THE END IS NEAR: Jan. 20, 2017

Yes, that's right folks. It's taken us 8 years, but I'm seeing light at the end of the tunnel.  I'm looking ahead, and.... yes!  The end of self-destructive Leftist tyranny is finally upon us!

The end of a stagnant decade is near its end. No more Obama, ObamaCare, and perhaps the end to the slowest era of economic growth in all of American history.

Happy 2017, everyone!  Goodbye to Obama, Liberals, and everything that eats at, and destroys, man's will and moral fiber.

Republicans fought against Trump... and lost.
Democrats fought against Trump... and now Hillary is on depression medication.

The failed Liberal ideology was a fad, like any other.  Like bell-bottom jeans and ankle-warmers, their ideology is tacky, out-dated, ugly, and irrelevant to our time.  It's time to bury useless relics, like Liberals and lava-lamps, and leave our ugly past behind.

Go Independent. Or go back home.

Well it will be 4 years of where at least someone of this bat shit crazy being elected to power. Will ensure no other will be elected for decades to come. Whilst many US citizens will have to suffer this nightmare which will sadly further divide the nation. There is as I stated a silver lining. One which will ensure people never vote for such a conman again. As that is what Trump fundamentally is, a conman.

Democrats fought against each other and the emails were instrumental in further dividing the Democrat vote. The timing was crucial, but many Sanders supporters never voted. I really am not sure why you are jumping high and over the moon at the prospect of an imbecile. Whilst Obama will go down as the worst foreign policy wise, he was one of the best domestically and his record speaks for itself

Liberalism has brought you all the rights and freedom of speech and expression that you have. So how can it be a failed ideology? Just because there is illiberal and regressive's, do not mean they represent liberalism. It sounds to me that you are against Liberal values, so what authoritarian value do we place you on?
The left or right?

Lord Independent Thoughts wrote:Yes, that's right folks. It's taken us 8 years, but I'm seeing light at the end of the tunnel.  I'm looking ahead, and.... yes!  The end of self-destructive Leftist tyranny is finally upon us!

The end of a stagnant decade is near its end....

You really are a lying and delusional little turd,  Ivanka...

You couldn't lie straight in bed...


Obama made affordable medical cover available to an extra 20 million Americans..
Unemployment down by a third over the last two terms..
Best economic growth since the 1990s..
Obama's team captured and executed bin Laden..
Obama's mob rescued the USA from the Repub-created GFC..
The sharemarket and the US $ are up, compared to 8 years ago..


And once again, you have proved that you have no idea what a "Liberal" even is.
You are aware that Obama wasn't left-wing, aren't you ?  

And that the American guvm'nt was still under GOP domination in Congress ?

Nor do you understand the true meaning of "independent".

Oh,  and Obama already is being rated among the top 5 US presidents..


A Repub' administration will create more unemployment, more overall taxation, less healthcare, poorer education outcomes, less affordable housing --  and lead the USA head-on into it's next recession..
You really are one clueless numbnutz, when it comes to both economics and politics,  I/T.    

You are an idiot IT. I'm notice immediately that you come out openly in favour of Trump only when it is clear he will in fact be President.

At the bare minimum, Obama ensured the GOP couldn't permanently destroy the USA for ordinary Americans. And ensured millions had the healthcare they need.

If you think that egotistical orange pilloock will be good for Americans you are delusional. As much as Brexit voters in the UK.

I'd refrain on smugness if I were you, too soon.

Xlnt posts, wolf and les.  It will certainly be interesting.  Pretender President (elect) Trump rides in with the support of a minority of Americans, and some sleezy help from the Russians.  

Of the majority of Americans that oppose him, fully half of them think he didn't win at all--apparently, he among them.  "The fix is in," he openly admitted before November 9th, "the election will be rigged."  It's fascinating, because most of that majority didn't believe him then.  But now that his predictions have come true, the cloud clears and they see what he meant.  The Russians hacked voting machines in three states, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.  Doh!!

The majority that opposed Trump is divided.  Half think we should go along with the ruse for the sake of political continuity.  The other half refuse to accept the legitimacy of the man, and take the position that for the next four years America will have no president.

