Ok for one side to disrupt the system and not the other?

[vinnywright]

wellllllllllllll early voting started in my county today and I just got it out the way ,,,,,, and I could not , would not , did not , vote for Trump.

now to wait and see .

VINNY

[MoonRise]

Let's all face it. Either way were in a bad boat. There will be no real winners here.

[Snowhog]

That's the truth fer sure!

[Qqmike]

Let's all face it. Either way were in a bad boat. There will be no real winners here.

Ain't that the damn truth. Now there's talk of Trump leading some sort of private movement, to include his base, post-election after he loses ... a TV network? what? And his kids, don't they have to run the (possibly failing) Trump brand? I don't think we've heard the end of DJT. People I talk to--left and right--are stressed and depressed daily about all the negativity in the air from this election.

[GreyGeek]

My question is "what additional damage will be done to our constitutional rights?" The last 16 years have almost destroyed them. It wouldn't take much to bury them for good. And, regardless of who wins, they will not be able to do much about the $21 Trillion debt we owe, and if we confiscated ALL the wealth of the 1% it wouldn't make a dent in the debt. The middle class is taxed to death and we have almost 100 million people of working age not working.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[whatthefunk]

I wonder how the hell a two year long vetting process resulted in the two worst possible choices. A lot of elections make me feel like Im choosing the candidate I dislike least rather than the one I like most, but this one...

[GreyGeek]

Ok for one side to disrupt the system and not the other?

To call it a "vetting" process is being generous. What it has become is a giant Ponzi scheme with those at the top extracting cash from those at the bottom. It isn't just "two years". Politicians spend 24/7/365 running for office and when they do set in congress it is to pass, without reading, giant omnibus bills, thousands and thousands of pages of legalese infested with one line bacon strips to pay off donors. The "campaign war chests" they fill with Goldman Sachs bribes can, if they lose, be converted to their own personal funds.

Lawyers who spend decades saving up a few hundred thousand dollars, once elected to congress, become millionaires in two or three years. They didn't suddenly get stock market savvy - they do insider trading, which is illegal for us little people. They sell their offices in pay-to-play schemes. We've known this for years but we little people get the shaft every election.

How could it be any different? The media ignores the over whelming evidence of corruption revealed in the DNC email hack from Wikileaks with the absurd claim that the Russians did it, AFTER the DNC admitted the emails were genuine. The media has also ignored the 50 years of voting corruption revealed in the Undercover Veritas tapes just released. Judging from the reactions of the RNC elites, who are Democrat-lites, I suspect that they wallow in the same filth. The neo-con Billy Kristin quoted his dad as saying that there wasn't a dimes worth of difference between the two political parties, regardless of which is in office. With the exception of Kennedy and Raegan, that's been the case since Johnson was elected in 1964, if not earlier.
After the passage of the 1965 Civil Rights Act, Johnson is quoted as saying "We'll have those N*** voting Democrat for the next 100 years". Three years later Marxist rioted at the Chicago DNC convention and successfully captured control of the Democrat Party. Howard Dean's 2009 message to the PES convention in Europe shows how far Left they've moved. The DNC has adopted ALL the political planks of the CPA. They ARE the CPA. Why then, is Hillary making a beef with Putin, her ideological brother, and supporting "moderate" jihadists, risking WWIII? She's not. The game plan is to further destabilize Europe while flooding our own borders. Podesta's wrote in one of his emails to Hillary that allowing illegals to vote is a good thing. Well, for the Democrats it most certainly is. It will guarantee their continued election for the next hundred years.

Two weeks before the 1979 election the MNM and polls had Carter ahead by 47 to 39%. Raegan won 49 states by a landslide. Even vote rigging didn't help. The poles were lying, and the pollsters knew it. Just like today the polls were an attempt to convince Raegan supporters that they shouldn't bother going to vote because he was too far behind.

If you had read my G+ blog you would have learned last fall that I felt that Trump was a Perot candidate, a recent "convert" to conservatism, whose purpose was to lose the election. As it stands, I doubt that Trump can over come the media bias, the revealed vote rigging, or the flood of illegals voting illegally. While conservatives make up 40-45% of the voters the elections have always hinged on the Democrat swing vote. This time they'll have help. Trump will lose and in another year he'll be a Democrat again. Most voters are lo-info, as one would expect since their "news" sources have been SNL and Jon Stewart's The Daily Show, when they weren't watching Brian Williams or David Murh, who quickly dismissed this hot mic discussion:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XsFR8DbSRQE


Who is responsible for this mess? WE THE PEOPLE.

We get the government we deserve, and that has never been more true than in this election cycle. Just how many will admit that they voted for the winner, who ever it may be, three years from now?

[vinnywright]

I wonder how the hell a two year long vetting process resulted in the two worst possible choices. A lot of elections make me feel like Im choosing the candidate I dislike least rather than the one I like most, but this one...

+1 on that .

VINNY