Tgards79 wrote:
Every comment here has been about Hillary. No one has said Trump won because he was a good candidate. What you say is all about the Dems blowing it, and the GOP getting very lucky. I'm just playig back your words.
No you're not, what you are doing is the typical leftwing word play game.......Trump was a far better candidate that Hillary, not our problem your side brought a sway backed glue horse to the derby....now is it?
It is certainly not your fault that the Dems nominated Hillary Clinton, I totally agree with that. But she would have won if not for Comey and Putin, the nest campaign managers ever.
Tgards79 wrote:
Wow, the enthusiasm overwhelms me. Do you have any idea what his actual policies will be? He certainly doesn't, he veers all over the place and his cabinet appointees are disowning his positions right and left.
You're losing sight of the problem, we knew what Hillarys policies would be........and America said FU on more of that bullshit!!
Hold on tight, put on clean panties, because you are in for one hell of a ride in the right direction.
Tgards79 wrote:
It is certainly not your fault that the Dems nominated Hillary Clinton, I totally agree with that. But she would have won if not for Comey and Putin, the nest campaign managers ever.
You sound like a little spoiled brat......blame everyone but yourselves, the Russians are coming, the FBI did it....how about blaming the character flaws of your candidate, the people helping her and her psychotic base of weirdos.........most of all it was America that rejected your policies and agenda.......blame Obammy for her loss if you need a reason.
Tgards79 wrote:
Wow, the enthusiasm overwhelms me. Do you have any idea what his actual policies will be? He certainly doesn't, he veers all over the place and his cabinet appointees are disowning his positions right and left.
Why don't you wait and see...he hasn't even been sworn in yet. One way to tell if any one of his policies are really good, is to watch the panic stricken posts from you leftists morons.
I don't think so. What happened was that a core group of voters, comprised of undereducated working white man, bought Trump's line (or lie) that between crimping immigration and ripping up trade deals, he would restore old line industrial jobs to the heartland. This fiction enabled him to carry, barely, a set of industrial states - Pa, Wisc, Mich, Iowa -- that had previously been Blue, and this was barely enough to squeeze out a win. But you will soon learn there is no going back, it was technology, not trade or immigrants, that replaced those jobs. And that will be all she wrote, if he does not start nuclear war or be impeached for conflicts before his first-term is up.
Tgards79 wrote:
I don't think so. What happened was that a core group of voters, comprised of undereducated working white man, bought Trump's line (or lie) that between crimping immigration and ripping up trade deals, he would restore old line industrial jobs to the heartland. This fiction enabled him to carry, barely, a set of industrial states - Pa, Wisc, Mich, Iowa -- that had previously been Blue, and this was barely enough to squeeze out a win. But you will soon learn there is no going back, it was technology, not trade or immigrants, that replaced those jobs. And that will be all she wrote, if he does not start nuclear war or be impeached for conflicts before his first-term is up.
I don't think so. What happened was that a core g... (
show quote)
Clueless!!!! Absolutely clueless!!!!! But, you know, I really could give a shit, because your corrupt pathological lying old hag of a candidate LOST! And, ours won! Go Trump!
Tgards79 wrote:
I don't think so. What happened was that a core group of voters, comprised of undereducated working white man, bought Trump's line (or lie) that between crimping immigration and ripping up trade deals, he would restore old line industrial jobs to the heartland. This fiction enabled him to carry, barely, a set of industrial states - Pa, Wisc, Mich, Iowa -- that had previously been Blue, and this was barely enough to squeeze out a win. But you will soon learn there is no going back, it was technology, not trade or immigrants, that replaced those jobs. And that will be all she wrote, if he does not start nuclear war or be impeached for conflicts before his first-term is up.
I don't think so. What happened was that a core g... (
show quote)
More excuses??
Time to man up! Accept your loss and quit the whining as to why.....we know why, we've told you why......like EF Hutton. ...listen when its being explained.
Rivers wrote:
Clueless!!!! Absolutely clueless!!!!! But, you know, I really could give a shit, because your corrupt pathological lying old hag of a candidate LOST! And, ours won! Go Trump!
Hahaha....typical liberal, everyone's fault but their own........the uneducated white working voter did it, maybe if their side had some white workers on it things would be different, but no..............pander to the unproductive masses and expect something to get done...yea, works for me.
Tgards79 wrote:
You are all implying that Trump would have lost to another candidate because the only reason he won was because Hillary herself was terribly flawed. Is that what you mean?
===-------EXTREMELY FLAWED NOT TO BE TRUSTED WITH TOP SECRET MATERIAL !!!WHO KNOWS IF & HOW OUR SECURITY HAS BEEN RUINED THE WAY SHE RAN THE Secretary of the state !!!!!!! huma abedin is muslim who knows what they did with the top secret
material i think they need to do a lot of changing !!!!!! well old rotten obama's last day good for us !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Trump won it at"birther".
Hillary lost it at"what difference does it make".
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.