TriniTuner.com  |  Latest Event:  

Forums

All Things US Politics Related in a Trump run White House.

this is how we do it.......

Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods

US Presidential Election 2016

Donald Trump
49
47%
Hillary Clinton
39
37%
Ted Cruz
1
1%
Bernie Sanders
14
13%
Marco Rubio
1
1%
Other
1
1%
 
Total votes: 105

User avatar
De Dragon
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 11670
Joined: January 27th, 2004, 3:49 am
Location: Enjoying my little miracles............

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby De Dragon » November 28th, 2016, 1:38 pm

RBphoto wrote:Trump's business model and brand would be impossible to put in a blind trust

This was realized after the election? :roll: Don't facking run then. No one mentions that I. Trump already hawking a $10 500 bracelet worn by her at the meeting on her fashion website. Imagine when millions are at stake, who will risk the ire of a US President by slighting his daughter? Not many. Hell, even the PNM waited a year before overtly awarding Elias, Sinanan, and Sammy!

Advertisement
User avatar
baigan
Riding on 16's
Posts: 1172
Joined: April 3rd, 2016, 7:19 pm

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby baigan » November 28th, 2016, 1:42 pm

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/1971020

10 Reasons Why the Electoral College Is a Problem

Sticking with the Electoral College system, but not yet plunging into the surprising too-little-discussed history of why the Framers put it in the Constitution, I want first to dash off a quick list of ten problems and potential problems with the Electoral College system:

Problem No. 1

It creates the possibility for the loser of the popular vote to win the electoral vote. This is more than a theoretical possibility. It has happened at least four times out of the 56 presidential elections, or more than 7 percent of the time, which is not such a small percentage, and it created a hideous mess every time. The most recent occurrence was 2000.

Problem No. 2

It distorts the presidential campaign, as alluded to yesterday, by incentivizing the parties to write off the more than 40 states (plus the District of Colombia) that they know they either can’t win or can’t lose. Among the states that, in recent history, don’t get campaign visits (other than for fundraising) or TV ads (which is most of what all that fundraising pays for and the main method by which the campaign and their “independent,” “uncoordinated” allies seek to persuade the persuadable voters in the persuadable states) are the three most populous states (California, Texas and New York, which among them make up more than 25 percent of the U.S. population), the geographically biggest state (Alaska) and the best state (Minnesota, which, despite missing out on the ads and the campaign visits, usually leads the nation in voter turnout anyway, so there).

Problem No. 3

The Electoral College system further distorts the presidential campaign by causing the candidates to grant extra weight to the parochial needs of the swing states. If you have to carry Florida to win, it elevates the already ever-present need candidates feel to pander to elderly voters, Cuban-Americans, orange-growers and any other group that can deliver a bloc of Floridians. The same thing with Iowa and ethanol subsidies and other agriculture-friendly policies, except even more so because Iowa is not only a swing state over recent cycles but has become since 1976 the key first state in the presidential nominating process. (But that last bit about the nominating process, of course, is not rooted in the Constitution.)

Since the selection of Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney’s running-mate, how many stories have you read that said Ryan’s controversial plan to change Medicare could be especially costly to the ticket because so many of the swing states have above-average portions of senior voters? Pandering to large groups of voters is not a pretty aspect of democracy, but pandering to groups just because they happen to be concentrated in “swing states” is even uglier. Who can explain how this can be a good thing?

Problem No. 4

For the same reason, it distorts governance. A first-term president who expects to have a tough reelection fight (as they all at least expect to) but who wanted to establish diplomatic and trade relations with Cuba (broken in 1960) would have to consider the possibility that such a policy might cost him Florida and therefore a second term. Perhaps this helps explain why long after Washington normalized relations with the Soviet Union, China and other governments that formerly or presently call themselves Communists, Cuba remains on the do-not-call list.

Problem No. 5

The Electoral College system further distorts the one-person, one-vote principle of democracy because electoral votes are not distributed according to population. Every state gets one electoral vote for each member of its delegation to the House of Representatives (this by itself would be a rough measure of its population) and each state also gets two “bonus” electors representing its two senators.

