cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: Yo. BA

(The first thing you're taught in a cult:   "This is not a cult".)

Mmm, the DNC and their co-horts in the main stream liberal media keep saying that anteefer is not a cult? They are just "peaceful protesters".

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: Yo. BA

Evidence of what 3020?

Your last election was evidence that the majority do not choose your leader.

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: Yo. BA

(Your last election was evidence that the majority do not choose your leader.)

Those 3 million votes and $250 would get Hillary entrance into Martin Sundoval's fundraiser and an opportunity to mock assassinate President Trump.

Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: Yo. BA

I know. And that just burns you to no end. Is this a great country or what. We don't just believe in mob rule.

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: Yo. BA

So you think it is good that the minority gets to force their ideas on the majority?

Highlighted
Honored Advisor

Re: Yo. BA

Sometimes, Canuck.

Related image

Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: Yo. BA

Nothing is forced. Trump won the election. Hillary lost even though she won the popular vote. That is not what it takes to win our presidential election. If she didn't like the way our system works she should not have agreed to run.

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: Yo. BA

I realize how your system works, including gerrymandering.

I would not use the words you did as Clinton clearly won the election with 3 million more votes.

It was the system that your country uses to select the person to sit in the position of president that chose the 'winner'. Not the majority of voters desire.

Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: Yo. BA

If Clinton won the election she would be living in the white house. She didn't win the election, she won the popular vote. That is not what it takes to win the election. She knew that when she decided to run.

Highlighted
Honored Advisor

Re: Yo. BA

With "gerrymandering" don`t you push Democrats in more in one district to theoretically get more Republicans in another district?  So you`re getting a Republican, but you`re also handing the neighboring district to the Democrat.

Besides, when Democrats are in power don`t they also "gerrymander"?

Why don`t Republicans "gerrymander" in California and pick up seats there if it`s such a "trick"?  Or did Democrats do a better job of gerrymandering California?