A point about Elizabeth Warren's Native American Ancestry

Why is it that you leftists keep babbling on that those of us who voted for Trump were "had"? When it comes down to it, there were only 2 choices that had a chance to win the presidential election. Hillary Clinton was the worst of the 2, not only in my opinion, but half this country's opinion. Were you "had" because you voted for Hillary?

Actually...less than half this country.

3,000,000 more thought Trump was the worst of the two.
 
Address the questions Frank.

Much more fun responding to what you erroneously asserted, RB.

You said, " When it comes down to it, there were only 2 choices that had a chance to win the presidential election. Hillary Clinton was the worst of the 2, not only in my opinion, but half this country's opinion. "

If it does come down to which of the two the people of this country considered "the worst"...I pointed out that 3,000,000 more people thought Donald Trump was the worst of the two.

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to mention that again.
 
you people need to stop trying to get oneuli and other lib'ruls to change their minds.....if you succeed they might not nominate her......
 
Last edited:
I m Native American. Always have been.
Actually I'm pretty sure i can claim Sami heritage, green eyes and whatnot.
Makes me double repressed.

That Sami heritage, whatever the hell that is, is that part of your family folklore and stories handed down through the years?
 
Why is it that you leftists keep babbling on that those of us who voted for Trump were "had"? When it comes down to it, there were only 2 choices that had a chance to win the presidential election. Hillary Clinton was the worst of the 2, not only in my opinion, but half this country's opinion. Were you "had" because you voted for Hillary?

Your party had something like 16 candidates in the beginning... 16! Not to mention, the republican establishment hated trump. Why couldn't republican voters have nominated someone better than trump? IMO it doesn't speak well for anyone who was taken in by his bombast and lies. Still-loyal trump supporters make up his cult of personality; they sure don't seem to understand how damaging he is to the country.

Actually a majority of voters didn't think Hillary was the worst of the two.
 
I think you should let people have some voice in your elecctions.

The conservative assholes here are not stupid.

They are smart enough to be willing to allow ideas of 250 years ago to impact significantly on the notion of one person/one vote in today's world.

The small population states have an inordinate power in the Senate...and by extension in the Electoral College. Each state gets one electoral vote for each Representative...and for each Senator.

The abomination, Donald Trump, in his depth-plumbing ignorance, keep insisting that the Electoral College favors the Democrats and liberals...when it overwhelmingly favors the Republicans and conservatives.

Easy enough to test that for the asshole doubters. Let's agree to a Constitutional Amendment mandating that the Electoral College membership be limited ONLY to the number of Representatives...and not include the 2 for the senators.

It still would favor some small population states...but not nearly to the obscene degree it now does.

And we would all take a look at who votes for it...and who votes against it.

MY GUESS: Democrats and liberals would vote for it 5 to 1 over Republicans and conservatives. And that is a conservative estimate.
 
Much more fun responding to what you erroneously asserted, RB.

You said, " When it comes down to it, there were only 2 choices that had a chance to win the presidential election. Hillary Clinton was the worst of the 2, not only in my opinion, but half this country's opinion. "

If it does come down to which of the two the people of this country considered "the worst"...I pointed out that 3,000,000 more people thought Donald Trump was the worst of the two.

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to mention that again.

Still avoiding my questions? You have no answer, do you?
You mention nothing, Trump won the states and the electorate. That is fact.
 
Your party had something like 16 candidates in the beginning... 16! Not to mention, the republican establishment hated trump. Why couldn't republican voters have nominated someone better than trump? IMO it doesn't speak well for anyone who was taken in by his bombast and lies. Still-loyal trump supporters make up his cult of personality; they sure don't seem to understand how damaging he is to the country.

Actually a majority of voters didn't think Hillary was the worst of the two.

So you have no answer, do you? I didn't expect you to answer them.
 
Still avoiding my questions? You have no answer, do you?
You mention nothing, Trump won the states and the electorate. That is fact.

3,000,000 more Americans thought Trump was a poorer choice than Hillary...

...which contradicts what you said.

THAT is a fact.
 
I think you should let people have some voice in your elecctions.

Republicans started this trend of tallying up the number of counties, acres of land, number of states that their candidate won - because it got embarrassing to have to justify why the GOP keeps losing the popular vote - to justify why they keep coming in second place as the choice of the American people.

Counties and land do not vote. There are more people in Los Angeles, New York, and PHiladelphia than there are in about 600 rural, conservative counties - many of which have more cows than people.

I would love to be a fly on the wall at the Fox News meeting where they discussed selling the idea of "number of counties" and acres of land as a proxy for the intent of the voters, and having their barely educated base buy into it and parrot it across the interwebs.
 
Back
Top