Going along implies two things: 1) legitimacy is existential and thus it means what we say it means;  and 2) it will happen again.  America runs on a mechanism--the mechanism that the vote determines political authority.  If we turn that mechanism into a fiction, it's not a fix-all, it's an admission that actual legitimacy is unnecessary.

Gibbon would have been proud.  He would have written The Decline and Fall of the American Empire.  That political legitimacy is groundless in America means that anyone clever enough can become Emperor.  Not president--for that would be a legitimately elected position--but emperor.  As Gibbon pointed out in The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, this is how Rome went from democracy to empire.  We already have the Emperor Nero, even before the empire.  Ironic that Rome began with the mighty general, but America begins with the plebeian clown.

Congressman Lewis is quite right in refusing to give legitimacy to the pussy-grabber.  Not because he grabs pussies, nor because he takes weird  golden showers...but because it means the destruction of American democracy.  Two wrongs don't make a right.  The Russians created one lie, and now we hope to fix it with another lie?  I don't think so.  We're not smoothing the transition by appeasement...we are overlaying one mendacious act with another.  We're destroying the entire system to make pseudo-sense of one incident.

Thorin wrote:...[Obama] was one of the best domestically and his record speaks for itself.

Errrr... no. I'll go into more detail on this, below.

Thorin wrote:Liberalism has brought you all the rights and freedom of speech and expression that you have.

That's not what history has taught us. Below is a repost from another thread, but I thought it would be very relevant and informative in this case, as well. Behold all the "rights" and "freedoms" your beloved Democrats have tried to bestow upon blacks and minorities:

Lord Independent Thoughts wrote:- In 1857, a Democratically controlled Supreme Court delivered the Dred Scott decision, declaring that blacks were not persons or citizens but instead were property and therefore had no rights.

- The 13th Amendment to abolish slavery was voted for by 100% of the Republicans in congress and by 23% of the Democrats in congress.

- Not one Democrat either in the House or the Senate voted for the 14th amendment declaring that former slaves were full citizens of the state in which they lived and were therefore entitled to all the rights and privileges of any other citizen in that state.

- Not a single one of the 56 Democrats in Congress voted for the 15th amendment that granted explicit voting rights to black Americans.

- In 1866 Democrats formed the Ku Klux Klan to pave the way for Democrats to regain control in the elections.

- In the 19th century, Democrats prevented Black Americans from going to public school.

- In the 20th and 21st century Democrats prevented Black Americans trapped in failing schools from choosing a better school. In fact Democrats voted against the bill by 99%.

- Jim Crow laws, poll taxes, grandfather clauses, Literacy tests, white only primaries, and physical violence all came from the Democratic Party.

- Between 1882 and 1964, 4,743 individuals were lynched. 3,446 blacks and 1,297 whites. Republicans often led the efforts to pass federal anti-lynching laws and Democrats successfully blocked those bills.

- Though both the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 were signed into law under Democrat President, Lyndon Johnson, it was the Republicans in Congress who made it possible in both cases – not to overlook the fact that the heart of both bills came from the work of Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower.

- In the 108th Congress, when Republicans proposed a permanent extension of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, it was opposed by the Congressional Black Caucus (composed only of Democrats).

- In 1789, Congress passed the Northwest Ordinance that prohibited slavery in a federal territory. In 1820, the Democratic Congress passed the Missouri Compromise and reversed that earlier policy, permitting slavery in almost half of the federal territories.

- In 1850, Democrats in Congress passed the “Fugitive Slave Law”. That law required Northerners to return escaped slaves back into slavery or else pay huge fines.

And, let's not forget about what Dr. Martin Luther King fought hard for:
More Republicans voted in favor of the Civil Rights Act than Democrats

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t18919-bipartisan-anger-grows-over-russia-s-subversion-of-american-self-determination

Eilzel wrote:I'm notice immediately that you come out openly in favour of Trump only when it is clear he will in fact be President.

