PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on November 04, 2016, 05:32:18 PM
-
I hope the instinct to speak up keeps growing in people. This gal had courage and integrity.
https://milo.yiannopoulos.net/2016/11/trump-lawsuit-voter-fraud/
-
"There is no vote fraud."
-
"There is no vote fraud."
Its all a figment of the Pacists' imagination.
-
Something being real is not a prerequisite for Donnie suing someone. He threatens to sue people all the time for slights, real and imagined.
-
Something being real is not a prerequisite for Donnie suing someone. He threatens to sue people all the time for slights, real and imagined.
You're no t going to give up, are you? You are fine with Hillary winning and spending her entire time fighting off investigations until she is impeached or destroys the justice system even more.
-
You're no t going to give up, are you? You are fine with Hillary winning and spending her entire time fighting off investigations until she is impeached or destroys the justice system even more.
You're not going to give up are you? You're fine with a New York Liberal Democrat Hillary Donor winning and spending his entire time grabbing the pussies of interns and cooking off nukes because someone insulted him on Twitter at 3am.
-
You're no t going to give up, are you? You are fine with Hillary winning and spending her entire time fighting off investigations until she is impeached or destroys the justice system even more.
At least Jeff can't vote in this election.
-
You're not going to give up are you? You're fine with a New York Liberal Democrat Hillary Donor winning and spending his entire time grabbing the pussies of interns and cooking off nukes because someone insulted him on Twitter at 3am.
I didn't know bill was running again...
-
You're not going to give up are you? You're fine with a New York Liberal Democrat Hillary Donor winning and spending his entire time grabbing the pussies of interns and cooking off nukes because someone insulted him on Twitter at 3am.
No. I'm not going to give up as long as Trump is the only one that can keep Hillary out of the Whitehouse.
But you didn't answer the question? You are good with Hillary winning, aren't you?
I don't believe Trump will casually pop a nuke, and I don't think he will be pulling a "Bill Clinton" in White House. But I do think Hillary will drive the nation nuts with all the investigations and scheming, and I think she will lower our standing in the world tremendously. And I think her anti-business attitude will destroy our economy and I think her liberal judges will weaken the country immeasurably.
I can imagine Trump doing some good, but I can't see Hillary doing anything but causing problems.
-
The funny thing is with all the Trumpkins, they all rail about me being against Trump, but you know what they don't do? They don't refute what I say, because I'm telling the truth about their Orange Lord.
-
Jeff stops by the forum again:
(http://i1077.photobucket.com/albums/w464/flybywire1959/ae16fa53_wow-nerd-south-park-580_zpsz4gykhfp.jpeg)
-
The funny thing is with all the Trumpkins, they all rail about me being against Trump, but you know what they don't do? They don't refute what I say, because I'm telling the truth about their Orange Lord.
Don't confuse deliberately ignoring with failure to refute. Few here will defend Trump very far past his ability to serve as the anti-Clinton.
-
Jeff stops by the forum again:
Would you be trying for this kind of exchange?:
-
Would you be trying for this kind of exchange?:
Actually a Jeff post is more like this:
(http://i1077.photobucket.com/albums/w464/flybywire1959/throwing%20crap_zpsfnssuetj.gif)
-
The funny thing is with all the Trumpkins, they all rail about me being against Trump, but you know what they don't do? They don't refute what I say, because I'm telling the truth about their Orange Lord.
No, I don't refute what you say. Trump has a colorful and risque past. He is an egotistical blowhard. But I do think you magnify it's importance when compared to the failings and dangers of Hillary. And I think you fail to take into consideration the potential good that Trump can do while wildly speculating about the bad things you imagine he will do.
And while you often say you also criticize Hillary, you don't actually do that often. Every criticism of Hillary is met by you with a "but Trump . . . too".
And you still have not answered the question:
Are you ok with Hillary as President?
Because you are doing everything you can to assure that happens.
-
Don't confuse deliberately ignoring with failure to refute. Few here will defend Trump very far past his ability to serve as the anti-Clinton.
OK, you responded, but don't refute. I take that as most likely an inability.
-
Actually a Jeff post is more like this:
(http://i1077.photobucket.com/albums/w464/flybywire1959/throwing%20crap_zpsfnssuetj.gif)
Jeez.
You've even run out of new ad hominems. For you bread and butter, you'd think you'd be a BIT more creative.
-
No, I don't refute what you say. Trump has a colorful and risque past. He is an egotistical blowhard. But I do think you magnify it's importance when compared to the failings and dangers of Hillary. And I think you fail to take into consideration the potential good that Trump can do while wildly speculating about the bad things you imagine he will do.
And while you often say you also criticize Hillary, you don't actually do that often. Every criticism of Hillary is met by you with a "but Trump . . . too".
And you still have not answered the question:
Are you ok with Hillary as President?
Because you are doing everything you can to assure that happens.
There is plenty of criticism of Hillary around here. There is no need for Jeff to exacerbate the circle jerk with another "me too!" post, which is how a lot of these go. Frankly, I'm glad someone around here is helping remind you fine folks that you're voting for a pussy-grabbing egotistical blowhard with The Best Words (https://youtu.be/7UIE_MRAhEA?t=50s). Especially considering there are other options on the ballot.
