Dan Warnick

U.S. Presidential Elections Status - Electoral Votes

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Meanwhile, This is why I call him Xiden

 

 

You call the POTUS Xiden because you are a criminal spreading terrorism.

 

  • Haha 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Symmetry said:

You call the POTUS Xiden because you are a criminal spreading terrorism.

 

Which crime is that?

I guess the 1st Amendment means nothing to you now, but calling Trump a Putin stooge for 4 years is fine by you. 

Leftists: If it weren't for double standards; you'd have no standards.

 

Pathetic Enthalpy. 

  • Great Response! 1
  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Symmetry said:

Read the actual words written. 

"The vast majority of the US population does not support Trump."

 I even pointed out I did not mean registered voters in my post...

 

 

And the metrics you use to make such a outrageous statement? A extremely loose definition of the word Metrics will be allowed...Your personal opinion will count. Now that is running loosey-goosey...yugely!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

16 minutes ago, QuarterCenturyVet said:

Which crime is that?

I guess the 1st Amendment means nothing to you now, but calling Trump a Putin stooge for 4 years is fine by you. 

Leftists: If it weren't for double standards; you'd have no standards.

 

Pathetic Enthalpy. 

You can insult policy all you want.

You may not try to overthrow the government. 

Edited by Symmetry
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

And the metrics you use to make such a outrageous statement? A extremely loose definition of the word Metrics will be allowed...Your personal opinion will count. Now that is running loosey-goosey...yugely!

The Eejit is counting on the tens of millions of infants up to the teen ages, all smarter than him BTW and he's hoping against hope they don't support Trump. The infantile brains don't count for much, hence no one polls them, but the Eejit is expert in goo goo ga ga 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

 

All this were straight out of the trump cult playbook:

"put down"

"oppose by force the authority therefor"

"delay execution of law"

"possess any property."

 

 

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

The Eejit is counting on the tens of millions of infants up to the teen ages, all smarter than him BTW and he's hoping against hope they don't support Trump. The infantile brains don't count for much, hence no one polls them, but the Eejit is expert in goo goo ga ga 

Awesome, more backWard's logic.

The youth do not support trump and that is not changing.  The young are essentially always more liberal than the old.

Generally it is difficult to change a closed persons' mind therefore social change happens mostly because those without outdated ideas die off.

Heck "opposition to change" is right in the definition of conservatism. 

 

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Symmetry said:

Awesome, more backWard's logic.

The youth do not support trump and that is not changing.  The young are essentially always more liberal than the old.

Generally it is difficult to change a closed persons' mind therefore social change happens mostly because those without outdated ideas die off.

Heck "opposition to change" is right in the definition of conservatism. 

No "government" in a democracy is legitimate if I fails to abide by The consent of the governed. Lockdowns, illegal takings, mob rule by demoncrat operatives, the "consent" is sorely stretched. Coming for the guns will be the last mistake of the Demoncrats. Or not, they've been working hard to fake enough outrage they "might" get some support. There's a very good reason the first battles of the revolutionary war were at Lexington and Concord. That's where the guns and ammo were made, the British were attempting to disarm the PATRIOTS. Little Eejit can't comprehend the term.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ More criminal activity.

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

7 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

the first battles of the revolutionary war

You keep comparing a civil issue with the revolutionary war. 

You hate Americans, not the King.

 

Edited by Symmetry
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, QuarterCenturyVet said:

Which crime is that?

I guess the 1st Amendment means nothing to you now, but calling Trump a Putin stooge for 4 years is fine by you. 

Leftists: If it weren't for double standards; you'd have no standards.

 

Pathetic Enthalpy. 

Because Trump was at best a useful idiot to the Kremlin. He failed to push back against Putin's meddling, and if anything, encouraged it. 

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/03/russia-studied-how-get-americans-make-mistakes/618328/

He also let the country's cybersecurity infrastructure atrophy. It'll be a very looooong tail in the recent SolarWinds hack, one of the most technically sophisticated in history:

https://www.rpc.senate.gov/policy-papers/the-solarwinds-cyberattack

of which we are still going to find out more details, probably for a very long time:

https://apnews.com/article/solarwinds-hack-email-top-dhs-officials-8bcd4a4eb3be1f8f98244766bae70395

The atrophy:

Quote

 

In this regard, SolarWinds demonstrates a certain dissonance between President Trump and much of the rest of the government. Rather than fortify federal networks following the SolarWinds discovery, Trump instead vetoed the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) over seemingly unrelated criticisms of Section 230 and social media companies. Then, on January 1, Congress voted to override Trump’s veto, with approximately 150 Republican members breaking from the president. The 2021 NDAA, now law, includes provisions to establish a new White House cyber director position, grant additional authority to CISA, and require a review of the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification.

