http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

wrote:
http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/
ouch!

Trump still wins!!!!!!! Ha, Ha....

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 06:57:20 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Even if she ends up with a 10 million vote margin, it will not make
one bit of difference beyond illustrating that Trump does not have
overwhelming national popular support.

On 12/2/2016 7:59 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 06:57:20 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Even if she ends up with a 10 million vote margin, it will not make
one bit of difference beyond illustrating that Trump does not have
overwhelming national popular support.


I've heard the final count is est. around 3 mill. good time article.

I think the NYT has a problem with trumpy. They didn't like his
meet-and-greet. LOL Journalist don't like to be told what to write.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/01/us...hast.html?_r=0

like i said "new normal"

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 08:08:50 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 7:59 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 06:57:20 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Even if she ends up with a 10 million vote margin, it will not make
one bit of difference beyond illustrating that Trump does not have
overwhelming national popular support.


I've heard the final count is est. around 3 mill. good time article.


See my comment above.

On 12/2/2016 8:22 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 08:08:50 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 7:59 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 06:57:20 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Even if she ends up with a 10 million vote margin, it will not make
one bit of difference beyond illustrating that Trump does not have
overwhelming national popular support.


I've heard the final count is est. around 3 mill. good time article.


See my comment above.


did u read the article? You Know it's effecting the Trump fragile
thought processes. He's already tried to poo poo it on twitter.

is it my imagination? seems people comment on what's on their mind when
they click my posts? reading adverse? do you guys read at all?

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 08:35:05 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 8:22 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 08:08:50 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 7:59 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 06:57:20 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Even if she ends up with a 10 million vote margin, it will not make
one bit of difference beyond illustrating that Trump does not have
overwhelming national popular support.


I've heard the final count is est. around 3 mill. good time article.


See my comment above.


did u read the article? You Know it's effecting the Trump fragile
thought processes. He's already tried to poo poo it on twitter.

Here is a novel idea, if you wish to convey a particular point, why
don't you do that instead of hoping others will read the articles you
post and divine the same meaning and significance as you?


is it my imagination? seems people comment on what's on their mind when
they click my posts? reading adverse? do you guys read at all?

With all due respect, of course people comment about what's on their
minds! If you wish to steer the discourse, you should personally
compose a narrative and include that in your post.

The artsy fartsy approach of the liberal mind set, expecting others to
be mind readers and not presenting your own, cogent and pithy thoughts
in your posts is tantamount to setting yourself up for disappointment
and scorn.

On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 13:59:49 +0000, Stormin' Norman
wrote:

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 06:57:20 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Even if she ends up with a 10 million vote margin, it will not make
one bit of difference beyond illustrating that Trump does not have
overwhelming national popular support.

No it means Trump does not have "big city" support.
Democrats win the welfare vote hands down.
When you take money from Peter to pay Paul you will always have Paul's
support.

On 12/2/2016 8:57 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 08:35:05 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 8:22 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 08:08:50 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 7:59 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 06:57:20 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Even if she ends up with a 10 million vote margin, it will not make
one bit of difference beyond illustrating that Trump does not have
overwhelming national popular support.


I've heard the final count is est. around 3 mill. good time article.


See my comment above.


did u read the article? You Know it's effecting the Trump fragile
thought processes. He's already tried to poo poo it on twitter.

Here is a novel idea, if you wish to convey a particular point, why
don't you do that instead of hoping others will read the articles you
post and divine the same meaning and significance as you?


is it my imagination? seems people comment on what's on their mind when
they click my posts? reading adverse? do you guys read at all?

With all due respect, of course people comment about what's on their
minds! If you wish to steer the discourse, you should personally
compose a narrative and include that in your post.

