Now you're being a full fledged retard. There was no other more outspoken conservative on this board that was anti trump. My only disappointment lies with the voters for nominating him. I didn't think and still don't think that he was the best man for the job. But at the end of the day I am one man with one vote and little to no influence.
I NEVER went back & forth.
I supported one man, Walker. After that I didn't really care. And yes, you are mistaken.
And your stupid Trump line about there being 30 million illegal immigrants (that PC thinks are all eligible to vote!) is another pile of her rotting manure lies. As usual.
The number of illegal immigrants in the United States is "30 million, it could be 34 million."
— Donald Trump on Friday, July 24th, 2015 in an interview on MSNBC's "Morning Joe."
Donald Trump wrongly says the number of illegal immigrants is 30 million or higher
"There are, to my knowledge, no credible, research-based estimates of 30 million," said Jeffrey Passel, an expert on Hispanic immigration at the Pew Research Center. "The 11-12 million range is broadly accepted by almost all researchers and immigration advocates (regardless of perspective).
...
The Department of Homeland Security says the number of illegal immigrants was about 11.4 million as of January 2012. Other independent groups that research illegal immigration put the number between 11 and 12 million. We found no compelling evidence that the number could as high as Trump said.
Trump has provided no proof that the number of illegal immigrants is triple the widespread consensus. We rate this claim Pants on Fire."
"... 30 million illegal immigrants (that PC thinks are all eligible to vote!..."
See....now I've reduced you to lying.
I said just the opposite....they are not eligible to vote.....but do.
And with the imprimatur of Barack Hussein Obama (peace be on him).
They vote....as you admitted earlier.....and do so in numbers that obviate any Clinton popular vote victory.
Wait....didn't you claim earlier that a post was invalid because it came from a Rightwing site?????
But you're claiming that MSNBC and PolitFact are legit?????
Gads, you're a fool.
PolitiFact.org,
This bias is evident in:
1) The targeting of Republican political figures for lopsidedly disproportionate
PolitiFact examination;2
2) The showering of Republican politicians with suspiciously negative determinations;
and
3) The basing of these supposed “factual” determinations on highly subjective analysis
and even opinion masquerading as “fact checks.
http://library.constantcontact.com/...nia+--+Political+Bias+--+Final+--+7-10-12.pdf
Now comes a study from the George Mason University Center for Media and Public Affairs that demonstrates empirically that PolitiFact.org, one of the nation's leading "fact checkers," finds that Republicans are dishonest in their claims three times as often as Democrats. "PolitiFact.com has rated Republican claims as false three times as often as Democratic claims during President Obama's second term," the Center said in a release, "despite controversies over Obama administration statements on Benghazi, the IRS and the AP."
The fact that, as the Lichter study shows, "A majority of Democratic statements (54 percent) were rated as mostly or entirely true, compared to only 18 percent of Republican statements," probably has more to do with how the statements were picked and the subjective bias of the fact checker involved than anything remotely empirical. Likewise, the fact that "a majority of Republican statements (52 percent) were rated as mostly or entirely false, compared to only 24 percent of Democratic statements" probably has more to do with spinning stories than it does with evaluating statements.
There is a "truth gap" in Washington, but it doesn't exist along the lines the fact checkers would have you think. It was Obama who said you could keep the health care you had if you liked it, even if Obamacare became law. It was Obama who said the Citizens United decision would open the floodgates of foreign money into U.S. campaigns. It was Obama who said Benghazi happened because of a YouTube video. It was Obama's IRS that denied conservative political groups had been singled out for special scrutiny. And it was Obama who promised that taxes would not go up for any American making less than $250,000 per year.
