Let impeachment move to the Senate... and then find out Trump will be re-elected in a landslide...

[healthmyths]

because Biden will be his opponent.

And we know that Biden's problems are just beginning!

But for six particular Democratic presidential candidates and their campaigns (Michael Bennet, Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren), the possibility of a Senate impeachment trial occurring during the early stages of the caucus/primary season represents a potential calamity.
Could a Long Impeachment Trial Derail the Senators Running for President?

These candidates won't be able to campaign, etc. under rules of the Senate trial.

Joe Biden’s Family Has Been Cashing in on His Career for Decades. Democrats Need to Acknowledge That.
Democrats Must Admit Joe Biden’s Family Profits Off Him

 

[Pogo]

You can be certain of one thing --- there ain't no "landslide" in Rump's prospects except against him. He's maintained record-high disapprovals, he couldn't win the PV, he couldn't win a majority, he couldn't even win a majority in those three infamous states that supplied a 70,000 vote margin, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.

He couldn't even win a majority of the state vote in frickin' UTAH. Numbers don't get much softer than that, regardless who the alternate choices are.

 

[healthmyths]

You can be certain of one thing --- there ain't no "landslide" in Rump's prospects except against him. He's maintained record-high disapprovals, he couldn't win the PV, he couldn't win a majority, he couldn't even win a majority in those three infamous states that supplied a 70,000 vote margin, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.

He couldn't even win a majority of the state vote in frickin' UTAH. Numbers don't get much softer than that, regardless who the alternate choices are.

BUT idiots like YOU don't seem to realize that Trump is a businessman first who thoroughly understands marketing and where to spend money. Why else did it take half as much as what Hillary spent for Trump to WIN the electoral college. When the election depends on
popular vote... it won't be Trump by that time... but that winner will have recognized popular votes win and will go after Calif/NY/Texas/Fl..
and won't spend a dime in Utah! But until that major Constitution change occurs.. Trump and his ilk will spend money where it is most
effective. Again... Trump spent less than 43% ($5.32/vote) of what Hillary ($9.46) spent!
https://www.cato.org/blog/dollars-vote-2016-election

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Until Biden bragged at CFR, no one knew how DC worked or exactly why politicians stayed "public servants" for decades

Thank you, Quid Pro Joe!

 

[Pogo]

You can be certain of one thing --- there ain't no "landslide" in Rump's prospects except against him. He's maintained record-high disapprovals, he couldn't win the PV, he couldn't win a majority, he couldn't even win a majority in those three infamous states that supplied a 70,000 vote margin, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.

He couldn't even win a majority of the state vote in frickin' UTAH. Numbers don't get much softer than that, regardless who the alternate choices are.

BUT idiots like YOU don't seem to realize that Trump is a businessman first who thoroughly understands marketing and where to spend money. Why else did it take half as much as what Hillary spent for Trump to WIN the electoral college. When the election depends on
popular vote... it won't be Trump by that time... but that winner will have recognized popular votes win and will go after Calif/NY/Texas/Fl..
and won't spend a dime in Utah! But until that major Constitution change occurs.. Trump and his ilk will spend money where it is most
effective. Again... Trump spent less than 43% ($5.32/vote) of what Hillary ($9.46) spent!
Dollars per Vote in the 2016 Election
View attachment 288740

Elections are not won by "dollars". They're won by rhetoric. Dollars try to buy that but with limited efficacy.

Your chart doesn't account for enormous amounts of free publicity nor for the torrent of fake news flooded through the media and internet. When you have endless mythologies deliberately spread about "Hillary has Parkinson's" and "buses full of paid protesters" and it costs a candidate no money at all, that translates to a lot of votes from the ignorant, for FREE.

That's why we work to quash those myths here. As the old truism says, a lie gets halfway around the world before the Truth gets its pants on.

 

[healthmyths]

You can be certain of one thing --- there ain't no "landslide" in Rump's prospects except against him. He's maintained record-high disapprovals, he couldn't win the PV, he couldn't win a majority, he couldn't even win a majority in those three infamous states that supplied a 70,000 vote margin, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.

He couldn't even win a majority of the state vote in frickin' UTAH. Numbers don't get much softer than that, regardless who the alternate choices are.

