Johnson Double Digits and "not known" yet..

[Pumpkin Row]

Democrats helped us out. He did better in open polls. Besides that, we also got Bush, McCain, and Romney as our nominees, and they're not really Republicans, either.

So you finally admit republicans make really dumb choices?

What do you mean finally? I've never defended the Republican party tooth and nail, of course they've made poor decisions. there have been better choices than what we got numerous times, and I've hated it. The only solace to Bush was that we got him over Gore. McCain and Romney would have been better than Obama, but there were better choices than them, also. It's actually sad that we get so many lefties winning the Republican nomination, they're barely better than the actual Democrat choices. I'd even consider Martin O'Malley over Trump, just barely. He's worlds better than Hillary, but the lefties passed him up. Republicans have been forced far too many times to vote for the lesser of two evils, and that's a trend that is still continuing.

You're the one that gave a list of your republican chosen candidates that you claim were poor candidates and didn't represent the right wing.

They really don't, and that's a trend with Establishment Servants. I actually suspect it's more that Establishment Servants can buy the election, to an extent, than it is Republicans actually voting for them. Though, I have no proof of that. Could also be that people vote Establishment Servants because the Democrats pick them, and they think they'd out-cheat them, or at least have a better chance at it. Though, I've only seen Democrats with dead people votes.

So you're saying Democratic party members chose the republican candidate?

This time, yes. Last few times, maybe not. Though, I'm also not sure how many open primaries there were in the last few elections, nor am I sure of whether or not they did better in open primaries. So, in short, maybe? I have no proof for them, only for the Donald.

 

[BULLDOG]

So you finally admit republicans make really dumb choices?

What do you mean finally? I've never defended the Republican party tooth and nail, of course they've made poor decisions. there have been better choices than what we got numerous times, and I've hated it. The only solace to Bush was that we got him over Gore. McCain and Romney would have been better than Obama, but there were better choices than them, also. It's actually sad that we get so many lefties winning the Republican nomination, they're barely better than the actual Democrat choices. I'd even consider Martin O'Malley over Trump, just barely. He's worlds better than Hillary, but the lefties passed him up. Republicans have been forced far too many times to vote for the lesser of two evils, and that's a trend that is still continuing.

You're the one that gave a list of your republican chosen candidates that you claim were poor candidates and didn't represent the right wing.

They really don't, and that's a trend with Establishment Servants. I actually suspect it's more that Establishment Servants can buy the election, to an extent, than it is Republicans actually voting for them. Though, I have no proof of that. Could also be that people vote Establishment Servants because the Democrats pick them, and they think they'd out-cheat them, or at least have a better chance at it. Though, I've only seen Democrats with dead people votes.

So you're saying Democratic party members chose the republican candidate?

This time, yes. Last few times, maybe not. Though, I'm also not sure how many open primaries there were in the last few elections, nor am I sure of whether or not they did better in open primaries. So, in short, maybe? I have no proof for them, only for the Donald.

Don't be silly. Republicans chose rump to be the republican nominee.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

What do you mean finally? I've never defended the Republican party tooth and nail, of course they've made poor decisions. there have been better choices than what we got numerous times, and I've hated it. The only solace to Bush was that we got him over Gore. McCain and Romney would have been better than Obama, but there were better choices than them, also. It's actually sad that we get so many lefties winning the Republican nomination, they're barely better than the actual Democrat choices. I'd even consider Martin O'Malley over Trump, just barely. He's worlds better than Hillary, but the lefties passed him up. Republicans have been forced far too many times to vote for the lesser of two evils, and that's a trend that is still continuing.

You're the one that gave a list of your republican chosen candidates that you claim were poor candidates and didn't represent the right wing.

They really don't, and that's a trend with Establishment Servants. I actually suspect it's more that Establishment Servants can buy the election, to an extent, than it is Republicans actually voting for them. Though, I have no proof of that. Could also be that people vote Establishment Servants because the Democrats pick them, and they think they'd out-cheat them, or at least have a better chance at it. Though, I've only seen Democrats with dead people votes.

So you're saying Democratic party members chose the republican candidate?

This time, yes. Last few times, maybe not. Though, I'm also not sure how many open primaries there were in the last few elections, nor am I sure of whether or not they did better in open primaries. So, in short, maybe? I have no proof for them, only for the Donald.

Don't be silly. Republicans chose rump to be the republican nominee.

You can keep telling yourself that, but it's established fact that he got a lot of crossover votes and did better in open polls. Republicans did vote for him, yes, but as I said before, Democrats helped a lot. You're not even backing up your claim with evidence, like Flacaltenn and I, you're just repeatedly asserting the same thing.

 

[BULLDOG]

You're the one that gave a list of your republican chosen candidates that you claim were poor candidates and didn't represent the right wing.

They really don't, and that's a trend with Establishment Servants. I actually suspect it's more that Establishment Servants can buy the election, to an extent, than it is Republicans actually voting for them. Though, I have no proof of that. Could also be that people vote Establishment Servants because the Democrats pick them, and they think they'd out-cheat them, or at least have a better chance at it. Though, I've only seen Democrats with dead people votes.

So you're saying Democratic party members chose the republican candidate?

This time, yes. Last few times, maybe not. Though, I'm also not sure how many open primaries there were in the last few elections, nor am I sure of whether or not they did better in open primaries. So, in short, maybe? I have no proof for them, only for the Donald.

Don't be silly. Republicans chose rump to be the republican nominee.