All of these statements and plenty more are demonstrably false,
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...inds-fact-checkers-biased-against-republicans
PolitiFact.com is a project operated by the Tampa Bay Times, in which reporters and editors from the Times and affiliated media outlets "fact-check statements by members of Congress, the White House, lobbyists and interest groups".PolitiFact.com - Wikipedia
The St. PetersburgTampa Bay Times, which started PolitiFact in conjunction with the Congressional Quarterly, is a traditionally liberal paper. We note that PolitiFact's stories appear to damage Republicans far more often than Democrats despite the fact that PF tends to choose about as many stories dealing with Republicans as for Democrats. If the selection process was blind then either proportions should be approximately even or else the party with worse ratings should receive more ratings overall according to what PolitiFact lists as its selection criteria. Plus our independent research helps confirm the hypothesis. PolitiFact Bias: About PolitiFact Bias/FAQ
"The Tampa Bay Times, which produces the PolitFact Truth-o-Meter, has not endorsed a single Republican candidate this century for any of the three most important positions on the Florida election ballot. Accordingly, the Times scores a “Pants on Fire” for its lack of objectivity, according to an extensive analysis by Media Trackers Florida.
Since 2000, the Times has issued 10 endorsements in elections for U.S. President, U.S. Senate, and Florida Governor. Nine of the 10 endorsements went to Democrats, with the sole exception being theTimes’ endorsement of Democrat-leaning Independent Charlie Crist in the 2010 U.S. Senate contest." PolitiFact Parent Tampa Bay Times Scores Pants on Fire for Partisan Bias - Media Trackers
PolitiFact’s liberal bias, yet again (Arizona law; Climategate)
PolitiFact's liberal bias, yet again (Arizona law; Climategate) | RedState
Some people,like you, lack the ability to laugh at themselves...that's where I come in.
Don't ever change.
"I said just the opposite....they are not eligible to vote.....but do."
No, they don't. And there's been no proof illegals do, except in rare cases.
I inartfully said eligible to your fake 30 million number - as it regards the full population, meaning even if we accept your phony baloney 30 million number, (which is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyy off by all reputable sources,) that would mean all those illegals are of voting age. Which is stupid on a stick.
And you can deny reality all you want, pretend facts are not real, and hold up your thorny crown of pretend bravado and WINNING! Charlie Sheen style for all I care.
The intelligent, logical ones reading here can decide for themselves where the truth resides.
Ta ta.
Arizona: results are unofficial:And your stupid Trump line about there being 30 million illegal immigrants (that PC thinks are all eligible to vote!
The number of illegal immigrants in the United States is "30 million, it could be 34 million."
— Donald Trump on Friday, July 24th, 2015 in an interview on MSNBC's "Morning Joe."
Donald Trump wrongly says the number of illegal immigrants is 30 million or higher
"There are, to my knowledge, no credible, research-based estimates of 30 million," said Jeffrey Passel, an expert on Hispanic immigration at the Pew Research Center. "The 11-12 million range is broadly accepted by almost all researchers and immigration advocates (regardless of perspective).
...
The Department of Homeland Security says the number of illegal immigrants was about 11.4 million as of January 2012. Other independent groups that research illegal immigration put the number between 11 and 12 million. We found no compelling evidence that the number could as high as Trump said.
Trump has provided no proof that the number of illegal immigrants is triple the widespread consensus. We rate this claim Pants on Fire."
"... 30 million illegal immigrants (that PC thinks are all eligible to vote!..."
See....now I've reduced you to lying.
I said just the opposite....they are not eligible to vote.....but do.
And with the imprimatur of Barack Hussein Obama (peace be on him).
They vote....as you admitted earlier.....and do so in numbers that obviate any Clinton popular vote victory.
Wait....didn't you claim earlier that a post was invalid because it came from a Rightwing site?????
But you're claiming that MSNBC and PolitFact are legit?????
Gads, you're a fool.
PolitiFact.org,
This bias is evident in:
1) The targeting of Republican political figures for lopsidedly disproportionate
PolitiFact examination;2
2) The showering of Republican politicians with suspiciously negative determinations;
and
3) The basing of these supposed “factual” determinations on highly subjective analysis
and even opinion masquerading as “fact checks.
http://library.constantcontact.com/...nia+--+Political+Bias+--+Final+--+7-10-12.pdf
Now comes a study from the George Mason University Center for Media and Public Affairs that demonstrates empirically that PolitiFact.org, one of the nation's leading "fact checkers," finds that Republicans are dishonest in their claims three times as often as Democrats. "PolitiFact.com has rated Republican claims as false three times as often as Democratic claims during President Obama's second term," the Center said in a release, "despite controversies over Obama administration statements on Benghazi, the IRS and the AP."
