Reply With Quote
Personally, her blatant lying strikes me as much more repulsive than the lack of any sort of charisma.
Actually . . . yes. You were the one in fact who opened my eyes to the (perhaps unintended) consequences of the electoral college, for instance.You mean the cons ution?
Personally, her blatant lying strikes me as much more repulsive than the lack of any sort of charisma.
Yeah, there's no way the voting system would support three parties. Do people really want what's essentially a half-senate to decide the presidency each election? Because that's what we'd be facing.You mean the cons ution?
It was fully intended. Remember, the original design of the Cons ution was for a party-less system. It's straight-ridiculous how much faith the founders put in Congress.
Jesus, Lakerfan is so ing deluded.
You actually think Trump is going to debate her 3 times? And win? She will castrate him after the first debate and he'll refuse the next two. Book it.
Republicans would love that with more red states than blue in this nation.
Trump is in her head she really went after him
We shall see...
You actually think Trump is going to debate her 3 times? And win? She will castrate him after the first debate and he'll refuse the next two. Book it.
"don't use Twitter" yet posts tweets
Depends on what the third party looks like. If I had to guess now, it would be democrats, libertarians and some party that's like an extremely conservative populism. That wouldn't bode well for current republicans.
You won't be seeing when I'm done with you, Lakerfan
Why was it ridiculous though? It keeps entrenched power strong.
I know the whole goal was for them to toe the republic/oligarchy line by having only elites get to decide which super-elites got to decide how the country should function. It's just ridiculous that they were essentially putting all of their eggs in the basket of a re ed version of Parliament. Like the emphasis on state representation is so idiotic.
Maybe 5-10 posts out of 18,000. Yeah, don't use Twitter.
Which explains why all of your "information" comes from dailycaller, drudge, redstate, newsmax, etc
Clinton's fatal flaw is her checkered legal past. Ethical questions about her email practices, Benghazi, Wall Street dealings, falling approval rates. Trust me, Trump will hammer her for it. I can't see Clinton hitting Donald with anything new while Clinton is due for some more serious problems heading into the election (More wikileaks coming up)You won't be seeing when I'm done with you, Lakerfan
And if you're wrong?
I will bet you $1000 Trump loses.
I will ELE bet you Trump loses.
Name your price, got.
Stop smoking crack Splits, we're talking about their debates, not the general election.
And if you're wrong?
I will bet you $1000 Trump loses.
I will ELE bet you Trump loses.
Name your price, got.
These two statements are mutually exclusive.
After one, maybe two such elections, the mass outrage created by the losers (and the few % of sympathetic independents on the winning side) would hopefully cause enough momentum for a cons utional amendment.
trump is a joke
If it was intended then they would have mentioned them. Nevermind that they guaranteed the right to assemble and then immediately set up factions behind Jefferson and Hamilton falling in line with the federalist and antifederalist movements that were well established prior to drafting.
Hillary ain't much better
So the Democratic convention ended up referencing Reagan's optimism and defending John McCain's military legacy. Meanwhile the GOP convention's message was: America is ty, and the only person who can fix it is an uninformed, draft-dodging TV star with the vocabulary and impulse control of a ten year old.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions