Dynadot
Spaceship Spaceship
Watch

Who is to Blame for the Troubled US Economy?

  • This poll is still running and the standings may change.
  • Both Parties

    268 
    votes
    44.7%
  • Neither Party

    57 
    votes
    9.5%
  • Democrats

    134 
    votes
    22.3%
  • Republicans

    141 
    votes
    23.5%
  • This poll is still running and the standings may change.

Here you can spout your USA political views.

Rules:
1. Keep it clean
2. No fighting
3. Respect the views of others.
4. US Political views, No Religious views
5. Have fun :)

:wave:
 
8
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
Not a lie. My mistake to post a tweet I didn't check. Here is the correct break down for the last several elections.

Donald Trump Won 2,600 Counties Compared To Clinton’s 500, Winning 83% Of The Geographic Nation
http://www.inquisitr.com/3748311/do...tons-500-winning-83-of-the-geographic-nation/

For you to call someone a liar, while basing your "facts" on editorials from vox and usatoday is hysterical.

You posted bs. Again, 57 counties didn't ring any bells to you? Your mistake is the sources you use and not checking.
 
0
•••
You posted bs. Again, 57 counties, didn't ring any bells to you? Your mistake is the sources you use and not checking.

Prove it wrong asshole.
 
0
•••
Prove it wrong a*hole.

Prove what wrong? Your last post just did. Not 57, it's not something up for debate. You actually thought she barely won over 1 county per state?

Again, your sources? Where's the list. I know you're using Truthfeed, an extreme right site, doesn't even have about About page. What else?
 
Last edited:
0
•••
Prove what wrong? Your last post just did. Not 57, it's not something up for debate. You actually thought she barely won over 1 county per state?

I made a mistake and corrected it. You called me a liar twice now.

Shut up or prove my correction is wrong loser.
 
0
•••
Obviously the correction is right, I had to point that out for you.

So besides Truthfeed and Tyler Durden, what other sources do you use?

And I am curious when you posted that, you actually thought that could be true? Basically 1 county a state. Did you pause at all when posting that? For that 57 to be true, Trump would have had to win over 98% of the counties, over 98%.

And I went back over my post, I said you posted a lie.

You posted this:

\

Is that not a lie? Or is that true? I'll take you at your word that you just didn't check.

And Gilsan still posting that stupid map, even after it's been gone over. Trump could have 501 votes, Hillary 500. So technically you can say red but a clearer picture would be the map below. All those "red counties" have plenty of Hillary/Dems in them.

15027606_1000933210030046_8184642100537379557_n.jpg
 
Last edited:
0
•••
Wow, the GOP led The Committee on Science, Space and Technology retweeting Breitbart - Global Temperatures Plunge. Icy Silence from Climate Alarmists

haha - https://twitter.com/HouseScience

Chaired by this guy:

"As of 2015, Smith has received more than $600,000 from the fossil fuel industry during his career in Congress.[45] In 2014, Smith got more money from fossil fuels than he did from any other industry.[46] Smith is publicly skeptical of global warming.[47][48][49] Under his leadership, the House Science committee has held hearings that feature the views of skeptics,[50] subpoenaed the records and communications of scientists who published papers that Smith disapproved of,[47] and attempted to cut NASA's earth sciences budget.[51] He has been criticized for conducting "witch hunts" against climate scientists.[46] In his capacity as Chair of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, Smith issued more subpoenas in his first three years than the committee had for its entire 54-year history.[46] In a June 2016 response letter to the Union of Concerned Scientists, Mr. Smith cited the work of the House Un-American Activities Committee in the 1950s as valid legal precedent for his investigation.[52][53]"


Maybe they'll tweet how there were no such thing as dinosaurs. I'm afraid to ask if we actually have people posting in this thread that think there were no such thing as dinosaurs.

Rick Joyner: "If You Look At The Disciples That Jesus Chose, They Were All Donald Trump"


 
Last edited:
0
•••
Obviously the correction is right, I had to point that out for you.

You're an ungenerous person is the nicest thing I can think of to say.

Goodbye.
 
0
•••
You're an ungenerous person is the nicest thing I can think of to say.

Goodbye.

You did post false information, that graphic was a lie. That's the truth.

I did say:

I'll take you at your word that you just didn't check.

I just hope you do in the future, as I said before, we don't need another Gilsan. He posts enough BS.

Bernie Sanders giving Trump that business

We need a president who can stand up to big corporations, not fold to their demands.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...480632352969&tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.1d31b2502822

Trump getting torn for that deal now.

Trump's Carrier speech 'absolutely chilling,' economic analyst says

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/01/trum...g-economic-analyst-says.html?__source=twitter

Businesses already working Trump over. Sad.
 
Last edited:
1
•••
0
•••
Last edited:
1
•••
Draining the Swamp ...