The fact that, as the Lichter study shows, "A majority of Democratic statements (54 percent) were rated as mostly or entirely true, compared to only 18 percent of Republican statements," probably has more to do with how the statements were picked and the subjective bias of the fact checker involved than anything remotely empirical. Likewise, the fact that "a majority of Republican statements (52 percent) were rated as mostly or entirely false, compared to only 24 percent of Democratic statements" probably has more to do with spinning stories than it does with evaluating statements.
There is a "truth gap" in Washington, but it doesn't exist along the lines the fact checkers would have you think. It was Obama who said you could keep the health care you had if you liked it, even if Obamacare became law. It was Obama who said the Citizens United decision would open the floodgates of foreign money into U.S. campaigns. It was Obama who said Benghazi happened because of a YouTube video. It was Obama's IRS that denied conservative political groups had been singled out for special scrutiny. And it was Obama who promised that taxes would not go up for any American making less than $250,000 per year.
All of these statements and plenty more are demonstrably false,
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...inds-fact-checkers-biased-against-republicans
PolitiFact.com is a project operated by the Tampa Bay Times, in which reporters and editors from the Times and affiliated media outlets "fact-check statements by members of Congress, the White House, lobbyists and interest groups".PolitiFact.com - Wikipedia
The St. PetersburgTampa Bay Times, which started PolitiFact in conjunction with the Congressional Quarterly, is a traditionally liberal paper. We note that PolitiFact's stories appear to damage Republicans far more often than Democrats despite the fact that PF tends to choose about as many stories dealing with Republicans as for Democrats. If the selection process was blind then either proportions should be approximately even or else the party with worse ratings should receive more ratings overall according to what PolitiFact lists as its selection criteria. Plus our independent research helps confirm the hypothesis. PolitiFact Bias: About PolitiFact Bias/FAQ
"The Tampa Bay Times, which produces the PolitFact Truth-o-Meter, has not endorsed a single Republican candidate this century for any of the three most important positions on the Florida election ballot. Accordingly, the Times scores a “Pants on Fire” for its lack of objectivity, according to an extensive analysis by Media Trackers Florida.
Since 2000, the Times has issued 10 endorsements in elections for U.S. President, U.S. Senate, and Florida Governor. Nine of the 10 endorsements went to Democrats, with the sole exception being theTimes’ endorsement of Democrat-leaning Independent Charlie Crist in the 2010 U.S. Senate contest." PolitiFact Parent Tampa Bay Times Scores Pants on Fire for Partisan Bias - Media Trackers
PolitiFact’s liberal bias, yet again (Arizona law; Climategate)
PolitiFact's liberal bias, yet again (Arizona law; Climategate) | RedState
Some people,like you, lack the ability to laugh at themselves...that's where I come in.
Don't ever change.
"I said just the opposite....they are not eligible to vote.....but do."
No, they don't. And there's been no proof illegals do, except in rare cases.
I inartfully said eligible to your fake 30 million number - as it regards the full population, meaning even if we accept your phony baloney 30 million number, (which is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyy off by all reputable sources,) that would mean all those illegals are of voting age. Which is stupid on a stick.
And you can deny reality all you want, pretend facts are not real, and hold up your thorny crown of pretend bravado and WINNING! Charlie Sheen style for all I care.
The intelligent, logical ones reading here can decide for themselves where the truth resides.
Ta ta.
Trump: 62,972,226
Clinton: 62,277,750
TRUMP WON POPULAR VOTE ! • /r/The_Donald
Arizona: results are unofficial:And your stupid Trump line about there being 30 million illegal immigrants (that PC thinks are all eligible to vote!
The number of illegal immigrants in the United States is "30 million, it could be 34 million."
— Donald Trump on Friday, July 24th, 2015 in an interview on MSNBC's "Morning Joe."
