The Man's Ego Knows No Bounds

[Decus]

For those who think Trump didn't have a mandate, he won 33 Electoral Districts to Clinton's 17. And This is how presidential races are determined in our political system. That is more or less using rough figures 66% of the country for Trump and 34% for Clinton-Obama.

Nice try, but a total spin... 1. Clinton won the popular vote by millions 2. Trump won the 3 closest swing states by approx 100K votes... Thats what determined the election 3 states and 100K votes.

Having our politics decided by the good people of California isn't the most desirable solution:

You're right, the people in Wyoming deserve to have 3 times the voting power than theaverage American. Why should votes from the largest state that is responsible for the majority of the nations economic output count for anything?

What bothers me is that California has created something of a welfare problem and this has an affect on what people expect of government.

"34% Of the nation’s welfare recipients live in California but only …

12% … of the U.S. population resides here."

Is California the welfare capital?

This sets up a belief in what the government's role should be and most certainly influences how and who they vote for.

.

 

[francoHFW]

For those who think Trump didn't have a mandate, he won 33 Electoral Districts to Clinton's 17. And This is how presidential races are determined in our political system. That is more or less using rough figures 66% of the country for Trump and 34% for Clinton-Obama.

Nice try, but a total spin... 1. Clinton won the popular vote by millions 2. Trump won the 3 closest swing states by approx 100K votes... Thats what determined the election 3 states and 100K votes.

Having our politics decided by the good people of California isn't the most desirable solution:

You're right, the people in Wyoming deserve to have 3 times the voting power than theaverage American. Why should votes from the largest state that is responsible for the majority of the nations economic output count for anything?

What bothers me is that California has created something of a welfare problem and this has an affect on what people expect of government.

"34% Of the nation’s welfare recipients live in California but only …

12% … of the U.S. population resides here."

Is California the welfare capital?

This sets up a belief in what the government's role should be and most certainly influences how and who they vote for.

.

Well that article is damn confusing. RW San Diego?

 

[Slade3200]

For those who think Trump didn't have a mandate, he won 33 Electoral Districts to Clinton's 17. And This is how presidential races are determined in our political system. That is more or less using rough figures 66% of the country for Trump and 34% for Clinton-Obama.

Nice try, but a total spin... 1. Clinton won the popular vote by millions 2. Trump won the 3 closest swing states by approx 100K votes... Thats what determined the election 3 states and 100K votes.

Having our politics decided by the good people of California isn't the most desirable solution:

You're right, the people in Wyoming deserve to have 3 times the voting power than theaverage American. Why should votes from the largest state that is responsible for the majority of the nations economic output count for anything?

What bothers me is that California has created something of a welfare problem and this has an affect on what people expect of government.

"34% Of the nation’s welfare recipients live in California but only …

12% … of the U.S. population resides here."

Is California the welfare capital?

This sets up a belief in what the government's role should be and most certainly influences how and who they vote for.

.

Thats a valid concern... I hope we can improve our welfare system to work towards getting more people off it and rather than making more people dependent on it.

 

[Conservative65]

Best economy in the world. The rest is W's mess, and getting better. Stupidest wars EVER + another corrupt GOP world depression have that chaotic effect. Also the dumbest GOP obstruction and bs hate propaganda.

You mean all 47.6 million that were on food stamps under Obama?

Your bitch lost, pussy.

A number that's been going down, dupe. Thanks for the corrupt depression, a-hole. lol

A number that's still higher than any white President ever had.

 

[Conservative65]

For those who think Trump didn't have a mandate, he won 33 Electoral Districts to Clinton's 17. And This is how presidential races are determined in our political system. That is more or less using rough figures 66% of the country for Trump and 34% for Clinton-Obama.

Nice try, but a total spin... 1. Clinton won the popular vote by millions 2. Trump won the 3 closest swing states by approx 100K votes... Thats what determined the election 3 states and 100K votes.

Having our politics decided by the good people of California isn't the most desirable solution:

You're right, the people in Wyoming deserve to have 3 times the voting power than theaverage American. Why should votes from the largest state that is responsible for the majority of the nations economic output count for anything?

What bothers me is that California has created something of a welfare problem and this has an affect on what people expect of government.

"34% Of the nation’s welfare recipients live in California but only …

12% … of the U.S. population resides here."

Is California the welfare capital?

This sets up a belief in what the government's role should be and most certainly influences how and who they vote for.

.

Thats a valid concern... I hope we can improve our welfare system to work towards getting more people off it and rather than making more people dependent on it.

As long as you hand people more for doing nothing than they could make working for it, good luck. That's the primary problem with Liberals and their socialist agenda. They think someone getting someone for nothing and it being given to them at an amount greater they that have the capability of earning based on their skills will motivate them to get a job.

