Is Trump Resigning?

[ClydeR]

Based on Pence's abrupt change in schedule, that's the question a lot of people are asking. If Pence promises to pardon Trump and Trump's family, then the theory is that Trump will resign.



Vice President Pence will end his visit to South America early and fly home on Thursday, after President Trump sparked enormous controversy for his comments following deadly violence in Charlottesville, Va.

Pence's announcement came just as Trump was announcing the disbanding of two his economic councils amid an exodus of CEOs from the advisory boards after Trump's remarks. The violence in Charlotte left one counterprotester dead and at least 19 injured when a vehicle drove through a crowd.

Pence's office said the vice president was returning to Washington on Thursday night instead of Friday morning to attend the president's meeting at Camp David. Those meetings are expected to focus on North Korea.

Pence deputy chief of staff Jarrod Agen also said the vice president's other weekend plans had been canceled in case the president needed any follow up.

Pence will cut short his time with South American leaders including President of Chile Michelle Bachelet, who he joined for a joint press conference Wednesday discussing the political unrest in Venezuela.

More... (http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/346830-pence-ends-international-trip-early-amid-trump-controversy)

[Wrathbringer]

Based on Pence's abrupt change in schedule, that's the question a lot of people are asking. If Pence promises to pardon Trump and Trump's family, then the theory is that Trump will resign.

This is as retarded as a time4dung post.

[audioserf]

I saw this episode of House of Cards already.

[Some Rogue]

I saw this episode of House of Cards already.

This is House of Tards. Get it right.

[Androidpk]

I'd be okay with this.

[Maviur]

George W pardoned someone that was close to him? Can't remember what the crime was.

[Taernath]

George W pardoned someone that was close to him? Can't remember what the crime was.

Clinton pardoned his brother for drug charges, but he'd already served his sentence. That might be who you're thinking of.

[Androidpk]

Both GWB and BC had highly questionable pardons.

[Latrinsorm]

He's no closer to resigning. This event hasn't moved the needle in public opinion of the President the way the first repeal CBO score and firing Comey did. What is has moved the needle on is his relationship to the rest of the government, and that's where the Vice President can help him. At times like these Congress needs a grown up in the executive branch to talk to.

[~Rocktar~]

A large portion of Congress aren't grownups themselves so who cares who they want to talk too? Oh, right, you and all the other dingbats out there that want to hate the guy because he doesn't act the way you want.

[Fortybox]

A large portion of Congress aren't grownups themselves so who cares who they want to talk too? Oh, right, you and all the other dingbats out there that want to hate the guy because he doesn't act the way you want.

That would be what is called a temper tantrum.

[Latrinsorm]

A large portion of Congress aren't grownups themselves so who cares who they want to talk too?For one, Vice President Pence. For another, anybody (else) who wants the Republican platform signed into law, a process that requires the cooperation of the Congress and the President.
Oh, right, you and all the other dingbats out there that want to hate the guy because he doesn't act the way you want.The way the President is acting is negative to all Americans across the political spectrum. He's actively working against the Republican Congress, stymying their efforts to repeal Obamacare, pass tax reform, enact infrastructure spending. He's actively fighting a culture war against the left on fronts that nobody on the right even asked for. This isn't a question of decorum, it's a question of doing his job.

You would rather annoy people than get anything done. Fine. We're a couple schmucks on a message board.

The President should rather get things done. Or he'll be fired. Simple as that.

[Fortybox]

For one, Vice President Pence. For another, anybody (else) who wants the Republican platform signed into law, a process that requires the cooperation of the Congress and the President.The way the President is acting is negative to all Americans across the political spectrum. He's actively working against the Republican Congress, stymying their efforts to repeal Obamacare, pass tax reform, enact infrastructure spending. He's actively fighting a culture war against the left on fronts that nobody on the right even asked for. This isn't a question of decorum, it's a question of doing his job.

You would rather annoy people than get anything done. Fine. We're a couple schmucks on a message board.

The President should rather get things done. Or he'll be fired. Simple as that.

I want him to work against congress. Republicans are "stymying" efforts to repeal Obamacare because they never intended to do so.

I want him to fight a culture war against the left.

You just don't get it. You may not agree with the election result but several people elected Trump to do exactly what he is doing.

[BriarFox]

I want him to work against congress. Republicans are "stymying" efforts to repeal Obamacare because they never intended to do so.

I want him to fight a culture war against the left.

