Fucking torn apart.
-
@89th said in Fucking torn apart.:
I’m surprised Spanberger won. Earlier on Tuesday the local network had projected her loss. I often think of @jon-nyc ’s earlier summary of the election...Trump was rejected, but so was the extreme left.
Trump may wind up losing, but over 70 million votes does not quite fit the term rejected.
@Jolly said in Fucking torn apart.:
Trump may wind up losing, but over 70 million votes does not quite fit the term rejected.
Clearly the nation did not reject Ms. Clinton when she got 66 million votes compared to Trump’s 63 million votes back in 2016.
-
@Jolly said in Fucking torn apart.:
Trump may wind up losing, but over 70 million votes does not quite fit the term rejected.
Clearly the nation did not reject Ms. Clinton when she got 66 million votes compared to Trump’s 63 million votes back in 2016.
@Axtremus said in Fucking torn apart.:
@Jolly said in Fucking torn apart.:
Trump may wind up losing, but over 70 million votes does not quite fit the term rejected.
Clearly the nation did not reject Ms. Clinton when she got 66 million votes compared to Trump’s 63 million votes back in 2016.
That might be the funniest post you ever made. It’s as if the last four years didn’t exist. Never in my life have I seen such a concerted effort to reject and unseat a President. Ax, reLly now, some introspection is warranted here.
-
@89th said in Fucking torn apart.:
I’m surprised Spanberger won. Earlier on Tuesday the local network had projected her loss. I often think of @jon-nyc ’s earlier summary of the election...Trump was rejected, but so was the extreme left.
Trump may wind up losing, but over 70 million votes does not quite fit the term rejected.
@Jolly said in Fucking torn apart.:
@89th said in Fucking torn apart.:
I’m surprised Spanberger won. Earlier on Tuesday the local network had projected her loss. I often think of @jon-nyc ’s earlier summary of the election...Trump was rejected, but so was the extreme left.
Trump may wind up losing, but over 70 million votes does not quite fit the term rejected.
Fair, agreed. But the concept of a sitting President not winning re-election is not good.
-
@Jolly said in Fucking torn apart.:
@89th said in Fucking torn apart.:
I’m surprised Spanberger won. Earlier on Tuesday the local network had projected her loss. I often think of @jon-nyc ’s earlier summary of the election...Trump was rejected, but so was the extreme left.
Trump may wind up losing, but over 70 million votes does not quite fit the term rejected.
Fair, agreed. But the concept of a sitting President not winning re-election is not good.
@89th said in Fucking torn apart.:
@Jolly said in Fucking torn apart.:
@89th said in Fucking torn apart.:
I’m surprised Spanberger won. Earlier on Tuesday the local network had projected her loss. I often think of @jon-nyc ’s earlier summary of the election...Trump was rejected, but so was the extreme left.
Trump may wind up losing, but over 70 million votes does not quite fit the term rejected.
Fair, agreed. But the concept of a sitting President not winning re-election is not good.
Have we ever had a President fight a world-wide pandemic and the most hostile press in the history of the country?
A hostile press is nothing new. Wasn't unusual for the first 125 years or so from America's founding, to have very hostile, competing newspapers in any decent sized town. In a large city, you might have as many as three or four, espousing their views. Many times, the paper proudly proclaimed their views in their name...The Natchez Democrat immediately comes to mind.
In Trump's case, he was fighting almost all of the MSM, and certainly everything on the East Coast. I've seen figures ranging from 5% to 15%, on voters casting votes based on erroneous hostile press. Whether that is true, I do not know.
In an election as close as we just had, the MSM downplayed the role of kingmaker.
Enjoy.
-
@Jolly said in Fucking torn apart.:
@89th said in Fucking torn apart.:
I’m surprised Spanberger won. Earlier on Tuesday the local network had projected her loss. I often think of @jon-nyc ’s earlier summary of the election...Trump was rejected, but so was the extreme left.
Trump may wind up losing, but over 70 million votes does not quite fit the term rejected.
Fair, agreed. But the concept of a sitting President not winning re-election is not good.
-
-
Trump’s just the 2nd president in the last 39 years not to win re-election and the 4th in like 90 years.
I remember the state of the union address in January. Trump had his re-election locked down. I was very impressed. But he fumbled the pandemic big time, and it cost him plenty of votes. Turns out, he only needed a few of them to have won again. Oh well...
-
Trump’s just the 2nd president in the last 39 years not to win re-election and the 4th in like 90 years.
I remember the state of the union address in January. Trump had his re-election locked down. I was very impressed. But he fumbled the pandemic big time, and it cost him plenty of votes. Turns out, he only needed a few of them to have won again. Oh well...
@89th said in Fucking torn apart.:
Trump’s just the 2nd president in the last 39 years not to win re-election and the 4th in like 90 years.
I remember the state of the union address in January. Trump had his re-election locked down. I was very impressed. But he fumbled the pandemic big time, and it cost him plenty of votes. Turns out, he only needed a few of them to have won again. Oh well...
I suspect if the Democrats had fielded a decent candidate, he'd have been trounced.
-
@89th said in Fucking torn apart.:
Trump’s just the 2nd president in the last 39 years not to win re-election and the 4th in like 90 years.
I remember the state of the union address in January. Trump had his re-election locked down. I was very impressed. But he fumbled the pandemic big time, and it cost him plenty of votes. Turns out, he only needed a few of them to have won again. Oh well...
I suspect if the Democrats had fielded a decent candidate, he'd have been trounced.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Fucking torn apart.:
@89th said in Fucking torn apart.:
Trump’s just the 2nd president in the last 39 years not to win re-election and the 4th in like 90 years.
I remember the state of the union address in January. Trump had his re-election locked down. I was very impressed. But he fumbled the pandemic big time, and it cost him plenty of votes. Turns out, he only needed a few of them to have won again. Oh well...
I suspect if the Democrats had fielded a decent candidate, he'd have been trounced.
Name one.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in Fucking torn apart.:
@89th said in Fucking torn apart.:
Trump’s just the 2nd president in the last 39 years not to win re-election and the 4th in like 90 years.
I remember the state of the union address in January. Trump had his re-election locked down. I was very impressed. But he fumbled the pandemic big time, and it cost him plenty of votes. Turns out, he only needed a few of them to have won again. Oh well...
I suspect if the Democrats had fielded a decent candidate, he'd have been trounced.
Name one.
@Jolly said in Fucking torn apart.:
@Doctor-Phibes said in Fucking torn apart.:
@89th said in Fucking torn apart.:
Trump’s just the 2nd president in the last 39 years not to win re-election and the 4th in like 90 years.
I remember the state of the union address in January. Trump had his re-election locked down. I was very impressed. But he fumbled the pandemic big time, and it cost him plenty of votes. Turns out, he only needed a few of them to have won again. Oh well...
I suspect if the Democrats had fielded a decent candidate, he'd have been trounced.
Name one.
That is the problem (in both sides). The best candidates are too smart to want to go through the process. Lol
