He actually received 81 million votes (supposedly) and his voters aren't embarrassed at all.

[Puma Punku]

The moment that America is actually attacked ( EMT, dirty bomb, real germ warfare etc...) that will be the moment that all this nonsense we are quibbling over will end....instantly. No more talk of CRT, no more talk of white privilege, no more talk of Brittney Spears, no more talk about the rights of illegal aliens, no more talk about BLM etc... all that crap will end. We will be in the fight of our lives and we ,as Americans, will very likely wonder how stupid we were to elect a senile, corrupt politician that screws up everything while he eats ice-cream. So for those that are happy as hell that we got Biden instead of Trump.. you.. yes you, are the band playing as the Titanic sinks. All of those musicians inhaled the icy cold salt water.

 

[toobfreak]

Yes, candycorn and those types are not embarrassed in the least.

THAT is the problem. He DIDN'T receive 81 million votes! Not by a mile. Everyone knows it. They admit it. And they ARE embarrassed! So embarrassed, they still yell TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP! every day trying to cover it up!

 

[PoliticalChic]

You can sling all the hate you'd like. Trump inherited a growing economy and falling unemployment from Obama. He didn't usher any upward trajectory.
While Obama will be remembered as a good President, Trump will be remembered as the worst President this country ever elected.

Trump boasts the economy reached historic heights during his first term. Here are 9 charts showing how it stacks up to the Obama and Bush presidencies.

The economy under President Trump before the pandemic largely grew at the same pace as it did under Barack Obama.

www.businessinsider.com

In short, there was no upward trajectory to the economy on anyone's radar when Trump took office.” Economic Boom: Media Rewrite History To Credit Obama Instead Of Trump

 

[Road Runner]

`You've watched the truth your entire life. You have participated in the very racism that idiot says doesn't happen.

Whatever.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

In short, there was no upward trajectory to the economy on anyone's radar when Trump took office.” Economic Boom: Media Rewrite History To Credit Obama Instead Of Trump

Apparently you missed the "Editorial" heading. Dismissed. And this was pre-pandemic.

Trump's Economic Falsehoods - FactCheck.org

President Donald Trump rattled off several false claims in his Nov. 12 speech to the Economic Club of New York, in which he contrasted the supposedly "bleak" outlook at the end of his predecessor's term with an exaggerated portrayal of the economy's strong performance during his own tenure.

www.factcheck.org

"There’s no question the economy has been strong since Trump took office, but it was also strong before he took office, a fact he continues to distort as he falsely puffs up his own record".

 

[PoliticalChic]

Apparently you missed the "Editorial" heading. Dismissed. And this was pre-pandemic.

Trump's Economic Falsehoods - FactCheck.org

President Donald Trump rattled off several false claims in his Nov. 12 speech to the Economic Club of New York, in which he contrasted the supposedly "bleak" outlook at the end of his predecessor's term with an exaggerated portrayal of the economy's strong performance during his own tenure.

www.factcheck.org

"There’s no question the economy has been strong since Trump took office, but it was also strong before he took office, a fact he continues to distort as he falsely puffs up his own record".

FactCheck is a Democrat organization.

No wonder you're so dumb.


Factcheck.org -- A Fraudulent "Fact Check" Site Funded By Biased Political Group
theswash.com ^ | 8/27/2012 11 | matchdoctor


Posted on 8/28/2012, 146 PM by bronxville

Factcheck.org -- A Fraudulent "Fact Check" Site Funded By Biased Political Group

If you wanted to use a devious method to deceive people who are trying to differentiate between truth and lies on the Internet how would you do it? If you were extremely devious and had no conscience, you might set up a Web site with some official and unbiased sounding name that claims to be the encyclopedia of truth to be used as a tool for anyone who has the same biased view and wants to make believe to "back it up" with what they would like you to think is "indisputable fact."