You just don't get it. You may not agree with the election result but several people elected Trump to do exactly what he is doing.

Oh, okay, then. Good job on him. He'll go down as the biggest disaster in presidential history.

[Androidpk]

Oh, okay, then. Good job on him. He'll go down as the biggest disaster in presidential history.

Unlike the Titanic, Trump isn't going down. He's soaring higher than ever just like the Hindenburg.

[Fortybox]

Oh, okay, then. Good job on him. He'll go down as the biggest disaster in presidential history.

Yeah, the left is really good at predictions.


https://youtu.be/eAPv3zIbzmk

[BriarFox]

Unfortunately, due to gerrymandering and the seats up for reelection and so forth, Republicans and even Trump have pretty good shots in the next election. It's not fair or honest, and it's certainly not representative of the actual democratic majority in the U.S., but there it is.

[Gelston]

Unfortunately, due to gerrymandering and the seats up for reelection and so forth, Republicans and even Trump have pretty good shots in the next election. It's not fair or honest, and it's certainly not representative of the actual democratic majority in the U.S., but there it is.

This fuck is blaming Gerrymandering. I mean, he doesn't want to accept that Trump won places that haven't gone Republican in years, because yeah.. Apparently Gerrymandering. Accept that Hillary was a shit ass candidate.

[BriarFox]

This fuck is blaming Gerrymandering. I mean, he doesn't want to accept that Trump won places that haven't gone Republican in years, because yeah.. Apparently Gerrymandering. Accept that Hillary was a shit ass candidate.

There are a bunch of reasons, including that Hillary did not appeal broadly enough, I suppose, but she was still more popular than Trump. You're conveniently forgetting that Hillary won the popular vote by 3 million votes and beat Trump 48% to 46%. The country as a whole absolutely preferred Hillary.

[drauz]

There are a bunch of reasons, including that Hillary did not appeal broadly enough, I suppose, but she was still more popular than Trump. You're conveniently forgetting that Hillary won the popular vote by 3 million votes and beat Trump 48% to 46%. The country as a whole absolutely preferred Hillary.

California preferred Hillary you mean.

[Gelston]

There are a bunch of reasons, including that Hillary did not appeal broadly enough, I suppose, but she was still more popular than Trump. You're conveniently forgetting that Hillary won the popular vote by 3 million votes and beat Trump 48% to 46%. The country as a whole absolutely preferred Hillary.

She had a lower popular vote until California hit. Trump never campaigned in California, because what is the point.

[BriarFox]

She had a lower popular vote until California hit. Trump never campaigned in California, because what is the point.

Yes, I suppose when Trump looked at millions of people who constantly have good weather, a killer economy, and a healthy lifestyle, there really was no point in taking his brand of politics there.

[Parkbandit]

There are a bunch of reasons, including that Hillary did not appeal broadly enough, I suppose, but she was still more popular than Trump. You're conveniently forgetting that Hillary won the popular vote by 3 million votes and beat Trump 48% to 46%. The country as a whole absolutely preferred Hillary.

http://memes.ucoz.com/_nw/50/73899779.jpg

Explain to us all how winning the popular vote for President has anything to do with actually winning the Presidency.

While you're at it.. explain how gerrymandering has anything to do with the Presidential election.

These talks are always highly entertaining.

[Gelston]

Yes, I suppose when Trump looked at millions of people who constantly have good weather, a killer economy, and a healthy lifestyle, there really was no point in taking his brand of politics there.

What purpose was it for him to campaign in California if he A, knew he wasn't going to win it regardless and B, didn't need it? Tell me the last Republican to win California.

[BriarFox]

Don't worry, I wouldn't want to let 8th-grade concepts interfere with your circle jerk.

[BriarFox]

What purpose was it for him to campaign in California if he A, knew he wasn't going to win it regardless and B, didn't need it? Tell me the last Republican to win California.

Bush 1, which you could have found on Wikipedia...

[Gelston]

Bush 1, which you could have found on Wikipedia...

....I knew the answer. That is my point.

[BriarFox]

....I knew the answer. That is my point.

It's not a very good point. California has had Republican governors in office for more years than Democratic ones since Reagan left in 1975. Had Trump been more centrist, more fiscally conservative and socially liberal, he would have had a pretty good shot in CA.