BUT idiots like YOU don't seem to realize that Trump is a businessman first who thoroughly understands marketing and where to spend money. Why else did it take half as much as what Hillary spent for Trump to WIN the electoral college. When the election depends on
popular vote... it won't be Trump by that time... but that winner will have recognized popular votes win and will go after Calif/NY/Texas/Fl..
and won't spend a dime in Utah! But until that major Constitution change occurs.. Trump and his ilk will spend money where it is most
effective. Again... Trump spent less than 43% ($5.32/vote) of what Hillary ($9.46) spent!
Dollars per Vote in the 2016 Election
View attachment 288740

Elections are not won by "dollars". They're won by rhetoric. Dollars try to buy that but with limited efficacy.

Your chart doesn't account for enormous amounts of free publicity nor for the torrent of fake news flooded through the media and internet. When you have endless mythologies deliberately spread about "Hillary has Parkinson's" and "buses full of paid protesters" and it costs a candidate no money at all, that translates to a lot of votes from the ignorant, for FREE.

That's why we work to quash those myths here. As the old truism says, a lie gets halfway around the world before the Truth gets its pants on.

Again... you are proving the point with your gif of Poland's wife shaking hands WITH TRUMP and not the LIE you perpetuated.
Watch the ENTIRE video below where she SHAKES Trumps hand...
But you idiots like the search engines FAIL to tell the whole STORY!!!

 

[healthmyths]

You can be certain of one thing --- there ain't no "landslide" in Rump's prospects except against him. He's maintained record-high disapprovals, he couldn't win the PV, he couldn't win a majority, he couldn't even win a majority in those three infamous states that supplied a 70,000 vote margin, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.

He couldn't even win a majority of the state vote in frickin' UTAH. Numbers don't get much softer than that, regardless who the alternate choices are.

BUT idiots like YOU don't seem to realize that Trump is a businessman first who thoroughly understands marketing and where to spend money. Why else did it take half as much as what Hillary spent for Trump to WIN the electoral college. When the election depends on
popular vote... it won't be Trump by that time... but that winner will have recognized popular votes win and will go after Calif/NY/Texas/Fl..
and won't spend a dime in Utah! But until that major Constitution change occurs.. Trump and his ilk will spend money where it is most
effective. Again... Trump spent less than 43% ($5.32/vote) of what Hillary ($9.46) spent!
Dollars per Vote in the 2016 Election
View attachment 288740

Elections are not won by "dollars". They're won by rhetoric. Dollars try to buy that but with limited efficacy.

Your chart doesn't account for enormous amounts of free publicity nor for the torrent of fake news flooded through the media and internet. When you have endless mythologies deliberately spread about "Hillary has Parkinson's" and "buses full of paid protesters" and it costs a candidate no money at all, that translates to a lot of votes from the ignorant, for FREE.

That's why we work to quash those myths here. As the old truism says, a lie gets halfway around the world before the Truth gets its pants on.

YOUR video is a LIE.... the Poland leader's wife DID shake Trump's hand but dummies and the MSM think we can find the TRUTH?
Watch where she shakes his hand...

 

[Pogo]

You can be certain of one thing --- there ain't no "landslide" in Rump's prospects except against him. He's maintained record-high disapprovals, he couldn't win the PV, he couldn't win a majority, he couldn't even win a majority in those three infamous states that supplied a 70,000 vote margin, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.

He couldn't even win a majority of the state vote in frickin' UTAH. Numbers don't get much softer than that, regardless who the alternate choices are.

BUT idiots like YOU don't seem to realize that Trump is a businessman first who thoroughly understands marketing and where to spend money. Why else did it take half as much as what Hillary spent for Trump to WIN the electoral college. When the election depends on
popular vote... it won't be Trump by that time... but that winner will have recognized popular votes win and will go after Calif/NY/Texas/Fl..
and won't spend a dime in Utah! But until that major Constitution change occurs.. Trump and his ilk will spend money where it is most
effective. Again... Trump spent less than 43% ($5.32/vote) of what Hillary ($9.46) spent!
Dollars per Vote in the 2016 Election
View attachment 288740

Elections are not won by "dollars". They're won by rhetoric. Dollars try to buy that but with limited efficacy.