This causes significant overrepresentation of small states in the “College.” In the most extreme case, using 2010 Census figures and the new distribution of House seats based on that census, an individual citizen in Wyoming has more than triple the weight in electoral votes as an individual in California. Yes, you read that right. In fact, it’s closer to quadruple than triple. Can this be a good thing?

If we could do nothing more than allocate the electoral votes on a population basis, it would make the system substantially more democratic. But we can’t do that, at least not without amending the Constitution, because the apportionment formula is embedded in the Constitution as one more inducement that the Framers felt was necessary to attract support of small states for ratification.

Problem No. 6


The Electoral College creates the possibility of a 269-269 tie vote, and in almost every recent election there has been a relatively credible scenario for such an outcome. (Here’s a recent CNN piece going over the ways that we could end up there this year and a Nate Silver article on the same subject.) The rules of the Electoral College system for dealing with a tie are bizarre and scary and create a fairly plausible scenario by which no one would be elected president in time for Inauguration Day.

The only tie in Electoral College history was in 1800, a totally bizarre situation, in the days before formal tickets, and back in the days when several states still did not even hold a popular vote in the presidential selection process. (The Constitution did not and still does not require that any popular vote be conducted for president.) In that 1800 election, Thomas Jefferson tied with his own running mate Aaron Burr.

Better not try to cram that whole saga in here right now. It led to the 12th amendment (ratified 1804), which changed the Framers’ original language so that each elector could indicate which candidate they supported for president and which for vice president, thereby eliminating the possibility that any presidential candidate will end up in a tie with his own running mate. But that didn’t solve the serious problems inherent in the tie scenario.

Problem No. 7

Although our system, as evolved, makes it very hard for third parties to win elections and almost impossible for a third-party to win the presidency, the Electoral College system makes it quite possible for a small third-party showing in a single state or two to change the outcome of the whole national election.

This happened in 2000, when Ralph Nader, running as the Green Party nominee, finished third in the popular vote with just 2.74 percent, and received just 1.6 percent in Florida, but those votes (plus a number of other weird factors about which some people are still arguing) probably shifted the state from Democratic nominee Al Gore to Republican George W. Bush. And, because of winner-take-all, that one state also tipped the outcome of the national election.

In most recent cycles, there has been at least one halfway credible scenario under which a small third-party can tip a key state and perhaps the whole election. Here’s a Fox News piece about the possibility that Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson could play that role in 2012. Johnson, by the way, will be on the ballot in 48 states. (According to this New York Times piece, Republican state officials in Michigan “blocked Mr. Johnson from the ballot after he filed proper paperwork three minutes after his filing deadline,” and Romney campaign aides participated in unsuccessful efforts to keep him off the ballot in other states as well.)

There’s an even weirder scenario in which former Congressman Virgil Goode, the nominee of the tiny, right-wing Constitution Party, costs Mitt Romney the presidency by drawing votes in Virginia (which happens to be the state Goode represented in Congress, so he has a name there). Although the Constitution Party doesn’t even show up in national polls, when Goode’s name is included in Virginia polls this year, he has scored as much as 9 percent. I doubt he’ll get anywhere near 9, but Virginia is considered very close and has been designated a key swing state worth 13 winner-take-all electoral votes. Maybe that’s why a couple of lefty parties helped Goode get the signatures he needed to get on the ballot in Virginia.

Of course, even in a pure popular vote system (unless you have ranked choice voting) minor parties have the potential to change the outcome. But the Electoral College, paired with the winner-take-all aspect, greatly increases the leverage. I’m not predicting that any of these scenarios will come true in 2012, but the Electoral College system makes such shenanigans possible, and they happen more often that you might realize. (And by the way, if the name Virgil Goode rang a bell but you can’t place it, Goode was the congressman who made the biggest fool of himself objecting to both the election of Minnesota U.S. Rep Keith Ellison — first Muslim ever in Congress — and to Ellison’s decision to take his oath of office on a Qu’ran. The Qu’ran, by the way, had belonged to Thomas Jefferson.)