That is exactly what Web sites like factcheck.org are. They are biased, politically motivated propaganda Web sites, manned and funded by biased political organizations who set up the sites for the sole purpose of deviously "backing up" the political arguments of those who hold the same views that they do. It's kind of like you have a friend who is in on your lie, and you use him to back up your story and don't tell anyone else he is your friend.

Just because they use a name that implies unbiased assessments, doesn't mean that they provide them. You can call your Web site anything you want. I can set up a web site called thetruth.org or realfacts.com or stopthelies.org and post any kind of biased political propaganda I want on it. The name means nothing. And in the case of sites like factcheck.org, the name is intentionally misleading and deceptive. But it isn't the only so called "fact check" site that is a fraud. There are others.

Think about it. Would you rely on any particular Web site to get the "truth?" Anyone honest would tell you that you should NOT rely solely on them to get your facts. You should get them by considering many different and sources, with different points of view and opinions and arrive at what you believe to be the truth by using your own God given senses. Only con artists purport to be the de facto source of truth.

If you look behind the scenes at these phony "fact check" sites, you find that they are funded by organizations with political biases. You must always ask yourself. Who is writing about this so-called "truth." Who funds the site and pays their expenses. What are the origins and history of the funders and who are they associated with. In the case of factcheck.org they receive their funding from the liberal Annenberg Foundation.

The Annenberg Foundation was originally founded by Walter J. Annenberg, a conservative who supported Ronald Reagan. However, when Walter Annenberg died, his family took over the management of the foundation and it took a turn to the far left and has ties to radical left individuals such as Bill Ayers and his friend and fellow left wing radical collegue Barack Obama. How is factcheck.org associated with these people:

To start, Ayers was the key founder of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which was a Chicago public school reform project from 1995 to 2001. Upon its start in 1995, Obama was appointed Board Chairman and President of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Geesh, that alone connects all three. Well, it branches out even more from there.

Ayers co-chaired the organization’s Collaborative, which set the education policies of the Challenge. Oddly enough, Obama was the one who was authorized to delegate to the Collaborative in regards to its programs and projects. In addition to that, Obama often times had to seek advice and assistance from the Ayer’s led Collaborative in regards to the programmatic aspects of grant proposals. Ayers even sat on the same board as Obama as an “ex officio member”. They both also sat together on the board of the CAC’s Governance Committee. Obama and Ayers were two parts of a group of four who were instructed to draft the bylaws that would govern the CAC. Keep in mind that the “A” in CAC is for Annenberg, the owners of FactCheck.org. The funding for Ayer’s projects and those of his cronies was approved by Board Chair, Barack Obama.

http://theswash.com/liberty/who-fact-checks-factcheck-org

Factcheck.org -- A Fraudulent "Fact Check" Site Funded By Biased Political Group



All anyone needs to know is that FactCheck is sponsored by far-left liberals-mainly Barrack Obama. The connection with Obama and FactCheck is through
the Chicago Annenberg Challenge that received money via the Annenburg
Foundation. Then Senator Obama requested an earmark of 3.5 million dollars for the Annenburg Foundation, which funded the Chicago Annenburg Challenge and also funds FactCheck.org. Obama is tied to both groups one via earmark, the other via direct participation. If you are going to set up an official sounding fact-checking website you wouldn’t want it directly related with a political party so of course FactCheck will say they aren’t influenced by politicians that fund them through third parties. Is Factcheck.org unbiased?

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

FactCheck is a Democrat organization.

No wonder you're so dumb.


Factcheck.org -- A Fraudulent "Fact Check" Site Funded By Biased Political Group
theswash.com ^ | 8/27/2012 11 | matchdoctor


Posted on 8/28/2012, 146 PM by bronxville

Factcheck.org -- A Fraudulent "Fact Check" Site Funded By Biased Political Group

If you wanted to use a devious method to deceive people who are trying to differentiate between truth and lies on the Internet how would you do it? If you were extremely devious and had no conscience, you might set up a Web site with some official and unbiased sounding name that claims to be the encyclopedia of truth to be used as a tool for anyone who has the same biased view and wants to make believe to "back it up" with what they would like you to think is "indisputable fact."

