The Wall

[southernhybrid]

And who pray tell is calling for mayhem now?

Putin, and his little puppet.

The Dems and their followers, especially Holywood have failed to accept they lost and lost badly at the last Presidential elections, and instead of accepting their defeat gracefully, they've been on a witch hunt ever since, with fuck all proof. Nada, Zilch, nothing, and they'll keep digging right up to 2020, and gawd help them, beyond should Trump prevail again!

That's hilarious. Where the fuck were you when the Benghazi hearings were going on?

https://theweek.com/speedreads/782008/trey-gowdy-who-headed-benghazi-investigation-more-than-2-years-claims-mueller-taking-long

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) went on a tirade Thursday during a hearing with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray, demanding that "whatever" has been uncovered in the probe into links between the Trump campaign and Russia, "finish it the hell up, because this country is being torn apart."

Gowdy is hardly the only Republican to have expressed frustration with how long Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation is taking — his probe is now in its second year — but the South Carolina lawmaker is perhaps the least justified in complaining about it. As many have pointed out, Gowdy chaired the House Select Committee on Benghazi, an investigation that lasted more than two and a half years and resulted in no criminal indictments.

By comparison, Mueller in 13 months has "issued more than 100 criminal counts against 20 people and three companies," The New York Times reports. "Of the 20 people, five — including three Trump associates — have pleaded guilty. Fourteen are Russians accused of meddling in the 2016 presidential election." Watch the pot call the kettle black below. Jeva Lange

The above link is from last June. Even more people have confessed or been indicted since last June, but of all the scandals that the Republicans directed against Clinton, not a single one ended up in an arrest. There just wasn't any convincing evidence for that. Do they have Fox news in Australia? It sure sounds as if that's where you're getting all this misinformation. It's all bullshit. All of your claims are bullshit.

I watched almost the entire 11 hours that Gowdy and his minions grilled Hillary. She had excellent answers for them, which eventually left them with nothing to charge her with. Trump won't even agree to an open hearing. In fact, so far, he hasn't agreed to a closed hearing. I wonder why? He's told over 9000 known lies since he's been in office. Lies, which can be proven. The only reason anyone would defend him at this point is due to ignorance or hated of Democrats.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

The only reason anyone would defend him at this point is due to ignorance or hated of Democrats.

I certainly wouldn't argue with that.

This is the kind of thing that people defend about Trump:

How Trump's high school transcript was hidden after he demanded Obama's academic records

Why anyone defends this clown can only be attributed to absolute stupidity or absolute emotional attachment. It sure isn't for any decent reason.

Stories like this only used to come from The Onion.

 

[angelo]

The Dems and their followers, especially Holywood have failed to accept they lost and lost badly at the last Presidential elections,

Winning the popular vote by 3 million, and barely loosing the electoral college because of of only a few thousand votes in a couple states is loosing badly? Then what do you call the Dem wins in the previous elections?

and instead of accepting their defeat gracefully, they've been on a witch hunt ever since, with fuck all proof. Nada, Zilch, nothing, and they'll keep digging right up to 2020, and gawd help them, beyond should Trump prevail again!

A witch hunt that has caught several witches so far. Apparently multiple guilty pleas is not proof in your world.

The founding Fathers had just such a scenario in mind when they drew up the college vote system. To stop the most populous bigger states such as the Socialist Republic of California and NY state from dominating presidential elections and allowing smaller states to also have a say. As for just getting over the line in college votes, here are the results again, in case you need to jarr your leftists infected feeble mind!

https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2016/results/president

 

[angelo]

The Dems and their followers, especially Holywood have failed to accept they lost and lost badly at the last Presidential elections, and instead of accepting their defeat gracefully, they've been on a witch hunt ever since, with fuck all proof. Nada, Zilch, nothing, and they'll keep digging right up to 2020, and gawd help them, beyond should Trump prevail again!

Talk about projection!

The GOP has been on a witch hunt since Clinton was elected.

Which side is waving flags from the side that lost the civil war? Who needs to take defeat gracefully?

Also, I trust angelo can provide evidence of him telling all the GOP who railed for 8 years about Obama 'not being their president' and resisting everything he does (fucking hell, the senate majority leader, Mitch Turtle-Fucker McConnell said their only goal was to oppose anything Obama did). So fuck every single one of these right wing shit stains that keep saying this stupid shit.

And yet the GOP failed to stop the corrupt islamic Obama regime from shipping pallets of money to the islamic terrorist regime in Iran in the middle of the night.

Here's an honest report on it............................https://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/255932/the-obama-administrations-1-7-billion-iranian-deception

 

[Gun Nut]

Winning the popular vote by 3 million, and barely loosing the electoral college because of of only a few thousand votes in a couple states is loosing badly? Then what do you call the Dem wins in the previous elections?


A witch hunt that has caught several witches so far. Apparently multiple guilty pleas is not proof in your world.