Problem No. 8

The Electoral College system prevented Dick Cheney from becoming vice president. Well, no, it actually didn’t, but it would have if we had taken the letter and the intention behind the words in the Constitution seriously.

The Constitution says that an elector cannot vote for a presidential and vice presidential candidate both of whom come from the same state as him/herself (the elector, that is). This rule actually made sense when the Framers put it in there but stopped making sense almost immediately. (To explain this, we’ll eventually have to get to the story of how the Framers thought this contraption was going to work.) But it’s still in there. George W. Bush was a Texan. In 2000, when he became Bush’s running mate, Cheney had been living and voting and paying taxes for five years in Texas where he eked out a living as CEO of Halliburton.

If you had to say which state he “inhabited,” at that point in his life, you could not say anything other than “Texas.” This became awkward when the Bush-Cheney ticket carried Texas. The Constitution (in both the original and as changed by Amendment XII) technically prohibit the Texas electors from voting for both Bush and Cheney. And the electoral vote was so close that without the Texas votes, Cheney would not have had a majority.

It’s true that shortly before the election, Cheney obtained a Wyoming driver’s license and put his Dallas home on the market (he had a vacation home in Wyoming, which is the state he used to represent in Congress). And the courts decided that was good enough to make him a non-Texan for electoral vote purposes. It would have been silly to disqualify Cheney over this, but the issue is at least one more bizarre legacy of the Framers’ contraption and the fact that we are still (wink, wink, nod, nod) bound by the rules ratified in 1789 and 1804.

Problem No. 9

In case of a tie, or if no candidate receives a majority of all electoral votes cast for president, the choice of president is thrown in the House of Representatives but the election is conducted on a one-state one-vote basis. (Yes, Wyoming — population 563,000 in the 2010 census — would have equal say in the selection of the president with California — 37 million.) And to win, a candidate must receive the support of an absolute majority of states.

But states that have an even number of House members may deadlock. (Minnesota, with its current delegation of four Democrats and four Republicans, would be a good candidate for this fate.) A deadlocked state cannot vote at all for a presidential candidate. But, to produce a winner, one candidate would still have to win 26 states, even though several states would presumably be deadlocked.

If no presidential candidate can get to 26, there is no constitutional mechanism for producing a winner. The vice president (whose selection in this scenario would be thrown into the Senate) could serve indefinitely as acting president. This has never happened, although it has come close. If we wait long enough, it will happen someday.

Problem No. 10

And here’s a really crazy part, which sort of underscores the craziness of our practice of abiding by the Framers’ language. When the Framers put that crazy structure, where the presidential election would be thrown from the Electoral College into the House for a one-state one-vote choice of the next president, they believed this would actually happen on a regular basis. Which is why you need to come back here tomorrow for the installment on what the Framers thought they were doing when they came up with the Electoral College system (which, as I’ve already mentioned, had pretty much nothing to do with how it has turned out).

User avatar
De Dragon
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 11670
Joined: January 27th, 2004, 3:49 am
Location: Enjoying my little miracles............

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby De Dragon » November 28th, 2016, 2:29 pm


I have no issue with the US electoral system, but anyone who thinks that his children aren't already influencing his business is sorely delusional.

User avatar
Dizzy28
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10404
Joined: February 8th, 2010, 8:54 am
Location: People's Republic of Bananas

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby Dizzy28 » November 28th, 2016, 2:41 pm

Huff post is one of the most biased news site I have ever seen. Buzz feed pretty tame in comparison to them. Just to choose one of their points for rebuttal -

Problem No. 2

It distorts the presidential campaign, as alluded to yesterday, by incentivizing the parties to write off the more than 40 states (plus the District of Colombia) that they know they either can’t win or can’t lose. Among the states that, in recent history, don’t get campaign visits (other than for fundraising) or TV ads (which is most of what all that fundraising pays for and the main method by which the campaign and their “independent,” “uncoordinated” allies seek to persuade the persuadable voters in the persuadable states) are the three most populous states (California, Texas and New York, which among them make up more than 25 percent of the U.S. population), the geographically biggest state (Alaska) and the best state (Minnesota, which, despite missing out on the ads and the campaign visits, usually leads the nation in voter turnout anyway, so there).


