Russia confirms having had contact with Hillary Clinton's campaign in the 2016 election

a reply to: seasonal

The majority voted for Hillary ...the majority spoke and they didn't chose trump.
The majority still don't want him. What do you think all the shouting and constant news coverage and complaints about how trump does things is about? You think it's because people like him and what he's doing?
People hate him. People think he's a buffoon and a total failure already. He's in the news constantly for making the wrong moves or saying the wrong thing.
Yeah the majority. The ones who are going to see him impeached.

a reply to: seasonal

Three.

a reply to: carewemust

Biggest lie ever.

a reply to: SBMcG

Ha ha. Still mad he didn't get the popular vote? Still upset that we the people challenge every move he makes and every moronic utterances and tweet he makes?
That we're going to continue to ride his ass until he quits or we get enough to impeach him?
Get used to it. Lol

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

trump thinks it's important. He's still trying to get that figure changed to match his fantasy.

a reply to: mOjOm

Si segnor.

a reply to: BeneGesseritWitch

I though the majority just wanted Trump to say he wouldn't challenge the election results? Pinky Swear you monster!

a reply to: mOjOm

My man the Woman was a lifelong civil servant, I'm not saying she or her husband didn't deserve six figure salary's and state housing but something is up when a civil servant is a multi millionaire. Trump is a business man, he's the real waldo, when he does illegal stuff the government doesn't have to reshuffle it's cards out of fear of the whole house collapsing, they just apply the law. I really hope they make America great again, or just make Nigeria great or something there is a weird immigration trend going on that hasn't been seen since world war 2 and surprise they're not flocking to Russia.

a reply to: BeneGesseritWitch

there is a weird immigration trend going on that hasn't been seen since world war 2 and surprise they're not flocking to Russia.

What ya mean?

a reply to: Gryphon66

still not a thin margin no matter how you try to justify it. trump carried the majority of the states 30 to 20 and won by 77 electoral votes. thin would have been less than 10, hell i'll even say less than 35.

35% of her popular votes came from five states that's over a third of her popular votes. why should states with high populations dictate who becomes president.
high population areas are not the whole country. as i said before the founders foresaw this and took steps to prevent high population areas from ruling the country.


ETA: also, trump's popular vote is the fifth highest for a winning president. the top five are 2 for obama, clinton, gw bush.

and just to show how high population areas effect the popular vote, if you take away the highest california, the popular vote would have been clinton 55,402,467 trump 57,754,616 a lead for trumpof 2.3 million . so if that doesn't show you how the founders foresaw how high population areas could dictate the vote nothing will.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: SBMcG

Since we're just throwing out the votes we don't like then I'll just throw all of Trump's votes away and say that Hillary had the biggest win in history. Sound fair?

You can't just act like California votes didn't count, that's absolutely ridiculous.

Trump won based on about 107K votes in three swing States ... MI, WI, and PA.

More people voted against Trump than voted for him by a 10% margin.

His win in the Electoral College was thinner than any recent President except for ... GWB.

Some folks hate these facts, however.

LOL, when you put it like that, it shows how piss poor Hillary really was if she lost to him.
Thanks for the perspective.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Well, my statements have been that Trump won the Electoral College by a smaller margin than any modern President except George W. Bush.

As to our different measures of the word "thin" in this context, Trump's total margin was only 60% of the next lowest margin (Obama 12) and less than 35% of the highest margin (Clinton 96).

So yes, in comparison, I'm fine with using the word "thin" to characterize his win percentage. You don't have to.

Out of 7 Elections, he came in 5th overall. Cut that up anyway you wish.

You just observed that high populations affect the popular vote. Yes, since the popular vote means "based on population" I would guess so.

Again, the President is the only national elected Office that affects ALL Americans, and logically, ALL Americans' votes should count the same ... and they don't. We need to drop the "one person one vote" philosophy because American's votes are not reflected in the Electoral College, the relative size and power of the States is.

I agree that given what they knew our Founders did an amazing job with the Constitution. However, the Congress was the Branch intended to reflect fractional balance. The Presidency was to reflect the voice of the People, all of the People.

And it quite obviously doesn't and sometimes, in the case of 2016, doesn't do so DRAMATICALLY.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: SBMcG

Since we're just throwing out the votes we don't like then I'll just throw all of Trump's votes away and say that Hillary had the biggest win in history. Sound fair?

You can't just act like California votes didn't count, that's absolutely ridiculous.

Trump won based on about 107K votes in three swing States ... MI, WI, and PA.

More people voted against Trump than voted for him by a 10% margin.

His win in the Electoral College was thinner than any recent President except for ... GWB.

Some folks hate these facts, however.

LOL, when you put it like that, it shows how piss poor Hillary really was if she lost to him.
Thanks for the perspective.

Showing that Trump won based on less than 0.07% of the vote shows that Clinton was "piss poor? "

Let me go out on a limb here ... if Clinton had won by 50 million in the popular vote and swept the Electoral College completely ... you would still describe her as "piss poor" ... amirite?

originally posted by: BeneGesseritWitch
a reply to: mOjOm

Si segnor.

Are you having trouble figuring about where you're at or something???

originally posted by: BestinShow
Trumps probably saying to himself, Thanks a lot asshole, I could have used this info weeks ago..!

My God is Your avatar a Chupacabra?

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1


The majority of states voted for Trump so Your number is worthless.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: SBMcG

Since we're just throwing out the votes we don't like then I'll just throw all of Trump's votes away and say that Hillary had the biggest win in history. Sound fair?

You can't just act like California votes didn't count, that's absolutely ridiculous.

Trump won based on about 107K votes in three swing States ... MI, WI, and PA.

More people voted against Trump than voted for him by a 10% margin.

His win in the Electoral College was thinner than any recent President except for ... GWB.

Some folks hate these facts, however.

LOL, when you put it like that, it shows how piss poor Hillary really was if she lost to him.
Thanks for the perspective.

Showing that Trump won based on less than 0.07% of the vote shows that Clinton was "piss poor? "

Let me go out on a limb here ... if Clinton had won by 50 million in the popular vote and swept the Electoral College completely ... you would still describe her as "piss poor" ... amirite?

Trump is the president...amirite? Bwahahahaha!!

originally posted by: theantediluvian

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: allsee4eye

.

What is the it you are referring to?

From The Hill source:

.

It's treason when Trump's team does it, but I bet it's called diplomacy when Hilary's team does it

I believe he's referring to the outright and always blatant hypocrisy of Hillary's team. What's even funnier than Hillary's lifetime of hypocrisy is your own denial of it which perpetuates even more hypocrisy from you and Hillary supporters. You are dooming yourself and others to an epitaph level of hypocrisy. Now that you know this, how does it make you feel?

originally posted by: allsee4eye
Putin's spokesman Peskov confirms the Russian ambassador Kislyak had contact with Hillary Clinton's advisors in the 2016 election.

thehill.com...

www.telegraph.co.uk...

www.cnn.com...

10 days ago, Hillary Clinton's campaign manager Mook declined to confirm or deny whether the Clinton campaign had contact with Russia in the 2016 election.

www.longroom.com...

Fox News suggests Russia's goal was not to help either candidate but to cause chaos in the election.

Starts at the 2:10 mark.

The plot thickens.

Nobody believes a word Russia says though.
Right?

originally posted by: TinySickTears
so the hill is cool to use as a source now?
i mean just yesterday it was fake news

Are YOU calling it a bad source? Are YOU calling it fake news?