Posted by bad_luck on 1/6/2018 6:40:00 PM (view original):
He was the editor at a white supremacist publication.

I just explained to you that when he originally joined it was a pro Israel pro America publication. Learn to read. Now give me a concrete example from the web that you peruse so frequently that he is a white supremacist. Just one. I can give you dozens that illustrate otherwise. Just admit you were wrong. Again. Dummy.

Explain again why someone making $300k in Cali can deduct $30k more from his tax liability than the same person living in Indiana. Tell me again how that is "fair". There I explained it in as simple terms as I can. Again you will dodge the question because you cannot.

bad_luck and people like him are precisely why HRC lost. Sycophants w/o a brain.

Posted by strikeout26 on 1/6/2018 6:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 1/6/2018 6:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 1/6/2018 5:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 1/6/2018 3:18:00 PM (view original):
I agree with you that the national economy is best when we have a prez that can work with the other side. The best our economy has been was under Reagan and Clinton. Reagan had Skip O'Neil and Clinton had Newt Gingrich. They balanced each other.

As as far as republican economies, I'm not sure I agree. If you look at local levels, republican led local governments tend to do much better. Also, BHO gave us 8 years of stagnation. Reagan inherited a worse economy from Carter than Obama did from Bush and had a MUCH better recovery.

You know why Reagan did better? He was able to spend more than Obama (relative GDP).

bad_luck believe BHO was a great president who alienated Israel, gave billions to Iraq and Palestine. LOL.

Under his watch ISIS rose to power, Putin took Crimea, Syria became a refugee disaster area, Benghazi, the rise of BLM and an artificially high stock market.

Thanks, BHO.....

I know right. BHO did very little to help America. B_L is Obama's moy.

BL is an idiot. He is a loser with no career path.

Posted by cccp1014 on 1/6/2018 6:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 1/6/2018 6:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 1/6/2018 6:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 1/6/2018 5:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 1/6/2018 3:18:00 PM (view original):
I agree with you that the national economy is best when we have a prez that can work with the other side. The best our economy has been was under Reagan and Clinton. Reagan had Skip O'Neil and Clinton had Newt Gingrich. They balanced each other.

As as far as republican economies, I'm not sure I agree. If you look at local levels, republican led local governments tend to do much better. Also, BHO gave us 8 years of stagnation. Reagan inherited a worse economy from Carter than Obama did from Bush and had a MUCH better recovery.

You know why Reagan did better? He was able to spend more than Obama (relative GDP).

bad_luck believe BHO was a great president who alienated Israel, gave billions to Iraq and Palestine. LOL.

Under his watch ISIS rose to power, Putin took Crimea, Syria became a refugee disaster area, Benghazi, the rise of BLM and an artificially high stock market.

Thanks, BHO.....

I know right. BHO did very little to help America. B_L is Obama's moy.

BL is an idiot. He is a loser with no career path.

Haha, that sounds so much like a Trumpian Tweet it's not funny. The only thing that could make it it more Trumpian is if you were trying to tell us how smart you were. Oh wait, you do that all the time also.


Donald....is that you????

Posted by cccp1014 on 1/6/2018 6:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 1/6/2018 6:40:00 PM (view original):
He was the editor at a white supremacist publication.

I just explained to you that when he originally joined it was a pro Israel pro America publication. Learn to read. Now give me a concrete example from the web that you peruse so frequently that he is a white supremacist. Just one. I can give you dozens that illustrate otherwise. Just admit you were wrong. Again. Dummy.

Explain again why someone making $300k in Cali can deduct $30k more from his tax liability than the same person living in Indiana. Tell me again how that is "fair". There I explained it in as simple terms as I can. Again you will dodge the question because you cannot.

bad_luck and people like him are precisely why HRC lost. Sycophants w/o a brain.

At least you finally figured out the difference between a deduction and a credit. Took you long enough, “finance expert.”

Posted by bad_luck on 1/6/2018 7:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 1/6/2018 6:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 1/6/2018 6:40:00 PM (view original):
He was the editor at a white supremacist publication.

I just explained to you that when he originally joined it was a pro Israel pro America publication. Learn to read. Now give me a concrete example from the web that you peruse so frequently that he is a white supremacist. Just one. I can give you dozens that illustrate otherwise. Just admit you were wrong. Again. Dummy.

Explain again why someone making $300k in Cali can deduct $30k more from his tax liability than the same person living in Indiana. Tell me again how that is "fair". There I explained it in as simple terms as I can. Again you will dodge the question because you cannot.

bad_luck and people like him are precisely why HRC lost. Sycophants w/o a brain.

At least you finally figured out the difference between a deduction and a credit. Took you long enough, “finance expert.”

I always knew but I wanted to simplify it for you. Again, you dodged both questions. And there is a difference between finance and accounting. Again, you don't know what that is but it exists.