Without the Electoral College there is no need to campaign in 46 states. Candidates only need to focus on California, Texas, Florida and New York. If states think they are less visited under the college they will be even less visited under popular vote.

User avatar
Curtms
18 pounds of Boost
Posts: 2301
Joined: June 16th, 2010, 11:03 am
Location: 10° 10' N, 61° 40' W

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby Curtms » November 28th, 2016, 3:48 pm

1480362532656.jpg

User avatar
sMASH
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 13235
Joined: January 11th, 2005, 4:30 am

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby sMASH » November 28th, 2016, 6:52 pm

If we have Rowley, let them havee trump. But five the man a chance, he earned it.

User avatar
EFFECTIC DESIGNS
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 8698
Joined: April 1st, 2010, 3:17 pm

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby EFFECTIC DESIGNS » November 28th, 2016, 7:02 pm

People need to understand that popular votes do not win an election not in Trinidad and not in the United States and I don't get why people cannot understand this. Trump does not care about campaigning for popular vote because it is useless, not only is it useless but it is unfair to hard working people in rural states.

I can't help but laugh at all these political clowns debating about changing the constitution and getting rid of the electoral college just because the election did not go their way we live in an age of idiotic social justice warriors with no understanding of a democrat process, had it been the other way around with Trump losing but gaining the 2 million popular votes you never would have heard a word from the media or anyone about this.

Huff post and New York Times, the same NYT who PROMISED to stop lying after Trump won who admitted to being biased and dishonest they promised to be fair and good if people would give them a second chance, people did and guess what was the first thing they did? gone right back to being dishonest.....

Trump was right these are the most dishonest people, it is not the electoral college that has to die it is the dishonest mainstream media.

User avatar
EFFECTIC DESIGNS
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 8698
Joined: April 1st, 2010, 3:17 pm

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby EFFECTIC DESIGNS » November 28th, 2016, 7:11 pm

Dizzy28 wrote:Huff post is one of the most biased news site I have ever seen.


Huff post is a cancerous SJW website makes you feel like you are literally getting cancer when you read the rubbish posted there. These dishonest idiots still do not realize they are the reason that Trump won in the first place.

There is a slim chance the electoral college could say fck off to Trump and just elect Hillary as President as they can still do it.

And this is what Hillary is using Jill Stein for as a puppet. She is hoping the popular vote will encourage the electoral college to say to hell with Trump lets just do like North Korea and ignore a democratically elected President and install Hillary in the white house instead because some people are upset.

I wonder if Shogun would prefer that method? could you imagine how that would actually look if they elected Hillary for President? besides the fact that Hillary would be useless as the Republicans practically control congress now, it would mean that Trump was right and the election was rigged. And just think what would follow after that.....

User avatar
The_Honourable
punchin NOS
Posts: 4993
Joined: June 14th, 2009, 3:45 pm
Location: Land of Stupidity and Corruption

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby The_Honourable » November 28th, 2016, 10:47 pm

EFFECTIC DESIGNS wrote:People need to understand that popular votes do not win an election not in Trinidad and not in the United States and I don't get why people cannot understand this. Trump does not care about campaigning for popular vote because it is useless, not only is it useless but it is unfair to hard working people in rural states.

I can't help but laugh at all these political clowns debating about changing the constitution and getting rid of the electoral college just because the election did not go their way we live in an age of idiotic social justice warriors with no understanding of a democrat process, had it been the other way around with Trump losing but gaining the 2 million popular votes you never would have heard a word from the media or anyone about this.


Well said.

If there was NOT an electoral college, Presidential candidates would have adjusted their campaign strategy to suit. Now if the US want to change the electoral college system, they have the right to do so. But don't tell me you want to change it now just because things didn't go your way.

User avatar
EFFECTIC DESIGNS
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 8698
Joined: April 1st, 2010, 3:17 pm

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby EFFECTIC DESIGNS » November 29th, 2016, 12:02 am

^ Exactly!!!!

can you imagine an election in America where the president wins based on popular votes?

