jakee

So? Texas indicated a preference for Trump, the rest of the country was a landslide for Clinton. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

No, I want you to be honest. Futile mission, but maybe one day you'll slip... Then why did you just do it? I asked if you applied your reasoning to the previous elections. If that means I'm asking for a "this" that causes "that" then it is because your statement about the current election is about a "this" that causes "that". Do you want to have an ideagasm?

And what does that have to do with what I just asked you? To avoid the question? But you make it look so easy. But you always apply double standards, you always dodge questions you don't want to answer, and you always use psychotherapy mumbo-jumbo as a smokescreen. So what exactly is it that you think you're doing differently? And, again, if the result of this election shows what America wants, why didn't the results of the last elections show what America wanted? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Oh, cut him some slack - it's tough for the rightwingers right now. They're facing the fact that not only is Trump the President that the large majority of voters didn't want, he's not even the President that the people who did vote for him thought they were going to get. He doesn't represent their party, he doesn't represent the common people, he's freely admitting that he never believed in and doesn't care about doing the things he promised to the die-hard right to mobilise them in the election... but they have to swallow all that down and pretend it's all good because he still has an R next to his name. That kind of denial is hard to deal with, so it's inevitable they'll end up lashing out! Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Is that like the new Rick roll? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Why not? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Does that mean you concede that, for the last 8 years, America did want leadership that was Democrat, left leaning progressive liberal socialist? And that this time around, more Americans also wanted leadership that was Democrat, left leaning progressive liberal socialist? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

So for you, the ability to recognise that the world is a complicated place that can't be fully explained by single line soundbites is 'pathetic'? Yup, sounds like a right winger Do you want to have an ideagasm?

What is it that makes you youself (sic) think that Hilary took millions of $$ from foreign entities for access to the state department? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Really? Wow. It's almost like real life is a complicated thing. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

How is it a huge win for democracy? Like, apart from the fact that every free election which doesn't involve stuffed ballot boxes or other forms of outright fraud is a huge win for democracy, what is special about this one? Democratically speaking. Why? How? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

You never tried Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Do they? Do they really? Like, really really? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

- See more at: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2016/12/trump-adviser-rejects-climate-change-cites-5500-year-history-earth/#sthash.e9eApaKa.dpuf "Chris, there was an overwhelming science that the Earth was flat." What a cunt! Anyone who says that 'scientists' believed the earth was flat only broadcasts that they have no idea what science is. Ignorant fuckers like him believed the earth was flat, while scientists figured out not just that it was round but approximately how big it was as well, over two and a half thousand years ago using nothing but a calendar, a stick and a sunny day. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Ok Bob, but you and your friend are confused. The Virginia DNC convention was in July, and at that convention they decide who the delegates are. However the Virginia DNC primary was in March, and it is at the primary that the DNC find out who Virginia democrats want to be the nominee. Almost all of the Virginia delegates chosen at the convention are bound to vote according to the results of the Primary. So yeah, no shit the Virginia DNC convention was biased towards Hillary - they already knew that she'd won the Virginia primary (by a lot), and by that point they already knew that she'd won enough other primaries and caucuses to win the National Convention. She was, at that point, already the presumptive nominee. Presumptive is the correct word here, and it was wrong. Hillary Clinton didn't get the nod until the Richmond Convention. It's exactly this sort of arrogance and ignoring of the actual voters that I believe cost the election. It would be nice if you gave some indication that you had read or understood a word I just said. They had already held the primary and they already knew what the voters wanted, because they'd aleady voted. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Is that true? Even the source of the source they link to appears to suggest that is not true. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

No, silly. Fake news is anything he disagrees with. No. Fake news seems to be anything that makes the left cream their jeans. Well yeah, that's what I just said. You disagree with anything that liberals like, therefore any stories that liberals like is fake news. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

No, silly. Fake news is anything he disagrees with. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Ok Bob, but you and your friend are confused. The Virginia DNC convention was in July, and at that convention they decide who the delegates are. However the Virginia DNC primary was in March, and it is at the primary that the DNC find out who Virginia democrats want to be the nominee. Almost all of the Virginia delegates chosen at the convention are bound to vote according to the results of the Primary. So yeah, no shit the Virginia DNC convention was biased towards Hillary - they already knew that she'd won the Virginia primary (by a lot), and by that point they already knew that she'd won enough other primaries and caucuses to win the National Convention. She was, at that point, already the presumptive nominee. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Like what sanctions? Like what consequences? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

In the real world, when someone answers a question so directly, fully knowing the implications of a wrong, incorrect or untruthful answer. It generally means the person is not being deceptive. Except they've just spent the entire summer learning from Trump - who's taught them that just flat out lying will get you anything you want. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

I wasn't speaking to the Trump administration as a whole, simply the response to the supposed RNC hack. Compare the RNC answer to the legal, political, double speak given by the RNC in many of their issues over the years. The differences are stark. The above works just as well as the original. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

But it can affect your president, and isn't that the whole point of your vote in the first place? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Just what the Republicans have been asking for - a big, active federal government. They'll be so happy... Do you want to have an ideagasm?

rushmc is wrong. Wow, this needs to be recorded for posterity. Jerry Baumchen I am wrong I should have said a few of them not all....... Yeah - first you said all of his picks weren't donors, now you're saying a few of them aren't. That doesn't just invalidate your point, it reverses it. Do you want to have an ideagasm?