Donald Trump wrongly says the number of illegal immigrants is 30 million or higher
"There are, to my knowledge, no credible, research-based estimates of 30 million," said Jeffrey Passel, an expert on Hispanic immigration at the Pew Research Center. "The 11-12 million range is broadly accepted by almost all researchers and immigration advocates (regardless of perspective).
...
The Department of Homeland Security says the number of illegal immigrants was about 11.4 million as of January 2012. Other independent groups that research illegal immigration put the number between 11 and 12 million. We found no compelling evidence that the number could as high as Trump said.
Trump has provided no proof that the number of illegal immigrants is triple the widespread consensus. We rate this claim Pants on Fire."
"... 30 million illegal immigrants (that PC thinks are all eligible to vote!..."
See....now I've reduced you to lying.
I said just the opposite....they are not eligible to vote.....but do.
And with the imprimatur of Barack Hussein Obama (peace be on him).
They vote....as you admitted earlier.....and do so in numbers that obviate any Clinton popular vote victory.
Wait....didn't you claim earlier that a post was invalid because it came from a Rightwing site?????
But you're claiming that MSNBC and PolitFact are legit?????
Gads, you're a fool.
PolitiFact.org,
This bias is evident in:
1) The targeting of Republican political figures for lopsidedly disproportionate
PolitiFact examination;2
2) The showering of Republican politicians with suspiciously negative determinations;
and
3) The basing of these supposed “factual” determinations on highly subjective analysis
and even opinion masquerading as “fact checks.
http://library.constantcontact.com/...nia+--+Political+Bias+--+Final+--+7-10-12.pdf
Now comes a study from the George Mason University Center for Media and Public Affairs that demonstrates empirically that PolitiFact.org, one of the nation's leading "fact checkers," finds that Republicans are dishonest in their claims three times as often as Democrats. "PolitiFact.com has rated Republican claims as false three times as often as Democratic claims during President Obama's second term," the Center said in a release, "despite controversies over Obama administration statements on Benghazi, the IRS and the AP."
The fact that, as the Lichter study shows, "A majority of Democratic statements (54 percent) were rated as mostly or entirely true, compared to only 18 percent of Republican statements," probably has more to do with how the statements were picked and the subjective bias of the fact checker involved than anything remotely empirical. Likewise, the fact that "a majority of Republican statements (52 percent) were rated as mostly or entirely false, compared to only 24 percent of Democratic statements" probably has more to do with spinning stories than it does with evaluating statements.
There is a "truth gap" in Washington, but it doesn't exist along the lines the fact checkers would have you think. It was Obama who said you could keep the health care you had if you liked it, even if Obamacare became law. It was Obama who said the Citizens United decision would open the floodgates of foreign money into U.S. campaigns. It was Obama who said Benghazi happened because of a YouTube video. It was Obama's IRS that denied conservative political groups had been singled out for special scrutiny. And it was Obama who promised that taxes would not go up for any American making less than $250,000 per year.
All of these statements and plenty more are demonstrably false,
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...inds-fact-checkers-biased-against-republicans
PolitiFact.com is a project operated by the Tampa Bay Times, in which reporters and editors from the Times and affiliated media outlets "fact-check statements by members of Congress, the White House, lobbyists and interest groups".PolitiFact.com - Wikipedia
The St. PetersburgTampa Bay Times, which started PolitiFact in conjunction with the Congressional Quarterly, is a traditionally liberal paper. We note that PolitiFact's stories appear to damage Republicans far more often than Democrats despite the fact that PF tends to choose about as many stories dealing with Republicans as for Democrats. If the selection process was blind then either proportions should be approximately even or else the party with worse ratings should receive more ratings overall according to what PolitiFact lists as its selection criteria. Plus our independent research helps confirm the hypothesis. PolitiFact Bias: About PolitiFact Bias/FAQ
"The Tampa Bay Times, which produces the PolitFact Truth-o-Meter, has not endorsed a single Republican candidate this century for any of the three most important positions on the Florida election ballot. Accordingly, the Times scores a “Pants on Fire” for its lack of objectivity, according to an extensive analysis by Media Trackers Florida.
