Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
reds8n wrote: One assumes he'll close down the FEMA death camps, cancel the chemtrail flights and so forth.
What about the ready-for-use UN concentration camps and armories? You know, for when the UN declares a one-world government, rolls out the tanks and rounds up all the true "liberty or death" Americans? We've been warned about this before by rifle-toting rednecks in pickup trucks but sadly the corrupt government has ignored it (no doubt because they've been set up for good jobs in the New World Order).
The government has ignored it because they are in league with the same ally; the lizard men from the center of the earth!
Mr. Spencer’s after-dinner speech began with a polemic against the “mainstream media,” before he briefly paused. “Perhaps we should refer to them in the original German?” he said.
The audience immediately screamed back, “Lügenpresse,” reviving a Nazi-era word that means “lying press.”
Mr. Spencer suggested that the news media had been critical of Mr. Trump throughout the campaign in order to protect Jewish interests. He mused about the political commentators who gave Mr. Trump little chance of winning.
“One wonders if these people are people at all, or instead soulless golem,” he said, referring to a Jewish fable about the golem, a clay giant that a rabbi brings to life to protect the Jews.
But in an interview last week with The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Bannon said that the alt-right was only “a tiny part” of the viewpoint represented on Breitbart.
“Our definition of the alt-right is younger people who are anti-globalists, very nationalist, terribly anti-establishment,” he told The Journal, adding that the alt-right had “some racial and anti-Semitic overtones.”
still not to worry eh ?
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
Hey, uh, I know I'm a Canadian, but I'm living in the capital city of a country that currently has 35,000 Syrian Refugees in it, and I feel more fear from the fact that the country I share a border with is one where Presidential Nominee Ben Carson publicly admitted, to a crowd of thousands, to attempting to murder his teenage friend over a dispute in the radio station being played, and the fact that his stabbing lunge brought his knife into contact with his friend's belt buckle instead of his friend's stomach, thus breaking off the tip of the knife, is considered a redemption story sufficient to boost his popularity, than I do the fact that the sheer number of Syrian Refugees in my country could populate the entire city I grew up in means that there is likely somewhere between 0 and 1 terrorist masquerading as a refugee planning to kill Canadians in some part of the country.
Let's look at it like this. The odds of a Syrian Refugee being a terrorist is about 1 in 50,000.
Imagine a town of 50,000 people. One person in this town, all on his own, decided to build a bomb and killed people with it, while the rest of the people in this town are equally as horrified at such an act as the rest of the country. As a result of this, the federal government decides to deport the entire town's population to another continent on the grounds that because that one person blew people up, now you cannot trust the entire town's population to the point you will never allow them in the country ever again.
Don't you guys have more important things to worry about, like the amount of gun violence and mass shootings you've already had going on for decades?
Mr. Spencer’s after-dinner speech began with a polemic against the “mainstream media,” before he briefly paused. “Perhaps we should refer to them in the original German?” he said.
The audience immediately screamed back, “Lügenpresse,” reviving a Nazi-era word that means “lying press.”
Mr. Spencer suggested that the news media had been critical of Mr. Trump throughout the campaign in order to protect Jewish interests. He mused about the political commentators who gave Mr. Trump little chance of winning.
“One wonders if these people are people at all, or instead soulless golem,” he said, referring to a Jewish fable about the golem, a clay giant that a rabbi brings to life to protect the Jews.
But in an interview last week with The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Bannon said that the alt-right was only “a tiny part” of the viewpoint represented on Breitbart.
“Our definition of the alt-right is younger people who are anti-globalists, very nationalist, terribly anti-establishment,” he told The Journal, adding that the alt-right had “some racial and anti-Semitic overtones.”
still not to worry eh ?
Please, tell me that's a bad work of fanfiction and that it didn't actually happen. Please?
"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me." - Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks
Mr. Spencer’s after-dinner speech began with a polemic against the “mainstream media,” before he briefly paused. “Perhaps we should refer to them in the original German?” he said.
The audience immediately screamed back, “Lügenpresse,” reviving a Nazi-era word that means “lying press.”
Mr. Spencer suggested that the news media had been critical of Mr. Trump throughout the campaign in order to protect Jewish interests. He mused about the political commentators who gave Mr. Trump little chance of winning.
“One wonders if these people are people at all, or instead soulless golem,” he said, referring to a Jewish fable about the golem, a clay giant that a rabbi brings to life to protect the Jews.
