Originally Posted by Guest

You know...if states were given "equal rights"...It would have been a landslide.

WHY does CA get 55 electoral votes and WY gets 3? Isn't a state a state? CA was lucky to be born along the coast, giving it advantages that WY cannot hope to ever achieve. Why not affirmative action for disadvantaged states? A state, like a person...is a state. ALL states should be treated equally. A state having more people is like one person being smarter. Should that have an effect on their voting? Does the smarter person get extra votes? Then why should any state get more votes? A truly FAIR election would give EACH state ONE electoral vote. First to 26 wins. A tie goes to winner of the popular vote.

Seriously, a state is a state and all states should be treated equally. Like all people should be treated equally. Small concentrated areas shouldn't have such a dominating effect on the country as a whole. The 5% of area, like the 5% of a population shouldn't be able to control the rest.

Just some thoughts on reforming a corrupt system.

"WHY does CA get 55 electoral votes and WY gets 3? Isn't a state a state?"

Another brilliant statement from a trumpster, figures.

Originally Posted by dave harris

"WHY does CA get 55 electoral votes and WY gets 3? Isn't a state a state?"

Another brilliant statement from a trumpster, figures.

Once you get Donny B out of his racist anti-women mode he is at sea.

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Guest

You know...if states were given "equal rights"...It would have been a landslide.

WHY does CA get 55 electoral votes and WY gets 3? Isn't a state a state? CA was lucky to be born along the coast, giving it advantages that WY cannot hope to ever achieve. Why not affirmative action for disadvantaged states? A state, like a person...is a state. ALL states should be treated equally. A state having more people is like one person being smarter. Should that have an effect on their voting? Does the smarter person get extra votes? Then why should any state get more votes? A truly FAIR election would give EACH state ONE electoral vote. First to 26 wins. A tie goes to winner of the popular vote.

Seriously, a state is a state and all states should be treated equally. Like all people should be treated equally. Small concentrated areas shouldn't have such a dominating effect on the country as a whole. The 5% of area, like the 5% of a population shouldn't be able to control the rest.

Just some thoughts on reforming a corrupt system.

YOu would think that liberals/socialists would want all states to be equal. Give each state two electoral votes. No more than that. Since libtards believe that the wealthy should share their wealth with everyone else, wouldn't that pertain also to votes?

Any libtards want to argue that point? Maybe I should have started another thread for this, since we have gotten off the subject.

"Trump supporters still loving your man?" Well, as Gomer Pile used to say, "I don't love him, but I like him." Yes, I like what he is doing. I filter out what he says because most of what he says is not PC and I know that the left wing, as well as the RINOS will make a big deal of every thought he may verbalize. Trump beat Hillary, and I think that Hillary is dangerous. That's all that matters to me. Even if Trump did nothing more than sit in the White House, I would be satisfied. Sorry, but that's the way it is. The left is too dangerous for this country and have become an enemy agenda. Not the people, but the agenda is the enemy of the American way.

Originally Posted by Guest

"WHY does CA get 55 electoral votes and WY gets 3? Isn't a state a state?"

Another brilliant statement from a trumpster, figures.

Originally Posted by Guest

Once you get Donny B out of his racist anti-women mode he is at sea.

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

A sea of brilliance no doubt...

Why shouldn't states have equality like people do? Why are some states "wants" not as important as others?

If corporations are "people", with the same rights...why not states?

Because the liberals wouldn't win another national election ever.

They're all for equality and freedom...until you disagree.

If it was the other way around and the blue states were "flyover" states...then YOU would be screaming for a change in the system. Why is our state the red headed stepchild?

Originally Posted by Guest

When do you want the best for the America and give up this notion that
Orange - head is your guy!

