Hillary's team came up with the cover phrase "Marked Classified"

[hadit]

Interesting, given that there are emails that will not be released in any form because their information is so sensitive. You're not doing a very good job defending her, you know.

Well, I am to people who can read and comprehend English. GO back and read what I said, and then have your Home School Instructor help you with the big words, Cleetus

Again, the only "Evidence" we have that these were really "secret" materials is that the Intelligence Community is saying so. "Trust us, this is really secret stuff".

Let me guess, you won't agree they are secret unless you can see them yourself? Oh, brudda.

Whether she was hacked or not has absolutely zero impact on her carelessness with classified information. That's the bottom line. You might as well say a parent who lets their child play in the road is doing nothing wrong as long as the child doesn't get hurt.

Well, first you'd have to prove the kid was actually playing in the road. I haven't seen that evidence yet. Not "I saw little Billy Playing in the road and even though he denies he was, you are just going to have to take my word for it!"

Did they not explain to you how analogies worked in Home School?

See, you completely missed the point. I have to assume you did it deliberately because you would have to be a government school reject otherwise. I'll ask again, are parents who allow a small child to play unattended next to a busy street negligent? Take out whether the child actually toddled into the street or not. Is a parent being negligent when they knowingly expose their child to danger? If you don't get it this time, I'll have to believe what people say about you.

The Contract With America revitalized the Republican brand, gave them the House for the first time in decades and gave them ammunition to corral the worst of Bubba's impulses. Bubba also had something today's democrats simply do not have, and that is the ability to compromise.

Well, no, not really. The Contract with America mostly didn't pass, at least not the important parts. they didn't get the Balance Budget Amendment or Term limits, which were the two top items the Contract called for. The Line Item veto was ruled unconstitutional. The government shutdown failed and probably cost Bob Dole any chance of winning.

Contract with America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nonsense, it absolutely gave the Republicans the House for the first time in decades. Maybe you weren't paying attention back then. It also gave the Republicans the testicular fortitude to keep Bubba in check. Maybe you don't understand something and that's why you sound ignorant.

 

[JoeB131]

Let me guess, you won't agree they are secret unless you can see them yourself? Oh, brudda.

I would say that the fact that the FBI won't even characterize what is in them tells me they know that the case is pretty weak. I want a little more than, "Take my word for it, it's really secret stuff!!!!"

See, you completely missed the point. I have to assume you did it deliberately because you would have to be a government school reject otherwise. I'll ask again, are parents who allow a small child to play unattended next to a busy street negligent? Take out whether the child actually toddled into the street or not. Is a parent being negligent when they knowingly expose their child to danger? If you don't get it this time, I'll have to believe what people say about you.

Do look like I give a fuck what a bunch of inbred home-schoolers say about me? Anyway, I went to Catholic School. That's why I hate religion with a burning passion.

Okay, the thing is, you haven't proven that the kid was anywhere near the street or even that it was HIllary's kid. So what you have is a kid that only you saw and we have to totally take your word for it he was in danger. You haven't proven there was a kid or a street. So you want to prosecute Hillary over hypotheticals. Understandable, you've spent 20 years trying to prove real wrongdoing and came up flat.

Nonsense, it absolutely gave the Republicans the House for the first time in decades. Maybe you weren't paying attention back then. It also gave the Republicans the testicular fortitude to keep Bubba in check. Maybe you don't understand something and that's why you sound ignorant.

Uh, guy, Clinton's popularity shot up into the sixties when people realized what a douchebag Newt was. Clinton got more done after the Contract with America than before.

It's even questionable whether or not the Contract was a factor in 1994.

 

[hadit]

Let me guess, you won't agree they are secret unless you can see them yourself? Oh, brudda.

I would say that the fact that the FBI won't even characterize what is in them tells me they know that the case is pretty weak. I want a little more than, "Take my word for it, it's really secret stuff!!!!"

See, you completely missed the point. I have to assume you did it deliberately because you would have to be a government school reject otherwise. I'll ask again, are parents who allow a small child to play unattended next to a busy street negligent? Take out whether the child actually toddled into the street or not. Is a parent being negligent when they knowingly expose their child to danger? If you don't get it this time, I'll have to believe what people say about you.

Do look like I give a fuck what a bunch of inbred home-schoolers say about me? Anyway, I went to Catholic School. That's why I hate religion with a burning passion.