But in an interview last week with The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Bannon said that the alt-right was only “a tiny part” of the viewpoint represented on Breitbart.
“Our definition of the alt-right is younger people who are anti-globalists, very nationalist, terribly anti-establishment,” he told The Journal, adding that the alt-right had “some racial and anti-Semitic overtones.”
still not to worry eh ?
Of course we should worry. The conservatives will say these folks don't represent them. Maybe that's the truth. But when your policies are held up as masturbatory fodder for racists it should give you pause. If you stand by and try to explain it away, well you are part of the problem.
Sorry, on my phone.
Ender502
"Burning the aquila into the retinas of heretics is the new black." - Savnock
"The ignore button is for pansees who can't deal with their own problems. " - H.B.M.C.
The tears from the freaking of the lefties is so sweet. I love it.
NYT posts an article about California seceding. Please try.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Okay, I have a legitimate question about the American political system.
Why do you guys still have the Electoral College? Like, why haven't you removed it entirely from the election process decades ago? Why does it continue to exist?
Yeah, it made sense when it was written into law, because it was hundreds of years ago so you couldn't do a nation-wide election by popular vote.
But you can do that now if you want to. Even if the Constitution says it has to exist, you can Amend the Constitution to update it for the times to write the Electoral College out of existence now that you can just elect your President by popular vote instead since technology has improved to the point over the past 200 years it's such an easy thing to measure you keep mentioning it in every election even though it doesn't even matter.
Forget the particulars of the most recent election. Just in general.
How can you continue to tolerate the existence of a system in a democracy that can, has, and does put a candidate into power even though he received fewer votes than his opponent? How is this not even a topic you are discussing at all, even now?
Pouncey wrote: Okay, I have a legitimate question about the American political system.
Why do you guys still have the Electoral College? Like, why haven't you removed it entirely from the election process decades ago? Why does it continue to exist?
Yeah, it made sense when it was written into law, because it was hundreds of years ago so you couldn't do a nation-wide election by popular vote.
But you can do that now if you want to. Even if the Constitution says it has to exist, you can Amend the Constitution to update it for the times to write the Electoral College out of existence now that you can just elect your President by popular vote instead since technology has improved to the point over the past 200 years it's such an easy thing to measure you keep mentioning it in every election even though it doesn't even matter.
Forget the particulars of the most recent election. Just in general.
How can you continue to tolerate the existence of a system in a democracy that can, has, and does put a candidate into power even though he received fewer votes than his opponent? How is this not even a topic you are discussing at all, even now?
I'll ignore the history of its creation. It is an anachronism. But it should be able to stop the effect you are decrying. See hamiltonelectors. Some of us are trying to convince electors to vote their conscience and stop this thin skinned, racist apologist, man-child from becoming the leader of the free world.
How can you continue to tolerate the existence of a system in a democracy that can, has, and does put a candidate into power even though he received fewer votes than his opponent? How is this not even a topic you are discussing at all, even now?
Because it keeps the more populated states from dictating policies to the less populated states. Why does everyone assume that we want it abolished?
The Electoral College has performed its function for over 200 years (and in over 50 presidential elections) by ensuring that the President of the United States has both sufficient popular support to govern and that his popular support is sufficiently distributed throughout the country to enable him to govern effectively.
Although there were a few anomalies in its early history, none have occurred in the past century. Proposals to abolish the Electoral College, though frequently put forward, have failed largely because the alternatives to it appear more problematic than is the College itself.
Frazzled wrote: The tears from the freaking of the lefties is so sweet. I love it.
NYT posts an article about California seceding. Please try.
Who's crying? If thats all we were doing I think you would be happy. No, what we're doing is way worse. We are beginning to act. Of course, your ilk will call political participation "crying" but thats because you hate it when people actually participate in the democratic process.
And btw, Clinton's popular vote lead is now 1.5 million. There are more of us than you and the demographic gets better every year. So enjoy your last gasps.
Ender502
"Burning the aquila into the retinas of heretics is the new black." - Savnock
"The ignore button is for pansees who can't deal with their own problems. " - H.B.M.C.
wuestenfux wrote: Not sure how often the new president-elect will see the White House.
I guess he will reign from the 5th Avenue.
Well, considering how much NYC hates him, that may not be the greatest idea. And nothing will piss them off more than presidential convoys making traffic worse than it already is.
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
How can you continue to tolerate the existence of a system in a democracy that can, has, and does put a candidate into power even though he received fewer votes than his opponent? How is this not even a topic you are discussing at all, even now?