That is exactly what Web sites like factcheck.org are. They are biased, politically motivated propaganda Web sites, manned and funded by biased political organizations who set up the sites for the sole purpose of deviously "backing up" the political arguments of those who hold the same views that they do. It's kind of like you have a friend who is in on your lie, and you use him to back up your story and don't tell anyone else he is your friend.

Just because they use a name that implies unbiased assessments, doesn't mean that they provide them. You can call your Web site anything you want. I can set up a web site called thetruth.org or realfacts.com or stopthelies.org and post any kind of biased political propaganda I want on it. The name means nothing. And in the case of sites like factcheck.org, the name is intentionally misleading and deceptive. But it isn't the only so called "fact check" site that is a fraud. There are others.

Think about it. Would you rely on any particular Web site to get the "truth?" Anyone honest would tell you that you should NOT rely solely on them to get your facts. You should get them by considering many different and sources, with different points of view and opinions and arrive at what you believe to be the truth by using your own God given senses. Only con artists purport to be the de facto source of truth.

If you look behind the scenes at these phony "fact check" sites, you find that they are funded by organizations with political biases. You must always ask yourself. Who is writing about this so-called "truth." Who funds the site and pays their expenses. What are the origins and history of the funders and who are they associated with. In the case of factcheck.org they receive their funding from the liberal Annenberg Foundation.

The Annenberg Foundation was originally founded by Walter J. Annenberg, a conservative who supported Ronald Reagan. However, when Walter Annenberg died, his family took over the management of the foundation and it took a turn to the far left and has ties to radical left individuals such as Bill Ayers and his friend and fellow left wing radical collegue Barack Obama. How is factcheck.org associated with these people:

To start, Ayers was the key founder of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which was a Chicago public school reform project from 1995 to 2001. Upon its start in 1995, Obama was appointed Board Chairman and President of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Geesh, that alone connects all three. Well, it branches out even more from there.

Ayers co-chaired the organization’s Collaborative, which set the education policies of the Challenge. Oddly enough, Obama was the one who was authorized to delegate to the Collaborative in regards to its programs and projects. In addition to that, Obama often times had to seek advice and assistance from the Ayer’s led Collaborative in regards to the programmatic aspects of grant proposals. Ayers even sat on the same board as Obama as an “ex officio member”. They both also sat together on the board of the CAC’s Governance Committee. Obama and Ayers were two parts of a group of four who were instructed to draft the bylaws that would govern the CAC. Keep in mind that the “A” in CAC is for Annenberg, the owners of FactCheck.org. The funding for Ayer’s projects and those of his cronies was approved by Board Chair, Barack Obama.

http://theswash.com/liberty/who-fact-checks-factcheck-org

Factcheck.org -- A Fraudulent "Fact Check" Site Funded By Biased Political Group



All anyone needs to know is that FactCheck is sponsored by far-left liberals-mainly Barrack Obama. The connection with Obama and FactCheck is through
the Chicago Annenberg Challenge that received money via the Annenburg
Foundation. Then Senator Obama requested an earmark of 3.5 million dollars for the Annenburg Foundation, which funded the Chicago Annenburg Challenge and also funds FactCheck.org. Obama is tied to both groups one via earmark, the other via direct participation. If you are going to set up an official sounding fact-checking website you wouldn’t want it directly related with a political party so of course FactCheck will say they aren’t influenced by politicians that fund them through third parties. Is Factcheck.org unbiased?

Fact checks..are...fact checks sweetie. I don't give a hoot about your conspiracy theories. They have a good track record on both sides. You're irritated because they're correct.
Deal with it. Trump inherited a growing economy and was the beneficiary of falling unemployment. He bragged that he had "spectacular" growth. Which was barely better than
his predecessors...until, of course, he ignored the response to the pandemic and it all went in the crapper. To be expected from someone who wasn't fit for the office.
Remember, you supported him.