Posted by The Taint on 1/6/2018 7:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 1/6/2018 6:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 1/6/2018 6:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 1/6/2018 6:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 1/6/2018 5:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 1/6/2018 3:18:00 PM (view original):
I agree with you that the national economy is best when we have a prez that can work with the other side. The best our economy has been was under Reagan and Clinton. Reagan had Skip O'Neil and Clinton had Newt Gingrich. They balanced each other.

As as far as republican economies, I'm not sure I agree. If you look at local levels, republican led local governments tend to do much better. Also, BHO gave us 8 years of stagnation. Reagan inherited a worse economy from Carter than Obama did from Bush and had a MUCH better recovery.

You know why Reagan did better? He was able to spend more than Obama (relative GDP).

bad_luck believe BHO was a great president who alienated Israel, gave billions to Iraq and Palestine. LOL.

Under his watch ISIS rose to power, Putin took Crimea, Syria became a refugee disaster area, Benghazi, the rise of BLM and an artificially high stock market.

Thanks, BHO.....

I know right. BHO did very little to help America. B_L is Obama's moy.

BL is an idiot. He is a loser with no career path.

Haha, that sounds so much like a Trumpian Tweet it's not funny. The only thing that could make it it more Trumpian is if you were trying to tell us how smart you were. Oh wait, you do that all the time also.


Donald....is that you????

Those tweets got him elected. Sux for you. Good for him.

Posted by all3 on 1/6/2018 3:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 1/6/2018 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 1/6/2018 1:20:00 PM (view original):
bob, not sure which part of "He was a better option than HRC." is so difficult for you to understand. This wide-spread opinion is the reason he got elected. Then, and now, people liked and trusted him far more than her. She was the only other realistic option (thanks to the rigged Democratic primary process and the fact no status-quo Republican stood a chance of beating her). There are a ton of unfounded accusations against Trump, and yes, his tweeting needs to stop, but the job he has done so far, is still much, much better than many people believe HRC would have done. Of course there is no way to ever prove this, just like there's no way to ever change the fact that he did win. People need to stop trying to divide this Country be attacking it's President (sounds like something a Foreign Country would do, not Americans), and put that same time and effort in to making change down the road.

all3, not sure which part of "jut because YOU think he was a better option than HRC, doesn't mean he was." is so difficult for you to understand. As I've said many time, I dislike HRC very much. It pained me to vote for her, and if just about anyone else was running against her, I probably would not have. I felt that strongly that Trump would not make a good president. Despite what you and moy say, I haven't seen anything to change my opinion.

Stop, take a breath, and try to comprehend what you're reading, instead of feeling the need to try to post some "witty" response half-way through. The question was basically why did people vote for Trump and now continue to defend his election. The answer was because they, me included, believe that no matter how bad it may or may not get under Trump, it would have been worse under HRC. I even go on to say there is no way to prove who would have been worse. Maybe ask somebody else to translate that if you're still having a problem with it, but I'm betting if you put your hatred aside for just 1 minute you'll do just fine.

Spending time wandering why Trump won and who would have been worse are wasteful. He did win, that won't change, and we'll never know. People need to let those things go and spend the time and energy making sure we don't have any future choices like that one.

first, I don't hate anyone, least of all anyone who posts here. I don't know any of you well enough to hate. I also don't wonder why Trump won. He won because he appealed to a certain segment of the American population that felt very neglected, plus the Dems, in their infinite wisdom ran a horrible candidate. You're right, we'll never know how good or bad a president she would have made. We will eventually know what kind of a presidnet Trump will make. it is just my opinion, but so far I'm not impressed.

Posted by wylie715 on 1/7/2018 12:41:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 1/6/2018 3:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 1/6/2018 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 1/6/2018 1:20:00 PM (view original):
bob, not sure which part of "He was a better option than HRC." is so difficult for you to understand. This wide-spread opinion is the reason he got elected. Then, and now, people liked and trusted him far more than her. She was the only other realistic option (thanks to the rigged Democratic primary process and the fact no status-quo Republican stood a chance of beating her). There are a ton of unfounded accusations against Trump, and yes, his tweeting needs to stop, but the job he has done so far, is still much, much better than many people believe HRC would have done. Of course there is no way to ever prove this, just like there's no way to ever change the fact that he did win. People need to stop trying to divide this Country be attacking it's President (sounds like something a Foreign Country would do, not Americans), and put that same time and effort in to making change down the road.

all3, not sure which part of "jut because YOU think he was a better option than HRC, doesn't mean he was." is so difficult for you to understand. As I've said many time, I dislike HRC very much. It pained me to vote for her, and if just about anyone else was running against her, I probably would not have. I felt that strongly that Trump would not make a good president. Despite what you and moy say, I haven't seen anything to change my opinion.

Stop, take a breath, and try to comprehend what you're reading, instead of feeling the need to try to post some "witty" response half-way through. The question was basically why did people vote for Trump and now continue to defend his election. The answer was because they, me included, believe that no matter how bad it may or may not get under Trump, it would have been worse under HRC. I even go on to say there is no way to prove who would have been worse. Maybe ask somebody else to translate that if you're still having a problem with it, but I'm betting if you put your hatred aside for just 1 minute you'll do just fine.