Because it keeps the more populated states from dictating policies to the less populated states. Why does everyone assume that we want it abolished?
The Electoral College has performed its function for over 200 years (and in over 50 presidential elections) by ensuring that the President of the United States has both sufficient popular support to govern and that his popular support is sufficiently distributed throughout the country to enable him to govern effectively.
Although there were a few anomalies in its early history, none have occurred in the past century. Proposals to abolish the Electoral College, though frequently put forward, have failed largely because the alternatives to it appear more problematic than is the College itself.
You're right, the less populated states should dictate policies for the more populated states.
If the EC does not put a end to this trump nonsense, then it serves no purpose. The GOP is supposedly all for a smaller government, yet wants to keep all the archaic big government agencies that serve no purpose.
How can you continue to tolerate the existence of a system in a democracy that can, has, and does put a candidate into power even though he received fewer votes than his opponent? How is this not even a topic you are discussing at all, even now?
Because it keeps the more populated states from dictating policies to the less populated states. Why does everyone assume that we want it abolished?
The Electoral College has performed its function for over 200 years (and in over 50 presidential elections) by ensuring that the President of the United States has both sufficient popular support to govern and that his popular support is sufficiently distributed throughout the country to enable him to govern effectively.
Although there were a few anomalies in its early history, none have occurred in the past century. Proposals to abolish the Electoral College, though frequently put forward, have failed largely because the alternatives to it appear more problematic than is the College itself.
I'm not assuming you want it abolished. I'm asking why you don't seem to even want it abolished. Even liberals aren't pushing for its abolishment after the recent election, and the fact that they're not baffles me.
Also, are you really trying to say that you, as a country, believe so strongly in a fair representation of states in the Presidential election, you're willing to let the states' votes override the votes of the country's population every single time the two groups (states versus the entire population of voters) disagree on who should be President?
Pouncey wrote: Okay, I have a legitimate question about the American political system.
Why do you guys still have the Electoral College? Like, why haven't you removed it entirely from the election process decades ago? Why does it continue to exist?
Yeah, it made sense when it was written into law, because it was hundreds of years ago so you couldn't do a nation-wide election by popular vote.
But you can do that now if you want to. Even if the Constitution says it has to exist, you can Amend the Constitution to update it for the times to write the Electoral College out of existence now that you can just elect your President by popular vote instead since technology has improved to the point over the past 200 years it's such an easy thing to measure you keep mentioning it in every election even though it doesn't even matter.
Forget the particulars of the most recent election. Just in general.
How can you continue to tolerate the existence of a system in a democracy that can, has, and does put a candidate into power even though he received fewer votes than his opponent? How is this not even a topic you are discussing at all, even now?
Because without it 98% of the US wouldn't need to vote. They would be irrelevant.
Frazzled wrote: The tears from the freaking of the lefties is so sweet. I love it.
Oh come on you know better than that. Many on both sides are being overly sensitive right now. You have the silly protests saying he isn't President and the other is whining about a respectful comment from theater actors.
Frazzled wrote: NYT posts an article about California seceding. Please try.
California has been saying things like that for awhile, but not as much as that backward squatters colony Texas, of course.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
Frazzled wrote: The tears from the freaking of the lefties is so sweet. I love it.
NYT posts an article about California seceding. Please try.
You have to pace yourself buddy... we got at least 4 years of this.
I should note, I get the same glee when the militia types lose their mind about Obama and their weird circle of four of five posters.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
And btw, Clinton's popular vote lead is now 1.5 million. There are more of us than you and the demographic gets better every year. So enjoy your last gasps.
Ender502
Between the deportations and voter ID laws, I expect that demographic to get "worse" as a significant chunk of your voting base (i.e., illegals) won't be participating in the next election.
Pouncey wrote: Okay, I have a legitimate question about the American political system.
Why do you guys still have the Electoral College? Like, why haven't you removed it entirely from the election process decades ago? Why does it continue to exist?
Yeah, it made sense when it was written into law, because it was hundreds of years ago so you couldn't do a nation-wide election by popular vote.
But you can do that now if you want to. Even if the Constitution says it has to exist, you can Amend the Constitution to update it for the times to write the Electoral College out of existence now that you can just elect your President by popular vote instead since technology has improved to the point over the past 200 years it's such an easy thing to measure you keep mentioning it in every election even though it doesn't even matter.
Forget the particulars of the most recent election. Just in general.