You should work on honing your observational skills. You are clearly wrong.
Ever hear the story of how I went from being "Independent Thoughts" to "LORD Independent Thoughts"? Ben and I made a bet on who would win this Presidential election... back on April 29, 2016.

NewsFix wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2016 5:44 pm

Ben: I will bet you $1,000 that Clinton will win, right here and now.

IndependentThoughts: As the saying goes, “A fool and his money are soon parted.”
In the inevitable event that Hillary inevitably loses, how are you going to pay up? You gonna email the money to me?
Nah. Here’s something better. If Trump wins, you have to address me as “My Lord”. If Hillary wins (LOL!!!! As if!!! LOL!!!!), then you still get to call me “My Lord”.
For example, when I ask, "Isn't Trump a much better president than Obama?", you would respond, "Yes, My Lord." If you could do it with a proper English accent, that would be spectacular.
Deal?

Face it, Ben. Her campaign has no excitement. Trump is the Obama of this election season. All the buzz, excitement, and motivated voters are behind him. Hillary has far too much political baggage and her trust scores are abysmal – nobody trusts her! It’s going to be a lot easier for a loudmouth jerk to win over the public than someone with a huge trust deficit.

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t15729p50-um-charles-koch-backs-hillary
http://www.newsfixboard.com/t18535-the-greatest-has-returned-and-he-has-a-debt-to-collect

Lord Independent Thoughts wrote:

Thorin wrote:...[Obama] was one of the best domestically and his record speaks for itself.

Errrr... no.  I'll go into more detail on this, below.

Thorin wrote:Liberalism has brought you all the rights and freedom of speech and expression that you have.

That's not what history has taught us.  Below is a repost from another thread, but I thought it would be very relevant and informative in this case, as well.  Behold all the "rights" and "freedoms" your beloved Democrats have tried to bestow upon blacks and minorities:


http://www.newsfixboard.com/t18919-bipartisan-anger-grows-over-russia-s-subversion-of-american-self-determination

So your argument is against where Democrats have blocked progression, where they were more right wing and not Liberal.
That is misdirection and nothing in regards to Liberal ideology

Thank you for proving my point, that it took Liberal minded people to bring fourth change

Lets place things into perspective here
The Democrats are center right and the Republicans Right wing, though you have Senators with views that cross over to the left

So your argument is moot. I have often showed that right wing people have brought about Liberal changes
So going off past votes where people voted against is moot, as the laws that have brought change are in fact Liberal laws. Your weak argument is based on peoples views, not actual Liberal ideology

So are you saying women's rights is not a liberal ideology concept?

Take your time

Thorin wrote:

Lord Independent Thoughts wrote:
Errrr... no.  I'll go into more detail on this, below.



That's not what history has taught us.  Below is a repost from another thread, but I thought it would be very relevant and informative in this case, as well.  Behold all the "rights" and "freedoms" your beloved Democrats have tried to bestow upon blacks and minorities:


http://www.newsfixboard.com/t18919-bipartisan-anger-grows-over-russia-s-subversion-of-american-self-determination

So your argument is against where Democrats have blocked progression, where they were more right wing and not Liberal.
That is misdirection and nothing in regards to Liberal ideology

Thank you for proving my point, that it took Liberal minded people to bring fourth change

Lets place things into perspective here
The Democrats are center right and the Republicans Right wing, though you have Senators with views that cross over to the left

So your argument is moot. I have often showed that right wing people have brought about Liberal changes
So going off past votes where people voted against is moot, as the laws that have brought change are in fact Liberal laws. Your weak argument is based on peoples views, not actual Liberal ideology

So are you saying women's rights is not a liberal ideology concept?

Take your time

I was just going to say...

Comparing the Democratic Party of 1857 to today is like comparing the French Republic to the Napoleonic Empire Français. Doesn't compute...

Original Quill wrote:

Thorin wrote:


So your argument is against where Democrats have blocked progression, where they were more right wing and not Liberal.
That is misdirection and nothing in regards to Liberal ideology

Thank you for proving my point, that it took Liberal minded people to bring fourth change

Lets place things into perspective here
The Democrats are center right and the Republicans Right wing, though you have Senators with views that cross over to the left

So your argument is moot. I have often showed that right wing people have brought about Liberal changes
So going off past votes where people voted against is moot, as the laws that have brought change are in fact Liberal laws. Your weak argument is based on peoples views, not actual Liberal ideology

So are you saying women's rights is not a liberal ideology concept?

