DIRECTFLT wrote:

casinterest wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

You must be in a sad cult.

Keep telling that to yourself, as you support a lying fraud.

Keep calling him whatever you want.... but He is Making America Great Again !

After 8 years under Obama, what exactly do working blacks have to rejoice about ??

Just by you asking that question is a full display of how crippled your mind is with regard to race. It couldn’t be explained to a mind like that in a 1000 years.

Making America Great Again? WTF does that mean? When was it Great? And to whom was it Great? The American Indians? Who?

I’ll take it you’ll go silent on that one until a clown like Hannity comes along and tells you what to say.

Making America Great Again - pacifying Russia.
Can’t see Hillary doing that...
Making America Great Again - dismantling NATO.
Can’t see Hillary doing that one either.
Making America Great Again - trashing the #1 agency charged with the nation’s security.
Certainly would never see Hillary doing that stupid sh*t.
Making America Great Again - making enemies of America’s allies.

Nope, she wouldn’t be doing that nonsense either.

...sand somehow, some American minds (or Russians posing as Americans) are okay with ALL of that.

Any two-brain cell organism saying that and believing it... is someone truly mentally disturbed.

BB747

MAGA = the art of making great deals. And it is working. Trump has raised the awareness for potential major threats to the US security from countries like Germany, France and worst of all Canada. It is time to stock up on 223 rounds and AR15 to prepare for the certain invasion of the USA by leftist liberal Canadians.

You'll have a chance in two years to change the situation.
Let's see if you will...

FatCat wrote:

You'll have a chance in two years to change the situation.
Let's see if you will...

Actually, if Democrats can succeed in taking one of the chambers of Congress, Trump's agenda could come to a standstill. If Democrats keep the GOP from having a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, the Trump agenda also slows down. If Democrats somehow manage to capture both chambers of Congress, Trump might as well stop governing since all he'll do is go out to rallies to vilify Democrats.

I think the best scenario right now is for Democrats to make gains at the state level, make inroads in the House but not enough to capture the Speaker's gavel, and keep their losses to a minimum in the Senate. A good 2020 candidate could be just what Democrats need to push through to the House and, with a couple more GOP senators from purplish states on the ballot, they can have a path toward total government control.

einsteinboricua wrote:

Actually, if Democrats can succeed in taking one of the chambers of Congress, Trump's agenda could come to a standstill.

As a moderate, this appeals to me. I am happy when one party controls the Congressional branch and the other controls the Executive branch. It forces compromise.

Hillary would have had serious challenges if elected because the GOP would have attacked her full time. It would have been worse than a black man being elected, and look at the spasms that caused for 8 years. Even without being elected the GOP has spent hundred of millions (billions?) of taxpayer dollar going after Clinton she came pretty close. Between the Comey SNAFU 11 days before the election and the Russian support for Trump it is still a surprise how close the election.

For those who have an obsessive hatred for Clinton there needs to be a realization that she did win the actual election by 3 MILLION votes. That indicates that the voters clearly preferred Hillary over Trump - and Trump's obnoxiousness clearly demonstrates why.

Outside of the continual bashing by the GOP (The Party of NO) Hillary would have been far better than Trump when it comes to Foreign Affairs. Take a moment to look at how ignorant Trump is in terms of our allies and neighbors. Her treatment of the EU, Canada, Mexico, Japan, Australia, etc would be far superior to Trump's. Just as important Hillary would not be having a love affair with Putin of kiss Kim's ass in Singapore. Her time as SecState gives her far more experience in Foreign Affairs than Trump's will ever have.

Domestically Hillary would have been fine. There would be no tax cuts for the very rich, but cuts at the lower end or other programs would take their place. Solid programs like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security would be safe, not risking cuts after the November like we face.

Employment would be about the same as Trump continues to ride Obama's growth in employment - as a look at the employment since the "Bikini Graph" will clearly show. Most important, the upcoming increases in health insurance ce would not be a fear for those in the know as ObamaCare would be safe.

And, how about those Trump Tariffs? Trump has promised a $200 Billion hit on China if China matches his tariffs on China . China matched him a minute after his tariffs went into effect at 10:01 this morning so another $200 hit is due for China. Hillary understands that no one wins in a trade war. American consumers will pay higher prices, farmers are going to take a real beating and American Businesses are getting the shaft. By the November the voters will clearly indicate how impressed with the Trump Tariffs they are.

Hillary looks far better these days, even with all the obstructions the GOP would have put in her way.

Ken777 wrote:

For those who have an obsessive hatred for Clinton there needs to be a realization that she did win the actual election by 3 MILLION votes. That indicates that the voters clearly preferred Hillary over Trump

No, it merely indicates that Trump did not run a campaign designed to maximize the popular vote. There is a reason why he never set foot in California.