How can you continue to tolerate the existence of a system in a democracy that can, has, and does put a candidate into power even though he received fewer votes than his opponent? How is this not even a topic you are discussing at all, even now?
Because without it 98% of the US wouldn't need to vote. They would be irrelevant.
I'm curious on your reasoning behind that. Becauae I'd say in a straight popular vote, no winning states or anything, most people's votes wpuld matter more. Currently every Republican living in NY or CA might as well not vote, same for TX Ds.
And btw, Clinton's popular vote lead is now 1.5 million. There are more of us than you and the demographic gets better every year. So enjoy your last gasps.
Ender502
Between the deportations and voter ID laws, I expect that demographic to get "worse" as a significant chunk of your voting base (i.e., illegals) won't be participating in the next election.
Wow, that is one of the most ignorant things I've read all day.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/21 14:42:27
Frazzled wrote: Because without it 98% of the US wouldn't need to vote. They would be irrelevant.
That doesn't even make sense considering that I'm suggesting basing the outcome of your Presidential election, i.e. the guy who is the Head of State for your entire country, directly on the popular vote.
How could that possibly result in only 2% of people needing to vote?
Wait, are you referring to the difference between the popular vote being the only part that matters?
That's an absurd reason to disallow it for your Presidential election. It applies to literally every voting process in your entire country. It applies even to the Electoral College if you ignore the total votes for each side and just count the difference between the two sides as the only part that ever mattered.
And more to the point, when you need to ascribe this supposed statistic that 2% of the country's population would be the only ones who mattered and everyone else can stay home, if you were to dictate that into law, which 2% of your voters would be the ones you allow to vote while telling the others to not even bother? Specific people, not just abstract numbers. Exactly who are you now telling that their vote doesn't matter, while also telling another actual person their vote does matter?
Frazzled wrote: The tears from the freaking of the lefties is so sweet. I love it.
Oh come on you know better than that. Many on both sides are being overly sensitive right now. You have the silly protests saying he isn't President and the other is whining about a respectful comment from theater actors.
At first I was like whatever, then I was like wow that theater is really small, then I was like why are all the medoia talking head shows talking about then I was like really -especially after Pence poo pood making an issue of it, then I was like I can't believe these Chicago Yankees just served me gumbo and its actually not bad...
but as noted above, I enjoy the tears when the "righies" rant to. I have it in quotes because I can no longer quantify what being rightwing means with this election.
Frazzled wrote: NYT posts an article about California seceding. Please try.
California has been saying things like that for awhile, but not as much as that backward squatters colony Texas, of course.
There is a difference, in Texas its the four or five militia guys. Cali got a favorable NYT article on it. My only question is, if they somehow managed it (flight of fancy) can we deport all the illegal alien Californians from Austin? They're starting to figure out how to climb the perimeter wall. . .
Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm curious on your reasoning behind that. Becauae I'd say in a straight popular vote, no winning states or anything, most people's votes wpuld matter more. Currently every Republican living in NY or CA might as well not vote, same for TX Ds.
The same reason that, if you look at a map you would see the US is a vast ocean of red state with a tiny fringe of blue, and yet the Red Candidate did not win the popular election. It means two small regions utterly dominate the federal election process. The Constitution was SPECIFICALLY designed to avoid that (at that time the hyperpower was Virginia) .
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/11/21 14:52:18
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Frazzled wrote: The tears from the freaking of the lefties is so sweet. I love it.
Oh come on you know better than that. Many on both sides are being overly sensitive right now. You have the silly protests saying he isn't President and the other is whining about a respectful comment from theater actors.
At first I was like whatever, then I was like wow that theater is really small, then I was like why are all the medoia talking head shows talking about then I was like really -especially after Pence poo pood making an issue of it, then I was like I can't believe these Chicago Yankees just served me gumbo and its actually not bad...
I know right?
Trump fething settled a massive civil suit for $25 fething million jack-a-roos... and yet, the media talking heads/news paper/social media bubble are talking about what happened in that Hamilton event & Trump's "safe space" tweet.
I can't even...
but as noted above, I enjoy the tears when the "righies" rant to. I have it in quotes because I can no longer quantify what being rightwing means with this election.
Frazzled wrote: NYT posts an article about California seceding. Please try.
California has been saying things like that for awhile, but not as much as that backward squatters colony Texas, of course.
There is a difference, in Texas its the four or five militia guys. Cali got a favorable NYT article on it.