You can keep telling yourself that, but it's established fact that he got a lot of crossover votes and did better in open polls. Republicans did vote for him, yes, but as I said before, Democrats helped a lot. You're not even backing up your claim with evidence, like Flacaltenn and I, you're just repeatedly asserting the same thing.

You really expect me to back up the fact that democrats didn't chose or elect trump to be the republican nominee? That's the funniest thing I have read all day.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

They really don't, and that's a trend with Establishment Servants. I actually suspect it's more that Establishment Servants can buy the election, to an extent, than it is Republicans actually voting for them. Though, I have no proof of that. Could also be that people vote Establishment Servants because the Democrats pick them, and they think they'd out-cheat them, or at least have a better chance at it. Though, I've only seen Democrats with dead people votes.

So you're saying Democratic party members chose the republican candidate?

This time, yes. Last few times, maybe not. Though, I'm also not sure how many open primaries there were in the last few elections, nor am I sure of whether or not they did better in open primaries. So, in short, maybe? I have no proof for them, only for the Donald.

Don't be silly. Republicans chose rump to be the republican nominee.

You can keep telling yourself that, but it's established fact that he got a lot of crossover votes and did better in open polls. Republicans did vote for him, yes, but as I said before, Democrats helped a lot. You're not even backing up your claim with evidence, like Flacaltenn and I, you're just repeatedly asserting the same thing.

You really expect me to back up the fact that democrats didn't chose or elect trump to be the republican nominee? That's the funniest thing I have read all day.

Then it shouldn't be a problem to prove me wrong. either back up your claim, or back off. I and Flacaltenn explained why you're wrong, now prove you're right.

 

[flacaltenn]

What do you mean finally? I've never defended the Republican party tooth and nail, of course they've made poor decisions. there have been better choices than what we got numerous times, and I've hated it. The only solace to Bush was that we got him over Gore. McCain and Romney would have been better than Obama, but there were better choices than them, also. It's actually sad that we get so many lefties winning the Republican nomination, they're barely better than the actual Democrat choices. I'd even consider Martin O'Malley over Trump, just barely. He's worlds better than Hillary, but the lefties passed him up. Republicans have been forced far too many times to vote for the lesser of two evils, and that's a trend that is still continuing.

You're the one that gave a list of your republican chosen candidates that you claim were poor candidates and didn't represent the right wing.

They really don't, and that's a trend with Establishment Servants. I actually suspect it's more that Establishment Servants can buy the election, to an extent, than it is Republicans actually voting for them. Though, I have no proof of that. Could also be that people vote Establishment Servants because the Democrats pick them, and they think they'd out-cheat them, or at least have a better chance at it. Though, I've only seen Democrats with dead people votes.

So you're saying Democratic party members chose the republican candidate?

This time, yes. Last few times, maybe not. Though, I'm also not sure how many open primaries there were in the last few elections, nor am I sure of whether or not they did better in open primaries. So, in short, maybe? I have no proof for them, only for the Donald.

Don't be silly. Republicans chose rump to be the republican nominee.

Not the topic here. Does not matter to me. But before you say it's silly -- you ought to do some homework. Like this analysis from CNBC. Trump had MUCH more trouble in states where only registered repubs were voting for him..

 

[BULLDOG]

You're the one that gave a list of your republican chosen candidates that you claim were poor candidates and didn't represent the right wing.

They really don't, and that's a trend with Establishment Servants. I actually suspect it's more that Establishment Servants can buy the election, to an extent, than it is Republicans actually voting for them. Though, I have no proof of that. Could also be that people vote Establishment Servants because the Democrats pick them, and they think they'd out-cheat them, or at least have a better chance at it. Though, I've only seen Democrats with dead people votes.

So you're saying Democratic party members chose the republican candidate?

This time, yes. Last few times, maybe not. Though, I'm also not sure how many open primaries there were in the last few elections, nor am I sure of whether or not they did better in open primaries. So, in short, maybe? I have no proof for them, only for the Donald.

Don't be silly. Republicans chose rump to be the republican nominee.

Not the topic here. Does not matter to me. But before you say it's silly -- you ought to do some homework. Like this analysis from CNBC. Trump had MUCH more trouble in states where only registered repubs were voting for him..

If you want to believe the Democratic Party elected Trump to be the republican nominee, then go right ahead. If you are already convinced of such a hilariously odd belief, I'm at a total loss for anything that might convince you differently.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

They really don't, and that's a trend with Establishment Servants. I actually suspect it's more that Establishment Servants can buy the election, to an extent, than it is Republicans actually voting for them. Though, I have no proof of that. Could also be that people vote Establishment Servants because the Democrats pick them, and they think they'd out-cheat them, or at least have a better chance at it. Though, I've only seen Democrats with dead people votes.

So you're saying Democratic party members chose the republican candidate?

This time, yes. Last few times, maybe not. Though, I'm also not sure how many open primaries there were in the last few elections, nor am I sure of whether or not they did better in open primaries. So, in short, maybe? I have no proof for them, only for the Donald.

Don't be silly. Republicans chose rump to be the republican nominee.

Not the topic here. Does not matter to me. But before you say it's silly -- you ought to do some homework. Like this analysis from CNBC. Trump had MUCH more trouble in states where only registered repubs were voting for him..

If you want to believe the Democratic Party elected Trump to be the republican nominee, then go right ahead. If you are already convinced of such a hilariously odd belief, I'm at a total loss for anything that might convince you differently.

Continuing to assert a claim without facts. Here I thought you were here to debate, not to spout claims with nothing to back it up, even when you've been clearly proven wrong. Nice to know the Liberal way hasn't changed.