 

[jknowgood]

No he has not.

Gas prices way up.
Inflation way up.
Jobs report a joke.
Empty shelves at the grocery store and other shortages.
Heating your home will cost over 30% more this winter.
He has been a failure, we need Trump back.

 

[jknowgood]

You're still on the rebound after Biden wiped the floor with 45.

Yes, it's costing all Americans alot of money off him cheating. Gas alone here is over $3.00 a gallon. Less than $2.00 when he took over.

 

[jknowgood]

Still no data.

Look it up, in the UK. You won't hear it from cnn.

 

[jknowgood]

Unvannated people are getting it and dying. Your claim is untrue.

Let's see, liberals cancell out anything when you misspell. So try again.

 

[colfax_m]

Look it up, in the UK. You won't hear it from cnn.

I apparently won’t hear the data from you either.

 

[Faun]

Your answer was that's how bad the alternative was. So your willing to weaken our country and put a demented fool take over? With a reputation of screwing up everything he does? Even Obama said he could screw anything up. That's cool because Biden is actually destroying your party. Trump will be waiting to fix America again.

Better than the seditious dictator Trump tried to be.

 

[skews13]

ove how all of the puppets pretend that everything is completely normal.

He, they, this, is beyond absurd.

You damn right it's beyond absurd. A President that committed sedition and insurrection against his own country, and he hasn't been hung yet. Absurd

His children that actually had to be made by a judge to take a class on how to NOT steal from charities. Absurd

His son in law who lied 10 different times on the top secret security clearance application. Each lie a felony, and he hasn't been arrested and prosecuted yet. Absurd

 

[jknowgood]

Better than the seditious dictator Trump tried to be.

A dictator has mandates on what you can do. So far, that's Biden.

 

[Faun]

A dictator has mandates on what you can do. So far, that's Biden.

A dictator tries to stay in power even if an election is held and they lose.

 

[jknowgood]

A dictator tries to stay in power even if an election is held and they lose.

Not if the other side cheated. You will have Trump as president again, if he chooses. Biden is guaranteeing it!

 

[Foolardi]

And your post relates to the one you linked to....

....how?

The overall thrust being extremely Key.As far as our Economy is concerned.
Neither Obama,nor Pelosi,Schumer or Biden had any experience in the
Private sector.Such as meeting a payroll or even things juvenile such as
having a Paper route.This is not something to make light of.Which seems to
to be the route many a Democrat fly-by.
I find it extremely troubling.
Yes,Obamas Economy never took off..At best it remained stagnant.
The difference being his massive Budget deficits.Bush 43 had a budget
deficit in 2007 of $ 162 Billion. That proven by Honest GOP Senator
Rob Portman as Director of the Office of Management and Budget.
Obama had Budget Deficits in his First term averaging OVER $ 1.2 Trillion.
That's right ... Trillion.
Obama's First Budget { 2009 } which is tied-in fiscally with his Predecessor
or Bush 43 was $ 1.4 Trillion.
Again Obama in his first term Averaged OVER $ 1.2 Trillion.
And again ... Bush 43 had a Budget deficit in 2007 of $ 162 Billion.

 

[Foolardi]

FactCheck is a Democrat organization.

No wonder you're so dumb.


Factcheck.org -- A Fraudulent "Fact Check" Site Funded By Biased Political Group
theswash.com ^ | 8/27/2012 11 | matchdoctor


Posted on 8/28/2012, 146 PM by bronxville

Factcheck.org -- A Fraudulent "Fact Check" Site Funded By Biased Political Group

If you wanted to use a devious method to deceive people who are trying to differentiate between truth and lies on the Internet how would you do it? If you were extremely devious and had no conscience, you might set up a Web site with some official and unbiased sounding name that claims to be the encyclopedia of truth to be used as a tool for anyone who has the same biased view and wants to make believe to "back it up" with what they would like you to think is "indisputable fact."