The artsy fartsy approach of the liberal mind set, expecting others to
be mind readers and not presenting your own, cogent and pithy thoughts
in your posts is tantamount to setting yourself up for disappointment
and scorn.

or not. people need to stay informed on their own. I'm giving "some"
tools. you want to stay barefoot and preg? go ahead. I'd like people to
read and learn and your comments are just fine with me if it gets people
to read. I'm not here to entertain. I guess that went over your head.--
https://nodaplsolidarity.org/about/

On 12/2/2016 9:06 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 13:59:49 +0000, Stormin' Norman
wrote:

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 06:57:20 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Even if she ends up with a 10 million vote margin, it will not make
one bit of difference beyond illustrating that Trump does not have
overwhelming national popular support.

No it means Trump does not have "big city" support.
Democrats win the welfare vote hands down.
When you take money from Peter to pay Paul you will always have Paul's
support.


see here, he's talkin' macro. this is interesting. a transfer of wealth
problem. I made a vow never to argue economics because: I've only taken
2 sem. of econ and, two, The issue of wealth transfer causes misinformed
"conservatives" to go insane. Best to leave that argument to the pros.
WTS, I do see a need for a wealth transfer program but more in the terms
of eliminating the 1%. Yes, it involves helping the poor. Excuse the fuk
outta me.

--
https://nodaplsolidarity.org/about/

On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 10:06:57 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 13:59:49 +0000, Stormin' Norman
wrote:

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 06:57:20 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Even if she ends up with a 10 million vote margin, it will not make
one bit of difference beyond illustrating that Trump does not have
overwhelming national popular support.

No it means Trump does not have "big city" support.
Democrats win the welfare vote hands down.
When you take money from Peter to pay Paul you will always have Paul's
support.

Possibly you can cite a post election demographic study that verifies
your assertion?

Everything I have seen so far indicates that Clinton voters, in
general, had attained higher levels of education and were more
affluent than Trump voters.

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 09:11:34 -0600, #NoDAPL wrote:


The artsy fartsy approach of the liberal mind set, expecting others to
be mind readers and not presenting your own, cogent and pithy thoughts
in your posts is tantamount to setting yourself up for disappointment
and scorn.

or not. people need to stay informed on their own. I'm giving "some"
tools. you want to stay barefoot and preg? go ahead. I'd like people to
read and learn and your comments are just fine with me if it gets people
to read. I'm not here to entertain. I guess that went over your head.--
https://nodaplsolidarity.org/about/

I get it, you see yourself as a news / propaganda aggregator. You
simply post the work product of other people and expect that
participants here will draw the same conclusions as you from those
stories. If they do not come to the same conclusions as you, it must
due to their lack of comprehension and general ignorance.

Call me silly, but, IMHO, your posts are deserving of derision if you
are too lazy or incapable of formulating and presenting your own
thoughts, logic and arguments.

On 12/2/2016 9:26 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 10:06:57 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 13:59:49 +0000, Stormin' Norman
wrote:

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 06:57:20 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Even if she ends up with a 10 million vote margin, it will not make
one bit of difference beyond illustrating that Trump does not have
overwhelming national popular support.

No it means Trump does not have "big city" support.
Democrats win the welfare vote hands down.
When you take money from Peter to pay Paul you will always have Paul's
support.

Possibly you can cite a post election demographic study that verifies
your assertion?

Everything I have seen so far indicates that Clinton voters, in
general, had attained higher levels of education and were more
affluent than Trump voters.


educ is hillary has more phds and a slight edge, income is pretty even
(more mid class?) Trumps mid class tends to have more $.

but that is from a NYT poll. might not mean ****

--
https://nodaplsolidarity.org/about/

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 09:41:54 -0600, #NoDAPL wrote:

On 12/2/2016 9:26 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 10:06:57 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 13:59:49 +0000, Stormin' Norman
wrote:

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 06:57:20 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Even if she ends up with a 10 million vote margin, it will not make
one bit of difference beyond illustrating that Trump does not have
overwhelming national popular support.

No it means Trump does not have "big city" support.
Democrats win the welfare vote hands down.
When you take money from Peter to pay Paul you will always have Paul's
support.