[Gelston]

It's not a very good point. California has had Republican governors in office for more years than Democratic ones since Reagan left in 1975. Had Trump been more centrist, more fiscally conservative and socially liberal, he would have had a pretty good shot in CA.

"Republicans" And no, my point stands. It is a very valid point. Bush Jr was elected twice and Trump was Elected WITHOUT California. You don't need it to win and it is a hard state to get. There is NO fucking point in wasting time and money campaigning there because it isn't winnable.

[BriarFox]

You're arguing to one side of me. I'm not saying that Trump should have campaigned in California. He never could have won it. I mentioned California because its popular vote illustrates why Trump won. He won because he appealed to a vague nostalgia, a fear of difference, and a deeply rooted chauvinism. That message never would have gained traction in a generally prosperous and liberal place like California. It did gain traction across enough of the U.S. to pull off an Electoral College upset and steal the election, but he wasn't (and isn't) as popular nation-wide as you're making him out to be.

Here's the take-away: Literally the majority of people in the U.S. don't like Trump. We're currently in a government of the minority.

[Gelston]

You're arguing to one side of me. I'm not saying that Trump should have campaigned in California. He never could have won it. I mentioned California because its popular vote illustrates why Trump won. He won because he appealed to a vague nostalgia, a fear of difference, and a deeply rooted chauvinism. That message never would have gained traction in a generally prosperous and liberal place like California. It did gain traction across enough of the U.S. to pull off an Electoral College upset and steal the election, but he wasn't (and isn't) as popular nation-wide as you're making him out to be.

Here's the take-away: Literally the majority of people in the U.S. don't like Trump. We're currently in a government of the minority.

Trump won because Hillary was a weak ass candidate. ANY Republican would have destroyed her.

[BriarFox]

Trump won because Hillary was a weak ass candidate. ANY Republican would have destroyed her.

You know, this exchange is really emblematic of the PC politics folders. Lots of ignoring points and arguing something entirely different.

[Gelston]

You know, this exchange is really emblematic of the PC politics folders. Lots of ignoring points and arguing something entirely different.

No, I think you refusing to believe Hillary was a weak candidate is the point. I think Bernie would have won. You keep saying things like "popular vote" and "california". None of those things have ever mattered. You don't campaign for the popular vote. If you did, I think the map would have looked different. Trump would have campaigned different.

[BriarFox]

No, I think you refusing to believe Hillary was a weak candidate is the point. I think Bernie would have won. You keep saying things like "popular vote" and "california". None of those things have ever mattered. You don't campaign for the popular vote. If you did, I think the map would have looked different. Trump would have campaigned different.

My initial point was about a biased electoral playing field, and then about structural causes for the election, not about Hillary's strength or weakness. That's your skewed perception of my argument, and another classic example of simplifying something complex into something easier to grasp. As for her strength, though, I think that had Hillary been a man, she would have beaten Trump by 20 points or more. That said, I'm delighted to see that Trump's basically fucked up everything since he stepped into office and currently has an approval rating of 38% and falling. Enjoying your president?

[Gelston]

My initial point was about a biased electoral playing field, and then about structural causes for the election, not about Hillary's strength or weakness. That's your skewed perception of my argument, and another classic example of simplifying something complex into something easier to grasp. Had Hillary been a man, she would have beaten Trump by 20 points or more. That said, I'm delighted to see that Trump's basically fucked up everything since he stepped into office and currently has an approval rating of 38% and falling. Enjoying your president?

No, you just popped up and blamed Gerrymandering. Trump won places that Republicans haven't won in a long time.... yet somehow Gerrymandering is how.

[Neveragain]

Because Democrats don't use gerrymandering........

Gerrymandering is a reward (whether you like it or not) for winning elections, Democrats are not winning elections thus they don't get to gerrymander.


Had Hillary been a man, she would have beaten Trump by 20 points or more.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNH32rKXqd0

[Parkbandit]

You know, this exchange is really emblematic of the PC politics folders. Lots of ignoring points and arguing something entirely different.

You mean how you blamed gerrymandering on Trump's election and how he didn't even win the popular vote.. and when I asked you to explain it, you said it was an 8th grade concept and you didn't want to interfere with our circle jerk?

Yea, I agree.

Seriously though, thanks for playing the role of time4fun for a little bit. Not sure what absolutely triggggggggggggggggggggered you again, but get back on those meds and slink back to your safe space again.