Take your time

I was just going to say...

Comparing the Democratic Party of 1857 to today is like comparing the French Republic to the Napoleonic Empire Français.  Doesn't compute...

Agreed, as views have been forever changing over time and even right wing people have adopted liberal values. Making them more center right, but on other aspects they are right wing

So back to the false claim on Liberalism being a failed ideology, then how on earth are we living in Liberal societies? Hence his claim was false.

Lord Independent Thoughts wrote:

Eilzel wrote:I'm notice immediately that you come out openly in favour of Trump only when it is clear he will in fact be President.

You should work on honing your observational skills.  You are clearly wrong.
Ever hear the story of how I went from being "Independent Thoughts" to "LORD Independent Thoughts"?  Ben and I made a bet on who would win this Presidential election... back on April 29, 2016.

NewsFix wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2016 5:44 pm

Ben:  I will bet you $1,000 that Clinton will win, right here and now.

IndependentThoughts: As the saying goes, “A fool and his money are soon parted.”
In the inevitable event that Hillary inevitably loses, how are you going to pay up?  You gonna email the money to me?
Nah.  Here’s something better.  If Trump wins, you have to address me as “My Lord”.  If Hillary wins (LOL!!!!  As if!!!  LOL!!!!), then you still get to call me “My Lord”.  
For example, when I ask, "Isn't Trump a much better president than Obama?", you would respond, "Yes, My Lord." If you could do it with a proper English accent, that would be spectacular.
Deal?

Face it, Ben.  Her campaign has no excitement.  Trump is the Obama of this election season.  All the buzz, excitement, and motivated voters are behind him.  Hillary has far too much political baggage and her trust scores are abysmal – nobody trusts her!  It’s going to be a lot easier for a loudmouth jerk to win over the public than someone with a huge trust deficit.

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t15729p50-um-charles-koch-backs-hillary
http://www.newsfixboard.com/t18535-the-greatest-has-returned-and-he-has-a-debt-to-collect

I said openly in favour of, not who you expected to win.

"Independent Thoughts" is a right-wing Republican shill from way back. But I do think the thread title is very appropriate.

Lord Independent Thoughts wrote:

Eilzel wrote:I'm notice immediately that you come out openly in favour of Trump only when it is clear he will in fact be President.

You should work on honing your observational skills.  You are clearly wrong.
Ever hear the story of how I went from being "Independent Thoughts" to "LORD Independent Thoughts"?  Ben and I made a bet on who would win this Presidential election... back on April 29, 2016.

NewsFix wrote:
Fri Apr 29, 2016 5:44 pm

Ben:  I will bet you $1,000 that Clinton will win, right here and now.

IndependentThoughts: As the saying goes, “A fool and his money are soon parted.”
In the inevitable event that Hillary inevitably loses, how are you going to pay up?  You gonna email the money to me?
Nah.  Here’s something better.  If Trump wins, you have to address me as “My Lord”.  If Hillary wins (LOL!!!!  As if!!!  LOL!!!!), then you still get to call me “My Lord”.  
For example, when I ask, "Isn't Trump a much better president than Obama?", you would respond, "Yes, My Lord." If you could do it with a proper English accent, that would be spectacular.
Deal?

Face it, Ben.  Her campaign has no excitement.  Trump is the Obama of this election season.  All the buzz, excitement, and motivated voters are behind him.  Hillary has far too much political baggage and her trust scores are abysmal – nobody trusts her!  It’s going to be a lot easier for a loudmouth jerk to win over the public than someone with a huge trust deficit.

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t15729p50-um-charles-koch-backs-hillary
http://www.newsfixboard.com/t18535-the-greatest-has-returned-and-he-has-a-debt-to-collect

Fess up now,  Ivanka...