VTKillarney wrote:

Ken777 wrote:

For those who have an obsessive hatred for Clinton there needs to be a realization that she did win the actual election by 3 MILLION votes. That indicates that the voters clearly preferred Hillary over Trump

No, it merely indicates that Trump did not run a campaign designed to maximize the popular vote. There is a reason why he never set foot in California.

Yes, it is yet another demonstration of what poor president he is.

He does not represent the people of the USA, he doesn't care to represent the USA, he just wants to "be himself' and represent "Trump" alone. He really is the ultimate representation of the "all about me" ideal in the USA.

A president needs to think about the country and not about themselves alone.

Poor president Trump. He won, but is proving to be a poor president so far.

Tugg

Tugger wrote:

VTKillarney wrote:

Ken777 wrote:

For those who have an obsessive hatred for Clinton there needs to be a realization that she did win the actual election by 3 MILLION votes. That indicates that the voters clearly preferred Hillary over Trump

No, it merely indicates that Trump did not run a campaign designed to maximize the popular vote. There is a reason why he never set foot in California.

Yes, it is yet another demonstration of what poor president he is.

He does not represent the people of the USA, he doesn't care to represent the USA, he just wants to "be himself' and represent "Trump" alone. He really is the ultimate representation of the "all about me" ideal in the USA.

A president needs to think about the country and not about themselves alone.

Poor president Trump. He won, but is proving to be a poor president so far.

Tugg

He’s a poor president because he ran a smarter campaign? It’s impossible to take you seriously when you make statements like this.

This absurdity can be played both ways. Hillary would have been a poor president because she couldn’t find Wisconsin on a map and ignored the advice of her campaign managers so she could rub more shoulders with the Hollywood crowd.

Yawn.

You can do better than this - at least I hope.

VTKillarney wrote:

Tugger wrote:

VTKillarney wrote:

No, it merely indicates that Trump did not run a campaign designed to maximize the popular vote. There is a reason why he never set foot in California.

Yes, it is yet another demonstration of what poor president he is.

He does not represent the people of the USA, he doesn't care to represent the USA, he just wants to "be himself' and represent "Trump" alone. He really is the ultimate representation of the "all about me" ideal in the USA.

A president needs to think about the country and not about themselves alone.

Poor president Trump. He won, but is proving to be a poor president so far.

Tugg

He’s a poor president because he ran a smarter campaign? It’s impossible to take you seriously when you make statements like this.

This absurdity can be played both ways. Hillary would have been a poor president because she couldn’t find Wisconsin on a map.

You can do better than this - at least I hope.

You really only limit his "poorness" to his campaign? You ignore hos name calling, his pettiness, his abusiveness toward others, his emotional and impulsive statements? And apparently you ignore the part of my comment noting this is "another", as in not not just about the campaign. Smart campaigning is fine but then ignoring and not being a president who thinks about all he represents is another thing.

I KNOW you can do better than this.

Tugg

Tugger wrote:

He does not represent the people of the USA, he doesn't care to represent the USA, he just wants to "be himself' and represent "Trump" alone. He really is the ultimate representation of the "all about me" ideal in the USA.

A president needs to think about the country and not about themselves alone.

Poor president Trump. He won, but is proving to be a poor president so far.

Tugg

I gotta say that is one of the most pitiful arguments I've read for awhile (now that seb is on ignore).

How laughable, as if Hillary were any better, she ignored Wisconsin and lost the election. Good thing too, it put her completely out of touch.

Tugger wrote:

VTKillarney wrote:

Tugger wrote:

Yes, it is yet another demonstration of what poor president he is.

He does not represent the people of the USA, he doesn't care to represent the USA, he just wants to "be himself' and represent "Trump" alone. He really is the ultimate representation of the "all about me" ideal in the USA.

A president needs to think about the country and not about themselves alone.

Poor president Trump. He won, but is proving to be a poor president so far.

Tugg

He’s a poor president because he ran a smarter campaign? It’s impossible to take you seriously when you make statements like this.

This absurdity can be played both ways. Hillary would have been a poor president because she couldn’t find Wisconsin on a map.

You can do better than this - at least I hope.

You really only limit his "poorness" to his campaign? You ignore hos name calling, his pettiness, his abusiveness toward others, his emotional and impulsive statements? And apparently you ignore the part of my comment noting this is "another", as in not not just about the campaign. Smart campaigning is fine but then ignoring and not being a president who thinks about all he represents is another thing.

I KNOW you can do better than this.

