the fact that USM only targeted active liberal posters proving his intent was to troll

(12-13-2016 09:09 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 08:01 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 01:17 AM)john01992 Wrote:  You prove your low class with every post kap. What your last post acknowledges is that you approve of turning this place into an endless bashing of liberals rather than something constructive. And yet it's the kind fault for taking issue with it.

This **** has gone on for 2 days across 35 something threads

And yet just two days ago you posted how unfortunate it was that not enough libs participate on here. You are such a freaking joke.

He is being so much milder than you and Max were being a month and two months ago.

You are a lying sack of S--- if you call this "mild" bumping a thread let alone 35 times and doing it to target specific posters is as "in your face" as it gets. The biggest issue I have with this whole thing is the fact that USM only targeted active liberal posters proving his intent was to troll

I see you lack the capability to differentiate between opinion and "lies." I guess that's why you supported Hillary and made such ridiculous absolutist statements ridiculing anyone who didn't agree with your erroneous blind belief in MSM.

Not even Trump thought he would win. Your entire talking point that credible people saw this coming is stupid

(12-13-2016 09:31 AM)john01992 Wrote:  Not even Trump thought he would win. Your entire talking point that credible people saw this coming is stupid

Just shows how credible the people you consider to be credible are.

I knew Trump was going to win. I laughed at your stupid topics (like this one) back then, and will continue to do so.

Enjoy the L.

if Trump thought he was going to lose, why did he run?

So if Trump is not credible to cite on his own winning prospects than who is? Like I said holier than thou attitude. Y'all are playing revisionist history with this crap. I mean seriously I lost count of how many times I saw the cons concede Trump wouldn't win or had the smaller chance of winning.

(12-13-2016 09:52 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  if Trump thought he was going to lose, why did he run?

Every single candidate knows on Election Day roughly what their winning prospects are like.

Also everyone knows a large number of the GOP field knew they had little to no chances of winning and ran to get their name out for 2020, to help get their name out for a book deal, or in Trump's case a book deal and TV show.

You are a fool if you think chances of winning is the end all be all for a POTUS run.

(12-13-2016 09:57 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(12-13-2016 09:52 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  if Trump thought he was going to lose, why did he run?

Every single candidate knows on Election Day roughly what their winning prospects are like.

Also everyone knows a large number of the GOP field knew they had little to no chances of winning and ran to get their name out for 2020, to help get their name out for a book deal, or in Trump's case a book deal and TV show.

You are a fool if you think chances of winning is the end all be all for a POTUS run.

so by your logic hillary knew she wasnt going to win?

HRC was widely thought to be the nominee for like a decade. Like I said in the past. You strive to be difficult and ignore basic facts.

(12-13-2016 09:54 AM)john01992 Wrote:  So if Trump is not credible to cite on his own winning prospects than who is? Like I said holier than thou attitude. Y'all are playing revisionist history with this crap. I mean seriously I lost count of how many times I saw the cons concede Trump wouldn't win or had the smaller chance of winning.

Link?

(12-13-2016 10:25 AM)john01992 Wrote:  HRC was widely thought to be the nominee for like a decade. Like I said in the past. You strive to be difficult and ignore basic facts.

oh kind of like the fact that this discussion is about the presidential election and not the primaries?

(12-13-2016 10:25 AM)john01992 Wrote:  HRC was widely thought to be the nominee for like a decade. Like I said in the past. You strive to be difficult and ignore basic facts.

And that.... Is why we have president Trump!

1 - A lack of serious competition (outside of sanders) because "she's inevitable"
2 - A load of baggage which would have felled any other candidate outside of Clinton
3 - DNC favoritism which, when realized, turned off the voter that Sanders had energized.

Brutal

(12-13-2016 08:12 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  YOU MAD BRO?

He is definitely triggered. Called me an ahole. Needs his safeplace.

(12-12-2016 10:40 PM)john01992 Wrote:  the future of you being the most insufferable a$$hole possible?