[Parkbandit]

My initial point was about a biased electoral playing field, and then about structural causes for the election, not about Hillary's strength or weakness. That's your skewed perception of my argument, and another classic example of simplifying something complex into something easier to grasp. As for her strength, though, I think that had Hillary been a man, she would have beaten Trump by 20 points or more. That said, I'm delighted to see that Trump's basically fucked up everything since he stepped into office and currently has an approval rating of 38% and falling. Enjoying your president?

Yes, yes... the country didn't vote for Hillary only because she was a woman.

GTFO of here with your retarded projection.

[Tenlaar]

No, I think you refusing to believe Hillary was a weak candidate is the point. I think Bernie would have won. You keep saying things like "popular vote" and "california". None of those things have ever mattered. You don't campaign for the popular vote. If you did, I think the map would have looked different. Trump would have campaigned different.

You keep ignoring the fact that before Bush in 2000, a president had not become the president despite more US citizens voting for the other person in over a hundred years. Now it's happened with two of the last three presidents, both times in favor of Republicans. The mantra of "that's how it's always been" doesn't mean as much as you seem to think it does when even the oldest living US citizen wasn't alive yet to witness the previous time that this situation had occurred. You want to act like it doesn't matter, but a whole lot of people think that it's wrong and it does matter.

I know you're going to respond with "but that's still how it's always been" and how something that literally had not happened since the 1800's happening for two of the last three presidents, both Republican, couldn't possibly mean that the system could have been manipulated or that anything even slightly underhanded could have occurred. I guess I just still have a little hope.

[Neveragain]

2017 Iowa State Fair Cast Your Kernel current results.

By party:

Republican: 58%
Democrat: 39%
Libertarian: 3%

Governor:

Kim Reynolds (R): 52% (A woman, how can this be?)

Nate Boulton (D): 21%

http://whotv.com/2017/08/10/2017-iowa-state-fair-cast-your-kernel-results/

[Stumplicker]

For once, I'm on Trump's side on this one. If anything, George Washington is worse than Lee. By all accounts, both North and South, Lee was a brilliantly minded military officer, bound by duty to his country, and respectful of both sides. He felt his country was Virginia, and declined command of the Northern forces to take a tertiary leadership position in the Confederate Army. He refused to loot and pillage the North during his invasion, first in Maryland, as he was hoping to garner a number of recruits for the army, which he did, and then in Pennsylvania, because his country was his country and he wasn't going to burn it, say like Sherman did to the South.

George Washington, by contrast, took no salary, like...let's say...Trump, but then embezzled the shit out of the treasury to the tune of modern day MILLIONS in the costs of liquor alone, and by all accounts was a selfish, alcoholic asshole with anger issues. He was a good military strategist, as was Lee, but putting the two next to each other....I'd take Lee any day, based on historical accounts of character, accomplishment, and overall mindset.

Edit: To clarify what I mean by Lee taking a tertiary leadership role, since someone's bound to mention it - Lee was given Generalship of the Citizen Army of Virginia to start with, but not command of the entirety of the Confederate forces. That didn't happen until about 2 years into the war, and it was mainly a political move giving Lee overall leadership because Jefferson Davis didn't trust P.T. Beauregard.

[Parkbandit]

For once, I'm on Trump's side on this one. If anything, George Washington is worse than Lee. By all accounts, both North and South, Lee was a brilliantly minded military officer, bound by duty to his country, and respectful of both sides. He felt his country was Virginia, and declined command of the Northern forces to take a tertiary leadership position in the Confederate Army. He refused to loot and pillage the North during his invasion, first in Maryland, as he was hoping to garner a number of recruits for the army, which he did, and then in Pennsylvania, because his country was his country and he wasn't going to burn it, say like Sherman did to the South.

George Washington, by contrast, took no salary, like...let's say...Trump, but then embezzled the shit out of the treasury to the tune of modern day MILLIONS in the costs of liquor alone, and by all accounts was a selfish, alcoholic asshole with anger issues. He was a good military strategist, as was Lee, but putting the two next to each other....I'd take Lee any day, based on historical accounts of character, accomplishment, and overall mindset.

Edit: To clarify what I mean by Lee taking a tertiary leadership role, since someone's bound to mention it - Lee was given Generalship of the Citizen Army of Virginia to start with, but not command of the entirety of the Confederate forces. That didn't happen until about 2 years into the war, and it was mainly a political move giving Lee overall leadership because Jefferson Davis didn't trust P.T. Beauregard.