Tugg

Uh... we were talking about the campaign and the popular vote. But you knew that.

mham001 wrote:

Tugger wrote:

He does not represent the people of the USA, he doesn't care to represent the USA, he just wants to "be himself' and represent "Trump" alone. He really is the ultimate representation of the "all about me" ideal in the USA.

A president needs to think about the country and not about themselves alone.

Poor president Trump. He won, but is proving to be a poor president so far.

Tugg

I gotta say that is one of the most pitiful arguments I've read for awhile (now that seb is on ignore).

How laughable, as if Hillary were any better, she ignored Wisconsin and lost the election. Good thing too, it put her completely out of touch.

Seb doesn’t make pitiful arguments. There is no argument. He just flat out lies. He was caught lying twice just a little earlier today, as a matter of fact.

mham001 wrote:

Tugger wrote:

He does not represent the people of the USA, he doesn't care to represent the USA, he just wants to "be himself' and represent "Trump" alone. He really is the ultimate representation of the "all about me" ideal in the USA.

A president needs to think about the country and not about themselves alone.

Poor president Trump. He won, but is proving to be a poor president so far.

Tugg

I gotta say that is one of the most pitiful arguments I've read for awhile (now that seb is on ignore).

How laughable, as if Hillary were any better, she ignored Wisconsin and lost the election. Good thing too, it put her completely out of touch.

And if she did do that she would be a poor president. Don't you think? Or do think either "side" should wholly ignore and not try to at least work somewhere in the middle of everyone?

I do firmly believe that a huge problem with our nation is that we have become bifurcated with whoever wins only caring to "represent their people/their side". That is how nations fail. It may be how things are working right now but it is not good and it needs to change. Good presidents and legislators etc. do try to at least include other elements of their districts or state or nation in their work.

Tugg

VTKillarney wrote:

Uh... we were talking about the campaign and the popular vote. But you knew that.

Yes, to which I respond it was yet another example of him being a poor president... not the only reason he is a poor president. At least others make a stop in places like California to visit the Republican voters like me that actually reside here. Instead he felt we don't matter because we don't control the state. Forgive me but I think that certainly is part of not being a good president.

Tugg

Tugger wrote:

mham001 wrote:

Tugger wrote:

He does not represent the people of the USA, he doesn't care to represent the USA, he just wants to "be himself' and represent "Trump" alone. He really is the ultimate representation of the "all about me" ideal in the USA.

A president needs to think about the country and not about themselves alone.

Poor president Trump. He won, but is proving to be a poor president so far.

Tugg

I gotta say that is one of the most pitiful arguments I've read for awhile (now that seb is on ignore).

How laughable, as if Hillary were any better, she ignored Wisconsin and lost the election. Good thing too, it put her completely out of touch.

And if she did do that she would be a poor president. Don't you think? Or do think either "side" should wholly ignore and not try to at least work somewhere in the middle of everyone?

I do firmly believe that a huge problem with our nation is that we have become bifurcated with whoever wins only caring to "represent their people/their side". That is how nations fail. It may be how things are working right now but it is not good and it needs to change. Good presidents and legislators etc. do try to at least include other elements of their districts or state or nation in their work.

Tugg

While I agree with you that our nation is too polarized, your argument is absurd. You can’t blame anyone for understanding the electoral college map. That’s not “ignoring” anyone. It’s working with the system that you are given.

Stop looking for a bogeyman behind every corner.

VTKillarney wrote:

Ken777 wrote:

For those who have an obsessive hatred for Clinton there needs to be a realization that she did win the actual election by 3 MILLION votes. That indicates that the voters clearly preferred Hillary over Trump

No, it merely indicates that Trump did not run a campaign designed to maximize the popular vote. There is a reason why he never set foot in California.

I think the reason he avoided the left coast is that he wanted to be back in his own bed at the Trump Tower.

His maximizing his campaign was based on:

- nasty name calling like "Deadbeat Donald", "The Groper" and "Trump The Stiffer".

- Comes breaking FBI Standards & Policy with hie letter 11 Days before the Election. Trump doesn't have enough wealth to have paid for that stupid move.

- WikiLeaks (can you say Kissy Kissy Putin?). Do you really believe that Putin & Hacking Crew didn't hit his servers (business & personal)?

With all that help] (some of it illegal) Trump only pulled in the winning those 4 states Electoral Votes by around 67,000 votes TOTAL? How man y farmers and factory workers are getting the royal shaft from Trump's Tariffs? That is going to look great in November. Trump sill probably back out of his FUBAR and claim success, but lost jobs are lost jobs.

VTKillarney wrote:

He’s a poor president because he ran a smarter campaign? It’s impossible to take you seriously when you make statements like this.

