I see new hope for Trump

[jimnyc]

Everything I say is my own opinion. I post links because Jim will go hysterical if I don't produce a source.
You need to show up more often. And bring your brother Jeff with you next time. Where are you two been hiding that rascal lately?

What an idiot. He's saying, that outside of a link, or a short sentence, you haven't an opinion of your own.

Regardless, I can safely speak for both in saying they can't stand you, and think you're worth less than a box of rocks. The only reason they hold back in telling you what a scumbag you are - is me.

[OCA]

When exactly is it that you do the "discuss" part? All I ever see from you is a link to an article of someone else's opinion that fits what you just can't figure out how to say for yourself. Can you link me to a post of yours where you are truly posting your own thought's in larger than a single sentence?

Evil some of the alt right wing jobs here go all ballistic if you don't post some link to support your thoughts but then attack the link, it's a vicious little game they like to play meant to cover their intellectual shortcomings.

[jimnyc]

Evil some of the alt right wing jobs here go all ballistic if you don't post some link to support your thoughts but then attack the link, it's a vicious little game they like to play meant to cover their intellectual shortcomings.

Quite the opposite at most times. The person you are defending pretty much nixes everything I post based on the source. It's easier for her to debate in that manner, then it is to actually have to write sentences and paragraphs, which I'm not certain I have EVER seen her do in a debate. It's almost always a link/sentence and nothing more. A one liner of sarcasm instead of addressing the topic. VERY hard if not impossible to find her dropping actual paragraphs of debate. If ever that is. Even you will offer sentences and paragraphs, however shitty your opinions may be at times.

While I think you are a dickhead, I think you know what you're talking about at times, and you're capable of writing a debate, as in multiple paragraphs supporting your point of view. She cannot do this, not politically.

Some folks have a desire to come in with the one sentence sarcasm and other stuff intended to just rile others up - while it's obvious that when push comes to shove, they don't know jack shit about what is being discussed, other than they want to piss folks off.

Dude, she did so and it was her rodeo back when you were still a conservative!! Also still back when she claims endless times that the folks here said all kinds of unsavory things about her - when she didn't even have an account, and she refuses to backup her words. Don't use her as your "enemy of your enemy is a friend" - as siding with her makes it look like you are grasping, hanging out with the droolers coming off the short bus.

[OCA]

Quite the opposite at most times. The person you are defending pretty much nixes everything I post based on the source. It's easier for her to debate in that manner, then it is to actually have to write sentences and paragraphs, which I'm not certain I have EVER seen her do in a debate. It's almost always a link/sentence and nothing more. A one liner of sarcasm instead of addressing the topic. VERY hard if not impossible to find her dropping actual paragraphs of debate. If ever that is. Even you will offer sentences and paragraphs, however shitty your opinions may be at times.

While I think you are a dickhead, I think you know what you're talking about at times, and you're capable of writing a debate, as in multiple paragraphs supporting your point of view. She cannot do this, not politically.

Some folks have a desire to come in with the one sentence sarcasm and other stuff intended to just rile others up - while it's obvious that when push comes to shove, they don't know jack shit about what is being discussed, other than they want to piss folks off.

Dude, she did so and it was her rodeo back when you were still a conservative!! Also still back when she claims endless times that the folks here said all kinds of unsavory things about her - when she didn't even have an account, and she refuses to backup her words. Don't use her as your "enemy of your enemy is a friend" - as siding with her makes it look like you are grasping, hanging out with the droolers coming off the short bus.

I stand on my own two feet, just pointing out that it happens on both sides as recently as this week and includes staff members who play that game.

[jimnyc]

I stand on my own two feet, just pointing out that it happens on both sides as recently as this week and includes staff members who play that game.

Staff has nothing to do with anything.

People offer articles and/or opinions. Folks on both sides will point at the links. It's par for the course.

But NOT everyone does the things I've pointed out above. I, nor anyone else, has accused you of what I wrote. You may be disliked for your posting, but you actually offer articles, links - and most importantly you will actually discuss things - even in the midst of fighting - that shows you have a grasp of the knowledge - even if it floats 100% differently than what most others here like. The person you are trying to team up with - has NOT done so, offered a paragraph or discussion, to backup the shit she writes - not since you were last here. How long ago was that, Mike? Just giving a heads up, in case you forgot. Unless you want to align yourself with such types. It will be met with "I'm a troll because I write what you don't like?" <---- anyone can lookup every one of her posts. This is no mystery here.

And Fwiw - before you cast stones at "staff" = TWICE I asked you to backup things when I used Breitbart as a source, and you disappeared and refused what I offered. Just as bully and scabby did.

[OCA]

Staff has nothing to do with anything.

People offer articles and/or opinions. Folks on both sides will point at the links. It's par for the course.

But NOT everyone does the things I've pointed out above. I, nor anyone else, has accused you of what I wrote. You may be disliked for your posting, but you actually offer articles, links - and most importantly you will actually discuss things - even in the midst of fighting - that shows you have a grasp of the knowledge - even if it floats 100% differently than what most others here like. The person you are trying to team up with - has NOT done so, offered a paragraph or discussion, to backup the shit she writes - not since you were last here. How long ago was that, Mike? Just giving a heads up, in case you forgot. Unless you want to align yourself with such types. It will be met with "I'm a troll because I write what you don't like?" <---- anyone can lookup every one of her posts. This is no mystery here.

And Fwiw - before you cast stones at "staff" = TWICE I asked you to backup things when I used Breitbart as a source, and you disappeared and refused what I offered. Just as bully and scabby did.

