I would like to know what those of you who support trump will do when he loses the election?

[Millard]

There are some Brett Baher is a straight shooter. Lester Holt is a favorite as well. Bill O Reilly was great and still hosts a pretty fair broadcast. Least he isnt with Fox any more. Redeye Radios Eric Harley and Gary McNamara has been a long time favorite. All 5 of these examples are capable of setting aside preferences to have an honest broadcast. OReilly has always suprised me in his brutal honesty.

All of CNN is a joke and everyone in it. I want to like Brian Williams of msnbc but some thing is a lil off about his delivery. I dont trust him.

Oh i know you can get fair news from Hannity and Rush Watching Hannity always pisses me off. Really dislike that dude

To be fair i think everyone is aware shows like Hannity cater to the right and are not and never were intended to be news casts. Same with Rush and Tucker. Brett Baher by contrast is a journalist and a news caster and a damn good one.

The difference is CNN for example they parade around as news but are in actuality all just shows with zero journalism involved. Propoganda. Just like Hannity. But its understood Hannity exists for a sole purpose and should never be taken as news. Cooper, Cuomo, Zakaria, Lemon, Maddow and too many too list are in the same boat as Hannity just opposite spectrums. Equally as repulsive

You make a very important distinction that I'm not sure everyone appreciates. Most of the popular media personalities that you mention - both on the left and the right - are not newscasters. They are political pundits and commentators. They offer their opinions and commentary on current news events. As such, they are not restricted by journalistic standards and ethics. And of course that leads to bias. But that is the very things that makes them interesting and entertaining to the masses.

 

[gr8whitetrukker]

You make a very important distinction that I'm not sure everyone appreciates. Most of the popular media personalities that you mention - both on the left and the right - are not newscasters. They are political pundits and commentators. They offer their opinions and commentary on current news events. As such, they are not restricted by journalistic standards and ethics. And of course that leads to bias. But that is the very things that makes them interesting and entertaining to the masses.

But im not sure alot of ppl can discern the difference and responsibilities of each. They assume it is infact news. Yes...with a huge bias. Real news is different.

 

[flenser]

The illegality of spying on its own citizens can be said of the CIA too. Did that ever stop them? Are you saying that people in positions of power never do anything illegal?

Did you even read the article? Of course what you said about Dominion is true. That's half the focus of the article.

More to the point (to use your phrase) is that Lin Wood, Sidney Powell, POTUS and others tweeted about this article, so the question is why, and what importance might be inferred from them doing so. It strikes me as as a bit presumptive to just dismiss it as false. Much of what is said in it about corruption is most definitely true.

I'm wondering if the article confused the (retired) military intelligence individuals who were following the build up to the election with an official DOD operation. That group definitely exists, and claims to have been investigating since mid summer, and I believe at least one of them signed an affidavit included in Powell's civil suits.

 

[Uglyrichie]

I don't get it my wife hates trump, I just was telling her I read an article saying Joe surpassed 80 mill and is the most popular president in history. She got shitty with me saying Didn't want to fight about politics

 

[pigeonhed]

Your wife is your partner, your teammate. You have a bond that should go well beyond a political view. Your wife most likely does all sorts of awesome shit to make your life better. She cares and loves you, supports you and wishes prosperity and growth for you. Politics is folly. Focus on the things that matter.

Why fight about shit. Life has important real shit. Kids, community, local things that actually matter. Argue all day about politics online if you want, but always remember real connections with other humans is way more fulfilling and important to your own personal happiness.

I would much rather be surrounded by those I love than those that politically agree with me. All my daughters are WAY more liberal than I could ever even think of being, yet there are no people I would rather be around.

 

[Uglyrichie]

Wasn't trying to fight with her was just telling her about an article I just read. Only politics I care about are my states. And we both believe he needs to go. I just found her reaction odd as the person she voted for seems to be considered the most popular in history. Weather or not I believe it is another story but I have been married long enough to know what kind of shit pile I don't want to step in.

 

[gr8whitetrukker]

Wasn't trying to fight with her was just telling her about an article I just read. Only politics I care about are my states. And we both believe he needs to go. I just found her reaction odd as the person she voted for seems to be considered the most popular in history. Weather or not I believe it is another story but I have been married long enough to know what kind of shit pile I don't want to step in.