WTF is rocking around in that thing you call your skull?

A Smarter Campaign???

A Campaign that is rock solidly rooted in Racism (Latinos, are thugs, rapist, etc) = Smart?
A Campaign that appeal to the lowest and worse of human nature (Hate and divisiveness) = Smart?
...and make no mistake, that campaign was not one appealing to ALL Americans...but a select few - those eager to label others for their troubles.

...what the hell are you thinking? Is your life that miserable that you cannot see how destructive that is or are you a straight race hating human?
For anyone to even remotely agree with a fraction of that platform...umm yeah, something is seriously wrong with you. I can't wait to hear you
justify this as 'a smart campaign'...please, by all means ...proceed.

BN747

Oh, please. Enough with the hyperbole. I was referring to the fact that he played the map perfectly. That’s why I said, “You can’t blame anyone for understanding the electoral college map.” But of course you chose to ignore that. Because it’s more important to be offended than accurate, eh?

VTKillarney wrote:

Oh, please. Enough with the hyperbole. I was referring to the fact that he played the map perfectly. That’s why I said, “You can’t blame anyone for understanding the electoral college map.” But of course you chose to ignore that. Because it’s more important to be offended than accurate, eh?

You VTKillarney, must be addressing seb or someone else, because the above reply can't be addressing what I posted prior to this post.

If it is, where's the hyperbole? Traitor Trump was witnessed worldwide when he stated those things and launched his campaign based on that strategy - appealing to the very worst
nature of in every American juman being. The capacity to discriminate/hate based on superficial differences resides in ALL of us! Me, YOU and everyone on this site and beyond, no exceptions.
So when he threw that red meat out there...you ate it up and drank the Kool-aid that followed. If you think that weak-ass claim you just made excuses what he said collectively..then yes, you
have a built in 'ignore switch that allows you to override any possible amount of common sense that you may have had ... OR you don't have the stones to man up and admit that his racist demeanor
is appealing to you., it sure as hell resonates with all morons we see on a daily basis acting out and lashing out at others of different persuasions be they sexual, ethnicity or anything other than white.
If you are the type that can override that and accept it or bury your hand in the sand - then you are indeed an enabler and the kind of person that admires facist & racist thought. Period.

BN747

BN747 wrote:

VTKillarney wrote:

Oh, please. Enough with the hyperbole. I was referring to the fact that he played the map perfectly. That’s why I said, “You can’t blame anyone for understanding the electoral college map.” But of course you chose to ignore that. Because it’s more important to be offended than accurate, eh?

You VTKillarney, must be addressing seb or someone else, because the above reply can't be addressing what I posted prior to this post.

If it is, where's the hyperbole? Traitor Trump was witnessed worldwide when he stated those things and launched his campaign based on that strategy - appealing to the very worst
nature of in every American juman being. The capacity to discriminate/hate based on superficial differences resides in ALL of us! Me, YOU and everyone on this site and beyond, no exceptions.
So when he threw that red meat out there...you ate it up and drank the Kool-aid that followed. If you think that weak-ass claim you just made excuses what he said collectively..then yes, you
have a built in 'ignore switch that allows you to override any possible amount of common sense that you may have had ... OR you don't have the stones to man up and admit that his racist demeanor
is appealing to you., it sure as hell resonates with all morons we see on a daily basis acting out and lashing out at others of different persuasions be they sexual, ethnicity or anything other than white.
If you are the type that can override that and accept it or bury your hand in the sand - then you are indeed an enabler and the kind of person that admires facist & racist thought. Period.

BN747

Dude, lighten up with the hyperbole. I was talking about a freaking map and you insist on ignoring that. You are the perfect example of why the left isn’t making any real inroads. You are like the relative that has to be invited to the party, but nobody really wants to be there. In the real world people want to be able to talk about geography without you insisting that they are complicit racists for doing so. But that’s the left’s America now. Talking about a map is racist. In Trump’s America maps must NEVER be discussed. Gotcha. Let me know how that works in Ohio and Wisconsin. #resist

In the meantime, I’ll be adjusting my sexist thermostat.
https://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements ... tat-sexist

Trumpists are complicit racists. They've certainly answered all my questions about why "ordinary people" supported the Nazis in the 1930s. They just have different clothing from White Supremacist hatemongers that came before. That MAGA hat? Might as well be a white sheet, honestly. That's what it's a proxy for. And they know it.