Possibly you can cite a post election demographic study that verifies
your assertion?

Everything I have seen so far indicates that Clinton voters, in
general, had attained higher levels of education and were more
affluent than Trump voters.


educ is hillary has more phds and a slight edge, income is pretty even
(more mid class?) Trumps mid class tends to have more $.

but that is from a NYT poll. might not mean ****

Citation?

On 12/2/2016 9:44 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 09:41:54 -0600, #NoDAPL wrote:

On 12/2/2016 9:26 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 10:06:57 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 13:59:49 +0000, Stormin' Norman
wrote:

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 06:57:20 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Even if she ends up with a 10 million vote margin, it will not make
one bit of difference beyond illustrating that Trump does not have
overwhelming national popular support.

No it means Trump does not have "big city" support.
Democrats win the welfare vote hands down.
When you take money from Peter to pay Paul you will always have Paul's
support.

Possibly you can cite a post election demographic study that verifies
your assertion?

Everything I have seen so far indicates that Clinton voters, in
general, had attained higher levels of education and were more
affluent than Trump voters.


educ is hillary has more phds and a slight edge, income is pretty even
(more mid class?) Trumps mid class tends to have more $.

but that is from a NYT poll. might not mean ****

Citation?


oh now he wants a link? go fetch.

--
https://nodaplsolidarity.org/about/

On 12/2/2016 10:26 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
Everything I have seen so far indicates that Clinton voters, in
general, had attained higher levels of education and were more
affluent than Trump voters.


Bull****! Clinton voters are more effluent than Trump voters.

The typical Clinton voter is:

- on public assistance, maybe even committing disability fraud

- unaware of birth control

- has ~6 illegitimate kids from different sperm donors

- unemployed and too stupid to do anything useful

- unable to use a turn signal when appropriate

- can't navigate a traffic circle

- has never paid federal income tax

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 09:49:09 -0600, #NoDAPL wrote:

On 12/2/2016 9:44 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 09:41:54 -0600, #NoDAPL wrote:

On 12/2/2016 9:26 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 10:06:57 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 13:59:49 +0000, Stormin' Norman
wrote:

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 06:57:20 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Even if she ends up with a 10 million vote margin, it will not make
one bit of difference beyond illustrating that Trump does not have
overwhelming national popular support.

No it means Trump does not have "big city" support.
Democrats win the welfare vote hands down.
When you take money from Peter to pay Paul you will always have Paul's
support.

Possibly you can cite a post election demographic study that verifies
your assertion?

Everything I have seen so far indicates that Clinton voters, in
general, had attained higher levels of education and were more
affluent than Trump voters.


educ is hillary has more phds and a slight edge, income is pretty even
(more mid class?) Trumps mid class tends to have more $.

but that is from a NYT poll. might not mean ****

Citation?


oh now he wants a link? go fetch.

Yes, a citation. If you are going to assert something and attribute
it to a particular source, it is logical and reasonable to provide a
citation so others can determine the veracity of your claims.

Without a citation, your assertion is just so much smoke.

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:52:44 -0500, Taxpayer
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:26 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
Everything I have seen so far indicates that Clinton voters, in
general, had attained higher levels of education and were more
affluent than Trump voters.


Bull****! Clinton voters are more effluent than Trump voters.

The typical Clinton voter is:

- on public assistance, maybe even committing disability fraud

- unaware of birth control

- has ~6 illegitimate kids from different sperm donors

- unemployed and too stupid to do anything useful

- unable to use a turn signal when appropriate

- can't navigate a traffic circle

- has never paid federal income tax

Again, no citation.

Was the above from the editorial page of the KKK Crusader newspaper?

On 12/2/2016 9:55 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 09:49:09 -0600, #NoDAPL wrote:

On 12/2/2016 9:44 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 09:41:54 -0600, #NoDAPL wrote:

On 12/2/2016 9:26 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 10:06:57 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 13:59:49 +0000, Stormin' Norman
wrote:

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 06:57:20 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Even if she ends up with a 10 million vote margin, it will not make
one bit of difference beyond illustrating that Trump does not have
overwhelming national popular support.