 

[Slade3200]

Nice try, but a total spin... 1. Clinton won the popular vote by millions 2. Trump won the 3 closest swing states by approx 100K votes... Thats what determined the election 3 states and 100K votes.

Having our politics decided by the good people of California isn't the most desirable solution:

You're right, the people in Wyoming deserve to have 3 times the voting power than theaverage American. Why should votes from the largest state that is responsible for the majority of the nations economic output count for anything?

What bothers me is that California has created something of a welfare problem and this has an affect on what people expect of government.

"34% Of the nation’s welfare recipients live in California but only …

12% … of the U.S. population resides here."

Is California the welfare capital?

This sets up a belief in what the government's role should be and most certainly influences how and who they vote for.

.

Thats a valid concern... I hope we can improve our welfare system to work towards getting more people off it and rather than making more people dependent on it.

As long as you hand people more for doing nothing than they could make working for it, good luck. That's the primary problem with Liberals and their socialist agenda. They think someone getting someone for nothing and it being given to them at an amount greater they that have the capability of earning based on their skills will motivate them to get a job.

Don't speak for all liberals... Many like myself want to help the less fortunate. I just think it better to provide them with resources for success and incentives to get off welfare rather than making them too comfortable and dependent on the government.

 

[BluesLegend]

OP- BS- That's the new guy. Obama's problem was he couldn't persuade mindless, bought off swine to do the right thing...

Obama had no leadership skills or experience, hence his failures.

 

[Conservative65]

Having our politics decided by the good people of California isn't the most desirable solution:

You're right, the people in Wyoming deserve to have 3 times the voting power than theaverage American. Why should votes from the largest state that is responsible for the majority of the nations economic output count for anything?

What bothers me is that California has created something of a welfare problem and this has an affect on what people expect of government.

"34% Of the nation’s welfare recipients live in California but only …

12% … of the U.S. population resides here."

Is California the welfare capital?

This sets up a belief in what the government's role should be and most certainly influences how and who they vote for.

.

Thats a valid concern... I hope we can improve our welfare system to work towards getting more people off it and rather than making more people dependent on it.

As long as you hand people more for doing nothing than they could make working for it, good luck. That's the primary problem with Liberals and their socialist agenda. They think someone getting someone for nothing and it being given to them at an amount greater they that have the capability of earning based on their skills will motivate them to get a job.

Don't speak for all liberals... Many like myself want to help the less fortunate. I just think it better to provide them with resources for success and incentives to get off welfare rather than making them too comfortable and dependent on the government.

It's Liberal policies that de-incentivize working. When those policies provide as much or more than many on welfare could earn based on their skills, why would they work and spend 40+ hours/week doing something when they can get the same for doing nothing?

If you voted for one of those Liberal politicians, your actions don't match your words.

 

[Slade3200]

You're right, the people in Wyoming deserve to have 3 times the voting power than theaverage American. Why should votes from the largest state that is responsible for the majority of the nations economic output count for anything?

What bothers me is that California has created something of a welfare problem and this has an affect on what people expect of government.

"34% Of the nation’s welfare recipients live in California but only …

12% … of the U.S. population resides here."

Is California the welfare capital?

This sets up a belief in what the government's role should be and most certainly influences how and who they vote for.

.

Thats a valid concern... I hope we can improve our welfare system to work towards getting more people off it and rather than making more people dependent on it.

As long as you hand people more for doing nothing than they could make working for it, good luck. That's the primary problem with Liberals and their socialist agenda. They think someone getting someone for nothing and it being given to them at an amount greater they that have the capability of earning based on their skills will motivate them to get a job.

Don't speak for all liberals... Many like myself want to help the less fortunate. I just think it better to provide them with resources for success and incentives to get off welfare rather than making them too comfortable and dependent on the government.

It's Liberal policies that de-incentivize working. When those policies provide as much or more than many on welfare could earn based on their skills, why would they work and spend 40+ hours/week doing something when they can get the same for doing nothing?

If you voted for one of those Liberal politicians, your actions don't match your words.

I vote on both sides of the isle and I respect both liberal and conservative viewpoints. I also believe that the majority of people regardless of party seek the smart and effective answers to problems. Often the best course involves strategies from both ideologies.

 

[Conservative65]

What bothers me is that California has created something of a welfare problem and this has an affect on what people expect of government.

"34% Of the nation’s welfare recipients live in California but only …

12% … of the U.S. population resides here."

Is California the welfare capital?

This sets up a belief in what the government's role should be and most certainly influences how and who they vote for.

.

Thats a valid concern... I hope we can improve our welfare system to work towards getting more people off it and rather than making more people dependent on it.

As long as you hand people more for doing nothing than they could make working for it, good luck. That's the primary problem with Liberals and their socialist agenda. They think someone getting someone for nothing and it being given to them at an amount greater they that have the capability of earning based on their skills will motivate them to get a job.