LET'S BURN ALL THE STATUES OF GEORGE WASHINGTON TO THE GROUND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In your safe space forums, calling George Washington an asshole would hopefully get you banned.

[Back]

There may come a day we take down Washington or Jefferson. If we as a society decide to.

[Androidpk]

including that Hillary did not appeal broadly enough, I suppose, but she was still more popular than Trump. You're conveniently forgetting that Hillary won the popular vote by 3 million votes and beat Trump 48% to 46%. The country as a whole absolutely preferred Hillary.

Absolutely fucking no, the country as a whole did not prefer Hillary. The country as a whole found Hillary to be highly untrustworthy and her likability numbers are worse than Trumps STILL.

[Back]

Absolutely fucking no, the country as a whole did not prefer Hillary. The country as a whole found Hillary to be highly untrustworthy and her likability numbers are worse than Trumps STILL.

3 million more popular votes. I'd say the numbers speak for themselves. Gerrymandering won for Trump.

[Kobold]

I'm calling it here first. Trump resigns before Christmas this year!

[Androidpk]

3 million more popular votes. I'd say the numbers speak for themselves. Gerrymandering won for Trump.

Listen, you've already established you practically never have a firm grip on reality. Hillary lost for a number of reasons. She lost to Trump. By the way how do you feel about the news that Hillary staff members and DNC operatives were meeting with Ukrainian officials to get dirt on Trump during the election? I mean libs are losing their shit over Trump colluding with Russia but never seem to mention Hillary colluding with foreign states as well.

[Androidpk]

There are far more interesting numbers than that 3 million with the popular vote, like how many Democrats quit the D party because of the DNC rigging the primary. How many Democrats didn't vote because they couldn't stand Hillary. How many Democrats voted for Trump because they couldn't stand Hillary.

[Parkbandit]

Gerrymandering won for Trump.

I'd ask you to explain this.. but we both know you are incapable.. that you just heard that from another retarded liberal (oh, sorry Briarfox... I meant retarded in the same manner you meant "asshole".. in nothing but a loving, appreciative and group hug type of way....)

[~Rocktar~]

There are far more interesting numbers than that 3 million with the popular vote, like how many Democrats quit the D party because of the DNC rigging the primary. How many Democrats didn't vote because they couldn't stand Hillary. How many Democrats voted for Trump because they couldn't stand Hillary.

And how many Democrat voters are deceased, how many Democrat voters voted when more votes were cast that voters in the district and so on.

[Kobold]

I'd ask you to explain this.. but we both know you are incapable.. that you just heard that from another retarded liberal (oh, sorry Briarfox... I meant retarded in the same manner you meant "asshole".. in nothing but a loving, appreciative and group hug type of way....)

No problem PB! Try to get through the first sentence; I know reading comprehension is a skill you haven't mastered yet!

Which brings us to the House and the most underappreciated aspect of what’s propping up the Trump presidency: gerrymandering. Democrats need 24 seats to retake the House, and a new report from the Brennan Center estimates that “in the 26 states that account for 85 percent of congressional districts, Republicans derive a net benefit of at least 16-17 congressional seats in the current Congress from partisan bias.”

Congressional district maps were last redrawn after the 2010 Census — right when the tea party wave handed Republicans increased majorities in state legislatures, which meant control in more states over the new district lines. Thanks to technology, it’s easier than ever for one party to create new districts that maximize its seat share. In North Carolina in 2016, for example, Republican candidates received 53 percent of the total votes for the House, but won 10 of the 13 congressional seats. The results have been most pronounced in swing states; the report’s authors Laura Royden and Michael Li estimate that GOP-drawn maps in North Carolina, Michigan and Pennsylvania have netted Republicans between two and three seats on average in each state. (Some Democrats have played games as well: Royden and Li also estimate that Democratic gerrymandering in Maryland and Massachusetts cost the GOP a few seats.)

The GOP’s trickery means that instead of picking off a few Republicans here and there, Democrats need a wave to retake the House in 2018 and start honest oversight of the Trump White House. Such a wave is plausible given the Trump administration’s troubles — and the related difficulties Republicans have had enacting their agenda. But it’s equally plausible that gerrymandering could save Trump from a Democratic House. Trump opponents hoping for a quick conclusion should steel themselves for a long fight. And when congressional districts are redrawn again after the 2020 Census, Democrats — and honest Republicans — should back districts drawn in neutral fashion that actually reflect the will of the voters.