They've crippled our country, possibly permanently, and enabled and encouraged the worst elements of our society. We would be exponentially better off if Hillary had won that election for many, many reasons. But I'm sure this post will elicit howls of protest from Nazi-enabling, White-Supremacist, Ignorant Know-nothing Trump Cultists, who'd happily burn their country down to the ground so long as they could say they got one over on those libtards and "different types."

cargolex wrote:

Trumpists are complicit racists. They've certainly answered all my questions about why "ordinary people" supported the Nazis in the 1930s. They just have different clothing from White Supremacist hatemongers that came before. That MAGA hat? Might as well be a white sheet, honestly. That's what it's a proxy for. And they know it.

They've crippled our country, possibly permanently, and enabled and encouraged the worst elements of our society. We would be exponentially better off if Hillary had won that election for many, many reasons. But I'm sure this post will elicit howls of protest from Nazi-enabling, White-Supremacist, Ignorant Know-nothing Trump Cultists, who'd happily burn their country down to the ground so long as they could say they got one over on those libtards and "different types."

Nice hyperbole! And a No True Scotsman logical fallacy thrown in for good measure! Well done!

The American left has put itself in a moral quandary: Either it doesn't mean it when it calls the president and his supporters Nazis, in which the case it is merely guilty of cheapening the Holocaust, or it does mean it, in which case morality demands it take violent action against Trump supporters.

So are you lying or are you too cowardly to act morally? It’s got to be one or the other.

VTKillarney wrote:

So are you lying or are you too cowardly to act morally? It’s got to be one or the other.

Somebody who's here for the express purpose of normalizing fascism and policies that support it should not be lecturing anybody on acting morally.

The logical conclusion of Trumpists' ethno-nationalist views are the elimination of "the other" whom they do not like. Moral people have a duty to call out this behavior and these policies.

cargolex wrote:

VTKillarney wrote:

So are you lying or are you too cowardly to act morally? It’s got to be one or the other.

Somebody who's here for the express purpose of normalizing fascism and policies that support it should not be lecturing anybody on acting morally.

The logical conclusion of Trumpists' ethno-nationalist views are the elimination of "the other" whom they do not like. Moral people have a duty to call out this behavior and these policies.

No, moral people have a duty to arise and take forceful action against Nazis. But no Democrat is doing that. That’s because they know that the claim is BS. Either that or the Democrats are complicit Nazis. You can’t have it both ways.

Even you dropped the claim just now and slid back to “fascism.”

Your whole argument is crumbling underneath you, though. Try learning things:
https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/1 ... -democracy

VTKillarney wrote:

That’s because they know that the claim is BS. Either that or the Democrats are complicit Nazis. You can’t have it both ways.

Classic conservative projection in action:

"You called out my support for ignorant, racist, bigoted things by acknowledging that I am doing things that are ignorant, bigoted, and racist - that must mean you're the racist!"

If you don't like being called out for supporting a horrible regime that wants to do, and is doing, horrible things, then stop enabling them.

If you don't like being compared to Nazis, don't defend people who have similar policies and actually openly praise Nazis and White Supremacists. I know logic's hard for you, hon, but really.

Maybe comparing Trumpists to KKK supporters in the 1920s is more appropriate? They are, after all, the grandchildren and great grandchildren of those very same people.

So I just presented well reasoned, evidence based, professional reasoning that Trump isn’t even a fascist.

Do you have any actual evidence to present, or are you just riding the hyperbole and ad hominem train all the way into the station?

Nice No True Scotsman logical fallacy as well! It’s possible that I can call out BS attacks on Trump but not subscribe to everything Trump advocates. But you knew that. You are just grasping at straws now since the evidence isn’t on your side.

cargolex wrote:

VTKillarney wrote:

So I just presented well reasoned, evidence based, professional reasoning that Trump isn’t even a fascist.

I'm not surprised you've convinced yourself not to feel bad for advocating for a fascist and fascist policies.

More hyperbole! I love it! Choo choo! Make way for the hyperbole train!

Do you have any actual evidence to present? Third request. Or are you just incapable of learning?

cargolex wrote:

I'm not surprised you've convinced yourself not to feel bad for advocating for a textbook fascist and his fascist policies.

Wishing it doesn’t make it true.

When even VOX doesn’t agree with you, it’s time to come back to reality.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... mp-fascism

VTKillarney wrote:

So I just presented well reasoned, evidence based, professional reasoning that Trump isn’t even a fascist.

I'm not surprised you've convinced yourself not to feel bad for advocating for a textbook fascist and his fascist policies.