Both candidates would be fighting for the endorsement of celebrities and porn stars as opposed to the displaced people and those in poverty.

It would be the biggest joke of the century. Hillary actually ran her campaign for the popular votes where she invited all the youtube girls who does makeup channels, getting endorsement from Beyonce and JayZ and all this set of assness. This guaranteed her California and the popular vote but cost her the election.

Kellyanne Conway is smarter than Hillary's entire team combined. I still waiting for all these SJW feminists from the democrat to acknowledge Kellyanne as the first woman to make history as a Presidential Campaign Manager. But they won't because Trump was right these are the most dishonest people.

User avatar
EFFECTIC DESIGNS
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 8698
Joined: April 1st, 2010, 3:17 pm

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby EFFECTIC DESIGNS » November 29th, 2016, 12:24 am

Factor program tonight was especially good, O Reilly deals with Dictator Castro, Trump's Neo Nazi supporters and the popular vote nonsense.

He nails it again, no joke it really is the no spin zone with him. And that is what the liberals hate the most, honesty.


User avatar
shogun
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 13047
Joined: May 6th, 2008, 12:24 pm
Location: Gone Rogue.

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby shogun » November 29th, 2016, 12:55 am

The_Honourable wrote:Rachel Maddow and MSNBC was always pro-democrat so I am not surprised by her rant.

The elections didn't go your way, now you complaining about the electoral college and everything under the sun?

Better than that.



What does a piece on historical precedent have to do with Democrat or Republican, or "ranting?" Did you even watch the video?

We discuss the issue of constitutional reform no matter who's in office here? Why is any discussion that make the Trump flock uncomfortable, met with all kinds of typical right leaning accusations and epic beat-up?

User avatar
shogun
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 13047
Joined: May 6th, 2008, 12:24 pm
Location: Gone Rogue.

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby shogun » November 29th, 2016, 1:08 am

The_Honourable wrote:
EFFECTIC DESIGNS wrote:People need to understand that popular votes do not win an election not in Trinidad and not in the United States and I don't get why people cannot understand this. Trump does not care about campaigning for popular vote because it is useless, not only is it useless but it is unfair to hard working people in rural states.

I can't help but laugh at all these political clowns debating about changing the constitution and getting rid of the electoral college just because the election did not go their way we live in an age of idiotic social justice warriors with no understanding of a democrat process, had it been the other way around with Trump losing but gaining the 2 million popular votes you never would have heard a word from the media or anyone about this.


Well said.

If there was NOT an electoral college, Presidential candidates would have adjusted their campaign strategy to suit. Now if the US want to change the electoral college system, they have the right to do so. But don't tell me you want to change it now just because things didn't go your way.



Lmao.

Just for the sake of playing Devil's advocate. How does adjusting a campaign going to offset individual votes?

I love it when people pretend to understand the principles of others. If Hillary had won the electoral colleges but lost the popular vote to Trump, i'd still be concerned for her tenure in office, her legitimacy and her administration. 2 Million more votes seems to me to be a hell of a lot of disenfranchised citizens... no matter who won. Trump's win to me is irrelevant at this point. Calm down
Last edited by shogun on November 29th, 2016, 1:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
baigan
Riding on 16's
Posts: 1172
Joined: April 3rd, 2016, 7:19 pm

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby baigan » November 29th, 2016, 1:10 am

shogun wrote:
The_Honourable wrote:Rachel Maddow and MSNBC was always pro-democrat so I am not surprised by her rant.

The elections didn't go your way, now you complaining about the electoral college and everything under the sun?

Better than that.



What does a piece on historical precedent have to do with Democrat or Republican, or "ranting?" Did you even watch the video?

We discuss the issue of constitutional reform no matter who's in office here? Why is any discussion that make the Trump flock uncomfortable, met with all kinds of typical right leaning accusations and epic beat-up?

Trump himself is the most 'triggered' person ever lol
The extreme republicans get triggered easily just like the extreme democrats lol so they lose their sh*t anytime someone mentions their neon orange cheeto overlord

User avatar
shogun
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 13047
Joined: May 6th, 2008, 12:24 pm
Location: Gone Rogue.