1.  You haven't finished school yet, have you..
2.  You probably have never worked a day in your life..
3.  You really aren't even old enough to vote either, are you..
4.  Likely still covered by parents' health cover.

You really are a pathetic little doofus,  I/T..
Are you sure you're even an American  ?          

Eilzel wrote:I said openly in favour of, not who you expected to win.

Oh, in that case, you REALLY need your observational skills sharpened.
Has anyone, on this site, ever confused me for a Hillary supporter?  Anyone?
[insert sounds of chirping crickets, here]

Eilzel, just out of curiosity... are you just reading my posts for the first time?  I only ask because I didn't realize there was any ambiguity, amongst the community, as to who I was in favor of.

Ben wrote:"Independent Thoughts" is a right-wing Republican shill from way back.

For the first time in history, the crazy left is dazed and confused as to who their political foe is.  For the longest, it's been doctrine that Republicans and Conservatives were the long-time archenemies.  Then along comes a NY Democrat waving a Republican banner, who not only took on Hillary and denied her the presidency, but simultaneously took on the Republican establishment he represented, and that refused to support him.

I’m a Republican shill?  I find it ironic that you are very politically motivated, and an administrator of a news site… and yet you appear to be oblivious of what happened this past year in the election.  Just to refresh your memory, let’s recap:

- Trump announced his presidency. Immediately, the Republicans began to attack him.
- Trump started doing really well in the debates and polls.  The press gave him more air time than all other Republican Primary candidates, combined.  Republicans felt that this was unfairly giving an advantage to Trump, who they did NOT want to win the primary and become the face of their party.
- Republicans ganged up on Trump to the point that the Democrats just sat back and watched the show.  They didn’t have to get in the mud; hell, there wasn’t any room left in the mud!

See where I’m going, here?

How are you going to call a Trump supporter a Republican or a Conservative, when they were the ones attempting to sabotage his chances of being elected?  Anyone remember the Republican “Never Trump”-ers?  Or the Republican Senators and Representatives that disavowed and repudiated Trump, and claimed they would never put their support behind him?  Yes... I think we all remember that.

Your need to direct your anger has you aiming wildly, my friend.  You’re not sure who to be angry at so, out of sheer Liberal muscle memory, you attack Republicans.  Because that’s the party that won, right?  So, obviously, all the people that voted for Trump were racist Republicans… right?

The Washington Post wrote:Kenosha, south of Milwaukee and north of the Chicago suburbs where Hillary Clinton was raised, was telling of the threat that sneaked up on Democrats.

And it had voted for Democrats. It voted for Barack Obama, twice. It voted against George W. Bush, twice, and for Bill Clinton, twice. It helped Michael Dukakis carry the state in 1988 and, four years earlier, gave Walter Mondale a five-percentage-point victory over Ronald Reagan. No Democrat had lost since 1972.

Hillary Clinton lost it; in retrospect, the trend was obvious. In her 2008 loss to Barack Obama, Clinton lost Kenosha County by just three points, as she lost by 18 points statewide. In the 2016 Democratic primaries, Clinton lost the county to Sen. Bernie Sanders by 15 points — despite a closer result across the state. She carried heavily black Milwaukee County, and Sanders carried everything else.

“White working-class people are deserting the Democratic Party in droves,” Sanders said in an interview Thursday.
…
In 2012, 21 percent of Wisconsin voters told exit pollsters that they or a family member belonged to a union. They broke for Barack Obama by 33 percentage points.

This year, just as many voters said they were in union households — and Clinton won them by just 10 points. The numbers and the swoon were similar in Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-voters-who-heavily-supported-obama-switched-over-to-trump/2016/11/10/65019658-a77a-11e6-ba59-a7d93165c6d4_story.html?utm_term=.60ce3c016ce1

You're angry at the working class, the Independents, the disaffected Democrats, and those of us that don't really care about the politics of getting things done.  The Democrats are broken and corrupt.  We've seen that in the emails that were leaked.  The Republicans are broken and steadfast in their outdated ways.  It's time to create a new and more centrist party.