-
The funny thing is with all the Trumpkins, they all rail about me being against Trump, but you know what they don't do? They don't refute what I say, because I'm telling the truth about their Orange Lord.
Yea? Well I'm not a Trumpkin, as you know. I was on your side. I helped Cruz gain victory in Wisconsin.
But Cruz lost. In fact 16 of my top 17 candidates lost. Trump won. I don't like like him. But he does say some good things, and I have to try to trust him. The problem is, I totally trust Hillary. I trust her to change the United States irreversibly and permanently, and to do everything possible to gut the first and Second Amendments. And when it comes to the Constitution, I'm a single-issue voter.
-
Yea? Well I'm not a Trumpkin, as you know. I was on your side. I helped Cruz gain victory in Wisconsin.
But Cruz lost. In fact 16 of my top 17 candidates lost. Trump won. I don't like like him. But he does say some good things, and I have to try to trust him. The problem is, I totally trust Hillary. I trust her to change the United States irreversibly and permanently, and to do everything possible to gut the first and Second Amendments. And when it comes to the Constitution, I'm a single-issue voter.
That is pretty much how I feel. If we lose the 2A the rest will follow. We already have tremendous restrictions on legally owned firearms, and we also now have restrictions on free speech. Remember when DOJ Loretta Lynch wanted to prosecute "hate speech" against Muslims?
-
That is pretty much how I feel. If we lose the 2A the rest will follow. We already have tremendous restrictions on legally owned firearms, and we also now have restrictions on free speech. Remember when DOJ Loretta Lynch wanted to prosecute "hate speech" against Muslims?
While I am a firm believer in 2A, I am not radical about it. I could live with a "few" regulations and safeguards.
But this election is about much more than the 2nd.
She believes that the government knows how to run our lives better than we do.
She believes that raising taxes on the rich will raise more revenue.
She believes in an activist Supreme Court and would appoint judges that would support her views.
She is willing to sell the national interest for her own personal gain.
She believes that welfare is an economic stimulant.
She is meaner and more vile that Trump ever thought of being.
The list goes on.
-
While I am a firm believer in 2A, I am not radical about it. I could live with a "few" regulations and safeguards.
But this election is about much more than the 2nd.
She believes that the government knows how to run our lives better than we do.
She believes that raising taxes on the rich will raise more revenue.
She believes in an activist Supreme Court and would appoint judges that would support her views.
She is willing to sell the national interest for her own personal gain.
She believes that welfare is an economic stimulant.
She is meaner and more vile that Trump ever thought of being.
The list goes on.
I agree with all of this. I would submit, however, that the 2nd Amendment is vital to keeping the rest of our rights in tact.
-
While I am a firm believer in 2A, I am not radical about it. I could live with a "few" regulations and safeguards.
We already have many, many regulations, and safeguards. Many are Un-Constitutional. Criminals do not pay attention to these myriad of laws.
But this election is about much more than the 2nd.
She believes that the government knows how to run our lives better than we do.
She believes that raising taxes on the rich will raise more revenue.
She believes in an activist Supreme Court and would appoint judges that would support her views.
She is willing to sell the national interest for her own personal gain.
She believes that welfare is an economic stimulant.
She is meaner and more vile that Trump ever thought of being.
The list goes on.
Agree with all of the above.
-
While I am a firm believer in 2A, I am not radical about it. I could live with a "few" regulations and safeguards.
But this election is about much more than the 2nd.
She believes that the government knows how to run our lives better than we do.
She believes that raising taxes on the rich will raise more revenue.
She believes in an activist Supreme Court and would appoint judges that would support her views.
She is willing to sell the national interest for her own personal gain.
She believes that welfare is an economic stimulant.
She is meaner and more vile that Trump ever thought of being.
The list goes on.
I have a deal on the table for any Liberal Progressive out there who wants to take it. The terms of the deal are that if you can correctly answer just one single question, then I will agree with everything that you have to say and put my considerable full weight and support behind you. But if you cannot answer the question, then you simply must be quiet and abstain from making comments because you don't know the answer.
So far, the few that have accepted the challenge have failed and all have welched on the deal.
I will even give you the question - How will you ensure that I am personally happy under your plan? Because if you cannot answer that for me, then you cannot answer it for anyone and you are more likely to cause misery than happiness. So avoid being evil and causing misery and just drop out of politics.
-
We already have many, many regulations, and safeguards. Many are Un-Constitutional. Criminals do not pay attention to these myriad of laws.
I didn't necessarily mean we need new rules and regs, just that I am ok with some rules and regs. I actually think there are too many already, but we need to do a better job of enforcing the rules we do have. Guns used in domestic and social violence needs to be punished, but but gun use for defense needs to be protected. Sometimes distinguishing the two can be problematic though.