Your chart doesn't account for enormous amounts of free publicity nor for the torrent of fake news flooded through the media and internet. When you have endless mythologies deliberately spread about "Hillary has Parkinson's" and "buses full of paid protesters" and it costs a candidate no money at all, that translates to a lot of votes from the ignorant, for FREE.

That's why we work to quash those myths here. As the old truism says, a lie gets halfway around the world before the Truth gets its pants on.

Again... you are proving the point with your gif of Poland's wife shaking hands WITH TRUMP and not the LIE you perpetuated.
Watch the ENTIRE video below where she SHAKES Trumps hand...
But you idiots like the search engines FAIL to tell the whole STORY!!!

There is no "lie". It's a snippet of real events. And it's there for the PRECIOUS crestfallen look on Rump's face when she zips right by him to meet Melania her counterpart, bestowing upon His Orangeness the startling revelation that he ain't the centre of the universe. However briefly.

I never get enough of it. Glad you like it. Even though it's utterly off the topic.

 

[Pogo]

You can be certain of one thing --- there ain't no "landslide" in Rump's prospects except against him. He's maintained record-high disapprovals, he couldn't win the PV, he couldn't win a majority, he couldn't even win a majority in those three infamous states that supplied a 70,000 vote margin, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.

He couldn't even win a majority of the state vote in frickin' UTAH. Numbers don't get much softer than that, regardless who the alternate choices are.

BUT idiots like YOU don't seem to realize that Trump is a businessman first who thoroughly understands marketing and where to spend money. Why else did it take half as much as what Hillary spent for Trump to WIN the electoral college. When the election depends on
popular vote... it won't be Trump by that time... but that winner will have recognized popular votes win and will go after Calif/NY/Texas/Fl..
and won't spend a dime in Utah! But until that major Constitution change occurs.. Trump and his ilk will spend money where it is most
effective. Again... Trump spent less than 43% ($5.32/vote) of what Hillary ($9.46) spent!
Dollars per Vote in the 2016 Election
View attachment 288740

Elections are not won by "dollars". They're won by rhetoric. Dollars try to buy that but with limited efficacy.

Your chart doesn't account for enormous amounts of free publicity nor for the torrent of fake news flooded through the media and internet. When you have endless mythologies deliberately spread about "Hillary has Parkinson's" and "buses full of paid protesters" and it costs a candidate no money at all, that translates to a lot of votes from the ignorant, for FREE.

That's why we work to quash those myths here. As the old truism says, a lie gets halfway around the world before the Truth gets its pants on.

YOUR video is a LIE.... the Poland leader's wife DID shake Trump's hand but dummies and the MSM think we can find the TRUTH?
Watch where she shakes his hand...

Once AGAIN --- I don't need to. There's nothing particularly interesting in watching two people shake hands. But watching an egomaniacal asshole get his comeuppance --- VERY interesting. Even in the still frame of your video, that's great too. Everybody looks suitably cordial and smiley, except Rump, who looks like the little boy who lost his dog. Classic.


(/WAY offtopic)

 

[healthmyths]

You can be certain of one thing --- there ain't no "landslide" in Rump's prospects except against him. He's maintained record-high disapprovals, he couldn't win the PV, he couldn't win a majority, he couldn't even win a majority in those three infamous states that supplied a 70,000 vote margin, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.

He couldn't even win a majority of the state vote in frickin' UTAH. Numbers don't get much softer than that, regardless who the alternate choices are.

BUT idiots like YOU don't seem to realize that Trump is a businessman first who thoroughly understands marketing and where to spend money. Why else did it take half as much as what Hillary spent for Trump to WIN the electoral college. When the election depends on
popular vote... it won't be Trump by that time... but that winner will have recognized popular votes win and will go after Calif/NY/Texas/Fl..
and won't spend a dime in Utah! But until that major Constitution change occurs.. Trump and his ilk will spend money where it is most
effective. Again... Trump spent less than 43% ($5.32/vote) of what Hillary ($9.46) spent!
Dollars per Vote in the 2016 Election
View attachment 288740

Elections are not won by "dollars". They're won by rhetoric. Dollars try to buy that but with limited efficacy.

Your chart doesn't account for enormous amounts of free publicity nor for the torrent of fake news flooded through the media and internet. When you have endless mythologies deliberately spread about "Hillary has Parkinson's" and "buses full of paid protesters" and it costs a candidate no money at all, that translates to a lot of votes from the ignorant, for FREE.