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby shogun » November 29th, 2016, 1:11 am

Lmao!

User avatar
EFFECTIC DESIGNS
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 8698
Joined: April 1st, 2010, 3:17 pm

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby EFFECTIC DESIGNS » November 29th, 2016, 1:15 am

The 2 million more votes is most likely from illegal aliens aswell.

And just think Hillary still lost.

User avatar
shogun
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 13047
Joined: May 6th, 2008, 12:24 pm
Location: Gone Rogue.

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby shogun » November 29th, 2016, 1:23 am

^See! :lol:

Illegals aren't allowed to vote in the US. Just saying

User avatar
EFFECTIC DESIGNS
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 8698
Joined: April 1st, 2010, 3:17 pm

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby EFFECTIC DESIGNS » November 29th, 2016, 1:29 am

Check out the O Reilly Factor I posted, he explains how its actually done and how illegals can actually vote.


User avatar
shogun
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 13047
Joined: May 6th, 2008, 12:24 pm
Location: Gone Rogue.

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby shogun » November 29th, 2016, 1:36 am

You have any idea how many groups were monitoring the transparency of the US elections, ED?... especially this one?

You complain about MSNBC, CNN, CBS, New York Times, etc, constantly, but you expect me to watch 40 mins of FOX and O'Reilly? Really?

I'm sure O'Reilly has all kinds of ways it could be done, now that he realizes how far the popular vote went to Hillary. Bill is not stupid. He understands the significance of that fact

User avatar
EFFECTIC DESIGNS
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 8698
Joined: April 1st, 2010, 3:17 pm

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby EFFECTIC DESIGNS » November 29th, 2016, 2:27 am

Atleast Fox News don't fake interviews with their own camera men those other news sources you mentioned is a joke, Fox News is the number 1 watched news on cable and the Factor is the number 1 watched talk show on cable unbroken for 16 years in a row its because they cover elections and news as fairly as you can get it.

Also O reilly has never endorsed any political candidate in his life and he only reports facts and stats which is why its called the no spin zone because you know he has some integrity unlike the other crap media outlets like CNN and NYT which are more of a PR front for the democrat party as opposed to a news outlet. It was comical when NYT endorsed Hillary, they helped Trump win with that move and I hope they do it again in 2020

User avatar
EFFECTIC DESIGNS
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 8698
Joined: April 1st, 2010, 3:17 pm

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby EFFECTIC DESIGNS » November 30th, 2016, 2:54 am

HAHA! Sean Hanity call CNN Fake News yes :lol:

I almost forgot about all the wikileaks exposing CNN and the liberal media.


User avatar
De Dragon
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 11670
Joined: January 27th, 2004, 3:49 am
Location: Enjoying my little miracles............

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby De Dragon » November 30th, 2016, 5:23 am

shogun wrote:^See! :lol:

Illegals aren't allowed to vote in the US. Just saying

ED seems to have fallen hard for the bouffant haired full sized Oompa Loompa. He constantly parrots everything Trump says, no matter how inane or baseless.

User avatar
RASC
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 8340
Joined: February 6th, 2004, 11:00 am

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby RASC » November 30th, 2016, 5:45 am

Black Lives Matter is a local terrorist organization which piggy backs on the death of young black males, while singlehandedly has ZERO initiative for returning the man as the head of the black household and black leadership.

It's a far left organization run by lesbian s, queer and trans folk who really don't care to see the black male in power... But would like you to believe so to gain their sympathy and trust.

Also the mere fact the name of the movement is black lives matter shows an inferiority complex... And a notion that you're begging racist people to change their ways. A racist is going to be a racist regardless... Focus on building yourself forget what others think of you... Stop begging.

Oh and they're funded by George Soros. Nuff said - - - - >

User avatar
De Dragon
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 11670
Joined: January 27th, 2004, 3:49 am
Location: Enjoying my little miracles............