No it means Trump does not have "big city" support.
Democrats win the welfare vote hands down.
When you take money from Peter to pay Paul you will always have Paul's
support.

Possibly you can cite a post election demographic study that verifies
your assertion?

Everything I have seen so far indicates that Clinton voters, in
general, had attained higher levels of education and were more
affluent than Trump voters.


educ is hillary has more phds and a slight edge, income is pretty even
(more mid class?) Trumps mid class tends to have more $.

but that is from a NYT poll. might not mean ****

Citation?


oh now he wants a link? go fetch.

Yes, a citation. If you are going to assert something and attribute
it to a particular source, it is logical and reasonable to provide a
citation so others can determine the veracity of your claims.

Without a citation, your assertion is just so much smoke.


well lets see there is this thing called "google". Come on dude. I'm
just messin' w/ya. chill

--
https://nodaplsolidarity.org/about/

On 12/2/2016 9:58 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:52:44 -0500, Taxpayer
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:26 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
Everything I have seen so far indicates that Clinton voters, in
general, had attained higher levels of education and were more
affluent than Trump voters.


Bull****! Clinton voters are more effluent than Trump voters.

The typical Clinton voter is:

- on public assistance, maybe even committing disability fraud

- unaware of birth control

- has ~6 illegitimate kids from different sperm donors

- unemployed and too stupid to do anything useful

- unable to use a turn signal when appropriate

- can't navigate a traffic circle

- has never paid federal income tax

Again, no citation.

Was the above from the editorial page of the KKK Crusader newspaper?


sheet dude. you just got after me for leaving them. i take it you're not
in a happy relationship

--
https://nodaplsolidarity.org/about/

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:04:08 -0600, #NoDAPL wrote:


Again, no citation.

Was the above from the editorial page of the KKK Crusader newspaper?


sheet dude. you just got after me for leaving them. i take it you're not
in a happy relationship

You are correct about one thing, reading comprehension is certainly a
challenge for some in this group.....

On 12/2/2016 6:57 AM, #NoDAPL wrote:
http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Lots of people live in California...

--
Maggie

On 12/2/2016 7:59 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 06:57:20 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Even if she ends up with a 10 million vote margin, it will not make
one bit of difference beyond illustrating that Trump does not have
overwhelming national popular support.


It means that Trump had support from a majority of states since he won
the EC.

--
Maggie

On 12/2/2016 10:15 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:04:08 -0600, #NoDAPL wrote:


Again, no citation.

Was the above from the editorial page of the KKK Crusader newspaper?


sheet dude. you just got after me for leaving them. i take it you're not
in a happy relationship

You are correct about one thing, reading comprehension is certainly a
challenge for some in this group.....


well then reading the article is a good first step for you.

don't get all cry baby on me now. look im sorry, pls block me

On 12/2/2016 9:49 AM, #NoDAPL wrote:
On 12/2/2016 9:44 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 09:41:54 -0600, #NoDAPL wrote:

On 12/2/2016 9:26 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 10:06:57 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 13:59:49 +0000, Stormin' Norman
wrote:

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 06:57:20 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Even if she ends up with a 10 million vote margin, it will not make
one bit of difference beyond illustrating that Trump does not have
overwhelming national popular support.

No it means Trump does not have "big city" support.
Democrats win the welfare vote hands down.
When you take money from Peter to pay Paul you will always have Paul's
support.

Possibly you can cite a post election demographic study that verifies
your assertion?

Everything I have seen so far indicates that Clinton voters, in
general, had attained higher levels of education and were more
affluent than Trump voters.


educ is hillary has more phds and a slight edge, income is pretty even
(more mid class?) Trumps mid class tends to have more $.

but that is from a NYT poll. might not mean ****

Citation?


oh now he wants a link? go fetch.