That's your problem, not mine.

Okay, the thing is, you haven't proven that the kid was anywhere near the street or even that it was HIllary's kid. So what you have is a kid that only you saw and we have to totally take your word for it he was in danger. You haven't proven there was a kid or a street. So you want to prosecute Hillary over hypotheticals. Understandable, you've spent 20 years trying to prove real wrongdoing and came up flat.

It's not just me, dude. The company that maintained her server (and thus had access to the data on it), was not cleared to handle classified information. The kid is playing by the road. Hillary had authority to declare information classified and responsibility to handle it appropriately. Now everyone sees the kid playing by the road. The kid doesn't have to be killed by a car for the parent to be negligent. You're the neighbor refusing to look out the window after someone tells you that there's a kid playing by the road in front of your neighbor's house. "Nope, not going to look because it's just you that sees the kid, and he didn't get hit by a car yet. Nope, no danger there at all, not going to look, BECAUSE I MIGHT HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT".

Nonsense, it absolutely gave the Republicans the House for the first time in decades. Maybe you weren't paying attention back then. It also gave the Republicans the testicular fortitude to keep Bubba in check. Maybe you don't understand something and that's why you sound ignorant.

Uh, guy, Clinton's popularity shot up into the sixties when people realized what a douchebag Newt was. Clinton got more done after the Contract with America than before.

Clinton got a lot done because he was able to (and I know democrats can't handle this, so I'll whisper it) compromise. You can take your hands away from your eyes now, the scary word is past.

It's even questionable whether or not the Contract was a factor in 1994.

No it's not.

 

[JoeB131]

It's not just me, dude. The company that maintained her server (and thus had access to the data on it), was not cleared to handle classified information. The kid is playing by the road. Hillary had authority to declare information classified and responsibility to handle it appropriately. Now everyone sees the kid playing by the road. The kid doesn't have to be killed by a car for the parent to be negligent. You're the neighbor refusing to look out the window after someone tells you that there's a kid playing by the road in front of your neighbor's house. "Nope, not going to look because it's just you that sees the kid, and he didn't get hit by a car yet. Nope, no danger there at all, not going to look, BECAUSE I MIGHT HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT".

again, guy, a whole lot of problems with your sucky metaphor.

The first one is that the private server and contractor was any more or less dangerous than governmetn servers, which are hacked a lot more often than private servers.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/politics/state-department-hack-worst-ever/

If the Road in your metaphor is the nasty old Russians (seriously, where would you wingnuts be without that imaginary Russian hiding under your bed?) the thing is, the Road has been paved right over this whole situation, isn't it. But you want to complain about the one little patch of Road going through Chappaqua.

Okay, so now we have the kid (our super secret stuff) who is playing in the road near chapaqua and not all the kids that got run over before or after Hillary left, and the kid who got run down by Karl Rove and Scooter Libby that they were given a pass on. You have yet to prove to me that Hillary was the parent of that kid, and not the low level bureaucrat that copy and pasted something off a secret server and put it in an e-mail chain that eventually passed through 20 people's inboxes before it got to Hillary.

I'd like to know - is the Kid really a Kid? Or is he an adult wearing diapers who you are claiming is a kid?

(And, no, I don't mean David Vitter.) Was Hillary the one who left him at the side of the road, or did someone else?

Clinton got a lot done because he was able to (and I know democrats can't handle this, so I'll whisper it) compromise. You can take your hands away from your eyes now, the scary word is past.

No, Clinton got a lot done because he stood his ground when REpublicans wanted to do crazy shit like cheat Granny out of her Medicare to give a tax cut to rich people. and when people saw what you were up to, they rejected you soundly, which is why you had to steal the election because you couldn't WIN it.

 

[Boss]

No, Clinton got a lot done because he stood his ground when REpublicans wanted to do crazy shit....

Triangulation.

 

[hadit]

It's not just me, dude. The company that maintained her server (and thus had access to the data on it), was not cleared to handle classified information. The kid is playing by the road. Hillary had authority to declare information classified and responsibility to handle it appropriately. Now everyone sees the kid playing by the road. The kid doesn't have to be killed by a car for the parent to be negligent. You're the neighbor refusing to look out the window after someone tells you that there's a kid playing by the road in front of your neighbor's house. "Nope, not going to look because it's just you that sees the kid, and he didn't get hit by a car yet. Nope, no danger there at all, not going to look, BECAUSE I MIGHT HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT".

again, guy, a whole lot of problems with your sucky metaphor.