Hes just a generic candidate. All he had to do was not be Trump. Alot of votes "for" Biden were really just votes against Trump. That is the truth of the matter. Two of the most motivating emotions in the human mind are love and hate. Thats what motivated poll goers. Hate for trump. Now we just have to unravel how many votes he REALLY got and if Sydney can put her money where her gigantic dick hole is its probably not nearly as many as reported.

 

[BigDaddyV]

Capitalism is a system.

Who protects your property rights? Who pays taxes so they can protect your property rights. And not just property, but intellectual rights as well.

Capitalism is a monstrous system filled with hundreds of thousand of regulations and laws.

The Natural Order of Things is me grabbing a club to beat you over the head to take your property and any women I find sexually appealing. It's me dumping my toxic waste in the dark of the night to pollute your ground water as I drive off laughing.

We do have central planning in our current capitalistic system, perhaps your talking about a "pure fantasy" capitalism that doesn't exist in reality. Sort of like my preference for Anarchism that doesn't actually exist in reality either.

lol you’re one dark mfer

 

[Uncle Ted]

Hes just a generic candidate. All he had to do was not be Trump. Alot of votes "for" Biden were really just votes against Trump. That is the truth of the matter. Two of the most motivating emotions in the human mind are love and hate. Thats what motivated poll goers. Hate for trump. Now we just have to unravel how many votes he REALLY got and if Sydney can put her money where her gigantic dick hole is its probably not nearly as many as reported.

You're mentioning the hate people have for trump without digging deep into why they hate the man.

We are Americans, we are supposed to hate rich boy cock suckers?

When did Americans start lining up, getting on their hands and knees, waiting eagerly with sweaty anticipation for their turn to fluff rich boys?

That was one of the main purposes of this country was to escape the bullshit of Europe and now Americans seem to have full trust in the rich as if it was the highest pursuit of man to become a filthy rich smug cunt.

 

[Skard]

This is the man who could have stopped everything. Illegal voting, Antifa rioting, foreign voting interference, the Clinton crime family, Hunter Biden and the selling of America, name it. He could have stopped it. But he didn’t. Because he was AWOL. And that’s a fact.

 

[flenser]

This is the man who could have stopped everything. Illegal voting, Antifa rioting, foreign voting interference, the Clinton crime family, Hunter Biden and the selling of America, name it. He could have stopped it. But he didn’t. Because he was AWOL. And that’s a fact.

Straight from the DC swamp. Not one of Trump's better appointees.

 

[Test_Subject]

Hes just a generic candidate. All he had to do was not be Trump. Alot of votes "for" Biden were really just votes against Trump. That is the truth of the matter. Two of the most motivating emotions in the human mind are love and hate. Thats what motivated poll goers. Hate for trump. Now we just have to unravel how many votes he REALLY got and if Sydney can put her money where her gigantic dick hole is its probably not nearly as many as reported.

Biden is a terrible candidate, no doubt. His voting record is bad, he's creepy and corrupt and he hasn't accomplished anything remarkable in almost 50 years of politics aside from helping to spearhead the housing collapse and to help put more black people in jail than ever before. If he ran against anyone other than Trump, he'd have lost horribly.

Trump is just such a morally reprehensible conman that people would rather vote for Satan himself than give him their support. The writing was on the wall with that one: Trump has always been a piece of shit.

Luckily, Biden will be a one-term president once people see that he's nothing but a Wall Street crony and not their Democratic messiah after all.

 

[Skard]

Biden is a terrible candidate, no doubt. His voting record is bad, he's creepy and corrupt and he hasn't accomplished anything remarkable in almost 50 years of politics aside from helping to spearhead the housing collapse and to help put more black people in jail than ever before. If he ran against anyone other than Trump, he'd have lost horribly.

Trump is just such a morally reprehensible conman that people would rather vote for Satan himself than give him their support. The writing was on the wall with that one: Trump has always been a piece of shit.

Luckily, Biden will be a one-term president once people see that he's nothing but a Wall Street crony and not their Democratic messiah after all.

Right, so many voted for dumb fuck that massive fraud was necessary to overcome the overwhelming support for Trump. Give me a break.

 

[Test_Subject]

Right, so many voted for dumb fuck that massive fraud was necessary to overcome the overwhelming support for Trump. Give me a break.

Right. Hence all of the court cases that the GOP is winning and all of the states being overturned by the recounts.

 

[Sp2.0]

Right. Hence all of the court cases that the GOP is winning and all of the states being overturned by the recounts.

Whether it's successfully overturned or not anyone looking at it objectively would admit that there's plenty of circumstantial evidence that gives the whole thing a fishy smell.