Some more for you:
https://extranewsfeed.com/why-donald-tr ... 535da27546

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... e23507a3c1

https://www.theatlantic.com/internation ... st/424449/

https://m.jpost.com/Opinion/Trump-is-a- ... nce-486831

http://www.chicagotribune.com/g00/news/ ... &i10c.ua=4

And more.

http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2 ... scist.html

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion ... e27566968/

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/4wb5 ... ascist-124

VTKillarney wrote:

BN747 wrote:

VTKillarney wrote:

Oh, please. Enough with the hyperbole. I was referring to the fact that he played the map perfectly. That’s why I said, “You can’t blame anyone for understanding the electoral college map.” But of course you chose to ignore that. Because it’s more important to be offended than accurate, eh?

You VTKillarney, must be addressing seb or someone else, because the above reply can't be addressing what I posted prior to this post.

If it is, where's the hyperbole? Traitor Trump was witnessed worldwide when he stated those things and launched his campaign based on that strategy - appealing to the very worst
nature of in every American juman being. The capacity to discriminate/hate based on superficial differences resides in ALL of us! Me, YOU and everyone on this site and beyond, no exceptions.
So when he threw that red meat out there...you ate it up and drank the Kool-aid that followed. If you think that weak-ass claim you just made excuses what he said collectively..then yes, you
have a built in 'ignore switch that allows you to override any possible amount of common sense that you may have had ... OR you don't have the stones to man up and admit that his racist demeanor
is appealing to you., it sure as hell resonates with all morons we see on a daily basis acting out and lashing out at others of different persuasions be they sexual, ethnicity or anything other than white.
If you are the type that can override that and accept it or bury your hand in the sand - then you are indeed an enabler and the kind of person that admires facist & racist thought. Period.

BN747

Dude, lighten up with the hyperbole. I was talking about a freaking map and you insist on ignoring that. You are the perfect example of why the left isn’t making any real inroads. You are like the relative that has to be invited to the party, but nobody really wants to be there. In the real world people want to be able to talk about geography without you insisting that they are complicit racists for doing so. But that’s the left’s America now. Talking about a map is racist. In Trump’s America maps must NEVER be discussed.

First off, point out where I'm addressing this 'map' issue you are yammering on about.

You toss the term 'hyperbole' around like a monkey slinging his poop at gawking tourist. At least the monkey knows the purpose of his actions. YOU otoh, have no idea how to effectively apply the term 'hyperbole'.

What exactly is 'hyperbole' in my pointing out your calling Traitor Trump's campaign based on division, hatred and racism. Speak up.

Why address me with your 'map' issue if I've mentioned nothing about it? Bonkers dude...

Now here's something telling about you, VTKillarney. Nearty every member here with 'standing' is a true aviation fan of some sort. Everyomne. Meaning they like viewing photos, taking them, discussing them, aviation videos, airport knowledge, aviation tech, Trip Reports, Airline ops, even old ticket Jackets, etc... run my username in Civil Av, plenty of links are yielded...

...enter 'VTKillarney' ...and zero results come up. SO...

That can only mean one or two things.

1 - You are not hear as an Av fan, but here as a shit ....
2 - A former disgraced member operating with a new username (your profile says you joined 5 months) that is not typical behavior of a new A.net member to fly off at the mouth the way you do....
...okay there's a 3rd option explaining your presence here, you are a real Russian BOT. Or a Trump WH Bot attempting to sway ppl the same way a Russian Bot would - essentailly the same thing.

..very odd psychological behavior....

So you have to be an authority on aviation to have a credible political opinion? Shall we play “spot the logical fallacy?”

VTKillarney wrote:

So you have to be an authority on aviation to have a credible political opinion? Shall we play “spot the logical fallacy?”

Now THAT’S a PERFECT use of hyperbole..now WTF did I say you had to be an aviation expert to be here.

No where.

Since you have not even the slightest interest in aviation (as proof by lack of any participation) it means you arrived here with an very specific agenda!

Thanks for confirming what member Jetero said about you from the start, some hack appearing out of nowhere just to shit up.

Pathetic.

BN747

BN747 wrote:

VTKillarney wrote:

So you have to be an authority on aviation to have a credible political opinion? Shall we play “spot the logical fallacy?”

Now THAT’S a PERFECT use of hyperbole..now WTF did I say you had to be an aviation expert to be here.

No where.

Since you have not even the slightest interest in aviation (as proof by lack of any participation) it means you arrived here with an very specific agenda!

Thanks for confirming what member Jetero said about you from the start, some hack appearing out of nowhere just to shit up.

Pathetic.

BN747

And you are doing this because you can’t go after the facts I present? Gotcha.

Regardless, you don’t know me and what I like to view on this site. But you knew that.

VTKillarney wrote:

No, it merely indicates that Trump did not run a campaign designed to maximize the popular vote. There is a reason why he never set foot in California.