But dissonance is nothing new for Trump: his presidency has long been characterized by contradictions and conflict with cybersecurity professionals within his own administration. A recent example occurred on November 12, when CISA published a statement by election officials affirming that no evidence of fraud or compromise was found during the 2020 elections. Instead of viewing election security as an accomplishment, Trump retaliated to the statement by firing CISA Director Christopher Krebs. Even before then, Trump’s presidency saw the departures of three national security advisers and eight deputy national security advisers, not to mention CISA Assistant Director Jeanette Manfra and Homeland Security Advisor Tom Bossert. Under Trump, the White House has lacked coordination and clarity on its own policies—an issue exacerbated by the elimination of the White House cyber coordinator position. 

 

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

5 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

 

894.png

This is not cancel culture.  I would report child pornography or incels saying they a have a right to rape or beat women; pretty much the same community (ashamed children). 

Cancel culture is ward complaining to the moderators just because he gets whooped so often.

Edited by Symmetry
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, QuarterCenturyVet said:

Nothing said here is anything like Seditious Conspiracy, you mush-minded pussy. 

Read again, two, three times if necessary. 

Offer still stands old man!  Meow.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

No "government" in a democracy is legitimate if I fails to abide by The consent of the governed. Lockdowns, illegal takings, mob rule by demoncrat operatives, the "consent" is sorely stretched.

You can not repeatedly claim the government is not legitimate after court vetting.

The Law - it sucks for the losers.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Symmetry said:

You can not repeatedly claim the government is not legitimate after court vetting.

The Law - it sucks for the losers.

You'll be similarly going after CNN, MSNBC, Pelosi, Shumer and Hillary then? 

No. You're a pussy, and double standards are your only standards. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

2 minutes ago, QuarterCenturyVet said:

You'll be similarly going after CNN, MSNBC, Pelosi, Shumer and Hillary then? 

No. You're a pussy, and double standards are your only standards. 

The cult went after them every time.

I won't do their job for them just like they failed to point out all trumps crimes themselves.

 

 

Edited by Symmetry
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Symmetry said:

The cult went after them every time.

I won't do their job for them just like they failed to point out all trumps crimes themselves.

 

 

 

tenor.gif

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

4 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

 

tenor.gif

You fight for your side, I fight for mine.

I win, you lose.

Simple.

Edited by Symmetry
  • Haha 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

I think that it's pretty clear that Trump's primary motivation for pushing the Stolen Election Big Lie--no matter what the damage to our constitutional republic--was a desperate attempt to keep his rear end out of jail, but it's pretty clear that a secondary objective was $$$.  

A pretty good article on his predatory behavior regarding small donors follows, but of course, Trump is not alone in trying to raise money off the Stolen Election Big Lie. 

Trump’s Millions

https://amgreatness.com/2021/03/28/trumps-millions/

Excerpt:

Former President Donald Trump continues to rake in huge piles of cash, but very little of that money has gone toward the causes for which donors believe they are giving. At the heart of various fundraising projects are misleading solicitations that appear primarily to target desperate and loyal middle and lower-income Trump supporters. . . .

The fine print in some fundraising emails stated that a donor would have to give over $8,000 before any funds went to an account created to finance election challenges, including recounts and lawsuits over alleged fraud. As a result, large sums would go instead to Trump’s Save America PAC. Trump supporters were encouraged to sign up for recurring donations to “protect the results and keep fighting even after Election Day.” . . . .

It is difficult to overstate the impropriety of Trump’s leadership PAC fundraising. The $8,000 “Election Defense Fund” threshold meant that those solicitations preyed directly upon working-class constituents, as only wealthier donors could easily clear that figure to actually contribute to anything election-related. Indeed, the former president pulled in vast sums of money from crucial small donors—something he appears to be aware of and is willing to use as leverage against the GOP.

The “why,” “how,” and “what” comes into view as a nebulous labyrinth of shell companies, fronts, PACs, and vendors served by an army of cronies. The latest fundraising apparatus appears to be a proposed Trump-branded social media network, which Jason Miller told Fox News will launch “in probably about two or three months.” If the Save America PAC is any indicator, users should think twice before allowing Trump’s team to harvest their data, and always remember to read the fine print.

How do you milk sheep?.png

Edited by Jeffrey Brown
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Symmetry said:

You can not repeatedly claim the government is not legitimate after court vetting.

The Law - it sucks for the losers.

Not just doubling down on stupid, you're all in. 

BD4B05BA-0181-493C-AD07-045A324E0B92.jpeg

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.