Don't speak for all liberals... Many like myself want to help the less fortunate. I just think it better to provide them with resources for success and incentives to get off welfare rather than making them too comfortable and dependent on the government.

It's Liberal policies that de-incentivize working. When those policies provide as much or more than many on welfare could earn based on their skills, why would they work and spend 40+ hours/week doing something when they can get the same for doing nothing?

If you voted for one of those Liberal politicians, your actions don't match your words.

I vote on both sides of the isle and I respect both liberal and conservative viewpoints. I also believe that the majority of people regardless of party seek the smart and effective answers to problems. Often the best course involves strategies from both ideologies.

Oh, a wishy washy fence rider?

 

[Slade3200]

Thats a valid concern... I hope we can improve our welfare system to work towards getting more people off it and rather than making more people dependent on it.

As long as you hand people more for doing nothing than they could make working for it, good luck. That's the primary problem with Liberals and their socialist agenda. They think someone getting someone for nothing and it being given to them at an amount greater they that have the capability of earning based on their skills will motivate them to get a job.

Don't speak for all liberals... Many like myself want to help the less fortunate. I just think it better to provide them with resources for success and incentives to get off welfare rather than making them too comfortable and dependent on the government.

It's Liberal policies that de-incentivize working. When those policies provide as much or more than many on welfare could earn based on their skills, why would they work and spend 40+ hours/week doing something when they can get the same for doing nothing?

If you voted for one of those Liberal politicians, your actions don't match your words.

I vote on both sides of the isle and I respect both liberal and conservative viewpoints. I also believe that the majority of people regardless of party seek the smart and effective answers to problems. Often the best course involves strategies from both ideologies.

Oh, a wishy washy fence rider?

A realist... Not a blind partisan... You absolutists are comical

 

[Conservative65]

As long as you hand people more for doing nothing than they could make working for it, good luck. That's the primary problem with Liberals and their socialist agenda. They think someone getting someone for nothing and it being given to them at an amount greater they that have the capability of earning based on their skills will motivate them to get a job.

Don't speak for all liberals... Many like myself want to help the less fortunate. I just think it better to provide them with resources for success and incentives to get off welfare rather than making them too comfortable and dependent on the government.

It's Liberal policies that de-incentivize working. When those policies provide as much or more than many on welfare could earn based on their skills, why would they work and spend 40+ hours/week doing something when they can get the same for doing nothing?

If you voted for one of those Liberal politicians, your actions don't match your words.

I vote on both sides of the isle and I respect both liberal and conservative viewpoints. I also believe that the majority of people regardless of party seek the smart and effective answers to problems. Often the best course involves strategies from both ideologies.

Oh, a wishy washy fence rider?

A realist... Not a blind partisan... You absolutists are comical

Don't make the mistake of thinking because I've realized conservatism is the best way and liberalism provides nothing worthwhile makes me a partisan. It makes me intelligent. A partisan is one that doesn't look at anything but the name. Big difference in that and knowing what does an doesn't work.

 

[Slade3200]

Don't speak for all liberals... Many like myself want to help the less fortunate. I just think it better to provide them with resources for success and incentives to get off welfare rather than making them too comfortable and dependent on the government.

It's Liberal policies that de-incentivize working. When those policies provide as much or more than many on welfare could earn based on their skills, why would they work and spend 40+ hours/week doing something when they can get the same for doing nothing?

If you voted for one of those Liberal politicians, your actions don't match your words.

I vote on both sides of the isle and I respect both liberal and conservative viewpoints. I also believe that the majority of people regardless of party seek the smart and effective answers to problems. Often the best course involves strategies from both ideologies.

Oh, a wishy washy fence rider?

A realist... Not a blind partisan... You absolutists are comical

Don't make the mistake of thinking because I've realized conservatism is the best way and liberalism provides nothing worthwhile makes me a partisan. It makes me intelligent. A partisan is one that doesn't look at anything but the name. Big difference in that and knowing what does an doesn't work.

So do you believe that there should be no public education? No social security or healthcare for our elderly?

 

[francoHFW]

OP- BS- That's the new guy. Obama's problem was he couldn't persuade mindless, bought off swine to do the right thing...

Obama had no leadership skills or experience, hence his failures.

McConnell and his drones wouldn't be led period. Nor would the brainwashed ( 50% racist) dupes...

 

[BluesLegend]

OP- BS- That's the new guy. Obama's problem was he couldn't persuade mindless, bought off swine to do the right thing...

Obama had no leadership skills or experience, hence his failures.

McConnell and his drones wouldn't be led period. Nor would the brainwashed ( 50% racist) dupes...