The first one is that the private server and contractor was any more or less dangerous than governmetn servers, which are hacked a lot more often than private servers.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/politics/state-department-hack-worst-ever/

If the Road in your metaphor is the nasty old Russians (seriously, where would you wingnuts be without that imaginary Russian hiding under your bed?) the thing is, the Road has been paved right over this whole situation, isn't it. But you want to complain about the one little patch of Road going through Chappaqua.

Okay, so now we have the kid (our super secret stuff) who is playing in the road near chapaqua and not all the kids that got run over before or after Hillary left, and the kid who got run down by Karl Rove and Scooter Libby that they were given a pass on. You have yet to prove to me that Hillary was the parent of that kid, and not the low level bureaucrat that copy and pasted something off a secret server and put it in an e-mail chain that eventually passed through 20 people's inboxes before it got to Hillary.

I'd like to know - is the Kid really a Kid? Or is he an adult wearing diapers who you are claiming is a kid?

(And, no, I don't mean David Vitter.) Was Hillary the one who left him at the side of the road, or did someone else?

That's stupid. No wonder no one takes you seriously. Tell you what, leave your kid by the road, I'll call CPS and we'll see what they say.

Clinton got a lot done because he was able to (and I know democrats can't handle this, so I'll whisper it) compromise. You can take your hands away from your eyes now, the scary word is past.

No, Clinton got a lot done because he stood his ground when REpublicans wanted to do crazy shit like cheat Granny out of her Medicare to give a tax cut to rich people. and when people saw what you were up to, they rejected you soundly, which is why you had to steal the election because you couldn't WIN it.

Wow, you sound like you actually believe that, in spite of how stupid it is. Clinton triangulated because he knew his party wasn't going to cooperate, so he had to if he wanted to accomplish anything. Too bad Albore couldn't carry his own state.

 

[JoeB131]

That's stupid. No wonder no one takes you seriously. Tell you what, leave your kid by the road, I'll call CPS and we'll see what they say.

Duly noted you couldn't defend your absurd metaphor. Which is understandable. You can no more get real people to care about emails than blow jobs.

Wow, you sound like you actually believe that, in spite of how stupid it is. Clinton triangulated because he knew his party wasn't going to cooperate, so he had to if he wanted to accomplish anything. Too bad Albore couldn't carry his own state.

MOre Americans voted for Gore than Bush. The treason was Scotus making it otherwise.

 

[hadit]

That's stupid. No wonder no one takes you seriously. Tell you what, leave your kid by the road, I'll call CPS and we'll see what they say.

Duly noted you couldn't defend your absurd metaphor. Which is understandable. You can no more get real people to care about emails than blow jobs.

What's to defend? It's very simple, the negative event does not have to happen in order for a person to be negligent. Only in liberal lala rainbow farting unicorn land are you not negligent as long as the child doesn't get hurt, or the server hacked.

Wow, you sound like you actually believe that, in spite of how stupid it is. Clinton triangulated because he knew his party wasn't going to cooperate, so he had to if he wanted to accomplish anything. Too bad Albore couldn't carry his own state.

MOre Americans voted for Gore than Bush. The treason was Scotus making it otherwise.

And most Americans didn't want obamadon'tcare, but the SCOTUS made it otherwise. Guess what, that's the power they have today.

Also, it's irrelevant that Albore won the popular vote, because that's not what the law says determines the winner. You might as well complain that the loser in a football game should have won because they had control of the ball longer and racked up more yards on the ground.

 

[JoeB131]

What's to defend? It's very simple, the negative event does not have to happen in order for a person to be negligent. Only in liberal lala rainbow farting unicorn land are you not negligent as long as the child doesn't get hurt, or the server hacked.

Funny, when I was 8 I was hit by a car, and no one arrested my parents... Imagine that...Probably because they weren't home. My sister was supposed to be watching me, but they didn't arrest her, either. THEY did arrest the guy who hit me, because he was driving on a suspended license.

So it strikes me IF the Russians were hacking info, like they did off of State's computers, that the guys we should blame are the Russians.

And most Americans didn't want obamadon'tcare, but the SCOTUS made it otherwise. Guess what, that's the power they have today.