The founding Fathers had just such a scenario in mind when they drew up the college vote system. To stop the most populous bigger states such as the Socialist Republic of California and NY state from dominating presidential elections and allowing smaller states to also have a say. As for just getting over the line in college votes, here are the results again, in case you need to jarr your leftists infected feeble mind!

https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2016/results/president

Individual states do not have a vote. Individual people do. While I am no fan of city folk, their vote is just as valid as any other American's vote. They are wrong about so many things, but where they are physically located in the Country should not matter one bit with respect to the value of their vote.
There is a room that is 500 square feet, with 25 students in it. Another room is 1,000 square feet, with 10 students in it. How do you count the votes for class president? Do you count 35 votes and see who wins, or do you divide 500 by 25 and give 20 points to the majority winner in one room and divide 1000 by 10 and give 100 points to the majority winner in the other room?
Which one of those scenarios is more democratic? Which one is more fair to the individuals?

 

[Patooka]

Which side is waving flags from the side that lost the civil war? Who needs to take defeat gracefully?

Also, I trust angelo can provide evidence of him telling all the GOP who railed for 8 years about Obama 'not being their president' and resisting everything he does (fucking hell, the senate majority leader, Mitch Turtle-Fucker McConnell said their only goal was to oppose anything Obama did). So fuck every single one of these right wing shit stains that keep saying this stupid shit.

And yet the GOP failed to stop the corrupt islamic Obama regime from shipping pallets of money to the islamic terrorist regime in Iran in the middle of the night.

Here's an honest report on it............................https://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/255932/the-obama-administrations-1-7-billion-iranian-deception

Buddy...just stop.

 

[repoman]

The people as a whole can have a tendency to be nativist, even ones that are fairly new to a country. Especially in times of economic troubles -- and NOW even the good times are full of economic troubles for a vast amount of people.

But if you are in the creditor class (financial, construction, retail, real estate), you WANT more people even if it makes things worse for the ones already here.

That is why I am getting close to being a Third Positionist.

I think that people in the construction business should not be allowed to influence immigration policy in any manner (lobbying), they have a massive conflict of interest that is parasitical to the nation as a whole.

 

[repoman]

https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=9Y32i_1551921487

 

[angelo]

Winning the popular vote by 3 million, and barely loosing the electoral college because of of only a few thousand votes in a couple states is loosing badly? Then what do you call the Dem wins in the previous elections?


A witch hunt that has caught several witches so far. Apparently multiple guilty pleas is not proof in your world.

The founding Fathers had just such a scenario in mind when they drew up the college vote system. To stop the most populous bigger states such as the Socialist Republic of California and NY state from dominating presidential elections and allowing smaller states to also have a say. As for just getting over the line in college votes, here are the results again, in case you need to jarr your leftists infected feeble mind!

https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2016/results/president

Individual states do not have a vote. Individual people do. While I am no fan of city folk, their vote is just as valid as any other American's vote. They are wrong about so many things, but where they are physically located in the Country should not matter one bit with respect to the value of their vote.
There is a room that is 500 square feet, with 25 students in it. Another room is 1,000 square feet, with 10 students in it. How do you count the votes for class president? Do you count 35 votes and see who wins, or do you divide 500 by 25 and give 20 points to the majority winner in one room and divide 1000 by 10 and give 100 points to the majority winner in the other room?
Which one of those scenarios is more democratic? Which one is more fair to the individuals?

The American population numbers around 325 million, around 40 million of those inhabitants reside in The Socialist Republic Of California.. They already have the highest number of college votes, but are you implying that they should vote for the President of their choice alone, that their votes should overrule all other states ?

 

[angelo]

Which side is waving flags from the side that lost the civil war? Who needs to take defeat gracefully?

Also, I trust angelo can provide evidence of him telling all the GOP who railed for 8 years about Obama 'not being their president' and resisting everything he does (fucking hell, the senate majority leader, Mitch Turtle-Fucker McConnell said their only goal was to oppose anything Obama did). So fuck every single one of these right wing shit stains that keep saying this stupid shit.

And yet the GOP failed to stop the corrupt islamic Obama regime from shipping pallets of money to the islamic terrorist regime in Iran in the middle of the night.

Here's an honest report on it............................https://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/255932/the-obama-administrations-1-7-billion-iranian-deception

Buddy...just stop.

Truth hurts doesn't it?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Individual states do not have a vote. Individual people do. While I am no fan of city folk, their vote is just as valid as any other American's vote. They are wrong about so many things, but where they are physically located in the Country should not matter one bit with respect to the value of their vote.
There is a room that is 500 square feet, with 25 students in it. Another room is 1,000 square feet, with 10 students in it. How do you count the votes for class president? Do you count 35 votes and see who wins, or do you divide 500 by 25 and give 20 points to the majority winner in one room and divide 1000 by 10 and give 100 points to the majority winner in the other room?
Which one of those scenarios is more democratic? Which one is more fair to the individuals?

The American population numbers around 325 million, around 40 million of those inhabitants reside in The Socialist Republic Of California.. They already have the highest number of college votes, but are you implying that they should vote for the President of their choice alone, that their votes should overrule all other states ?

In general, the smaller states have a higher effective influence in the electoral college than larger states, citizen to citizen.