Let's drain the swamp and put in Mnuchin for Treasury Secretary - Wall St. uber-insider and the former co-owner of One West. You may remember them for predatory loans and aggressive foreclosures during the mortgage crisis - they were big on foreclosing reverse mortgages. They're the ones that foreclosed on a 90 yr old homeowner over a 27 cent payment error. Thousands of people lost their homes, while he lined his own pockets.

But if he gets this appointment, he'll be in a great position to regulate the very industry that made him rich. What could go wrong?
 
0
•••
2
•••
So we have David deflecting on Sarah Palin.
The only person here deflecting is you. I've tasked you with doing research into Obama's appointed VA secretary Eric Shinseki and the countless scandals that have occurred in the VA during his reign.

You failed to do so, and you fail to recognize my statement of anyone else other than him would be better is unarguably true.
 
Last edited:
1
•••
Hey Liberals, wanna feel good and dream again? Thousands of these T-shirts are on sale
333g3gb-photo-22-640x453.jpg
 
1
•••
1
•••
Democrats lost 2016 b/c Fox News was playing in bars in the Midwest. - President Obama.
Yep.

If the Dems really believe that, they should find a guy named Jack Daniels and run him 2020. It's heartening to see that the Dems are as bad at learning from losses as many Republicans are. True bi-partisan arrogance.
 
4
•••
1
•••
Interesting thread on Quora..
"Do Republicans Trust Canada"?
https://www.quora.com/Do-Republicans-trust-Canada
Kinda like asking, "is every Brian AKA briguy, super smart and super sexy"?

Vague question. Quora has been going the Yahoo answers road lately. It used to be that people thought carefully about whether they had something to add before answering there.

And since Quora is heavily Democratic, this question will be answered by Democrats who think they know Republican motives, and who answer using the most 2-dimensional and stereotyped caricatures.
 
1
•••
Snowflakes these days... exactly the man we need for Secretary of Defense; hopefully he's approved by Congress.
Trump picks man who thinks 'it's fun to shoot some people' for defence secretary
You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn’t wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain’t got no manhood left anyway. So it’s a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them. Actually it’s quite fun to fight them, you know. It’s a hell of a hoot. It’s fun to shoot some people. I’ll be right up there with you. I like brawling.
And 15 more amazing, but very politically incorrect, quotes from Mad Dog.
 
1
•••
Snowflakes these days... exactly the man we need for Secretary of Defense; hopefully he's approved by Congress.
Trump picks man who thinks 'it's fun to shoot some people' for defence secretary
You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn’t wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain’t got no manhood left anyway. So it’s a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them. Actually it’s quite fun to fight them, you know. It’s a hell of a hoot. It’s fun to shoot some people. I’ll be right up there with you. I like brawling.
And 15 more amazing, but very politically incorrect, quotes from Mad Dog.
Great pick...
 
0
•••
Obama presidency in one shot.

CytCr0OXcAAjv6c.jpg
 
0
•••
1
•••
1
•••
Petraeus: has to call his parole officer.
Manenfort: making cabinet recommendations while under criminal investigation by the FBI

You didn't want a perceived criminal in the White House - let's get some convicted ones instead! Brilliant!

While we're at it, let's start a war with China because the big orange crybaby snowflake, who's too busy preening about his election victory to sit through security briefings etc., wants to build some luxury hotels in Taiwan.

FWIW, China cares. China has nukes. We trade with them. Most of the low priced merchandise at Walmart comes from China. And who knows whats up with those CHIPs?

But what could go wrong?
 
1
•••
Currently, flag burning is not illegal in the United States. The Supreme Court of the United States in its decision from 1969 has ruled that the burning of the flag is protected by the First Amendment. However, the person who burnt the flag can be found guilty of a misdemeanor for starting a fire without a permit.

Interesting that the burning of the flag has been against the law until 1969. The first U.S. Supreme Court ruling on flag desecration was passed in 1907 in Halter vs. Nebraska case. Most early flag desecration statutes prohibited burning a flag or any other ways of disrespecting the flag. Later, in 1968, Congress responded to the burning of the American flag in the Central Park as the protest against the Vietnam War by passing the Federal Flag Desecration Law. This law prohibited any display of β€œcontempt” directed against the flag. Thus, burning of the American flag had been illegal until 1969 when the Supreme Court ruled the decision to award the First Amendment protection to the burning of the flag.

Furthermore, in a few court cases it has been declared that it is only illegal to burn the US flag if the flag would be stolen. In fact, burning the flag is one of approved ways to destroy a too worn or torn flag.

For the past 20 years, the Congress has made seven attempts to overrule the Supreme Court decision regarding the burning of the American flag by passing a constitutional amendment that had an exception to the First Amendment and allowed the government to ban flag desecration. The Amendment was first proposed in 1990 but failed to receive the required two-thirds majority votes of the House. After 1994, when the Republicans took over the Congress, the Amendment has consistently passed in the House but failed in the Senate.
http://thelawdictionary.org/article/is-flag-burning-illegal/
 
1
•••
  • The sidebar remains visible by scrolling at a speed relative to the page’s height.
Back