[Stumplicker]

LET'S BURN ALL THE STATUES OF GEORGE WASHINGTON TO THE GROUND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In your safe space forums, calling George Washington an asshole would hopefully get you banned.

My point is we should burn none of them, not that we should burn all of them. Remembering history, even its assholes, is important. It's just important that we remember them all accurately instead of with rose tinted glasses, like we remember Washington.

[Parkbandit]

No problem PB! Try to get through the first sentence; I know reading comprehension is a skill you haven't mastered yet!

Which brings us to the House and the most underappreciated aspect of what’s propping up the Trump presidency: gerrymandering. Democrats need 24 seats to retake the House, and a new report from the Brennan Center estimates that “in the 26 states that account for 85 percent of congressional districts, Republicans derive a net benefit of at least 16-17 congressional seats in the current Congress from partisan bias.”

Congressional district maps were last redrawn after the 2010 Census — right when the tea party wave handed Republicans increased majorities in state legislatures, which meant control in more states over the new district lines. Thanks to technology, it’s easier than ever for one party to create new districts that maximize its seat share. In North Carolina in 2016, for example, Republican candidates received 53 percent of the total votes for the House, but won 10 of the 13 congressional seats. The results have been most pronounced in swing states; the report’s authors Laura Royden and Michael Li estimate that GOP-drawn maps in North Carolina, Michigan and Pennsylvania have netted Republicans between two and three seats on average in each state. (Some Democrats have played games as well: Royden and Li also estimate that Democratic gerrymandering in Maryland and Massachusetts cost the GOP a few seats.)

The GOP’s trickery means that instead of picking off a few Republicans here and there, Democrats need a wave to retake the House in 2018 and start honest oversight of the Trump White House. Such a wave is plausible given the Trump administration’s troubles — and the related difficulties Republicans have had enacting their agenda. But it’s equally plausible that gerrymandering could save Trump from a Democratic House. Trump opponents hoping for a quick conclusion should steel themselves for a long fight. And when congressional districts are redrawn again after the 2020 Census, Democrats — and honest Republicans — should back districts drawn in neutral fashion that actually reflect the will of the voters.

A simple "I have no idea what I'm talking about" would have sufficed from you.

Are you going for the record number of accounts with full red rep?

[Pin]

Gerrymandering won for Trump.

Look man, I'm not a Trump fan either - but this literally makes no sense, you can't gerrymander a state line.

[Pin]

My point is we should burn none of them, not that we should burn all of them. Remembering history, even its assholes, is important. It's just important that we remember them all accurately instead of with rose tinted glasses, like we remember Washington.

I'm pretty sure you've never seen statues of many famous (and infamous) people, yet still know who they are.

[Pin]

California preferred Hillary you mean.

No, the majority of Americans that voted preferred Hillary.

[Androidpk]

No, the majority of Americans that voted preferred Hillary.

The majority of Americans didn't even vote.

[Pin]

The majority of Americans didn't even vote.

Hence the pronoun 'that'

[Methais]

Unfortunately, due to gerrymandering and the seats up for reelection and so forth, Republicans and even Trump have pretty good shots in the next election. It's not fair or honest, and it's certainly not representative of the actual democratic majority in the U.S., but there it is.

Yes clearly gerrymandering is why Trump won a bunch of states that voted for Obama in '08 and/or 2012 or haven't gone red in years/decades.

It's a good thing we have experts like you around to speak facts and not let emotion cloud your judgement.

[Methais]

You mean how you blamed gerrymandering on Trump's election and how he didn't even win the popular vote.. and when I asked you to explain it, you said it was an 8th grade concept and you didn't want to interfere with our circle jerk?

Yea, I agree.

Seriously though, thanks for playing the role of time4fun for a little bit. Not sure what absolutely triggggggggggggggggggggered you again, but get back on those meds and slink back to your safe space again.

I'd just like to take a moment to point out how nice it's been here now that time4fun is posting like 90% less.

PC before time4cunt:
https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/x/meadows-early-morning-14499354.jpg

PC during time4cuck:
https://ak5.picdn.net/shutterstock/videos/21153109/thumb/1.jpg

PC after time4kek:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dnsLTKshQlg/UkbqCEWBhvI/AAAAAAAAHo8/Y83FzCX_LQU/s1600/Green+field+13.jpg

https://media.giphy.com/media/TComJGQq9j3hu/giphy.gif

[Back]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcUDBgYodIE

[Back]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-4dIImaodQ

[Back]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnhFm5QVVTo

[Parkbandit]

In your own words Backlash.