Let's review the last 3 weeks:

Trump's been busy writing exec orders with "show and tell"
TRUMP Protestors everywhere in the world. That is a first!!!
Obamacare supposedly will be repealed and replaced within a week????
His appointment of Flynn is out the window.
Labor sec. will be a re-do.
Immigrant deportation is a fiasco, dreamers arrested.
Your boy is obsessed with his failure to win popular vote.
Cost of keeping potus safe has hit new records.
Appointing Bannon must make you especially proud.
Protecting Russia and Russian influence in election, and who knows what
Putin is hanging over his head, we will soon know after those mysterious tax returns become public.
Numerous law suits pending.
The latest with Flynn is not over yet.
This little issue of "conflict of interest" continues.


And this is only 3 weeks, any guesses as to how long b4 impeachment.

In the real world-NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH OBAMALAND.
I love not OUR PRESIDENT but OUR COUNTRY.

Unlike the PROGRESSIVE TEACHERS leading children in song god bless Obama-WHICH I FOUND AND YOU SHOULD BUT PROBABLY DID NOT FIND DISGUSTING.

Re: conflict of interest.
You clearly are ANTI-TRUMP. You are focused on Trump's tax return. And yet as a blind progressive, you did not see any conflict of interest between Hillary and the Clinton foundation. She is no longer secretary of State or a presidential candidate. Donations to the clinton foundation which they did in fact use for personal expenses and speeches by Billy and Hilly ARE ON SALE AT FAR LOWER RATES.

Re: Trumps income tax
I think CNN told you. Due to carry over losses he likely paid zero or close to it. Do you REALLY THINK you are better able to review Trump's tax returns then are the top people at the IRS? Your tax return-would you wish to make that public? I would not want to make mine public.
Trump is no saint. You should be aware that Trump turned down the 400,000 presidential salary. THAT SHOULD BE A TAX DEDUCTION FOR HIM.
Our tax code. It is interesting that the constitution of the US is four pages. Our income tax code is now 86,000 pages.
Aside- the income tax started in the 1930's we tend to assume it is or was forever. Once, we had the income tax it led to the growth of government. Before the income tax the government was funded by tariffs on imported goods making American goods less expensive than foreign goods with the tariff on them.

Trump is no saint-BUT CLEARLY YOU HOLD HIM TO A MUCH HIGHER STANDARD THEN YOU DO YOURSELF OR ANY PROGRESSIVE LIBERAL. PERHAPS, THAT IS JUSTIFIED IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT YOU FIND OBAMA AND HILLARY A BETTER CHOICE.

Originally Posted by Guest

In the real world-NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH OBAMALAND.
I love not OUR PRESIDENT but OUR COUNTRY.

Unlike the PROGRESSIVE TEACHERS leading children in song god bless Obama-WHICH I FOUND AND YOU SHOULD BUT PROBABLY DID NOT FIND DISGUSTING.

Re: conflict of interest.
You clearly are ANTI-TRUMP. You are focused on Trump's tax return. And yet as a blind progressive, you did not see any conflict of interest between Hillary and the Clinton foundation. She is no longer secretary of State or a presidential candidate. Donations to the clinton foundation which they did in fact use for personal expenses and speeches by Billy and Hilly ARE ON SALE AT FAR LOWER RATES.

Re: Trumps income tax
I think CNN told you. Due to carry over losses he likely paid zero or close to it. Do you REALLY THINK you are better able to review Trump's tax returns then are the top people at the IRS? Your tax return-would you wish to make that public? I would not want to make mine public.
Trump is no saint. You should be aware that Trump turned down the 400,000 presidential salary. THAT SHOULD BE A TAX DEDUCTION FOR HIM.
Our tax code. It is interesting that the constitution of the US is four pages. Our income tax code is now 86,000 pages.
Aside- the income tax started in the 1930's we tend to assume it is or was forever. Once, we had the income tax it led to the growth of government. Before the income tax the government was funded by tariffs on imported goods making American goods less expensive than foreign goods with the tariff on them.

Trump is no saint-BUT CLEARLY YOU HOLD HIM TO A MUCH HIGHER STANDARD THEN YOU DO YOURSELF OR ANY PROGRESSIVE LIBERAL. PERHAPS, THAT IS JUSTIFIED IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT YOU FIND OBAMA AND HILLARY A BETTER CHOICE.