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby De Dragon » November 30th, 2016, 5:51 am

RASC wrote:Black Lives Matter is a local terrorist organization which piggy backs on the death of young black males, while singlehandedly has ZERO initiative for returning the man as the head of the black household and black leadership.

It's a far left organization run by lesbian s, queer and trans folk who really don't care to see the black male in power... But would like you to believe so to gain their sympathy and trust.

Also the mere fact the name of the movement is black lives matter shows an inferiority complex... And a notion that you're begging racist people to change their ways. A racist is going to be a racist regardless... Focus on building yourself forget what others think of you... Stop begging.

Oh and they're funded by George Soros. Nuff said - - - - >

Buh you eh black!

User avatar
EFFECTIC DESIGNS
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 8698
Joined: April 1st, 2010, 3:17 pm

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby EFFECTIC DESIGNS » November 30th, 2016, 2:55 pm

RASC wrote:Black Lives Matter is a local terrorist organization which piggy backs on the death of young black males, while singlehandedly has ZERO initiative for returning the man as the head of the black household and black leadership.

It's a far left organization run by lesbian s, queer and trans folk who really don't care to see the black male in power... But would like you to believe so to gain their sympathy and trust.

Also the mere fact the name of the movement is black lives matter shows an inferiority complex... And a notion that you're begging racist people to change their ways. A racist is going to be a racist regardless... Focus on building yourself forget what others think of you... Stop begging.

Oh and they're funded by George Soros. Nuff said - - - - >


Couldn't agree more, Alfonzo did a great take on it he has an awesome youtube channel aswell this guy is a star. I subscribed first time I Saw one of his videos.

The likes of George Soros have been trying to brainwash people into thinking you have to vote left and become part of the LGBTQ community because anything less than that would be racist and hateful. Its one of the ways they establish their New World Order.

Doh even talk about the next moron Kaepernick he promoting BLM for how long now, kneeling for the national anthem in protest and they just found out he didn't even have a common decency to register to vote




User avatar
EFFECTIC DESIGNS
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 8698
Joined: April 1st, 2010, 3:17 pm

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby EFFECTIC DESIGNS » November 30th, 2016, 6:05 pm

:rofl: :lol:


User avatar
The_Honourable
punchin NOS
Posts: 4993
Joined: June 14th, 2009, 3:45 pm
Location: Land of Stupidity and Corruption

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby The_Honourable » November 30th, 2016, 10:30 pm

RASC wrote:Black Lives Matter is a local terrorist organization which piggy backs on the death of young black males, while singlehandedly has ZERO initiative for returning the man as the head of the black household and black leadership.

It's a far left organization run by lesbian s, queer and trans folk who really don't care to see the black male in power... But would like you to believe so to gain their sympathy and trust.

Also the mere fact the name of the movement is black lives matter shows an inferiority complex... And a notion that you're begging racist people to change their ways. A racist is going to be a racist regardless... Focus on building yourself forget what others think of you... Stop begging.

Oh and they're funded by George Soros. Nuff said - - - - >


WELL SAID!!!

I don't drink but I owe you a beer.

User avatar
EFFECTIC DESIGNS
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 8698
Joined: April 1st, 2010, 3:17 pm

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby EFFECTIC DESIGNS » November 30th, 2016, 11:11 pm

Another big win for Trump

He just saved 1000 American Jobs from being shipped to Mexico, looks like the American people made the right choice after all.

I wish the dishonest media would actually bother to cover it. I for one welcome this move, when I go to the hardware I always look for the tools still Made in USA, better quality control etc There aren't many left very few but they can still be found, hopefully we see more of this now.


User avatar
sMASH
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 13235
Joined: January 11th, 2005, 4:30 am

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby sMASH » December 1st, 2016, 9:43 am


User avatar
Miktay
Shifting into 6th
Posts: 1963
Joined: July 30th, 2013, 1:13 am

Re: US Presidential Election 2016

Postby Miktay » December 1st, 2016, 10:58 am

Nigel Farage...a leading Brexit campaigner...explains the shortcomings of the mainstream media to the mainstream media.


Advertisement

Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dohplaydat, G-DUB, maj. tom and 34 guests