My only question is, if they somehow managed it (flight of fancy) can we deport all the illegal alien Californians from Austin? They're starting to figure out how to climb the perimeter wall. . .
Only if they leave the queso behind... like Canada's Maple Syrup, queso is Texa's national resource.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/21 14:55:20
That doesn't even make sense considering that I'm suggesting basing the outcome of your Presidential election, i.e. the guy who is the Head of State for your entire country, directly on the popular vote.
So if California seceded to Canada, how would that impact your vote? Would you reckon the Quebecois would feel better or want to leave ven more? And why does Quebec want to leave...oh yea that minority French thing in an English country.
Acquire Canada then it will be majority Spanish. Poutain and queso baby!
Only if they leave the queso behind... like Canada's Maple Syrup, queso is Texa's national resource.
Queso was a thing before California was even a territory baby.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/21 14:56:00
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Frazzled wrote: but as noted above, I enjoy the tears when the "righies" rant to. I have it in quotes because I can no longer quantify what being rightwing means with this election.
As a Canadian, I have a somewhat different viewpoint on what political left and political right are.
I do find it amusing to think about though, that Canada is so far to the left of the USA, if certain types of US liberals end up immigrating to Canada for whatever reason, they're probably going to be weirded out by the fact that in Canada they're actually considered conservatives.
I'm curious on your reasoning behind that. Becauae I'd say in a straight popular vote, no winning states or anything, most people's votes wpuld matter more. Currently every Republican living in NY or CA might as well not vote, same for TX Ds.
Are state governments are independent sovereigns?
Or are they provincial subdivisions of the federal government?
That doesn't even make sense considering that I'm suggesting basing the outcome of your Presidential election, i.e. the guy who is the Head of State for your entire country, directly on the popular vote.
So if California seceded to Canada, how would that impact your vote? Would you reckon the Quebecois would feel better or want to leave ven more?
And why does Quebec want to leave...oh yea that minority French thing in an English country.
Acquire Canada then it will be majority Spanish. Poutain and queso baby!
Only if they leave the queso behind... like Canada's Maple Syrup, queso is Texa's national resource.
Queso was a thing before California was even a territory baby.
Man that would be awesome, I'm amazed when people think a taco truck on every corner could somehow be a bad thing.
Canada has a liberal government, they have a liberal party, california would fit right in. Canada also lacks good mexican food, so tempting us with Queso is just a win win for me.
I'm curious on your reasoning behind that. Becauae I'd say in a straight popular vote, no winning states or anything, most people's votes wpuld matter more. Currently every Republican living in NY or CA might as well not vote, same for TX Ds.
Are state governments are independent sovereigns?
Or are they provincial subdivisions of the federal government?
There's your answer.
No it isn't. I was asking him about the 98% thing. I'm not sure what you are talking about.
I'm curious on your reasoning behind that. Becauae I'd say in a straight popular vote, no winning states or anything, most people's votes wpuld matter more. Currently every Republican living in NY or CA might as well not vote, same for TX Ds.
Are state governments are independent sovereigns?
Or are they provincial subdivisions of the federal government?
There's your answer.
No it isn't.
Sure it is, that's the justification of using the electoral college now and present.
I was asking him about the 98% thing. I'm not sure what you are talking about.
That's just the old man being hyperbolic there I'm sure....
And btw, Clinton's popular vote lead is now 1.5 million. There are more of us than you and the demographic gets better every year. So enjoy your last gasps.
Ender502
Between the deportations and voter ID laws, I expect that demographic to get "worse" as a significant chunk of your voting base (i.e., illegals) won't be participating in the next election.
Lol. It's not that demographic that'll win it for the dems... It's the people dying of old age each year.
Nah, long term the Republican party is done. I'll spend the next 4 years laughing as trump backtracks on his promises and betrays the people that voted for him. He's already started... Repeal and replace? Nah. Keep and modify. Build a wall? Well, part of that will be a fence. Deport the 11 million undocumented? Well, maybe just 3 million.
The Republicans had a chance to expand their party. They doubled down on whipping up the base and with the dems losing their economic message they managed to squeak by through the electoral college. It wont happen again. And all those union workers that flipped for trump? Do you think they will stay red when he does come through with the promised hubs? Nah bro. Nah.
Ender502
"Burning the aquila into the retinas of heretics is the new black." - Savnock
"The ignore button is for pansees who can't deal with their own problems. " - H.B.M.C.
" I'm sorry, but after 7200 's that has to be the most annoying sign-off ever." 
of four of five posters.