Good post....

Originally Posted by Guest

The old Muslim BS!

...........Born in Kenya must be a Muslim

RE: Barry Barack Hussane Obama
To avoid my reply being a book.
You clearly voted for Obama but who or what did you vote for. At this point it no longer matters as Obama has been removed from the presidency by LAW-term limits.

Were you to look it up you would find Obama graduated high school as BARRY not Barack. His middle name HUSSANE is from a historical MUSLIM hero. Obama CLAIMS to be Christian. Had Obama said he was a Muslim, I think we can all agree he would not have been elected. Obama attended Muslim schools. Do you really believe assuming he reported to the school that he was Christian they did not make every effort to convert him to the muslim faith??????

As to whether Obama was born in America. Actually to run for the presidency you MUST be a born American not a naturalized citizen. The birth record that was supposed to end the question was not an original but a recreation. Interesting it did not match the records he provided in school. While I am not running for president, my birth record which I have shows not only the date and hour of my birth but the name of the doctor who delivered me and my parents name. IT EVEN HAS A FOOT PRINT.

Unlike in third grade there are no do overs.

Obama could not run for a third term though in a speech he did say if he could run he would win a third term. Obama DESPERATELY tried to install Hillary BUT HE FAILED. Aside-yet another unanswered issue. Bill Clinton had already done two terms. When, he was elected Bill directly said that we go two for the price of one with him and HILLARY. Had Hillary won I expect there would be an immediate move to impeach her for an ILLEGAL THIRD CLINTON TERM.

Originally Posted by Guest

In the real world-NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH OBAMALAND.
I love not OUR PRESIDENT but OUR COUNTRY.

Unlike the PROGRESSIVE TEACHERS leading children in song god bless Obama-WHICH I FOUND AND YOU SHOULD BUT PROBABLY DID NOT FIND DISGUSTING.

Re: conflict of interest.
You clearly are ANTI-TRUMP. You are focused on Trump's tax return. And yet as a blind progressive, you did not see any conflict of interest between Hillary and the Clinton foundation. She is no longer secretary of State or a presidential candidate. Donations to the clinton foundation which they did in fact use for personal expenses and speeches by Billy and Hilly ARE ON SALE AT FAR LOWER RATES.

Re: Trumps income tax
I think CNN told you. Due to carry over losses he likely paid zero or close to it. Do you REALLY THINK you are better able to review Trump's tax returns then are the top people at the IRS? Your tax return-would you wish to make that public? I would not want to make mine public.
Trump is no saint. You should be aware that Trump turned down the 400,000 presidential salary. THAT SHOULD BE A TAX DEDUCTION FOR HIM.
Our tax code. It is interesting that the constitution of the US is four pages. Our income tax code is now 86,000 pages.
Aside- the income tax started in the 1930's we tend to assume it is or was forever. Once, we had the income tax it led to the growth of government. Before the income tax the government was funded by tariffs on imported goods making American goods less expensive than foreign goods with the tariff on them.

Trump is no saint-BUT CLEARLY YOU HOLD HIM TO A MUCH HIGHER STANDARD THEN YOU DO YOURSELF OR ANY PROGRESSIVE LIBERAL. PERHAPS, THAT IS JUSTIFIED IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT YOU FIND OBAMA AND HILLARY A BETTER CHOICE.

I absolutely, totally and 100% disagree with you.

The media does NOT IN ANY WAY hold him to a higher standard.

They DO in fact hold me to a higher level of proof than any ohther President.

I started a few threads on this subject.

Trump is no stranger to the media. I, personally, followed him quite closely.

The media knows all about him.