-
I didn't necessarily mean we need new rules and regs, just that I am ok with some rules and regs. I actually think there are too many already, but we need to do a better job of enforcing the rules we do have. Guns used in domestic and social violence needs to be punished, but but gun use for defense needs to be protected. Sometimes distinguishing the two can be problematic though.
Agreed. Prosecute people using guns illegally in crime, and don't plea down the sentence to get an easy conviction. A lot of these thugs spend little to no time in jail, and are multiple felons, often using guns in violent crime. Guess what? They walk, and get maybe house arrest, and their ankle bracelets often are not monitored.
-
I didn't necessarily mean we need new rules and regs, just that I am ok with some rules and regs. I actually think there are too many already, but we need to do a better job of enforcing the rules we do have. Guns used in domestic and social violence needs to be punished, but but gun use for defense needs to be protected. Sometimes distinguishing the two can be problematic though.
Domestic violence is the only non-felony crime in which guns are taken away (that I know of) permanently. That's another way to take away guns from people. If someone is committed to abusing someone in their household, not having a gun won't stop them.
-
West central FL: early voting line out the door. About a half hour wait, I'm in line now.
-
Domestic violence is the only non-felony crime in which guns are taken away (that I know of) permanently. That's another way to take away guns from people. If someone is committed to abusing someone in their household, not having a gun won't stop them.
Just the accusation of domestic violence and/or a PFA will have your guns confiscated, and you going to jail. There is absolutely no due process. Women sometimes do this as leverage during a divorce to get what they want. Sometimes it is custody of the kids. Sometimes it is money.
-
https://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2016/11/07/leaked-documents-reveal-expansive-soros-funding-to-manipulate-federal-elections/?singlepage=true
-
https://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2016/11/07/leaked-documents-reveal-expansive-soros-funding-to-manipulate-federal-elections/?singlepage=true
Do you think Soros can do enough to counteract the Russians and Assange who are trying to swing the election for Trump? What if we throw in the possible GOP voter intimidation tactics that might come into play on election day?
Fortunately, I don't think that the vote will be close enough that the overall result of the election can be reasonably questioned. Hillary will win enough states by enough of a margin that voter fraud will not be reasonably possible unless it is by Russian hacking and then the leather tangerine might just "win".
-
Do you think Soros can do enough to counteract the Russians and Assange who are trying to swing the election for Trump? What if we throw in the possible GOP voter intimidation tactics that might come into play on election day?
Fortunately, I don't think that the vote will be close enough that the overall result of the election can be reasonably questioned. Hillary will win enough states by enough of a margin that voter fraud will not be reasonably possible unless it is by Russian hacking and then the leather tangerine might just "win".
The polls are all very close, with many state polls showing Trump up in states that weren't in play a month ago. States like Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.
I've seen a lot of those 270towin electoral maps people can create and they're acting like Hillary has already won and there's really no point in even having the election. That sounds an awful lot like the exit polls from 2004 where Kerry was going to win in a landslide and then lost.
What GOP voter intimidation tactics are you referring to? Last I checked, it's the Democrats that are doing that more than the Republicans.
-
What GOP voter intimidation tactics are you referring to? Last I checked, it's the Democrats that are doing that more than the Republicans.
These are the "voter intimidation tactics" that leftists complain about:
(https://cached-assets.patriotpost.us/images/2016-11-07-df05de5d_large.jpg)
They never complained about this voter intimidation, even though Eric Holder let the perps on video skate without punishment:
-
Do you think Soros can do enough to counteract the Russians and Assange who are trying to swing the election for Trump? What if we throw in the possible GOP voter intimidation tactics that might come into play on election day?
Fortunately, I don't think that the vote will be close enough that the overall result of the election can be reasonably questioned. Hillary will win enough states by enough of a margin that voter fraud will not be reasonably possible unless it is by Russian hacking and then the leather tangerine might just "win".
GOP voter intimidation tactics? Ok, such as?
Yea, you're a moderate.
-
GOP voter intimidation tactics? Ok, such as?
Yea, you're a moderate.
Pay it no mind -- just the Daily Kos/Democratic Underground/Leftist Fever Swamp talking points (read as, marching orders) of the day.
You know, if leftists really want to make it seem the slightest bit authentic and not at all like a total astroturf job, they really shouldn't all complain about the same hallucination on the same day.
-
http://right-mind.us/poll-workers-in-nevada-were-caught-wearing-defeat-trump-t-shirts/
-
Do you think Soros can do enough to counteract the Russians and Assange who are trying to swing the election for Trump? What if we throw in the possible GOP voter intimidation tactics that might come into play on election day?
Fortunately, I don't think that the vote will be close enough that the overall result of the election can be reasonably questioned. Hillary will win enough states by enough of a margin that voter fraud will not be reasonably possible unless it is by Russian hacking and then the leather tangerine might just "win".
So are you celebrating this morning?
-
You're not going to give up are you? You're fine with a New York Liberal Democrat Hillary Donor winning and spending his entire time grabbing the pussies of interns and cooking off nukes because someone insulted him on Twitter at 3am.
Another thread reminded me of this old one.
Somebody tell me just how many nukes Trump popped off, in spite of having more insults hurled at him than practically anyone in history?