Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Don't try to tell me what I am thinking, asshole. You can barely put your own thoughts together.So, then what you are saying is Hillary really only had 2,590,707 votes more than trump, instead of the most recent count of 2,624,262 votes, right?IN THE WISCONSIN DAY 3 RECOUNT UPDATE 18,422 VOTES FOR HILLARY CLINTON WERE ERASED RESULTING IN A 15,133 VOTE NET INCREASE FOR DONALD TRUMP.
You mean those votes that Clinton got in one state ( California ) that gave her the popular vote!?!
Subtract California lopsided vote count and notice Clinton was losing the popular vote until California threw it to her...
I know how dare I point out the reality when you want to use the popular vote to justify your thinking Clinton should have won...
Tells us stupid, how was it rigged, and be very specific.Wow so it was rigged for Hillary just not rigged enough?
Because trump said it was rigged doesn't count.
It provides evidence of two things: first, Clinton really did try to rig the election, and second, she is too incompetent to do it right. It also answers the question of why Clinton never visited Wisconsin during the general election campaign: she thought she had the state wrapped up with voter fraud. Clearly, America dodged a bullet when corrupt, incompetent Clinton lost the election.So, then what you are saying is Hillary really only had 2,590,707 votes more than trump, instead of the most recent count of 2,624,262 votes, right?IN THE WISCONSIN DAY 3 RECOUNT UPDATE 18,422 VOTES FOR HILLARY CLINTON WERE ERASED RESULTING IN A 15,133 VOTE NET INCREASE FOR DONALD TRUMP.
Minus the sanctuary cities, maybe. California is the land of fruits and nuts. San Francisco just legalized pissing in the street. lolDon't try to tell me what I am thinking, asshole. You can barely put your own thoughts together.So, then what you are saying is Hillary really only had 2,590,707 votes more than trump, instead of the most recent count of 2,624,262 votes, right?IN THE WISCONSIN DAY 3 RECOUNT UPDATE 18,422 VOTES FOR HILLARY CLINTON WERE ERASED RESULTING IN A 15,133 VOTE NET INCREASE FOR DONALD TRUMP.
You mean those votes that Clinton got in one state ( California ) that gave her the popular vote!?!
Subtract California lopsided vote count and notice Clinton was losing the popular vote until California threw it to her...
I know how dare I point out the reality when you want to use the popular vote to justify your thinking Clinton should have won...
I wasn't thinking nor did I ever state she should have won because of the popular vote. Stop making shit up.
I am just stating she had more votes than trump. That is a fact.
And why would you say to subtract the California vote, don't you count them as a part of the USA?
Because he won, why the fuck would he want recount, where's the upside for him? next stupid question. ......I have another thread about this and was very amused at the answers (or mostly nonanswers) to the question. If Trump believes that the system was rigged in Clintons favor and millions of fraudulent votes were cast, then WHY is he suing to block the recounts?!? Why not support them and expose the corruption and throw the results back in his opponents face??
Hey Blues, still waiting for a link to that study that you claimed proves over a million fraudulent votes were cast... speaking of heads up the buttTells us stupid, how was it rigged, and be very specific.Wow so it was rigged for Hillary just not rigged enough?
Because trump said it was rigged doesn't count.
Step 1 pull your head out of your ass, then maybe we can discuss your seething hatred of Trump and conservatives.
I didn't think you would be able to answer the question, dunderhead.Tells us stupid, how was it rigged, and be very specific.Wow so it was rigged for Hillary just not rigged enough?
Because trump said it was rigged doesn't count.
Step 1 pull your head out of your ass, then maybe we can discuss your seething hatred of Trump and conservatives.
Haha, what exactly did she do? And how did she do it? Please respond with proof, not assumptionsIt provides evidence of two things: first, Clinton really did try to rig the election, and second, she is too incompetent to do it right. It also answers the question of why Clinton never visited Wisconsin during the general election campaign: she thought she had the state wrapped up with voter fraud. Clearly, America dodged a bullet when corrupt, incompetent Clinton lost the election.So, then what you are saying is Hillary really only had 2,590,707 votes more than trump, instead of the most recent count of 2,624,262 votes, right?IN THE WISCONSIN DAY 3 RECOUNT UPDATE 18,422 VOTES FOR HILLARY CLINTON WERE ERASED RESULTING IN A 15,133 VOTE NET INCREASE FOR DONALD TRUMP.
I was hoping Trump was gonna demand to see if the vote was from and illegal or a dead person. Prove the liberal rigging once and for all. Hillary thought she was way ahead and must of quit pulling dead voters out of the grave.I have another thread about this and was very amused at the answers (or mostly nonanswers) to the question. If Trump believes that the system was rigged in Clintons favor and millions of fraudulent votes were cast, then WHY is he suing to block the recounts?!? Why not support them and expose the corruption and throw the results back in his opponents face??
Why, you ask? How about to expose the rigged system? Show that he got more votes than those than were recorded to reenforce a mandate and justify reform to our election system.Because he won, why the fuck would he want recount, where's the upside for him? next stupid question. ......I have another thread about this and was very amused at the answers (or mostly nonanswers) to the question. If Trump believes that the system was rigged in Clintons favor and millions of fraudulent votes were cast, then WHY is he suing to block the recounts?!? Why not support them and expose the corruption and throw the results back in his opponents face??