Since 2000, the Times has issued 10 endorsements in elections for U.S. President, U.S. Senate, and Florida Governor. Nine of the 10 endorsements went to Democrats, with the sole exception being theTimes’ endorsement of Democrat-leaning Independent Charlie Crist in the 2010 U.S. Senate contest." PolitiFact Parent Tampa Bay Times Scores Pants on Fire for Partisan Bias - Media Trackers
PolitiFact’s liberal bias, yet again (Arizona law; Climategate)
PolitiFact's liberal bias, yet again (Arizona law; Climategate) | RedState
Some people,like you, lack the ability to laugh at themselves...that's where I come in.
Don't ever change.
"I said just the opposite....they are not eligible to vote.....but do."
No, they don't. And there's been no proof illegals do, except in rare cases.
I inartfully said eligible to your fake 30 million number - as it regards the full population, meaning even if we accept your phony baloney 30 million number, (which is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyy off by all reputable sources,) that would mean all those illegals are of voting age. Which is stupid on a stick.
And you can deny reality all you want, pretend facts are not real, and hold up your thorny crown of pretend bravado and WINNING! Charlie Sheen style for all I care.
The intelligent, logical ones reading here can decide for themselves where the truth resides.
Ta ta.
Trump: 62,972,226
Clinton: 62,277,750
TRUMP WON POPULAR VOTE ! • /r/The_Donald
http://apps.azsos.gov/election/2016/PPE/Result/PPE2016Results.htm
Virginia: unofficial and not 100%:
2016 November General
Missouri: unofficial:
State of Missouri - Election Night Results
New York State: unofficial:
NYS Board of Elections Unofficial Election Night Results
Attempt at propaganda with false figures noted.
can't do any better than a link to R/The Donald redditors using a French twitterer as source, where even the commenters are calling bullshit, can you?
You don't give a flip about your credibility, do you?
CLINTON: 61,039,676 votes
TRUMP: 60,371,193 votes
2016 election results - Google Search
Still millions more to count.
It doesn't matter in the final EC outcome, but it sure mattered enough to you to push the bullshit that Trump won the popular vote.
^ Completely off her rocker.
can't do any better than a link to R/The Donald redditors using a French twitterer as source, where even the commenters are calling bullshit, can you?
You don't give a flip about your credibility, do you?
CLINTON: 61,039,676 votes
TRUMP: 60,371,193 votes
2016 election results - Google Search
Still millions more to count.
It doesn't matter in the final EC outcome, but it sure mattered enough to you to push the bullshit that Trump won the popular vote.
Wait for the final tally, paperweight....Trump won both the electoral college, and the popular vote.
...I'm gonna snatch any hope you have of claiming the tiniest victory from this election...
It will prove to be a total repudiation of your worldview.
Just wait.
Oh....and while you're waiting.....take a gander at what a gay, Liberal, and Democrat wrote in the Mexican paper:
A Liberal Democrat Lays Blame Where It Belongs
^ Completely off her rocker.
can't do any better than a link to R/The Donald redditors using a French twitterer as source, where even the commenters are calling bullshit, can you?
You don't give a flip about your credibility, do you?
CLINTON: 61,039,676 votes
TRUMP: 60,371,193 votes
2016 election results - Google Search
Still millions more to count.
It doesn't matter in the final EC outcome, but it sure mattered enough to you to push the bullshit that Trump won the popular vote.
Wait for the final tally, paperweight....Trump won both the electoral college, and the popular vote.
...I'm gonna snatch any hope you have of claiming the tiniest victory from this election...
It will prove to be a total repudiation of your worldview.
Just wait.
Oh....and while you're waiting.....take a gander at what a gay, Liberal, and Democrat wrote in the Mexican paper:
A Liberal Democrat Lays Blame Where It Belongs
I'm a tad curious about what he's PROMISING> LOL
Did I touch you in a bad spot? Lol Hit that lone guilt receptor in your peweny brain?
White boys like me? Lolo lol