Until the Apprentice, he was a playboy millionaire.. He seemed to always involved in one conspiracy theory or another...he publicly paraded his views on race (see his actions on the Central Park drive). He was and has proven this point even as a politician a man who lied consistently, never apologized, frequented drug filled booze party, humiliate wives in public, bragged to the media about screwing others wives, and again was always know as a liar, who cared ONLY about himself. His self importance and lying were and are legends. He has always been self centered to the exclusion of anyone but himself.

They know this...he did not just pop out of nowhere.

He created a past..,not the media..they followed it.

They will forvsure hold his feet to the fire..they know the man.

This does not mean he will fail...in my opinion, the only way his presidency is even average is having success with economics...deficit, spending, etc.

Of course the press will not bend over..they know this man. HE created this not the media.

If folks that criticize Trump accepted, supported, honored Obama then they have absolutely no legitimate complaint about anything any other politicians does or did including Trump.

The media is democratic oriented. owned and operated.
They should not "follow" and "report" anymore for or on Trump than they ever did for Obama.

A totally blind person is able to see the media bias and support of the resistence party.

Originally Posted by Guest

If folks that criticize Trump accepted, supported, honored Obama then they have absolutely no legitimate complaint about anything any other politicians does or did including Trump.

The media is democratic oriented. owned and operated.
They should not "follow" and "report" anymore for or on Trump than they ever did for Obama.

A totally blind person is able to see the media bias and support of the resistence party.

Originally Posted by Guest

Really! Could not have said it better. Has any president EVER had a post election RALLY!!!!!!!

Would it not be fair to hold the democrats to the same code of ethics as you do the republicans?

Obama spent millions of taxpayer dollars in his effort to implant Hillary. Not only did Obama appear at several Hillary rallies but, they sent Biden to others.

Based on the history of both the Clintons, how can any of you question ETHICS.

Originally Posted by Guest

All you Chumpsters can go support him once AGAIN, he's back in FL. this weekend for a RE-ELECTION CAMPAIGN!!

OMG-REALLY 3 reasons he's in FL. this weekend:
1: He HATES Washington ( they're evidently not fond of him either )
2: He's actually going on an explanation tour of how the press MADE him FIRE Flynn ( such a wonderful man that he was ).
3: Russia has been misbehaving this week and we have heard NOTHING from the self proclaimed genius, BUT he DOES do his best thinking over SALAD at Mara-Lara-Go. The pictures were great! Time Magazine cover materiel.

Would be funny if he gets shouted of the stage like the rest of the GOPers in the past weeks at town hall meetings!

RE-ELECTION CAMPAIGN RALLY OMG IS NO ONE SICK OF THIS.
What a waste of tax payers funds to protect the baboon 4 weeks in another round in FL. for a RALLY!!!!!

Do you not see how deplorable the libs are? You call our president a baboon. I could just hear the screaming. In fact we heard the screaming when a reporter called Michelle a guerilla.

To you-TO MICHELLE I am, after eight long years again proud to be an American. As to manners, you did not see AMERICANS WHO DID NOT VOTE FOR OBAMA pulling the same CRAP as the liberals are.

Originally Posted by Guest

90% of Liberals would think that The DOW is a chemical company and a company that they think should not exist !

The other 10% would say that the DOW is up because of both Bill Clinton and Obummie .

Libs / Dems / Progressives have little to no education in corporate accounting , corporate finance and how our economy actually operates .

The numbers are not easily found but, the stock market is up at least in part due to foreign money flowing in.

You, we need to realize you are just bait for the sharks. I laugh when I read crap that says Buffet like. Buffet an others like him do not even trade in the same market as we bait fish.

Among other things, the stock market is up because our government, our Fed, is controlling interest rates. With returns on treasuries, a bank CDs so far below the TRUE rate of inflation, you/we have no choice but to be in the stock market or real estate. WE ALL KNOW THE STOCK MARKET AND REAL ESTATE NEVER GO DOWN-EXCEPT WHEN THEY DO.

Originally Posted by Guest

Good post....

Trump broke 64 promises in his first month in office

"Are you Trump supporters still loving your man????"

Ask Caitlyn Jenner LOL LOL