HAHAHA!! go fetch!! LOL

--
Maggie

On 12/2/2016 10:04 AM, #NoDAPL wrote:
On 12/2/2016 9:58 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:52:44 -0500, Taxpayer
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:26 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
Everything I have seen so far indicates that Clinton voters, in
general, had attained higher levels of education and were more
affluent than Trump voters.


Bull****! Clinton voters are more effluent than Trump voters.

The typical Clinton voter is:

- on public assistance, maybe even committing disability fraud

- unaware of birth control

- has ~6 illegitimate kids from different sperm donors

- unemployed and too stupid to do anything useful

- unable to use a turn signal when appropriate

- can't navigate a traffic circle

- has never paid federal income tax

Again, no citation.

Was the above from the editorial page of the KKK Crusader newspaper?


sheet dude. you just got after me for leaving them. i take it you're not
in a happy relationship


HAHAAHAH!!! STOP! My side is hurting from laughing!!

--
Maggie

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:27:04 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:15 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:04:08 -0600, #NoDAPL wrote:


Again, no citation.

Was the above from the editorial page of the KKK Crusader newspaper?


sheet dude. you just got after me for leaving them. i take it you're not
in a happy relationship

You are correct about one thing, reading comprehension is certainly a
challenge for some in this group.....


well then reading the article is a good first step for you.

don't get all cry baby on me now. look im sorry, pls block me


Block you? You don't really understand Usenet do you?

On 12/2/2016 10:30 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:27:04 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:15 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:04:08 -0600, #NoDAPL wrote:


Again, no citation.

Was the above from the editorial page of the KKK Crusader newspaper?


sheet dude. you just got after me for leaving them. i take it you're not
in a happy relationship

You are correct about one thing, reading comprehension is certainly a
challenge for some in this group.....


well then reading the article is a good first step for you.

don't get all cry baby on me now. look im sorry, pls block me


Block you? You don't really understand Usenet do you?


no

do you need a link for that?

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:19:17 -0600, Muggles
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 7:59 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 06:57:20 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Even if she ends up with a 10 million vote margin, it will not make
one bit of difference beyond illustrating that Trump does not have
overwhelming national popular support.


It means that Trump had support from a majority of states since he won
the EC.

Yes, when the Electoral College votes, odds are that he will take a
majority of those votes.

However, Trump cannot truthfully claim a national popular mandate of
individual citizens. Fortunately for Trump, the only reason he needs
a national popular mandate is to assuage his fragile ego.

On 12/2/2016 9:52 AM, Taxpayer wrote:
On 12/2/2016 10:26 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
Everything I have seen so far indicates that Clinton voters, in
general, had attained higher levels of education and were more
affluent than Trump voters.


Bull****! Clinton voters are more effluent than Trump voters.

The typical Clinton voter is:

- on public assistance, maybe even committing disability fraud

- unaware of birth control

- has ~6 illegitimate kids from different sperm donors

- unemployed and too stupid to do anything useful

- unable to use a turn signal when appropriate

- can't navigate a traffic circle

- has never paid federal income tax


word

--
https://nodaplsolidarity.org/about/

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:34:25 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:30 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:27:04 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:15 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:04:08 -0600, #NoDAPL wrote:


Again, no citation.

Was the above from the editorial page of the KKK Crusader newspaper?


sheet dude. you just got after me for leaving them. i take it you're not
in a happy relationship

You are correct about one thing, reading comprehension is certainly a
challenge for some in this group.....


well then reading the article is a good first step for you.

don't get all cry baby on me now. look im sorry, pls block me


Block you? You don't really understand Usenet do you?


no

do you need a link for that?

You replied to a simple question with a direct answer, that is an
anomaly for you.

Not sure how a citation could enhance your answer, so no, I don't need
a link.

On 12/2/2016 10:42 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:34:25 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:30 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:27:04 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:15 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:04:08 -0600, #NoDAPL wrote:


Again, no citation.