When did we have a national referendum on ObamaCare? It seems to me that if you guys made that the issue in 2012, you lost. (It probably didn't help that you ran a Weird Mormon Robot who thought it was a good idea).

Also, it's irrelevant that Albore won the popular vote, because that's not what the law says determines the winner. You might as well complain that the loser in a football game should have won because they had control of the ball longer and racked up more yards on the ground.

Bush used a technicality to flip off the will of the people, something no one has tried in 112 years prior to that because they knew it was wrong. Bush probably lost Florida, too.

 

[Boss]

Funny, when I was 8 I was hit by a car

That explains a LOT!

Bush used a technicality to flip off the will of the people, something no one has tried in 112 years prior to that because they knew it was wrong.

It happened in 1960 with Nixon and Kennedy.

 

[JoeB131]

Bush used a technicality to flip off the will of the people, something no one has tried in 112 years prior to that because they knew it was wrong.

It happened in 1960 with Nixon and Kennedy.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. Nixon COULD have challenged votes in IL and TX that were suspicious, but the fact was, he lost the national election by 108,000 votes. He accepted America rejected him.

Not good old Dubya. He stole the election with a big-shit-eating smile and then proceeded to fuck up the country beyond all recognition.

 

[hadit]

What's to defend? It's very simple, the negative event does not have to happen in order for a person to be negligent. Only in liberal lala rainbow farting unicorn land are you not negligent as long as the child doesn't get hurt, or the server hacked.

Funny, when I was 8 I was hit by a car, and no one arrested my parents... Imagine that...Probably because they weren't home. My sister was supposed to be watching me, but they didn't arrest her, either. THEY did arrest the guy who hit me, because he was driving on a suspended license.

At age 8 you should be smart enough to know to get out of the way when a car is coming at you. I did. Again, you're way off in lala land. Too bad I won't just leave you there. You see, when I say parents letting a small child play close to the road, I'm not talking about 8 year olds. Were you not considered smart enough to avoid the road when you were 8?

So it strikes me IF the Russians were hacking info, like they did off of State's computers, that the guys we should blame are the Russians.

A guy who rapes a woman that came into a seedy bar alone, got smashed, then wandered outside and passed out in the alley is guilty of rape. The woman is guilty of stupidity for doing that whether she got raped or not.

And most Americans didn't want obamadon'tcare, but the SCOTUS made it otherwise. Guess what, that's the power they have today.

When did we have a national referendum on ObamaCare? It seems to me that if you guys made that the issue in 2012, you lost. (It probably didn't help that you ran a Weird Mormon Robot who thought it was a good idea).

No poll taken while it was being crafted and rammed through showed majority support for it, and you seem to have forgotten 2010's historic shellacking of democrats. How disingenuous of you.

Also, it's irrelevant that Albore won the popular vote, because that's not what the law says determines the winner. You might as well complain that the loser in a football game should have won because they had control of the ball longer and racked up more yards on the ground.

Bush used a technicality to flip off the will of the people, something no one has tried in 112 years prior to that because they knew it was wrong. Bush probably lost Florida, too.

Equal protection under the law isn't a technicality, and none of Albore's efforts resulted in him moving ahead, so he lost Fla AND the election.

 

[Slyhunter]

What's to defend? It's very simple, the negative event does not have to happen in order for a person to be negligent. Only in liberal lala rainbow farting unicorn land are you not negligent as long as the child doesn't get hurt, or the server hacked.

Funny, when I was 8 I was hit by a car, and no one arrested my parents... Imagine that...Probably because they weren't home. My sister was supposed to be watching me, but they didn't arrest her, either. THEY did arrest the guy who hit me, because he was driving on a suspended license.

So it strikes me IF the Russians were hacking info, like they did off of State's computers, that the guys we should blame are the Russians.

And most Americans didn't want obamadon'tcare, but the SCOTUS made it otherwise. Guess what, that's the power they have today.

When did we have a national referendum on ObamaCare? It seems to me that if you guys made that the issue in 2012, you lost. (It probably didn't help that you ran a Weird Mormon Robot who thought it was a good idea).

Also, it's irrelevant that Albore won the popular vote, because that's not what the law says determines the winner. You might as well complain that the loser in a football game should have won because they had control of the ball longer and racked up more yards on the ground.

Bush used a technicality to flip off the will of the people, something no one has tried in 112 years prior to that because they knew it was wrong. Bush probably lost Florida, too.