Tell us exactly how Republican gerrymandering was the cause for Trump to win the Presidency.

I would like to specifically hear from Backlash and Backlash only on this. Everyone else, stfu while Backlash works on this.

Thank you.

[Methais]

A simple "I have no idea what I'm talking about" would have sufficed from you.

Are you going for the record number of accounts with full red rep?

@Whirlin where art thou??????


Look man, I'm not a Trump fan either - but this literally makes no sense, you can't gerrymander a state line.

Backlash doesn't actually think or research, he literally just parrots what he hears on TV or HuffPo or some shitty hipster blog.

[Pin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnhFm5QVVTo

All that's great, but gerrymandering can't sway a presidential election because it counts all votes in the state, what district the vote came from doesn't matter.

Trump didn't win because he had more over-all votes, he had 70k more votes in the states that matter. Whatever arbitrary district they came from is irrelevant.

[Methais]

3 million more popular votes. I'd say the numbers speak for themselves. Not even all the illegals and dead people voting could save Hillary.

Fixed.

[Parkbandit]

All that's great, but gerrymandering can't sway a presidential election because it counts all votes in the state, what district the vote came from doesn't matter.

Trump didn't win because he had more over-all votes, he had 70k more votes in the states that matter. Whatever arbitrary district they came from is irrelevant.

Nice going asshole... now he won't even try to explain it.

https://media.giphy.com/media/qwZQ7BqbWiIj6/giphy.gif

[Methais]

You didn't really think he would have anyway though did you? He would either just copy & paste some random emotional shit or just link some more random shit.

[Pin]

Nice going asshole

That's Racist

[Parkbandit]

That's Racist

Can't be.. assholes are usually brown (unless you are into anal bleaching) and therefor cannot possibly be racist.

I expect a full apology.

[Parkbandit]

You didn't really think he would have anyway though did you? He would either just copy & paste some random emotional shit or just link some more random shit.

I sure was hoping he would try.

[~Rocktar~]

Can't be.. assholes are usually brown (unless you are into anal bleaching) and therefor cannot possibly be racist.

I expect a full apology.

How to you even know this shit exists? Never mind, I don't want to know. Ugggg . . .

[Androidpk]

How to you even know this shit exists? Never mind, I don't want to know. Ugggg . . .

Have you been living under a rock? All the cool kids are into anal bleaching these days.

[Latrinsorm]

I want him to work against congress. Republicans are "stymying" efforts to repeal Obamacare because they never intended to do so.

I want him to fight a culture war against the left.

You just don't get it. You may not agree with the election result but several people elected Trump to do exactly what he is doing.People elected Trump to ensure Democratic laws stayed on the books for as long as he was in office? Seems unlikely, Fortybox.
What purpose was it for him to campaign in California if he A, knew he wasn't going to win it regardless and B, didn't need it? Tell me the last Republican to win California.The same reason he campaigned in Virginia.
No, I think you refusing to believe Hillary was a weak candidate is the point. I think Bernie would have won. You keep saying things like "popular vote" and "california". None of those things have ever mattered. You don't campaign for the popular vote. If you did, I think the map would have looked different. Trump would have campaigned different.Neither candidate campaigned in California.

[Methais]

How to you even know this shit exists? Never mind, I don't want to know. Ugggg . . .

It's why porn chicks' assholes look like they've never taken a dump in their lives.

And probably something involving Michael Jackson as well.

[Kobold]

It's why porn chicks' assholes look like they've never taken a dump in their lives.

And probably something involving Michael Jackson as well.

It can't be because of shit, noones asshole is that dirty. My GF's asshole is usually a reddish pink.

[Wrathbringer]

It can't be because of shit, noones asshole is that dirty. My GF's asshole is usually a reddish pink.

My gf lol like you get any. Ever.

[Parkbandit]

How to you even know this shit exists? Never mind, I don't want to know. Ugggg . . .

https://media.giphy.com/media/HDTNUfAm1abyo/giphy.gif

[Parkbandit]

It can't be because of shit, noones asshole is that dirty. My GF's asshole is usually a reddish pink.

https://media.giphy.com/media/HDTNUfAm1abyo/giphy.gif