you're making a big mistake by underestimating. giving someone the excuse of ignorance can leave you wide open.

at times they are espousing personal views, at other times they're posting with hyperbole to get page long reactions out of reactionary posters in PARD. Which is just fine if its just fine by you, as long as you know you're on a soap box having a self contained conversation. I mean i like to rant as much as the next guy i just like to know when the other person is and isn't actually trying to contribute. For the time my posting window is fairly limited due to a heavy workload and lots of travel at work, so i won't be wasting time with partisan dick measuring, but if i had more time i'd be shit posting with the trumpets more.

the one dude spends a significant amount of his day and all of 2016 just doing this (c)

jokes on us

Well when Bush II was coming into office I was like "oh no, it is the Nixon White House....they're back!". And it was true....look at what the did with mass surveillance!

But yes, this group is much worse. Bush's people were experienced and competent. We have a secretary of energy who is a legitimate idiot and who couldn't name that particular department when he said "as president I would close three departments....". We have a secretary of education who has never been a teacher, school administrator, on a public school board, or has ever worked in education in any meaningful way, just for donating $9 mil and being an early supporter. Ben Carson for HUD secretary? He literally said "i don't know how to do this job" and tried to get out of it. He has no experience in welfare experience or policy. When he is interviewed or doing a speech he looks like he has been prescribing himself benzos for at least a decade.

A couple are passable, Mathis is actually a good pick, though I don't think he will last in the Trump cabinet...I don't know if Trump can handle a much greater alpha being so close....he just surrounds himself with sycophants so much lol.

how does it feel to back a candidate, the one proclaimed as the 'most qualified candidate of all the times and the smartest woman ever' & with all of the media/talking heads/incumbent popular President carrying her water, that was defeated 3 times by a 'dumbass'

just take a second and imagine a hypothetical in which you've repeatedly laid out pages and pages of responses. and in that hypothetical the other person was baiting you. would this make you happy? i'd be disappointed i didn't see it. it happens to us all, and normally i'd let it go on, but the number of times i read "they're not trolling they're just stupid" or "when you're that dumb you just read off fox news and don't form opinions" is troubling.

I feel fantastic about voting for the better candidate of the 2

Our country is full of dumbasses that vote for dumbasses all the time.

Acting like you have to be smart to stay rich when you were born into wealth and extreme privilege is silly.

Acting like you can't be a dumbass and become President is silly.

so a 'dumbass' can beat the 'smartest best candidate ever' because our country is 'just full of dumbasses'
keep at it for another 10 years, no wait, go longer than that. may you keep this up your entire life and shout it from every mountainside you roam furball.

I didn't call her the smartest candidate but she is certainly one of the most knowledgeable we've seen

and you assume I think only right wingers can be and vote in dumbasses

both sides do it all the time

on the left you get dudes with the name wiener that literally can't stop taking pics of his dick

and on the right you get Trump type characters

The law of our great country mentions nothing about the popular vote.

Democrats are more likely to be criminals, so I can see why youre trying to lie in order to get away with breaking the law.

laws change due to circumstance, psychic abilities require being in the right place for a government chemical spill...



you don't have a source for this, if you do it's your usually hackery.


go figure...