You don't leave your door unlocked in a crime ridden neighborhood and expect not to get robbed. You don't reward stupidity like that. When it's the ones in charge acting that stupid it's proof they shouldn't of been in charge.

 

[hadit]

What's to defend? It's very simple, the negative event does not have to happen in order for a person to be negligent. Only in liberal lala rainbow farting unicorn land are you not negligent as long as the child doesn't get hurt, or the server hacked.

Funny, when I was 8 I was hit by a car, and no one arrested my parents... Imagine that...Probably because they weren't home. My sister was supposed to be watching me, but they didn't arrest her, either. THEY did arrest the guy who hit me, because he was driving on a suspended license.

So it strikes me IF the Russians were hacking info, like they did off of State's computers, that the guys we should blame are the Russians.

And most Americans didn't want obamadon'tcare, but the SCOTUS made it otherwise. Guess what, that's the power they have today.

When did we have a national referendum on ObamaCare? It seems to me that if you guys made that the issue in 2012, you lost. (It probably didn't help that you ran a Weird Mormon Robot who thought it was a good idea).

Also, it's irrelevant that Albore won the popular vote, because that's not what the law says determines the winner. You might as well complain that the loser in a football game should have won because they had control of the ball longer and racked up more yards on the ground.

Bush used a technicality to flip off the will of the people, something no one has tried in 112 years prior to that because they knew it was wrong. Bush probably lost Florida, too.

You don't leave your door unlocked in a crime ridden neighborhood and expect not to get robbed. You don't reward stupidity like that. When it's the ones in charge acting that stupid it's proof they shouldn't of been in charge.

Correct. It's not a crime to leave your door unlocked, but it's stupid. I wouldn't want a person who did that to be rewarded with the combination to the safe, would you?

 

[JoeB131]

At age 8 you should be smart enough to know to get out of the way when a car is coming at you. I did. Again, you're way off in lala land. Too bad I won't just leave you there. You see, when I say parents letting a small child play close to the road, I'm not talking about 8 year olds. Were you not considered smart enough to avoid the road when you were 8?

I think you are getting a little silly when you are comparing written words to children... that's the point. I'm just pointing out how ridiculous your metaphor is, as the police almost never arrest the parents of children who are HIT by cars, much less the ones who were supposedly playing too close to the street.

So how about instead of absurd metaphors and analogies, Clinton should go to jail because someone sent her an e-mail without any classification marking on it, and she should have

1) Read it. (Even though apparently she got hundreds of emails a day.)

2) Caught that this information should have been classified.

3) Didn't immediately drop everything and tell people this was classified.

because

4) The Russians who have no problem hacking into government servers might have hacked into hers if it didn't have state of the art firewalls.

You don't leave your door unlocked in a crime ridden neighborhood and expect not to get robbed. You don't reward stupidity like that. When it's the ones in charge acting that stupid it's proof they shouldn't of been in charge.

Except that you guys didn't present any evidence she left the door "unlocked'. Again, I'm betting you it was probably easier to hack into State's computers (which we know have been hacked) than Hillary's, which probably had state of the art firewall protection because she and Bill have enough money to afford that now and are just paranoid enough to want it.

Oh, by the way, if someone spent 70 million dollars investigating YOUR sex life, you'd probably want really good security, too.

And that's the point, guys. the security around the Clintons is a lot tougher than it is around Bob in the Mail Room at State, who is probably watching porn sites on his computer at work.

No poll taken while it was being crafted and rammed through showed majority support for it, and you seem to have forgotten 2010's historic shellacking of democrats. How disingenuous of you.

NO, i ignore midterms because most Americans don't participate in them. 75% of Americans can't name both of their state's senators. 51% can't name one. simply put, they aren't representative at all. More people voted for democrats for Congress than republicans in 2012, but thanks to Gerrymandering, it didnt' matter.

Equal protection under the law isn't a technicality, and none of Albore's efforts resulted in him moving ahead, so he lost Fla AND the election.

Are you some kind of retard? Point was, Most AMericans DIDN'T vote for Dubya.

 

[Boss]

Are you some kind of retard? Point was, Most AMericans DIDN'T vote for Dubya.

