Donald John Trump is no longer president: what does it mean for you?

The radical left is beginning to attack each other more and more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...ed-steele-dossier-be-true-then-it-fell-apart/

Also that fucking traitor McStain is supposedly the path the Steele dossier took to reach the FBI accor to the IG report. People ought to be pissing on his grave daily for the things he did.

I'll repeat since some have their heads too far up their asses, this is not a Democrat vs Republican issue. This is people wanting to return the government back to form from the corruption of those entrenched politicians on both sides of the isle who use their offices for their own personal gain. In this case it just happens to be "Republican" led because the system is so F'd up that it's nearly impossible to win as an independent. The shorthanded for these people are "Rinos" and they too need to be removed. Hopefully Romney's next.
 
"Crazy Nancy" "Sleepy Joe" et al.

It's rather unbecoming for POTUS from a traditional perspective but I'll give him that it's pretty entertaining and it will likely pay off in the polls.

I thought CBC said that they had removed Trump from the movie in 2014? If so, the fact he would be running (or that he had a real chance) was likely unknown at that point.
 
kahos said:
"Crazy Nancy" "Sleepy Joe" et al.

It's rather unbecoming for POTUS from a traditional perspective but I'll give him that it's pretty entertaining and it will likely pay off in the polls.

I thought CBC said that they had removed Trump from the movie in 2014? If so, the fact he would be running (or that he had a real chance) was likely unknown at that point.
Click to expand...

What a freaking snowflake, TV networks do it all the time so they can fit in more commercials. He literally had 2 lines in the movie that contribute nothing so they axed it.
 
kahos said:
I thought CBC said that they had removed Trump from the movie in 2014? If so, the fact he would be running (or that he had a real chance) was likely unknown at that point.
Click to expand...
There are two likely explanations:
1. Justin Trudeau time traveled back to 2014 and ordered the CBC to remove Trump's cameo.
2. There are stupid people who go out of their way to get offended, even if it means ignoring facts.
 
Lol at people who think this is actually about a Trump scene being removed. It's really about pointing out to people that the CBC is a government controlled media, and getting them to question what else are they censoring even if this cut is 100% legit.
 
250Rocket said:
Lol at people who think this is actually about a Trump scene being removed. It's really about pointing out to people that the CBC is a government controlled media, and getting them to question what else are they censoring even if this cut is 100% legit.
Click to expand...

Me semble que c’est déjà assez connu que Radio-Canada, qui est financé par le gouvernement fédéral, est contrôlé par le gouvernement...
 
KerplunK said:
Me semble que c’est déjà assez connu que Radio-Canada, qui est financé par le gouvernement fédéral, est contrôlé par le gouvernement...
Click to expand...

Agree 100%, but it's not that they are a government run channel, it's the fact that people think they are 100% impartial and truthful when like everyone else they are biased in their own way and have their own agendas. It's not like there's a sinister plan at work, more like too strong a collective of people who are quite far left leaning and then it manifests itself without formal coordination.
 
Peut pas croire qui en a qui prenne Radio-Can comme une source crédible d'information de politique occidentale.
 
kahos said:
There's no such thing as a neutral media organization.

If you ever think you found one, you're wrong.
Click to expand...

I have no such delusions but go back a few pages in this thread, I believe you'll see my point about how people hold certain sources in too high of a light and give them a free pass.

I promote taking everything these days with an appropriate level of skepticism. Asking Cui Bono or who benefits is a good way insure the real motive is known.

Anyway, in other news, it looks like California is trying to steal the vote by not including Republicans as a choice. Developing story, let's see where this goes.
 
But but..! Obama is an eloquent speaker and bad orange man isn't! Impeach bad orange man!

Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk
 
250Rocket said:
Anyway, in other news, it looks like California is trying to steal the vote by not including Republicans as a choice. Developing story, let's see where this goes.
Click to expand...

You mean this?

California 2020 primary: Independent voters can participate in Democratic contest, but not Republican

California voters registered with "no party preference" can choose among the Democratic, Libertarian, and American Independent parties to vote for a 2020 primary candidate, its secretary of state announced on Monday.

The Republican, Green, and Peace and Freedom, however, have opted to keep their primaries solely for voters registered with their respective parties.
The DNC's rules encourage state parties to open their primaries to unaffiliated voters, hoping to attract as large of a base as possible. In California -- where no party preference represents one of the largest voting blocs in the state -- those unaffiliated voters who choose to vote in the Democratic primary will have it recorded in their voter file, which will be available for the party to target in the future.
The parties are following the same arrangement they did during the June 2016 presidential primaries.

California holds a "jungle primary" for its congressional and state elections, a system that voters approved in a ballot initiative in 2010. Only the top two primary vote-getters make it onto the general election ballot, regardless of party.
"As we enter the fifth election cycle under the 'Top Two Primary' system, California voters have become increasingly accustomed to voting for the candidates of their choice regardless of political party preference," Secretary of State Alex Padilla said in a statement released Monday. "The Presidential Primary, however, remains the exception. Voters registered as 'No Party Preference' have the option of requesting a ballot that includes presidential candidates of a political party that allows 'cross-over' voting."
"The California Democratic Party is the Party of inclusion. Unlike others, we will continue to make it easier -- not harder -- for Californians to ensure their voices are heard at the ballot box," California Democratic Party Chairman Rusty Hicks said in a statement provided to CNN Tuesday.

In a statement, Cynthia Bryant, executive director of the California Republican Party, said it's been the GOP's "long-standing position that Republicans should pick the Republican nominee."
Independent voters who wish to vote for a Democratic candidate will need to request a primary ballot from the party, or they will receive a primary election ballot without any presidential candidates listed. Voters can make the request in person when they head to the polls. The same goes for voters who wish to vote for a Libertarian candidate or an American Independent candidate.
Absentee, unaffiliated voters are first sent a postcard, allowing them to select a ballot they'd like to vote for and then return the postcard via mail.
The voters who don't respond to the postcard can expect to receive a ballot without presidential candidates. But these voters can still request a "crossover ballot" via phone, email, fax, or in-person at their polling center.
As of February, there are about 5.6 million Californians registered as "no party preference," according to the secretary of state's office.

According to a 2016 Los Angeles Times report, a large number of voters during the 2016 primary inadvertently registered with the American Independent Party, an ultraconservative party, thinking that they weren't registering with a party.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, vetoed a bill earlier this month that would have required any existing political party that includes the phrase "no party preference," "decline to state," or the word "independent" to change its party name. Newsom issued the veto, saying the measure would violate freedom of speech and association.
But he signed a bill also this month that allows same-day voter registration at all polling sites in the state.
Last month, party leaders in several states, including South Carolina, Nevada, Kansas, Arizona and Alaska, canceled their Republican presidential primaries for the 2020 election, in a show of support for Trump.
It is not unprecedented for state Republicans or Democrats to decide not to hold a presidential primary when an incumbent is running essentially uncontested.
Click to expand...
https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/22/politics/california-2020-primary-independent-voters/index.html
 
Damn lol this is kinda embarrassing...

To have all the [tin foil hats/reddit conspiracy evangelists/Alex Jones fanboys] get all excited about something they don’t understand is one thing, but to have actual American voters not understanding their own voting system, not doing any due diligence on their own to at least try to understand what’s going on and choosing instead to flash their ignorance on reddit by elaborating the first theory they were able to come up with, which is that the corrupted states are starting to publicly send sabotaged voting cards to millions of citizens hoping not to get caught, is quite hilarious.

source.gif


Gotta love it though, the entertainment is real on both sides!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top