 

[Test_Subject]

Whether it's successfully overturned or not anyone looking at it objectively would admit that there's plenty of circumstantial evidence that gives the whole thing a fishy smell.

I have no doubt that election interference has occurred to some degree in every election in recorded history, but without proof to substantiate the claims of rampant fraud, we have nothing to go off of. You can't just go around believing things because someone says so.

The fact of the matter is that there's clearly not enough evidence to prove large-scale fraud in court. If there were, the GOP would be winning cases. That either means that the evidence is weak because large-scale fraud didn't actually occur, or it means that the DNC orchestrated the deception so well that there's was very little evidence left to find. I find the second option hard to believe, but it's entirely possible.

 

[No Gods No Masters]

You can't just go around believing things because someone says so.

Actually that's the entire basis of this country. Some people make up some bullshit and most of these dumbasses that make up this fine country believe it.

Sure Biden cheated, we all cheat in life. We all lie. We do whatever it takes to travel the easy road because that's what we evolved to do.

A bear doesn't go after a full grown Moose, he goes after the calf. Life is about resource conservation, why waste resources when you can cheat?

 

[flenser]

I have no doubt that election interference has occurred to some degree in every election in recorded history, but without proof to substantiate the claims of rampant fraud, we have nothing to go off of. You can't just go around believing things because someone says so.

The fact of the matter is that there's clearly not enough evidence to prove large-scale fraud in court. If there were, the GOP would be winning cases. That either means that the evidence is weak because large-scale fraud didn't actually occur, or it means that the DNC orchestrated the deception so well that there's was very little evidence left to find. I find the second option hard to believe, but it's entirely possible.

You seem extremely reliant on the courts and judges, political appointees, for your opinions. It's as if you lack the mental faculties to form your own opinions, which I know is not true. Just because judges ignore the evidence doesn't mean you have to. As opposed to "every election in recorded history", you don't think this one stands out?

Numerical analysis alone has revealed multiple winner changing impossibilities as well as numerous statistical results too improbable to discount. Combined with the witnessed suspicious, illegal and unconstitutional behavior of officials in ONLY those areas needed to defeat Trump, and I am at a loss to explain it any other way. Media inspired TDS cannot explain the results, the timing, the clear intentional cover up without listing it as the cause of officials violating election laws.

I guess people will believe what they want. There's no need for reason when appeals to authority produce the wished for answer. The absurd idea that a group of political appointees will arrive at and prove the truth of things leaves little room for real discussion, so I'm done commenting on this.

 

[Test_Subject]

You seem extremely reliant on the courts and judges, political appointees, for your opinions. It's as if you lack the mental faculties to form your own opinions, which I know is not true. Just because judges ignore the evidence doesn't mean you have to. As opposed to "every election in recorded history", you don't think this one stands out?

Numerical analysis alone has revealed multiple winner changing impossibilities as well as numerous statistical results too improbable to discount. Combined with the witnessed suspicious, illegal and unconstitutional behavior of officials in ONLY those areas needed to defeat Trump, and I am at a loss to explain it any other way. Media inspired TDS cannot explain the results, the timing, the clear intentional cover up without listing it as the cause of officials violating election laws.

I guess people will believe what they want. There's no need for reason when appeals to authority produce the wished for answer. The absurd idea that a group of political appointees will arrive at and prove the truth of things leaves little room for real discussion, so I'm done commenting on this.

I'm not relying on the courts for my opinion at all. They're the designated arbiters of legal authority in the country and thus evidence has to be up to their standard. I haven't seen any evidence that I've found compelling. Someone seeing some vans that may or may not have had food or votes in them doesn't cut it.

If you truly believe that the courts are also complicit in a massive cross-party conspiracy to hand Biden the win, then I'd say that the US has an issue that's bigger than just voter fraud.

 

[flenser]

I'm not relying on the courts for my opinion at all. They're the designated arbiters of legal authority in the country and thus evidence has to be up to their standard. I haven't seen any evidence that I've found compelling. Someone seeing some vans that may or may not have had food or votes in them doesn't cut it.

If you truly believe that the courts are also complicit in a massive cross-party conspiracy to hand Biden the win, then I'd say that the US has an issue that's bigger than just voter fraud.

If the only evidence you've seen is about vans, you haven't been paying attention. That's your choice, but then your claim you are not relying on the courts for your opinion is not credible. That is, unless you are basing your opinion on something other than the evidence or the courts.