Doesn't matter if most people didn't vote for Dubya... that's why we have the Electoral College. So that when the herd mentality of big city liberals try to shit on fly-over country, there is a way to mitigate the potential damage. If you don't like the arrangement you're free to lobby and have the Constitution changed but since every state has but two Senators and most states aren't chock-full of left-wing sheep who bloc-vote for the liberal without thinking, I don't think you stand any chance. But good luck!

 

[SwimExpert]

that's why we have the Electoral College. So that when the herd mentality of big city liberals try to shit on fly-over country, there is a way to mitigate the potential damage.

That is....creative.

 

[JoeB131]

Are you some kind of retard? Point was, Most AMericans DIDN'T vote for Dubya.

Doesn't matter if most people didn't vote for Dubya... that's why we have the Electoral College. So that when the herd mentality of big city liberals try to shit on fly-over country, there is a way to mitigate the potential damage. If you don't like the arrangement you're free to lobby and have the Constitution changed but since every state has but two Senators and most states aren't chock-full of left-wing sheep who bloc-vote for the liberal without thinking, I don't think you stand any chance. But good luck!

Guy, you are one dumb-inbred fuck. I really just have to say that.

"I'm going to support a system that doesn't work to my advantage because I can't POSSIBLY ADMIT I made a mistake!!!"

The electoral college is NOT your friend. The "Blue Wall" of those Big City Liberals starts the Democratic Candidate a 243 Electoral votes. Those are states the Democrat has won all six of the last six elections. The states they've won 5 out of six times (IA, NH, NM) adds another 15.

So to even have a chance to win, you guys have to run the table with the "Purple States" - VA, OH, FL, CO, NV. Bush stole FL in 2000 and in 2004, he got the Homophobes to deliver OH to him. (How'd that work out for you homophobes? Oh yeah, the government is MAKING you bake gay wedding cakes. You chumps!)

But it gets worse for you. Immigration will eventually turn Texas and Arizona into Blue States. Probably within the next 20 years. Then you guys are pretty much screwed.

But because you stupid, inbred, mouth-breathing, bible thumping fucks living next to toxic waste dumps can't POSSIBLY ADMIT that George W. Bush was a fucking mistake that never needed to happen. so, no, you'll answer anyone who points out the fucking disaster that was George Bush with "Well, some Slave Rapists said we had to do it this way, so it's still a good idea!"

Man, are you fucking stupid.

 

[Boss]

Are you some kind of retard? Point was, Most AMericans DIDN'T vote for Dubya.

Doesn't matter if most people didn't vote for Dubya... that's why we have the Electoral College. So that when the herd mentality of big city liberals try to shit on fly-over country, there is a way to mitigate the potential damage. If you don't like the arrangement you're free to lobby and have the Constitution changed but since every state has but two Senators and most states aren't chock-full of left-wing sheep who bloc-vote for the liberal without thinking, I don't think you stand any chance. But good luck!

Guy, you are one dumb-inbred fuck. I really just have to say that.

"I'm going to support a system that doesn't work to my advantage because I can't POSSIBLY ADMIT I made a mistake!!!"

The electoral college is NOT your friend. The "Blue Wall" of those Big City Liberals starts the Democratic Candidate a 243 Electoral votes. Those are states the Democrat has won all six of the last six elections. The states they've won 5 out of six times (IA, NH, NM) adds another 15.

So to even have a chance to win, you guys have to run the table with the "Purple States" - VA, OH, FL, CO, NV. Bush stole FL in 2000 and in 2004, he got the Homophobes to deliver OH to him. (How'd that work out for you homophobes? Oh yeah, the government is MAKING you bake gay wedding cakes. You chumps!)

But it gets worse for you. Immigration will eventually turn Texas and Arizona into Blue States. Probably within the next 20 years. Then you guys are pretty much screwed.

But because you stupid, inbred, mouth-breathing, bible thumping fucks living next to toxic waste dumps can't POSSIBLY ADMIT that George W. Bush was a fucking mistake that never needed to happen. so, no, you'll answer anyone who points out the fucking disaster that was George Bush with "Well, some Slave Rapists said we had to do it this way, so it's still a good idea!"

Man, are you fucking stupid.

Well, Ronald Reagan won every state but Minnesota as I recall. So there goes your theory.

 

[Boss]

that's why we have the Electoral College. So that when the herd mentality of big city liberals try to shit on fly-over country, there is a way to mitigate the potential damage.

That is....creative.

Yep... The founding fathers were brilliant like that.