193,000 Wyoming voters are represented by one electoral vote. (579,000 / 3)
718,000 California voters are represented by one electoral vote. (39,540,000 / 55)

But please, don't let facts get in the way of yet another one of your misunderstandings of American politics.

 

[repoman]

This is a slow walk to avoid building the wall, placate the rabble.

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/article227257814.html

 

[angelo]

Individual states do not have a vote. Individual people do. While I am no fan of city folk, their vote is just as valid as any other American's vote. They are wrong about so many things, but where they are physically located in the Country should not matter one bit with respect to the value of their vote.
There is a room that is 500 square feet, with 25 students in it. Another room is 1,000 square feet, with 10 students in it. How do you count the votes for class president? Do you count 35 votes and see who wins, or do you divide 500 by 25 and give 20 points to the majority winner in one room and divide 1000 by 10 and give 100 points to the majority winner in the other room?
Which one of those scenarios is more democratic? Which one is more fair to the individuals?

The American population numbers around 325 million, around 40 million of those inhabitants reside in The Socialist Republic Of California.. They already have the highest number of college votes, but are you implying that they should vote for the President of their choice alone, that their votes should overrule all other states ?

In general, the smaller states have a higher effective influence in the electoral college than larger states, citizen to citizen.

193,000 Wyoming voters are represented by one electoral vote. (579,000 / 3)
718,000 California voters are represented by one electoral vote. (39,540,000 / 55)

But please, don't let facts get in the way of yet another one of your misunderstandings of American politics.

Gerrymander? I doubt it.

This was a gerrymander! ..................................https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legislative_Assembly_of_Queensland

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I wish you could deal with you attention deficit issue. You can’t stick to one point for longer than a single post.

You said California is over represented in the EC but when told it was otherwise, you scramble to some other completely irrelevant point.

 

[angelo]

I wish you could deal with you attention deficit issue. You can’t stick to one point for longer than a single post.

You said California is over represented in the EC but when told it was otherwise, you scramble to some other completely irrelevant point.

I said nothing of the sort! I said that the bigger states like The Socialist Republic of California, NY, and Florida could in reality elect the President just on their own. That the founding fathers of the American constitution saw the problem and tried to fix it by allocating some smaller states with enough clout to also have a say in the process.

 

[Patooka]

I wish you could deal with you attention deficit issue. You can’t stick to one point for longer than a single post.

You said California is over represented in the EC but when told it was otherwise, you scramble to some other completely irrelevant point.

I said nothing of the sort! I said that the bigger states like The Socialist Republic of California, NY, and Florida could in reality elect the President just on their own.

1) Certain states have determined who will be president in elections. Google is your friend.

2) That is exactly what the "founding fathers" wanted. They were no where near as egalitarian as you suggest. It's not a coincidence that the regions in the US in 1787 that had more votes in the Electoral College dovetailed nicely with areas where the 1% congregated

That the founding fathers of the American constitution saw the problem and tried to fix it by allocating some smaller states with enough clout to also have a say in the process.

The authors of the US Constitution had a lot of ideas. For example, they had the view that Hillary Clinton should be vice president because of the election results. And "The Socialist Republic of California" wasn't even part of the US when the EC was created. Your belief in that a)their views were flawless and b)they could accurately predict demographics centuries into the future is, frankly, bullshit.

EDIT: I agree that Joh Bjelke-Petersen is the fucking master of the gerrymander however. That guy was as bent as a paperclip.

 

[Angry Floof]

1) Certain states have determined who will be president in elections. Google is your friend.

2) That is exactly what the "founding fathers" wanted. They were no where near as egalitarian as you suggest. It's not a coincidence that the regions in the US in 1787 that had more votes in the Electoral College dovetailed nicely with areas where the 1% congregated

That the founding fathers of the American constitution saw the problem and tried to fix it by allocating some smaller states with enough clout to also have a say in the process.

The authors of the US Constitution had a lot of ideas. For example, they had the view that Hillary Clinton should be vice president because of the election results. And "The Socialist Republic of California" wasn't even part of the US when the EC was created. Your belief in that a)their views were flawless and b)they could accurately predict demographics centuries into the future is, frankly, bullshit.

EDIT: I agree that Joh Bjelke-Petersen is the fucking master of the gerrymander however. That guy was as bent as a paperclip.

Side note: Did you notice how the blue wave last fall hit everywhere pretty consistently *except* where Republicans could gerrymander or otherwise cheat? They are working hard to undermine democracy. They talk about a majority and "the people have spoken" kind of bullshit, but obviously they don't actually care about that. Some elected Republicans are openly talking about violence in lieu of democracy if they don't get their way.

 

[Patooka]

When in doubt, turn to John Oliver:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-4dIImaodQ[/youtube]

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

*beep*

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Did you notice how the blue wave last fall hit everywhere pretty consistently *except* where Republicans could gerrymander or otherwise cheat? They are working hard to undermine democracy. They talk about a majority and "the people have spoken" kind of bullshit, but obviously they don't actually care about that. Some elected Republicans are openly talking about violence in lieu of democracy if they don't get their way.

This is very true. I think it's because everyone knows that there's something wrong with the NFL if my team doesn't always win.