Your perfect loyalty to Clinton is impressive. If you could bark and wag your tail, you'd make a perfect pet for her.Haha, what exactly did she do? And how did she do it? Please respond with proof, not assumptionsIt provides evidence of two things: first, Clinton really did try to rig the election, and second, she is too incompetent to do it right. It also answers the question of why Clinton never visited Wisconsin during the general election campaign: she thought she had the state wrapped up with voter fraud. Clearly, America dodged a bullet when corrupt, incompetent Clinton lost the election.So, then what you are saying is Hillary really only had 2,590,707 votes more than trump, instead of the most recent count of 2,624,262 votes, right?IN THE WISCONSIN DAY 3 RECOUNT UPDATE 18,422 VOTES FOR HILLARY CLINTON WERE ERASED RESULTING IN A 15,133 VOTE NET INCREASE FOR DONALD TRUMP.
Hey Blues, still waiting for a link to that study that you claimed proves over a million fraudulent votes were cast... speaking of heads up the buttTells us stupid, how was it rigged, and be very specific.Wow so it was rigged for Hillary just not rigged enough?
Because trump said it was rigged doesn't count.
Step 1 pull your head out of your ass, then maybe we can discuss your seething hatred of Trump and conservatives.
Don't try to tell me what I am thinking, asshole. You can barely put your own thoughts together.So, then what you are saying is Hillary really only had 2,590,707 votes more than trump, instead of the most recent count of 2,624,262 votes, right?IN THE WISCONSIN DAY 3 RECOUNT UPDATE 18,422 VOTES FOR HILLARY CLINTON WERE ERASED RESULTING IN A 15,133 VOTE NET INCREASE FOR DONALD TRUMP.
You mean those votes that Clinton got in one state ( California ) that gave her the popular vote!?!
Subtract California lopsided vote count and notice Clinton was losing the popular vote until California threw it to her...
I know how dare I point out the reality when you want to use the popular vote to justify your thinking Clinton should have won...
I wasn't thinking nor did I ever state she should have won because of the popular vote. Stop making shit up.
I am just stating she had more votes than trump. That is a fact.
And why would you say to subtract the California vote, don't you count them as a part of the USA?
I think he would want a recount so he could prove to all of America that he wasn't just talking nonsensical bullshit.Because he won, why the fuck would he want recount, where's the upside for him? next stupid question. ......I have another thread about this and was very amused at the answers (or mostly nonanswers) to the question. If Trump believes that the system was rigged in Clintons favor and millions of fraudulent votes were cast, then WHY is he suing to block the recounts?!? Why not support them and expose the corruption and throw the results back in his opponents face??
Still no proof of any of that, but you are right, this would be a great opportunity for Trump to further investigate on Steins dime and expose the corruption and back up his claims. Yet he spends his money suing to block the recounts. Why?I was hoping Trump was gonna demand to see if the vote was from and illegal or a dead person. Prove the liberal rigging once and for all. Hillary thought she was way ahead and must of quit pulling dead voters out of the grave.I have another thread about this and was very amused at the answers (or mostly nonanswers) to the question. If Trump believes that the system was rigged in Clintons favor and millions of fraudulent votes were cast, then WHY is he suing to block the recounts?!? Why not support them and expose the corruption and throw the results back in his opponents face??
I didn't think you would be able to answer the question, dunderhead.Tells us stupid, how was it rigged, and be very specific.Wow so it was rigged for Hillary just not rigged enough?
Because trump said it was rigged doesn't count.
Step 1 pull your head out of your ass, then maybe we can discuss your seething hatred of Trump and conservatives.
Nice dodge and non answer. I didn't vote for Clinton, but I'm also not going to perpetuate outright lies like you are trying to do. Back up your claims or don't make themYour perfect loyalty to Clinton is impressive. If you could bark and wag your tail, you'd make a perfect pet for her.Haha, what exactly did she do? And how did she do it? Please respond with proof, not assumptionsIt provides evidence of two things: first, Clinton really did try to rig the election, and second, she is too incompetent to do it right. It also answers the question of why Clinton never visited Wisconsin during the general election campaign: she thought she had the state wrapped up with voter fraud. Clearly, America dodged a bullet when corrupt, incompetent Clinton lost the election.So, then what you are saying is Hillary really only had 2,590,707 votes more than trump, instead of the most recent count of 2,624,262 votes, right?IN THE WISCONSIN DAY 3 RECOUNT UPDATE 18,422 VOTES FOR HILLARY CLINTON WERE ERASED RESULTING IN A 15,133 VOTE NET INCREASE FOR DONALD TRUMP.
Well Trump and the Clinton's were friends, maybe he is trying to stop her from continuing to humiliate herself.Still no proof of any of that, but you are right, this would be a great opportunity for Trump to further investigate on Steins dime and expose the corruption and back up his claims. Yet he spends his money suing to block the recounts. Why?I was hoping Trump was gonna demand to see if the vote was from and illegal or a dead person. Prove the liberal rigging once and for all. Hillary thought she was way ahead and must of quit pulling dead voters out of the grave.I have another thread about this and was very amused at the answers (or mostly nonanswers) to the question. If Trump believes that the system was rigged in Clintons favor and millions of fraudulent votes were cast, then WHY is he suing to block the recounts?!? Why not support them and expose the corruption and throw the results back in his opponents face??