So because of leaks on emails by one candidate, that makes Independent claim the democrats are corrupt and claim Trump in comparison is a saint. Who is fundamentally prejudice, racist, sexist and the biggest conman going who won with one of the lowest turnouts and victories ever. Nothing to jump home about, especially when many democrats mainly Sanders supporters did not vote for Clinton. The Democrat vote had been split. So if they had Sanders and not Clinton, its fair to say Trump would have easily lost.

Your argument is yet again misdirection. Labour have a new leader in Corbyn, who has been attacked from his own quarters many times, but with Trump, they never concentrated on his countless lies. They concentrated on his bigotry, when they should have concentrated on exposing his countless lies. The man is a self confessed sex pest and know doubt will be the first President convicted of sexual assault.

The youth of the country is Democrats, and that is the future, but if you want to champion a conman, who is further dividing the country with his divisive views. Then be my guest. Within 4 years when many of Trump supporters, will be hating him and after a nightmare four years. Like I said, nobody will again fall for such bullshit that he promoted.

Thorin wrote:So because of leaks on emails by one candidate, that makes Independent claim the democrats are corrupt and claim Trump in comparison is a saint.

Hardly.  Hillary started out the gate with an enormous trust deficit and low favorability ratings.  Everyone already knew she was a power-hungry corrupt politician that would say and do anything to get elected.



The emails only confirmed what we already knew about Hillary and her character.  More interestingly, they served to pull the curtain back a bit further to expose just how deep that corruption went.  The DNC was corroborating with Hillary in an orchestrated effort to prevent Sanders from winning the primary.  And the DNC actively worked to cover up Hillary's email server fallout.

Is this the kind of party you want to proudly promote?  One that defies their constituents' democratic election process in declaring a primary winner?  The DNC clearly intervened in the primary election and disregarded the people.  The DNC's Super Delegate system is their fail-proof way to veto the will of the people and promote a candidate that they had already pre-selected to run.

Had they let the people choose, Sanders would have won the primary and would likely have moved on to become the 45th POTUS.  But... that was not to be.  It was rigged from the jump.  
I'll bet most of you don't know this little factoid about Sanders:  He's not a Democrat.  He's an Independent.

Wikipedia wrote:Bernard "Bernie" Sanders (born September 8, 1941) is an American politician who has been the junior United States Senator from Vermont since 2007. Sanders is the longest serving independent in U.S. congressional history.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders

That's right.  The DNC wasn't about to let an outsider come in and take their party's nomination.  He had to go.

You throw the word "conman" around quite a bit.  Are you sure that you're not the one getting conned?  If someone told me that my vote mattered, and it was later found out that everything was already predetermined before the first ballot was cast, I'd think I was being conned. Wouldn't you?

1) I am not a Hilary supporter and think she would have been an appalling President, but is the lesser of two evils. You then claim she is power hungry, ignoring that Trump is egotistical narcissist power mad hunger. So how do you favour one whilst chastising the other. That is illogical and is hypocritical when I chastise both of them.

2) The emails damaged more the Democrat vote as I already said between Sanders and Hilary. Again you are blatantly ignoring it was a low turn out and and that many Sanders supporters did not vote for her. Which means the Democrat vote was split. We can all post videos as well.




3) So its no good distracting to Clinton. This about why you are supporting someone who has been openly racist towards a Judge of Mexican ethnicity, prejudiced against Mexicans, African Americans, Muslims. Sexist against women. Has lied so many times its now becoming an embarrassment and to the view he conned countless people to vote for him. He has back tracked on so many of his pledges it is now a resounding joke and like I say in the end it will be Trump supporters hating him most

4) He has brought onto his team a load of people classified as complete quacks. Those in denial of climate change, those who are are anti vaxxers, religious idiots to name just a view. So I am more interested why you are drawn to people who are more Totalitarian in their thinking and where already Trump wants to censer media's he does not like. Maybe you want to be led by an iron fist, which seems to be more a reality everyday, when your new President is chums with a dictator like Putin? I fail to see how on any reasonable level you can even be optimistic about the future under such a leader?

He is a conman, are you claiming his University he settled on out of court, was not a con?
Come on, you have more intelligence than that surely?