That is exactly what Web sites like factcheck.org are. They are biased, politically motivated propaganda Web sites, manned and funded by biased political organizations who set up the sites for the sole purpose of deviously "backing up" the political arguments of those who hold the same views that they do. It's kind of like you have a friend who is in on your lie, and you use him to back up your story and don't tell anyone else he is your friend.

Just because they use a name that implies unbiased assessments, doesn't mean that they provide them. You can call your Web site anything you want. I can set up a web site called thetruth.org or realfacts.com or stopthelies.org and post any kind of biased political propaganda I want on it. The name means nothing. And in the case of sites like factcheck.org, the name is intentionally misleading and deceptive. But it isn't the only so called "fact check" site that is a fraud. There are others.

Think about it. Would you rely on any particular Web site to get the "truth?" Anyone honest would tell you that you should NOT rely solely on them to get your facts. You should get them by considering many different and sources, with different points of view and opinions and arrive at what you believe to be the truth by using your own God given senses. Only con artists purport to be the de facto source of truth.

If you look behind the scenes at these phony "fact check" sites, you find that they are funded by organizations with political biases. You must always ask yourself. Who is writing about this so-called "truth." Who funds the site and pays their expenses. What are the origins and history of the funders and who are they associated with. In the case of factcheck.org they receive their funding from the liberal Annenberg Foundation.

The Annenberg Foundation was originally founded by Walter J. Annenberg, a conservative who supported Ronald Reagan. However, when Walter Annenberg died, his family took over the management of the foundation and it took a turn to the far left and has ties to radical left individuals such as Bill Ayers and his friend and fellow left wing radical collegue Barack Obama. How is factcheck.org associated with these people:

To start, Ayers was the key founder of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which was a Chicago public school reform project from 1995 to 2001. Upon its start in 1995, Obama was appointed Board Chairman and President of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Geesh, that alone connects all three. Well, it branches out even more from there.

Ayers co-chaired the organization’s Collaborative, which set the education policies of the Challenge. Oddly enough, Obama was the one who was authorized to delegate to the Collaborative in regards to its programs and projects. In addition to that, Obama often times had to seek advice and assistance from the Ayer’s led Collaborative in regards to the programmatic aspects of grant proposals. Ayers even sat on the same board as Obama as an “ex officio member”. They both also sat together on the board of the CAC’s Governance Committee. Obama and Ayers were two parts of a group of four who were instructed to draft the bylaws that would govern the CAC. Keep in mind that the “A” in CAC is for Annenberg, the owners of FactCheck.org. The funding for Ayer’s projects and those of his cronies was approved by Board Chair, Barack Obama.

http://theswash.com/liberty/who-fact-checks-factcheck-org

Factcheck.org -- A Fraudulent "Fact Check" Site Funded By Biased Political Group



All anyone needs to know is that FactCheck is sponsored by far-left liberals-mainly Barrack Obama. The connection with Obama and FactCheck is through
the Chicago Annenberg Challenge that received money via the Annenburg
Foundation. Then Senator Obama requested an earmark of 3.5 million dollars for the Annenburg Foundation, which funded the Chicago Annenburg Challenge and also funds FactCheck.org. Obama is tied to both groups one via earmark, the other via direct participation. If you are going to set up an official sounding fact-checking website you wouldn’t want it directly related with a political party so of course FactCheck will say they aren’t influenced by politicians that fund them through third parties. Is Factcheck.org unbiased?

Correcto Mondo.The easiest and sickest example is the Far left's
insistence on Snopes.Which is run by some Old Bag and her paramour.
Think Michael Moore in his early years.

 

[jasonnfree]

Over abundance of republicans on this site. Most of 'em probably living the good life on a democrat program like social security which republican honchos would love to shit can if they were able to. Looks like they're going after the post office with trump's de joy in charge. Privatize the post office and farm it out to good buddies with deep pockets. The republican way. And yeah, I did vote for trump thinking he would be different. Nope, same republican pig only way worse.