Spending time wandering why Trump won and who would have been worse are wasteful. He did win, that won't change, and we'll never know. People need to let those things go and spend the time and energy making sure we don't have any future choices like that one.

first, I don't hate anyone, ;east of all anyone who posts here. I don't know any of you well enough to hate. I also don't wonder why Trump won. He won because he appealed to a certain segment of the American population that felt very neglected, plus the Dems, in their infinite wisdom ran a horrible candidate. You're right, we'll never know how good or bad a president she would have made. We will eventually know what kind of a presidnet Trump will make. it is just my opinion, but so far I'm not impressed.

That's interesting. I would like to know WHAT he has done thus far that hasn't impressed. A short list would suffice. Maybe "he tweets too much" or whatever it is. THEN I would also like you to tell me what, if anything, he has done to impress you. At least something you might admire or agree with. Thanks.

Let me opine on this. HRC was a BAD candidate. The issue was that the media made it out to be a two horse race from the beginning. Both sides AND independents had a chance but the media over covered Hillary and Trump and undercovered others. Then, once it was a two horse race so to say they overcovered scandals and generallu presented both negatively. Hillary got covered on Emails and corruption, and Trump was so awful that every scandal got glanced over. I wish Bernie won.

Posted by cccp1014 on 1/6/2018 10:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 1/6/2018 7:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 1/6/2018 6:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 1/6/2018 6:40:00 PM (view original):
He was the editor at a white supremacist publication.

I just explained to you that when he originally joined it was a pro Israel pro America publication. Learn to read. Now give me a concrete example from the web that you peruse so frequently that he is a white supremacist. Just one. I can give you dozens that illustrate otherwise. Just admit you were wrong. Again. Dummy.

Explain again why someone making $300k in Cali can deduct $30k more from his tax liability than the same person living in Indiana. Tell me again how that is "fair". There I explained it in as simple terms as I can. Again you will dodge the question because you cannot.

bad_luck and people like him are precisely why HRC lost. Sycophants w/o a brain.

At least you finally figured out the difference between a deduction and a credit. Took you long enough, “finance expert.”

I always knew but I wanted to simplify it for you. Again, you dodged both questions. And there is a difference between finance and accounting. Again, you don't know what that is but it exists.

I think it’s funny that you pretend to be a financial expert but don’t know the difference between a deduction and a credit.

I think maybe youre an administrative assistant.

That would make more sense. But, on the other hand, my assistant knows the difference between the two.

So, maybe night janitor at a bank?

As to negayive coverage I have 2 thoughts.
1. Negative coverage to a bad candidate is nothing new. Fox was 24/7 anti-Obama, scraping the bottom of the barrel for his presidency. We are STILL TALKING ABOUT OBAMA. Trump is nothing new. Guess what: If you are the presjdent, people will talk about you. And if you do stupid ****, people will talk about you negatively.
2. Could jt be that *gasp* Trump brought a lot of this on himself? Maybe, JUST MAYBE, if he would get the hell off of Twitter and stop saying and doing stupid ****, PROPLE WON'T COVER YOU AS NEGATIVELY!! When you come out of the gate with a blatant lie as small as your inauguration crowd, you will be covered negatively.

As for fake news, Trump was helped out by facebook more than any other news.

"So, maybe night janitor at a bank?"

That's insulting................. to janitors everywhere............. :-)

Posted by tangplay on 1/8/2018 9:40:00 AM (view original):
Let me opine on this. HRC was a BAD candidate. The issue was that the media made it out to be a two horse race from the beginning. Both sides AND independents had a chance but the media over covered Hillary and Trump and undercovered others. Then, once it was a two horse race so to say they overcovered scandals and generallu presented both negatively. Hillary got covered on Emails and corruption, and Trump was so awful that every scandal got glanced over. I wish Bernie won.

The media didn't get HRC anointed the Democratic candidate, the crooked DNC did that all on their own. Nobody else ever had a chance.

Posted by all3 on 1/8/2018 11:06:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 1/8/2018 9:40:00 AM (view original):
Let me opine on this. HRC was a BAD candidate. The issue was that the media made it out to be a two horse race from the beginning. Both sides AND independents had a chance but the media over covered Hillary and Trump and undercovered others. Then, once it was a two horse race so to say they overcovered scandals and generallu presented both negatively. Hillary got covered on Emails and corruption, and Trump was so awful that every scandal got glanced over. I wish Bernie won.

The media didn't get HRC anointed the Democratic candidate, the crooked DNC did that all on their own. Nobody else ever had a chance.

I never made that claim. Obbiously the DNC rigged it. My point was that the media was making it SEEM like a two-horse race before we knew that conclusion.

I think we should probably quit with the DNC rigged it bullshit. The DNC clearly preferred Clinton in 2016, just like the DNC preferred Clinton in 2008.

She got the nomination because she got way more votes than Sanders.