Which actually makes the case to abolish the Electoral College all the more stronger. Why should the needs of OH, PA, MI, and WI (to name a few) outweigh the needs of the rest? For all his love of "beautiful, clean coal", he never set foot in KY or WV. How would he know what Kentuckians and West Virginians are going through? For all his talk about reviving the Rust Belt, Missouri was left out.

Oh, those were safe states and he didn't need to visit them? Well TX, CT, WA, MS, GA, IN, and AZ were also reliably safe states ("leans" at worst in the case of GA and AZ). That didn't stop him from visiting those states at least once.

VTKillarney wrote:

BN747 wrote:

VTKillarney wrote:

So you have to be an authority on aviation to have a credible political opinion? Shall we play “spot the logical fallacy?”

Now THAT’S a PERFECT use of hyperbole..now WTF did I say you had to be an aviation expert to be here.

No where.

Since you have not even the slightest interest in aviation (as proof by lack of any participation) it means you arrived here with an very specific agenda!

Thanks for confirming what member Jetero said about you from the start, some hack appearing out of nowhere just to shit up.

Pathetic.

BN747

And you are doing this because you can’t go after the facts I present? Gotcha.

Regardless, you don’t know me and what I like to view on this site. But you knew that.

Oh my goodness ... you really are beyond deranged
It stated facts about the Traitor Trump and his campaign and your BEST reply is ‘hyperbole’.

You can’t dispute a word I said regarding Traitor Trump OR you (let alone reply with challenging ‘facts’) .. I don’t need ‘know’ you... your mouth via keyboard is telling everyone here ‘EXACTLY’ who you are...you’re just too stupid to see what you’re doing, which making a complete fool of yourself with each and every reply.


BN747

einsteinboricua wrote:

VTKillarney wrote:

No, it merely indicates that Trump did not run a campaign designed to maximize the popular vote. There is a reason why he never set foot in California.

Which actually makes the case to abolish the Electoral College all the more stronger. Why should the needs of OH, PA, MI, and WI (to name a few) outweigh the needs of the rest? For all his love of "beautiful, clean coal", he never set foot in KY or WV. How would he know what Kentuckians and West Virginians are going through? For all his talk about reviving the Rust Belt, Missouri was left out.

Oh, those were safe states and he didn't need to visit them? Well TX, CT, WA, MS, GA, IN, and AZ were also reliably safe states ("leans" at worst in the case of GA and AZ). That didn't stop him from visiting those states at least once.

Somebody slept through the lecture on federalism.

In any event, you have a greater chance of seeing Hillary Clinton become President than you do of the electoral college being eliminated. The left loves to fantasize, that’s for sure.

BN747 wrote:

VTKillarney wrote:

BN747 wrote:

Now THAT’S a PERFECT use of hyperbole..now WTF did I say you had to be an aviation expert to be here.

No where.

Since you have not even the slightest interest in aviation (as proof by lack of any participation) it means you arrived here with an very specific agenda!

Thanks for confirming what member Jetero said about you from the start, some hack appearing out of nowhere just to shit up.

Pathetic.

BN747

And you are doing this because you can’t go after the facts I present? Gotcha.

Regardless, you don’t know me and what I like to view on this site. But you knew that.

Oh my goodness ... you really are beyond deranged
It stated facts about the Traitor Trump and his campaign and your BEST reply is ‘hyperbole’.

You can’t dispute a word I said regarding Traitor Trump OR you (let alone reply with challenging ‘facts’) .. I don’t need ‘know’ you... your mouth via keyboard is telling everyone here ‘EXACTLY’ who you are...you’re just too stupid to see what you’re doing, which making a complete fool of yourself with each and every reply.


BN747

And now ad hominem. You are the logical fallacy king!

VTKillarney wrote:

Somebody slept through the lecture on federalism.

Let's leave aside the fact that I come from an area where US history is not THE history course to take, if you think political systems can't be changed, then YOU haven't paid attention either. For example, the Senate was meant to be elected by state legislatures; an amendment changes that process. Nowhere in the Constitution did it say that the people even had a say in how the POTUS is elected; rather it's state legislatures who decided how the electors would be selected. I'm fairly certain you wouldn't be in favor of state legislatures taking your votes away, in the name of preserving a political system, would you?

So why is the idea to evolve the system and maximize voter turnout that ridiculous?

einsteinboricua wrote:

VTKillarney wrote:

Somebody slept through the lecture on federalism.

Let's leave aside the fact that I come from an area where US history is not THE history course to take, if you think political systems can't be changed, then YOU haven't paid attention either. For example, the Senate was meant to be elected by state legislatures; an amendment changes that process. Nowhere in the Constitution did it say that the people even had a say in how the POTUS is elected; rather it's state legislatures who decided how the electors would be selected. I'm fairly certain you wouldn't be in favor of state legislatures taking your votes away, in the name of preserving a political system, would you?