Yes yes nothing is ever Obama's fault. /eyeroll

 

[Clementine]

“I take some responsibility for that,” he admits before shifting instantly to how he wasn’t really responsible, having inherited an economy brutalized by the financial crisis, etc etc. I’d be curious to hear him explain, in detail, where he thinks his share of the blame lies. Stephanopoulos doesn’t press him on it, which may be a symptom of his Democratic sympathies or, more charitably, may be due to him suspecting that Obama would have only given a self-serving answer anyway. You’re never going to hear O say that it was a dumb idea to pass a massive health-care reform bill that was unpopular from day one on a strict party-line vote. The most you’ll get from him is something along the lines of “I overestimated how ready the country was for the sort of forward-looking change I’m interested in.” He was simply too far ahead of his time, and thus must America take a detour into “the wrong side of history” before realizing that Obama was right all along.

The funniest part of this answer is how it develops, of course, into him extolling his own abilities. “Partly because my docket was really full here, I couldn’t be both chief organizer of the Democratic Party and function as commander in chief and president of the United States,” he told Stephanopoulos. “We did not begin what I think needs to happen over the long haul, and that is rebuild the Democratic Party at the ground level.” If only he’d been able to juggle both roles, president and “chief organizer” (whatever that means), the Democratic Party wouldn’t have lost a thousand farking seats at the federal and state level since 2009? I don’t know how to read that answer except as him saying (a) the current “chief organizers” of the party are utter incompetents and (b) there’s no problem with the Democratic Party that a little more Barack Obama couldn’t have cured.

Obama: I can’t help feeling that I’m partly responsible for my party being destroyed - Hot Air

He also thinks he could have beat Trump and that his administration was scandal free. Even his admissions are nothing but bragging about what a super hero he is. His farewell speech was more bullshit.

 

[francoHFW]

“I take some responsibility for that,” he admits before shifting instantly to how he wasn’t really responsible, having inherited an economy brutalized by the financial crisis, etc etc. I’d be curious to hear him explain, in detail, where he thinks his share of the blame lies. Stephanopoulos doesn’t press him on it, which may be a symptom of his Democratic sympathies or, more charitably, may be due to him suspecting that Obama would have only given a self-serving answer anyway. You’re never going to hear O say that it was a dumb idea to pass a massive health-care reform bill that was unpopular from day one on a strict party-line vote. The most you’ll get from him is something along the lines of “I overestimated how ready the country was for the sort of forward-looking change I’m interested in.” He was simply too far ahead of his time, and thus must America take a detour into “the wrong side of history” before realizing that Obama was right all along.

The funniest part of this answer is how it develops, of course, into him extolling his own abilities. “Partly because my docket was really full here, I couldn’t be both chief organizer of the Democratic Party and function as commander in chief and president of the United States,” he told Stephanopoulos. “We did not begin what I think needs to happen over the long haul, and that is rebuild the Democratic Party at the ground level.” If only he’d been able to juggle both roles, president and “chief organizer” (whatever that means), the Democratic Party wouldn’t have lost a thousand farking seats at the federal and state level since 2009? I don’t know how to read that answer except as him saying (a) the current “chief organizers” of the party are utter incompetents and (b) there’s no problem with the Democratic Party that a little more Barack Obama couldn’t have cured.

Obama: I can’t help feeling that I’m partly responsible for my party being destroyed - Hot Air

He also thinks he could have beat Trump and that his administration was scandal free. Even his admissions are nothing but bragging about what a super hero he is. His farewell speech was more bullshit.


View attachment 106165

He's right, racist hater dupe. And bs.

 

[Claudette]

If anyone expected Douchebag to take the blame for anything they were doomed to disappointment.

He has never been responsible for anything that happened in his administration unless it was something good.

Can't wait to see the backside of that douchebag.

 

[Spare_change]

 

[Conservative65]

It's Liberal policies that de-incentivize working. When those policies provide as much or more than many on welfare could earn based on their skills, why would they work and spend 40+ hours/week doing something when they can get the same for doing nothing?

If you voted for one of those Liberal politicians, your actions don't match your words.

I vote on both sides of the isle and I respect both liberal and conservative viewpoints. I also believe that the majority of people regardless of party seek the smart and effective answers to problems. Often the best course involves strategies from both ideologies.

Oh, a wishy washy fence rider?

A realist... Not a blind partisan... You absolutists are comical

Don't make the mistake of thinking because I've realized conservatism is the best way and liberalism provides nothing worthwhile makes me a partisan. It makes me intelligent. A partisan is one that doesn't look at anything but the name. Big difference in that and knowing what does an doesn't work.

So do you believe that there should be no public education? No social security or healthcare for our elderly?

I believe what the Constitution says. Public education is not mentioned in the Constitution. That makes it a STATE matter. If STATE'S choose to do it, it's Constitutional. Social Security and Medicare are not mentioned in the Constitution. If a STATE chooses to put such a program in place for their people, the Constitution says it's within that STATE'S authority.