Zambroski Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 3 minutes ago, revkevsdi said: Perhaps you would like to explain why Trump supporters were convinced that they couldn't vote for Hillary because she was dishonest. Yet Politifact showed that Trump lied more. Can you explain why her speech to Goldman Sachs was a reason not to vote for her, yet Trump appointing a top Goldman Sachs exec. is acceptable. Can you explain why it is ok to have an Oil Exec that has ties to Russia and who received an award from Putin should be in a position to help remove restrictions on Russian trades. Can you trust him to make a decision that is good for the US. and the world when he stands to make a fortune personally? Bernie Sanders keeps pointing out that people voted for Trump because he was anti-establishment yet he almost exclusively appointed people from the upper echelons of the establishment. I could, but I'm not gonna bother. You guys just aren't getting it. Not getting it at all. Not even close. Works for me though. Dems won't see office for 20 years. And your fancy boy up there is most likely on his way out too. Too bad...so sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Skidooski Posted January 23, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted January 23, 2017 44 minutes ago, revkevsdi said: Perhaps you would like to explain why Trump supporters were convinced that they couldn't vote for Hillary because she was dishonest. Yet Politifact showed that Trump lied more. Can you explain why her speech to Goldman Sachs was a reason not to vote for her, yet Trump appointing a top Goldman Sachs exec. is acceptable. Can you explain why it is ok to have an Oil Exec that has ties to Russia and who received an award from Putin should be in a position to help remove restrictions on Russian trades. Can you trust him to make a decision that is good for the US. and the world when he stands to make a fortune personally? Bernie Sanders keeps pointing out that people voted for Trump because he was anti-establishment yet he almost exclusively appointed people from the upper echelons of the establishment. All of this ^^^ Because I called you out on your ramblings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted January 23, 2017 Author Share Posted January 23, 2017 (edited) 48 minutes ago, Zambroski said: Dream on you liberal shit wad. Hey....HEY.......................HEY!!!! That's MR. President to you! Bwaaaahahahahahhahahahahahah hahahhhahahahahhahahahah SBYL You don't wanna debate like a man...like youve asked for a so many times only to call names, turn tail and run...well...get used to these responses. Oh yes, it's my intelligence and reading comprehension failure that is the communication breakdown. Poor liberal twats. All is lost....all is lost....there is no hope, for all is lost. Ready? BOOOOO FUCKING HOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I already debated and owned your ass in the process. just because I don't want to go down deflection road and waste time with you doesn't mean I turn tail and run, like you won or something. neither do the cute little gifs and shit you post after each owning. Edited January 23, 2017 by Snoslinger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momorider Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Snot thinking he actually owned anyone ever 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 3 hours ago, Snoslinger said: I already debated and owned your ass in the process. just because I don't want to go down deflection road and waste time with you doesn't mean I turn tail and run, like you won or something. neither do the cute little gifs and shit you post after each owning. You've "turned tail" on all THREE debates you asked for...ALL FUCKING THREE! Fuck you ya loser pants...you're fucked for eight! Boo Hoo! Hey, show us your mad face! You fucking racist! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revkevsdi Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 5 hours ago, Zambroski said: I could, but I'm not gonna bother. You guys just aren't getting it. Not getting it at all. Not even close. Works for me though. Dems won't see office for 20 years. And your fancy boy up there is most likely on his way out too. Too bad...so sad. 4 hours ago, Skidooski said: All of this ^^^ Because I called you out on your ramblings I'll take that as a no from both of you. 20 years? Wow! Just yesterday you said 8. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 1 minute ago, revkevsdi said: I'll take that as a no from both of you. 20 years? Wow! Just yesterday you said 8. No, it can be explained easily. But why bother? You fuck heads can't explain a fucking thing I've asked for...EVER. Just spin, lie, repeat. And on the 8 years or 20, let's compromise....and say 30. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revkevsdi Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 2 minutes ago, Zambroski said: No, it can be explained easily. But why bother? You fuck heads can't explain a fucking thing I've asked for...EVER. Just spin, lie, repeat. And on the 8 years or 20, let's compromise....and say 30. 30? He'll be lucky to last one term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Skidooski Posted January 24, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted January 24, 2017 2 hours ago, revkevsdi said: I'll take that as a no from both of you. 20 years? Wow! Just yesterday you said 8. Rambling dipshit who's going to get more and more angry as time goes by Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.