That's why we work to quash those myths here. As the old truism says, a lie gets halfway around the world before the Truth gets its pants on.

Again... you are proving the point with your gif of Poland's wife shaking hands WITH TRUMP and not the LIE you perpetuated.
Watch the ENTIRE video below where she SHAKES Trumps hand...
But you idiots like the search engines FAIL to tell the whole STORY!!!

There is no "lie". It's a snippet of real events. And it's there for the PRECIOUS crestfallen look on Rump's face when she zips right by him to meet Melania her counterpart, bestowing upon His Orangeness the startling revelation that he ain't the centre of the universe. However briefly.

I never get enough of it. Glad you like it. Even though it's utterly off the topic.

It is a lie when you don't show the whole video that shows she didn't snub Trump but shook his hand!
You really believe that a "snippet" i.e. clipping out the truth helps your case? All it does is reinforce more and more
people that idiots like you are really being led by the nose to the slaughterhouse! Remember you are part of the
group that believes in your self extinction because you believe it is OK to murder children...i.e. over 300,000 a year by people
like you that believe that is OK! And the correlation with your response is perfectly aligned ... you are the kind that
during WWII truly believed the concentration camp furnaces were being used to heat the camps!

 

[Pogo]

You can be certain of one thing --- there ain't no "landslide" in Rump's prospects except against him. He's maintained record-high disapprovals, he couldn't win the PV, he couldn't win a majority, he couldn't even win a majority in those three infamous states that supplied a 70,000 vote margin, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.

He couldn't even win a majority of the state vote in frickin' UTAH. Numbers don't get much softer than that, regardless who the alternate choices are.

BUT idiots like YOU don't seem to realize that Trump is a businessman first who thoroughly understands marketing and where to spend money. Why else did it take half as much as what Hillary spent for Trump to WIN the electoral college. When the election depends on
popular vote... it won't be Trump by that time... but that winner will have recognized popular votes win and will go after Calif/NY/Texas/Fl..
and won't spend a dime in Utah! But until that major Constitution change occurs.. Trump and his ilk will spend money where it is most
effective. Again... Trump spent less than 43% ($5.32/vote) of what Hillary ($9.46) spent!
Dollars per Vote in the 2016 Election
View attachment 288740

Elections are not won by "dollars". They're won by rhetoric. Dollars try to buy that but with limited efficacy.

Your chart doesn't account for enormous amounts of free publicity nor for the torrent of fake news flooded through the media and internet. When you have endless mythologies deliberately spread about "Hillary has Parkinson's" and "buses full of paid protesters" and it costs a candidate no money at all, that translates to a lot of votes from the ignorant, for FREE.

That's why we work to quash those myths here. As the old truism says, a lie gets halfway around the world before the Truth gets its pants on.

Again... you are proving the point with your gif of Poland's wife shaking hands WITH TRUMP and not the LIE you perpetuated.
Watch the ENTIRE video below where she SHAKES Trumps hand...
But you idiots like the search engines FAIL to tell the whole STORY!!!

There is no "lie". It's a snippet of real events. And it's there for the PRECIOUS crestfallen look on Rump's face when she zips right by him to meet Melania her counterpart, bestowing upon His Orangeness the startling revelation that he ain't the centre of the universe. However briefly.

I never get enough of it. Glad you like it. Even though it's utterly off the topic.

It is a lie when you don't show the whole video that shows she didn't snub Trump but shook his hand!
You really believe that a "snippet" i.e. clipping out the truth helps your case? All it does is reinforce more and more
people that idiots like you are really being led by the nose to the slaughterhouse! Remember you are part of the
group that believes in your self extinction because you believe it is OK to murder children...i.e. over 300,000 a year by people
like you that believe that is OK! And the correlation with your response is perfectly aligned ... you are the kind that
during WWII truly believed the concentration camp furnaces were being used to heat the camps!

LOOK DOODLES, I don't give a flying **** what you choose to INFER, it's MY goddam sigline, it's MY goddam gif and I already explained to your wangly ass what its point is, and there ain't jack friggety shit you can do about it, now tell the class why you're hijacking your own thread with a crock of pissing and moaning before I tell you which hand Rump wipes his rump with.

As for your bullshit about infanticide, you're getting your ass reported.