Here you go

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/11/05/toronto_star_compiles_list_of_almost_500_trump_lies_during_campaign.html

As you are so interested in videos Independent, which really your name should change now don;t you think to Trumpton?




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WORo0cjd0BE





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKLakp_rpbY

Bernie Sanders lost the popular vote in the Democratic primaries (popular votes that actually count for something) by a large margin, 55 percent to 43 percent. (By contrast, Clinton only defeated Trump by a 48 percent to 46 percent margin.)

I and most people knew that Sanders isn't a Democrat, but he's not an independent in the sense of being a moderate -- he's actually a bit to the left of most Democrats, along with being a self-described democratic socialist.

As far as the e-mails about Sanders go, it was "inside baseball" campaigning, no different than what goes on in most political campaigns. In fact, if you want to see an actually unusual campaign that we should be asking questions about, see the Trump campaign, which is under increasing suspicion of having coordinated with the Russian government: http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-russia-campaign-coordination-233439

Finally, who really gives a fuck who the people were who threw the Hail Mary pass that got Trump into the White House? They call themselves Republicans, and I will call them that as well. It was the Republican primary process that started this, after all.

@Thorin
I understand that you're in disagreement with the voters of this nation and their decision that they didn't want another 4 years of failed Liberal policies.  I agree that our perspectives on this are different.  

I agree that Trump isn't without his flaws.  What person isn't?  Neither is he my ideal candidate.  In that saime vein, what a person says doesn't influence my opinion as much as what a person does.  Actions speak louder than words and, in using that as the metric by which to measure, Hillary has quite a dossier on what she has done... and hasn't done. 30 years in the political arena, and nothing to show for it.

Regardless, the elections are over and so are the campaigns.
This country can start heading in a more prosperous and productive direction, now.
One day, decades from now, we'll tell our grandchildren stories about when Liberals were around, and how entitled and deserving they felt for what others worked hard for.  To their dismay, we'll laugh as we tell stories about how mentally and emotionally fragile they were, explain to them what "Safe Spaces" were, and how many of the lefties lost their marbles when Trump won. Ahhhh... good times.

Lord Independent Thoughts wrote:I understand that you're in disagreement with the voters of this nation and their decision that they didn't want another 4 years of failed Liberal policies.  I agree that our perspectives on this are different.  

I agree that Trump isn't without his flaws.  What person isn't?  Neither is he my ideal candidate.  In that saime vein, what a person says doesn't influence my opinion as much as what a person does.  Actions speak louder than words and, in using that as the metric by which to measure, Hillary has quite a dossier on what she has done... and hasn't done. 30 years in the political arena, and nothing to show for it.

Regardless, the elections are over and so are the campaigns.
This country can start heading in a more prosperous and productive direction, now.
One day, decades from now, we'll tell our grandchildren stories about when Liberals were around, and how entitled and deserving they felt for what others worked hard for.  To their dismay, we'll laugh as we tell stories about how mentally and emotionally fragile they were, and how many of them lost their marbles when Trump won. Good times.

1) Again we are back to a charge of claim Liberal polices, where before you claim ideology. Even though you have grown up your life within a Liberal society. So what is these failed Liberal policies you speak of? For my part I am not American and thus at a disadvantage as I do not live there. Though have many relatives who do.

2) The point is Trump has engineered a very clever campaign, where he basically said he could go out and shoot someone and people would still vote for him and do you know why? He constantly uses misdirection all the time. The moment he is exposed on something he immediately uses misdirection and he has done so with such effect. It had him elected. That is just having a good propaganda machine, but that is besides the point. What aspects of their of him that can signal that he will be an effective President when he is in denial of climate change and has brought on board a team that worrying to say the least on their poor beliefs. As already explained.

3) The country has been prosperous after it had become increasingly indebt from the previous Presidency. There is no denying that Obama has brought down unemployment and provided more health to people than every before. i fail to see how that is not prosperity. He inherited a mess from Bush, of that there is no doubt. What I am more interested to understand is what exactly do you class as a failed liberal policy?