So why is the idea to evolve the system and maximize voter turnout that ridiculous?

If you are familiar with the process of amending the Constitution, you can see why this will never happen. It just is what it is.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/mo ... away-soon/

VTKillarney wrote:

BN747 wrote:

VTKillarney wrote:

And you are doing this because you can’t go after the facts I present? Gotcha.

Regardless, you don’t know me and what I like to view on this site. But you knew that.

Oh my goodness ... you really are beyond deranged
It stated facts about the Traitor Trump and his campaign and your BEST reply is ‘hyperbole’.

You can’t dispute a word I said regarding Traitor Trump OR you (let alone reply with challenging ‘facts’) .. I don’t need ‘know’ you... your mouth via keyboard is telling everyone here ‘EXACTLY’ who you are...you’re just too stupid to see what you’re doing, which making a complete fool of yourself with each and every reply.


BN747

And now ad hominem. You are the logical fallacy king!

And you continue to expose how weak your mind (and surely body) is. Confident people (mind and/or body or both) address issues with facts. The weak feeble and ignorant are more comfortable with tossing out distracting terms of which they can only pronounce but are absolutely clueless to their meanings and application.

BN747

And now attacking my (an unknown stranger’s) physique- while insisting on facts. I love the hypocrisy! The new left, ladies and gentlemen!

Let me know when you are ready for a genuine debate. I’ll be here. In the meantime have fun!

Also, learn what an ad hominem is. You are embarrassing yourself.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

And here we have further confirmation ..

VTKillarney wrote:

And now attacking my (an unknown stranger’s) physique

That weak ass reply (or cry) reveals more than you will ever know. You haven’t the slightest idea of how to answer it because you KNOW every word is true. Cue..(Here’s where u look in a mirror

VTKillarney wrote:

Let me know when you are ready for a genuine debate. I’ll be here. In the meantime have fun

EVERYONE here has done that..and all you’ve managed to do is deflect and distract..many arguments present here at you and the best you can manage is to duck dodge and deceive. You wouldn’t know an intelligent debate if one sat on your face for a month.

There’s a term for that...troll-extraordinaire!

BN747

More ad hominems! Keep it up! Great job!

VTKillarney wrote:

More ad hominems! Keep it up! Great job!

Accurate enough to nail you to the wall.

But here’s an option for you gain some ground..answer one simple direct question.

Aside from demonstrating how excellent you are giving your hero Traitor Trump virtual BJs by the second... why are YOU really on A.net?

You have zero aviation interests (and you’ve had ample opportunity to address that and chose not to do so...

...you joined 5 months ago and right outta the cage started trumpeting Traitor Trump and have done nothing else.

So again, I ask ...clear this up, are you more than a troll, or are you permanently relagated to that domain.

Simple question...you capable of a simple (and definitely, honest) answer.

BN747

Yup. It’s an easy question.

The answer may be that I’ve looked at thousands of photos and finally decided to register and eventually dip my toe in an area of the forum that interested me the most.

Or the answer could be that I never heard of the site until recently and have no interest in aviation.

Who knows?

The one thing we do know is that you are doubling down on your love of logical fallacies since NONE of that has any bearing on whether my arguments are correct or not.

But this is the new left.

Sorry, but I’m not going to reward or validate this type of behavior. Especially not when it is directly opposed to the forum rules:
b. Debating the Topic
1. If a topic becomes a debate, you may debate the subject itself but not the credibility or intellect of other members.

As I said earlier, when you are ready to discuss facts, I’ll be here. I’m still waiting. But I’m not here to play your logical fallacy games or to facilitate your breaking forum rules.

VTKillarney wrote:

Yup. It’s an easy question.

The answer may be that I’ve looked at thousands of photos and finally decided to register and eventually dip my toe in an area of the forum that interested me the most.

Or the answer could be that I never heard of the site until recently and have no interest in aviation.

Who knows?
.

Who Knows???

You see you’re completely incapable of answering a direct and simple question. Only an unstable mind can screw that up.

Case closed. By all means Keep showing us who you REALLY are...

BN747

No, I am completely capable of answering a [u]relevant[u] question. I am unwilling to engage in logical fallacies. It’s really quite simple. That’s who I REALLY am.

If you are going to try to set some sort of trap, at least think it through first. This one was entirely impotent and could be seen from miles away.

BN747 wrote:

Only an unstable mind can screw that up.

b. Debating the Topic
1. If a topic becomes a debate, you may debate the subject itself but not the credibility or intellect of other members.