Sorry my friend, Breitbart is well known "suit and tie" white nationalist site, they'll get no play from me same as i'm sure you would be laughing if i linked to a site that started with "bluestate" or "progressive" yada yada yada. Hell i bacled up aposition and used a link from the Washington Times (hardly a left publication)and then a you tube video and got dismissed.

I ain't throwin in with nobody, you know that.

[jimnyc]

Sorry my friend, Breitbart is well known "suit and tie" white nationalist site, they'll get no play from me same as i'm sure you would be laughing if i linked to a site that started with "bluestate" or "progressive" yada yada yada. Hell i bacled up aposition and used a link from the Washington Times (hardly a left publication)and then a you tube video and got dismissed.

I ain't throwin in with nobody, you know that.

And yet - when given a chance to put down - several times - the stories I posted - you could not do so. Why would that be? Sure, it's easy to say "they'll get no play from me" - but you look silly when the stories are factually based and also on every other media agency out there.

For example - "Wikileaks drops new emails - one of them is Podesta talks to Mills about getting rid of emails".... And if you, bully and Scabby refuse to prove wrong, what you refuse to entertain - simply because of the source - again - SILLY. It would probably look better to just ignore such threads, as opposed to demanding a story is incorrect, based on the source, when its actually 100% factually proven. But hey, do as you wish.

[jimnyc]

Now, ALLEGEDLY, this "story" is about something that Clinton's campaign manager supposedly stated. But you're right, absolutely no reason to believe he ever stated anything remotely similar to this.

Podesta: ‘We Think’ Hillary Can Hold on to Michigan

Sunday NBC’s “Meet The Press,” Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta said, “Look, if we hold on to Nevada, hold on to Michigan, you know, then Hillary Clinton is going to be the next president of the United States.”

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/...hold-michigan/


Another one. They "may" be up for a lawsuit on this one, just making shit up, things that Breitart likes to make up. You know, things that Breitbart covers that you won't see elsewhere. I mean, it's real easy, the fine members here can do a search on Google - and they will see that the liberals here are SPOT ON - and that these stories aren't even covered elsewhere, and this is all made up shit, right Mike?

Or is it sometimes easier to say 'they'll get no play from me' - than it is to take the time to actually type? Do you have alligator fingers like Scabby when it comes to the difficult questions? LOL

CNBC Reporter Called Obama ‘The Black Guy’ While Giving Advice to Clinton Campaign

A prominent CNBC reporter referred to President Barack Obama as “the black guy” while he was sending advice to Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.

“Perhaps I am missing something…” Harwood wrote in the subject line of an email to Podesta on June 6, 2015. The email, dumped by WikiLeaks, also went to Clinton speechwriter Joel Benenson, as well as Democratic strategists David Axelrod and David Plouffe.

“…but it seems to me the idea in this story that Bill Clinton ran broad centrist ’50-state’ campaign and Obama ran narrow ‘liberal’ campaign is ridiculous on its face,” Harwood complained, referring to a New York Times article. Harwood also writes for the New York Times.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presid...nton-campaign/

[OCA]

And yet - when given a chance to put down - several times - the stories I posted - you could not do so. Why would that be? Sure, it's easy to say "they'll get no play from me" - but you look silly when the stories are factually based and also on every other media agency out there.

For example - "Wikileaks drops new emails - one of them is Podesta talks to Mills about getting rid of emails".... And if you, bully and Scabby refuse to prove wrong, what you refuse to entertain - simply because of the source - again - SILLY. It would probably look better to just ignore such threads, as opposed to demanding a story is incorrect, based on the source, when its actually 100% factually proven. But hey, do as you wish.

Dude i don't dispute anything the rapist Allange has released i just say fuck it, welcome to 'Murica, isn't a damn thing you nor i can do to fix it at this point, the system is destroyed, the Clintons just work the broken pieces better than anyone out there.

IOW.....in the current state of America good guys get crushed, if you won't get your hands dirty you lose.

Sorry to sound cynical but that is current reality.

If you think that HRC will ever face any convictions or jail time you are high, they got it all the wheels well greased. The Gambinos have nothing on them.

[jimnyc]

Dude i don't dispute anything the rapist Allange has released i just say fuck it, welcome to 'Murica, isn't a damn thing you nor i can do to fix it at this point, the system is destroyed, the Clintons just work the broken pieces better than anyone out there.

IOW.....in the current state of America good guys get crushed, if you won't get your hands dirty you lose.

Sorry to sound cynical but that is current reality.

If you think that HRC will ever face any convictions or jail time you are high, they got it all the wheels well greased. The Gambinos have nothing on them.

I certainly agree with your last sentences.

As for the rest, I shall take a chance at rewording it a bit, if that's OK with you?

"I agree, sometimes Breitbart does have factual stories, you just proved it and I cannot deny it"

[Abbey Marie]

C'mopn now, if the "Monkey King" has picked Trump as the winner, that's all that needs to be said. You all know my connection with monkeys!!

-----

China’s ‘monkey king’ picks Trump as next US president

SHANGHAI: A Chinese monkey has tipped Donald Trump for the US presidency, a tourism park said, after the creature successfully predicted the winner of football’s European Championship final earlier this year.

Known as Geda — which means knots or goose bumps — is the latest in a series of purportedly psychic animals that have popped up around the world since Paul the Octopus correctly predicted multiple 2010 World Cup matches.

The simian seer, wearing a yellow shirt emblazoned with his title, was given a chance to pick between life-sized cut-outs of Republican Trump and his Democratic challenger Hillary Clinton.



http://www.samaa.tv/weird/2016/11/ch...-us-president/

Btw, give that monkey a banana.

[NightTrain]

Btw, give that monkey a banana.

That's one hell of a smart monkey!

It would appear that this lower primate is more qualified than Nate Silver at running FiveThirtyEight.