And says that we can all be civil only if the left gets a majority in Congress. Otherwise, we apparently have to keep throwing tantrums.
Link: Hitlery
(no message)
I do feel sorry for her. And if you watch Frontline's Decision 2016, you may feel the same.
She's ambitious, calculating, and at times cold, but in the terrible decisions department, it all starts with Bill and dominoes from there.
She has every right to be bitter, IMO. She's smarter and a better attorney than Bill ever was, she suffered through his scandals admirably expecting a light at the tunnel that will likely never come.
To clarify, I would never vote for her, but she isn't the devil that she's painted as, more of a victim of circumstance.
(no message)
It was Hillary for so long, even after she lost the election and had no actual power. "Lock her up!". But that faded. Then the boogeyman became Comey. And then Strzok. And then Rosenstein. And then Muller. And then that woman that testified against Kavanaugh. Still, I think they had a hard time keeping up enthusiasm over those likes of those folks.
So they've run back to "momma", so to speak.
I've never liked her much. But I think the demonization by the populist right is over the top.
And it's effectiveness is one of my least favorite aspects of human nature.
As I sit and watch the negative political ads, I always think: how can this even work, how is it cost-effective. And then I think about our partitards (copyright implied) here, yep it works.
My point wasn't really that Hillary is undeserving of much of the criticism she receives, but it's really the dehumanization that bothers me.
her connection to him...and without the party payback (hand-picked Senate seat, choice assignments) for standing by Bill to protect the party over all.
Their marriage is a business arrangement that has netted them over a quarter billion dollars and counting...prior to the big "stadium tour".
(no message)
the first lady. She's every bit the bitch most believe she is.
.....and she is bitter, broken, and unhinged since her defeat. Her Deep State has failed, her bid to block Kavanaugh has resulted in the same. She is left with violence.
Don't forget to check under the bed before you go to sleep tonight.
(no message)
(no message)
The Dems have become an ossified mommy fixated gerontocracy.
(no message)
They are more likely to have voted for her than for Trump.
Shoot, ask any random woman. They are far more likely to have voted for her than Trump.
Ask anyone under the age of 47. The are far more likely to have voted for her than Trump.
These kinds of people should be able to answer your question.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
However, your reading comprehension is piss-poor pathetic judging by this response you gave to Chris. I don't really expect much from you.
Link: https://forum.uhnd.com/forum/index.php?action=display&forumid=2&msgid=498438
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
Only around 126M people voted in the last election. Far less than half of the population.
"Ask anyone..." You'll get a lot of blank stares...
But if you re-read the post, it takes into account those non-voters.
(no message)
Let's walk through this. My post states that a random voter is "more likely to have voted for her than for Trump." This is a fact. Non-voters do not affect whether the P(H)>P(T). You see. If two people voted for Hillary, one person voted for Trump, and 997 people were non-voters, it is still two times more likely that a random person of that 1000 voted for Hillary. If you think that is otherwise, then I do not know what to tell you.
As for carefully selecting states, well then that would not be a random selection.
You are one of those people.