Not only did Hillary lose; she's a crook too.

What if orange man actually is bad, though?

What if Hillary IS bad, which we already know she is, and some of us on PaRD just can't get their head around that, and need orange man to be bad, to justify their stance of various things?

crazy thought, see if you can follow me, what if they're both bad. and what if your inability to acknowledge this makes you as hypocritical as the people you're failing to criticize in a deeply ironic way.

Science is about looking at evidence before reaching a conclusion. That's not how any of this works

What if Hillary Clinton is bad, but orange man is actually really, really bad and also the person who was elected president?

You keep saying the same thing over and over but none of it is relevant.

Actions are good or bad, and Hillary's are 100x worse. You have no examples to the contrary.

For real though: can you imagine the radicalization and the electoral success on the local and state level that the GOP would have had under a clinton presidency?

I honestly dont think that the country would be any less divided at this point in time, or the public discourse any less dysfunctional and toxic, if Clinton had won.

In the long run, Clinton losing to Trump was probably for the better of the Democratic party and its electoral prospects.

What an ironic post, do you even proof read?

HRC lost, and has no power, so her actions are irrelevant.

Trump won, has the most power of any human on earth basically, and his actions are therefore relevant.



this 100%. that election cycle split the electorate, neither could have brought it back together.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Nov 30 2018 02:09pm

given what we know of the umbrella incident trump strikes me as the type that would leave a shopping cart in the parking lot
hope he chokes on a mcnugget


you're right, i'm sure hillary would have been screeching about how fox news is the enemy of the people every 4 hours

This post was edited by duffman316 on Nov 30 2018 02:10pm