Well those fuckers had better watch out if I get down there first. There's going to be hell to pay.
Rush Limbaugh announces he has 'advanced lung cancer'
- Thread starter Optionpro007
- Start date
Well those fuckers had better watch out if I get down there first. There's going to be hell to pay.
Last edited:
and democrat turn out in Iowa was terrible.
and you tell us few blacks will vote for pete.
and now Van Jones even tells us the Trump could receive a meaningful percentage of the black votes.
your obviously weak arguments have been exposed as worthless by the new voting season.
and you tell us few blacks will vote for pete.
and now Van Jones even tells us the Trump could receive a meaningful percentage of the black votes.
your obviously weak arguments have been exposed as worthless by the new voting season.
For those very reasons.
your analysis and your posts lack any sort of intellectual rigor or honesty.
you are paid 35 cents a post... because that is what you are worth.
you are paid 35 cents a post... because that is what you are worth.
Answer the question.
The intellectual rigor is the 8,000,000 net votes cast for dems in the LAST MIDTERM.
Hillary won the popular vote by nearly 3,000,000. Are you so intellectually dishonest to believe that a net 5,000,000 (or more!) Dem votes won't result in a landslide victory in the Electoral College as well? The 8MM was in a midterm!
Look at WI, PA and MI.
You fucking tool.
you are incapable of thinking in systems.
if the majority of the raw votes were the key factor... how the hell did democrats not regain the Senate.
how many different ways do you have to learn that our system for electing officials is not based on raw vote totals but where those votes occur.
Even one minute of thought on your part... with just a modicum of intelligence would reveal to you that the reason why the parties gerrymander is because the location of the vote matters... not the grand totals.
And as I said now you see that the 8 million in 2018 was not an indicator for turnout in Iowa.
you are a 35 cent a post tool.
and in case you were unaware... when the president was not on the ballot in 2018,. some of his voters didn't show up...
its a historical fact the out of office party usually does well in the off election.
you just regurgitate the same stupidity... and when it does not turn out... you refuse to adjust.... because you have no intellectual honesty or rigor.
You are still trying to tell us the 2016 polls which had hillary up by double digits for a long time... were good. Because she got more votes.
You get paid 35 cents a post because you are worth it.
if the majority of the raw votes were the key factor... how the hell did democrats not regain the Senate.
how many different ways do you have to learn that our system for electing officials is not based on raw vote totals but where those votes occur.
Even one minute of thought on your part... with just a modicum of intelligence would reveal to you that the reason why the parties gerrymander is because the location of the vote matters... not the grand totals.
And as I said now you see that the 8 million in 2018 was not an indicator for turnout in Iowa.
you are a 35 cent a post tool.
and in case you were unaware... when the president was not on the ballot in 2018,. some of his voters didn't show up...
its a historical fact the out of office party usually does well in the off election.
you just regurgitate the same stupidity... and when it does not turn out... you refuse to adjust.... because you have no intellectual honesty or rigor.
You are still trying to tell us the 2016 polls which had hillary up by double digits for a long time... were good. Because she got more votes.
You get paid 35 cents a post because you are worth it.
Last edited:
you just made my point.
the location of the vote matters when you look at races state by state... not the raw vote totals.
do you realize how set up you were because you don't see systems.
It was as if you gave me the exact answers I was expecting from you.
Welcome to your first systematic understanding of how elections work in the U.S.
The founders did not want raw vote totals to dominate he Federal Govt.
are you there yet?
the location of the vote matters when you look at races state by state... not the raw vote totals.
do you realize how set up you were because you don't see systems.
It was as if you gave me the exact answers I was expecting from you.
Welcome to your first systematic understanding of how elections work in the U.S.
The founders did not want raw vote totals to dominate he Federal Govt.
are you there yet?