Was the above from the editorial page of the KKK Crusader newspaper?


sheet dude. you just got after me for leaving them. i take it you're not
in a happy relationship

You are correct about one thing, reading comprehension is certainly a
challenge for some in this group.....


well then reading the article is a good first step for you.

don't get all cry baby on me now. look im sorry, pls block me


Block you? You don't really understand Usenet do you?


no

do you need a link for that?

You replied to a simple question with a direct answer, that is an
anomaly for you.

Not sure how a citation could enhance your answer, so no, I don't need
a link.


I'll tell you what normy. I'll be back when she hits 3 mill. I think you
guys need a break. Stay Cool Dude.

--
https://nodaplsolidarity.org/about/

On 12/2/2016 10:40 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:19:17 -0600, Muggles
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 7:59 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 06:57:20 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Even if she ends up with a 10 million vote margin, it will not make
one bit of difference beyond illustrating that Trump does not have
overwhelming national popular support.


It means that Trump had support from a majority of states since he won
the EC.

Yes, when the Electoral College votes, odds are that he will take a
majority of those votes.

However, Trump cannot truthfully claim a national popular mandate of
individual citizens. Fortunately for Trump, the only reason he needs
a national popular mandate is to assuage his fragile ego.


Tell me of a man who doesn't have a fragile ego? LOL That's a
non-issue, I'm thinking.

OTOH, if becoming president require the popular vote every candidate
would run their campaigns differently, but since winning that particular
race depends on winning the EC, that's the only result that means anything.

--
Maggie

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:28:27 -0600, Muggles
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:04 AM, #NoDAPL wrote:
On 12/2/2016 9:58 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:52:44 -0500, Taxpayer
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:26 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
Everything I have seen so far indicates that Clinton voters, in
general, had attained higher levels of education and were more
affluent than Trump voters.


Bull****! Clinton voters are more effluent than Trump voters.

The typical Clinton voter is:

- on public assistance, maybe even committing disability fraud

- unaware of birth control

- has ~6 illegitimate kids from different sperm donors

- unemployed and too stupid to do anything useful

- unable to use a turn signal when appropriate

- can't navigate a traffic circle

- has never paid federal income tax

Again, no citation.

Was the above from the editorial page of the KKK Crusader newspaper?


sheet dude. you just got after me for leaving them. i take it you're not
in a happy relationship


HAHAAHAH!!! STOP! My side is hurting from laughing!!

Someone still has a case of severe swamp ass, poor Muggles.

On 12/2/2016 10:52 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:28:27 -0600, Muggles
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:04 AM, #NoDAPL wrote:
On 12/2/2016 9:58 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:52:44 -0500, Taxpayer
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:26 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
Everything I have seen so far indicates that Clinton voters, in
general, had attained higher levels of education and were more
affluent than Trump voters.


Bull****! Clinton voters are more effluent than Trump voters.

The typical Clinton voter is:

- on public assistance, maybe even committing disability fraud

- unaware of birth control

- has ~6 illegitimate kids from different sperm donors

- unemployed and too stupid to do anything useful

- unable to use a turn signal when appropriate

- can't navigate a traffic circle

- has never paid federal income tax

Again, no citation.

Was the above from the editorial page of the KKK Crusader newspaper?


sheet dude. you just got after me for leaving them. i take it you're not
in a happy relationship


HAHAAHAH!!! STOP! My side is hurting from laughing!!

Someone still has a case of severe swamp ass, poor Muggles.


Oh come on! You 2 are funny.

--
Maggie

Taxpayer expressed precisely :
On 12/2/2016 10:26 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
Everything I have seen so far indicates that Clinton voters, in
general, had attained higher levels of education and were more
affluent than Trump voters.


Bull****! Clinton voters are more effluent than Trump voters.

LOL!

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:58:17 -0600, Muggles
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:52 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:28:27 -0600, Muggles
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:04 AM, #NoDAPL wrote:
On 12/2/2016 9:58 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:52:44 -0500, Taxpayer
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:26 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
Everything I have seen so far indicates that Clinton voters, in
general, had attained higher levels of education and were more
affluent than Trump voters.


Bull****! Clinton voters are more effluent than Trump voters.

The typical Clinton voter is:

- on public assistance, maybe even committing disability fraud

- unaware of birth control

- has ~6 illegitimate kids from different sperm donors

- unemployed and too stupid to do anything useful

- unable to use a turn signal when appropriate

- can't navigate a traffic circle

- has never paid federal income tax

Again, no citation.

Was the above from the editorial page of the KKK Crusader newspaper?


sheet dude. you just got after me for leaving them. i take it you're not
in a happy relationship


HAHAAHAH!!! STOP! My side is hurting from laughing!!

Someone still has a case of severe swamp ass, poor Muggles.


Oh come on! You 2 are funny.

Let's see, how would Trump respond? I know:

I'm a funny guy, I have the world's best sense of humor, in fact, I am
the funniest man in the history of the planet. No one is funnier than
me, I know more about comedy then all the comedians who have ever
lived.....

Yeah, you should like that reply.

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:46:04 -0600, #NoDAPL wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:42 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:34:25 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:30 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:27:04 -0600, #NoDAPL
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:15 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:04:08 -0600, #NoDAPL wrote:


Again, no citation.

Was the above from the editorial page of the KKK Crusader newspaper?


sheet dude. you just got after me for leaving them. i take it you're not
in a happy relationship

You are correct about one thing, reading comprehension is certainly a
challenge for some in this group.....


well then reading the article is a good first step for you.

don't get all cry baby on me now. look im sorry, pls block me


Block you? You don't really understand Usenet do you?


no

do you need a link for that?

You replied to a simple question with a direct answer, that is an
anomaly for you.

Not sure how a citation could enhance your answer, so no, I don't need
a link.


I'll tell you what normy. I'll be back when she hits 3 mill. I think you
guys need a break. Stay Cool Dude.

I don't know about everyone else but I for one will really miss all
the DAPL propaganda.....

On 12/2/2016 11:02 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:58:17 -0600, Muggles
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:52 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:28:27 -0600, Muggles
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:04 AM, #NoDAPL wrote:
On 12/2/2016 9:58 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 10:52:44 -0500, Taxpayer
wrote:

On 12/2/2016 10:26 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
Everything I have seen so far indicates that Clinton voters, in
general, had attained higher levels of education and were more
affluent than Trump voters.


Bull****! Clinton voters are more effluent than Trump voters.

The typical Clinton voter is:

- on public assistance, maybe even committing disability fraud

- unaware of birth control

- has ~6 illegitimate kids from different sperm donors

- unemployed and too stupid to do anything useful

- unable to use a turn signal when appropriate

- can't navigate a traffic circle

- has never paid federal income tax

Again, no citation.

Was the above from the editorial page of the KKK Crusader newspaper?


sheet dude. you just got after me for leaving them. i take it you're not
in a happy relationship


HAHAAHAH!!! STOP! My side is hurting from laughing!!

Someone still has a case of severe swamp ass, poor Muggles.


Oh come on! You 2 are funny.

Let's see, how would Trump respond? I know:

I'm a funny guy, I have the world's best sense of humor, in fact, I am
the funniest man in the history of the planet. No one is funnier than
me, I know more about comedy then all the comedians who have ever
lived.....

Yeah, you should like that reply.


Hey, I can't help it if you 2 are funny!

--
Maggie

On 12/2/16 7:57 AM, #NoDAPL wrote:
http://time.com/4587158/clinton-lead...million-votes/

ouch!

Maybe so but most of those "votes" are fraudulent and should be null and
void as they are from dead people, illegal aliens, and felons

--
Never slap a man who's chewing tobacco.